Which Party do you THINK will win the 2008 Presidential Election?

[adam]

It really depends on who runs. I'll say that the worst choice for the major parties right now would be Hillary and McCain respectively.

Hillary simply doesn't have the ability to gain traction in more moderate, blue collar areas. She would lose all of the midwest  with the exception of Illinois and possibly Pennsylvania as well. It would be a lopsided looking election.

McCain on the other hand has burnt all of the wrong bridges. He has picked a bad time to support illegal immigration and has been riding the fence on a plythera of other issues. His approval ratings are slowly diminishing.

I think that if Giuliani runs in 2008 that the Dems wont stand much of a chance. He has a great record and an empty skeleton closet, plus hos moderate social stances appeal to all arenas.

Warner looks like he could be a good option for the dems, a moderate that actually decides on issues rather than riding the fence hoping for the best. However, a lot of people don't know much about him and his lack of accomplishment as governor could hurt him.

Here are a few predictions:

----------
Hillary in the race
----------

Hillary Clinton - 47%
George Allen - 50%
Other 3%

Hllary Clinton - 48%
John McCain - 49%
Other - 3%

----------
McCain in the race
----------

John McCain - 48%
Russ Feingold - 50%
Other 2%

John McCain - 46%
Mark Warner - 51%
Other - 3%

----------
Giuliani in the race
----------

Rudy Giuliani - 51%
Russ Feingold - 48%
Other - 1%

Rudy Giuliani - 50%
Mark Warner - 49%
Other - 1%

[adam]

Hllary Clinton - 48%
John McCain - 49%
Other - 3%

John McCain - 48%
Russ Feingold - 50%
Other 2%

Rudy Giuliani - 50%
Mark Warner - 49%
Other - 1%

I disagree with you on this ones.

I think McCain would defeat liberals like Clinton and Feingold by at least 4 to 5 points.

And I'm sure that Warner would defeat Giuliani by winning at least two Southern Bush states (Arkansas and his home state of Virginia)  while Giuliani could only weaken, but not win the Northeast.

A lot of polls show Giuliani gaining ground and fast in traditionally democratic areas. I could almost assure you that a strong Giuliani campaign could take New Hampshire, Iowa, Minnesota, and possibly Wisconsin. Mark Warner is a decent candidate - but he lacks accomplishment where as the public have given Giuliani the title of "America's mayor". I just don't think that people could warm up to Warner fast enough for him to beat the already tremendously popular Giuliani.

A couple of years ago I would have agreed with you on John McCain. However, the public is clamoring for immigration control, which is something he constantly votes against. His on the fence stances have left the public irritsted in a time when they demand decisivness. Feingold is a good decision maker and could one up McCain as far as a voting record goes. (Keep in mind that Feingold was the ONE senator to vote against the Patriot Act). People just don't like Hillary and that is why, despite McCain's poor output, could one up her.

[adam]

A lot of polls show Giuliani gaining ground and fast in traditionally democratic areas. I could almost assure you that a strong Giuliani campaign could take New Hampshire, Iowa, Minnesota, and possibly Wisconsin. Mark Warner is a decent candidate - but he lacks accomplishment where as the public have given Giuliani the title of "America's mayor". I just don't think that people could warm up to Warner fast enough for him to beat the already tremendously popular Giuliani.

Seems to me that you are better informed about Giuliani and I don't know any polls for a Giuliani vs. Warner race, but I think socially liberal Giuliani would loose more in the South - especially against moderate-to-conservative Warner - then he'dd win in the Northeast.

The white blue collar workers in the North would also vote for Warner over Giuliani, in my opinion.

Despite his socially liberal stances, he is an "immigration hawk" who has that if president he would "do for America with illegal immigration what he did for NYC with crime"(This is a good statement considering how much he slashed the crime rate during his mayorship. Immigration reform will be the main issue in 2008 and I think that his hawkish stance will save more votes in the south that his "non-evangelical" stances would lose him.

The midwest is also pretty divided on Giuliani, mainly because most people polled say that they don't know enough about him to form an opinion. If nominated I think that he could at least nab Minnesota and Wisconsin. A true fiscal conservative always strikes a chord in that area. Just my 2 cents.