My 2008 prediction....

[MAS117]

Since my ELECTION 2004 election prediction was a few weeks ago and I promised I would do a 2008 prediction, here it is. The 2004 part might be new:

In November 2004, John Kerry and his running mate John Edwards lose to President George Bush and his VP Dick Cheney in a 405 to 133 race. Soon, it is 2007 and time for a new election. Running for the Democratic ticket are:

Former Senator Hillary Clinton (NY)
Senator Evan Bayh (IN)
Governor Gary Locke (WA)
Governor Jim Doyle (WI)
Governor Mark Warner (VA)

Republicans running for the ticket include:

Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld
Senate Majority Leater Bill Frist
National Security Advisor Condoleeza Rice
Senator Rudy Giuliani (NY)
Governor Rick Perry (TX)
Governor Mike Huckabee (AR)
Governor Kenny Guinn (NV)

By early 2008, front runner for the Democrat's is an unexpected winner in Iowa Caucus: Jim Doyle. Second is Hillary Clinton, and third is Gary Locke. After a New Hampshire win, Doyle seems to be in the lead.

The Republicans in Iowa have their three places filled as: Third place: Condi Rice, second: Donald Rumsfeld, and first: Giuliani. New Hampshire goes to Rumsfeld. All this still has no clear frontrunner for the right.

By late spring, the Democrat list loses two candidates: Jim Doyle, and Gary Locke. Left are Bayh, Clinton, and Warner.

The Republicans have lost Perry, Guinn, Huckabee, and Frist. A hard choice is put up for Republicans: Giuliani who led NYC through 9-11 and as Senator of NY for 2 years after beating Clinton in 2006, Rumsfeld who served as Secretary of Defense for 8 years, or Rice who served as National Security Advisor for 8 years.

Nomination goes for the Democratic ticket..... Senator Hillary Clinton after a near loss to Mark Warner. She chooses Senator Frank Lautenberg of New Jersey as he running mate.

Nomination for the Republican ticket......... Rudy Giuliani! He chooses Condoleeza Rice as his running mate.

In the debates, Clinton wins one, while Giuliani wins two. In the vp debate, Rice badly beats Lautenberg, after all she does have a very smart IQ. On election night, polls show Clinton 44%, Giuliani 56%. Giuliani-Rice beat Clinton-Lautenberg 300 to 228. Two months later, we have Vice President Rice and President Giuliani.

WHAT DO YOU THINK? FUN TO READ, I WOULD LIKE TO READ YOURS. WRITE YOUR PREDICTION NO MATTER WHAT THE OUTCOME.

reaganfan by that time frank lautenberg will be like 80-85

[BushAlva]

Here is my 2004 and 2008 presidential election forecast as well as the 2006 mid-term elections

2004:

 Democrats:
     Sen. John Kerry P
     Gen. Wesley Clark VP

 Republicans:
     Pres. George W. Bush P
     V Pres. Richard Cheney VP

 Electoral Votes:   Rep. 280 -- Dem. 264

  California Goes for Bush
 
  GOP retain control of House and Senate

2006 Mid-Term:

  Dems regain control of Senate.  GOP retain control of the House.

2008:
 
  Democrats:
      Pres. Fmr. Gov. Roy Barnes (D-GA)
      V Pres. Gov. Bill Richardson (D-NM)

  Republicans:
      Pres. Gov. Dirk Kempthorne (R-ID)
      V Pres. Sen. Jim Inhofe (R-OK)

  Electoral Votes:  Dem. 247   Rep. 304

2012 Preview:

   Sen. John Edwards (D-NC) beats Fmr. Gov. Frank Keating (R-OK)

[agcatter]

Hillary's for Hillary.  Don't look for her to be giving Kerry any REAL help in getting to the White House.  My guess is that Hillary and Bill are active behind the scenes doing whatever they can to erect any roadblock they can think of to make sure Kerry's not in a position to run for reelection in 08.  They just can't be obvious about it.

[Reaganfan]

Lauenberg seems to give me a Democrat VP vibe. I would expect maybe even a Clinton-Bayh ticket.

[Reaganfan]

Here is my 2004 and 2008 presidential election forecast as well as the 2006 mid-term elections

2004:

 Democrats:
     Sen. John Kerry P
     Gen. Wesley Clark VP

 Republicans:
     Pres. George W. Bush P
     V Pres. Richard Cheney VP

 Electoral Votes:   Rep. 280 -- Dem. 264

  California Goes for Bush
 
  GOP retain control of House and Senate

2006 Mid-Term:

  Dems regain control of Senate.  GOP retain control of the House.

2008:
 
  Democrats:
      Pres. Fmr. Gov. Roy Barnes (D-GA)
      V Pres. Gov. Bill Richardson (D-NM)

  Republicans:
      Pres. Gov. Dirk Kempthorne (R-ID)
      V Pres. Sen. Jim Inhofe (R-OK)

  Electoral Votes:  Dem. 247   Rep. 304

2012 Preview:

   Sen. John Edwards (D-NC) beats Fmr. Gov. Frank Keating (R-OK)

Vice President Inhofe... President Kempthorne... hmmm. I like it.

[© tweed]

Bushalva had a strange prediction....the Dems won't nominate barnes when they have big names like Hillary, Gore, and Edwards on the table.

[TheWildCard]

Republicans Bush/Cheney
Democrats Kerry/Edwards

In what would be dubbed one of the toughest campignes in US history full of surprises and momentum shifts the biggest shocker would come election night when the Bush/Cheney ticket won the electoral vote 296-242 with narrow wins in MN, WI, IA and the south. the media called it a surprise landslide electoral win.

3 years later the speculation begins who will run for President in '08?

The Democrats
Hillary Clinton
Al Gore
John Edwards
Joe Lieberman

Hillary Clinton as expected announces her plans to run shortly after John Edwards and Joe Lieberman throw their hats into the ring. But then shockingly a candidate from the far left(or acts like it) jumps into the race, nope not Howard Dean though he hinted to it and considered it, but to the shock of many the person is Al Gore.

It is now some begin to ponder "Is Hillary really a shoe in for the nom.?" the doubt would continue as the Iowa Caucus and New Hampshire polls are realeased

IA
Gore 31%
Clinton 30%
Edwards 27%
Liberman 10%
2% undecided

NH
Clinton 29%
Gore 28%
Edwards 27%
Liberman 16%

It is after NH that a disapointed Lieberman ends his run for the White House.

Then after the narrow victory in NH the Clinton machine launches into high gear. As it does Lieberman endorses "The person with the most honesty and integrity in this race" John Edwards. The Gore and Clinton campignes are stunned. But at the end it wouldn't matter Hillary's campigne heavily funded goes on to win most of the primaries with minor wins for Gore and Edwards along the way.

The Democratic ticket Clinton/Clark.


The Republicans
Rudy Giuliani
Condi Rice
Tom Ridge
Bill Frist
John McCain

In a press conference hosted by John McCain he prepares to reveal big news many speculate that he will announce his intentions to run for President.

A smileing McCain comes out on the stage and announces that he is not running for the white house but "would like to introduce the next President of the United States of America Rudy Giuliani!"

Soon after Rice, Ridge and Frist(among others) announce their intenstions to run. Guiliani is dubbed the clear front runner

The Iowa caucus and New Hampshire primaries reveal a stunning surprise however

IA
Rice 40%
Giuliani 38%
Frist 14%
Ridge 5%
Other 2%
Undecided 1%

NH
Rice 32%
Giuliani 30%
Frist 29%
Ridge 5%
Other 4%

The Rice team full of former Bush campigne advisors prooves to be nearly unstoppable and wins the nomination with victories for Rudy Giuliani along the way.

Many believe that Jeb Bush will be her running mate but to the shock of many she picks Rudy Guiliani as her VP

Republican Ticket Rice/Giuiliani

The 2008 campigne would proove to be a gritty one. Hillary wins the first debate. The second is dubbed a tie but n the third debate Condi wins big and takes a big lead in the polls.

On election night in one of the biggest voter turn outs in American history Rice/Giuliani wins big.

(Yes I know this probably won't happen but its an interesting read at least)

[Reaganfan]

Republicans Bush/Cheney
Democrats Kerry/Edwards

In what would be dubbed one of the toughest campignes in US history full of surprises and momentum shifts the biggest shocker would come election night when the Bush/Cheney ticket won the electoral vote 296-242 with narrow wins in MN, WI, IA and the south. the media called it a surprise landslide electoral win.

3 years later the speculation begins who will run for President in '08?

The Democrats
Hillary Clinton
Al Gore
John Edwards
Joe Lieberman

Hillary Clinton as expected announces her plans to run shortly after John Edwards and Joe Lieberman throw their hats into the ring. But then shockingly a candidate from the far left(or acts like it) jumps into the race, nope not Howard Dean though he hinted to it and considered it, but to the shock of many the person is Al Gore.

It is now some begin to ponder "Is Hillary really a shoe in for the nom.?" the doubt would continue as the Iowa Caucus and New Hampshire polls are realeased

IA
Gore 31%
Clinton 30%
Edwards 27%
Liberman 10%
2% undecided

NH
Clinton 29%
Gore 28%
Edwards 27%
Liberman 16%

It is after NH that a disapointed Lieberman ends his run for the White House.

Then after the narrow victory in NH the Clinton machine launches into high gear. As it does Lieberman endorses "The person with the most honesty and integrity in this race" John Edwards. The Gore and Clinton campignes are stunned. But at the end it wouldn't matter Hillary's campigne heavily funded goes on to win most of the primaries with minor wins for Gore and Edwards along the way.

The Democratic ticket Clinton/Clark.


The Republicans
Rudy Giuliani
Condi Rice
Tom Ridge
Bill Frist
John McCain

In a press conference hosted by John McCain he prepares to reveal big news many speculate that he will announce his intentions to run for President.

A smileing McCain comes out on the stage and announces that he is not running for the white house but "would like to introduce the next President of the United States of America Rudy Giuliani!"

Soon after Rice, Ridge and Frist(among others) announce their intenstions to run. Guiliani is dubbed the clear front runner

The Iowa caucus and New Hampshire primaries reveal a stunning surprise however

IA
Rice 40%
Giuliani 38%
Frist 14%
Ridge 5%
Other 2%
Undecided 1%

NH
Rice 32%
Giuliani 30%
Frist 29%
Ridge 5%
Other 4%

The Rice team full of former Bush campigne advisors prooves to be nearly unstoppable and wins the nomination with victories for Rudy Giuliani along the way.

Many believe that Jeb Bush will be her running mate but to the shock of many she picks Rudy Guiliani as her VP

Republican Ticket Rice/Giuiliani

The 2008 campigne would proove to be a gritty one. Hillary wins the first debate. The second is dubbed a tie but n the third debate Condi wins big and takes a big lead in the polls.

On election night in one of the biggest voter turn outs in American history Rice/Giuliani wins big.

(Yes I know this probably won't happen but its an interesting read at least)

Wild Card, I LOVED IT!!!!!

[Starbucks Union Thug HokeyPuck]

2004:
Kerry/Edwards defeat Bush/Cheney 315-223

2008:
Kerry/Edwards have successful run...win relection over McCain/Guliani 413-125

2012:
Edwards/Clinton win over whoever the GOP nominates....

I seriously think in my closed, bias mind the Dems are on the verge of a big run : P

[Fmr. Gov. NickG]

I don't have a prediction for 2008, but how about this one:

In 2016, the Dem nominee will be Stephanie Herseth.


BTW, I think McCain at 68 will probably be too old to run in 2008, especially considering his previous health problems.  Also, I'm surprised no one has mentioned Ed Rendell as a Dem candidate.

[Ben.]

Firstly a Bush landslide of the kind you are predicting Reaganfan is unlikely in the extreme… but I wont deny its possible…. I recently found this analysis of a Kerry vs Bush race (http://www.centerforpolitics.org/crystalball/pres_college-kerry.htm ) which suggests it will be highly competitive… should Kerry lose it will be something like… 252 Electoral Votes to 286 for Bush (Bush gains New Mexico and Iowa while Kerry gains New Hampshire)… In the House of Representatives the Dems may well make some small gains but the Republican majority stays firm despite these inroads…In the Senate the GOP gains three seats (GA, SC and NC) while the Dems gain two seats (AK and IL)… Both parties could make larger gains in the Senate however in all probability they will not…

2008:

By 2006 the Budget deficit and Bush’s keenness for liberal spending plans have agitated his Conservative base and he is soon forced to introduce drastic cuts in Social Security and health care as well as other domestic programs, while also raising taxes in an attempt to take on the ballooning budget deficit… these cuts and the rise in taxation comes as a gift for the Democrats who have recently replaced Tom Daschle with Bill Nelson (D-FL) and in the 2006 midterms the Democrats mercilessly attack Republican incumbents across the country over the new taxes and the cuts in social programs…the Democrats as a result manage to recapture both houses of Congress taking a firm if not unassailable majority in the House and a slim majority in the Senate. After several weeks of gridlock between Congress and the White House a new budget is agreed to which spreads the cuts more broadly. Bush is left weakened and concentrates on foreign policy accelerating the full scale US withdrawal from Iraq despite the weakness of the newly instated government there and while this causes some Democrats outcries generally most US voters are glad to see the back of direct US involvement in the middle east at least for the moment. The Budget deficit begins to very slowly contract however still not fast enough for the US electorate…

In early 2007 several Democrats begin to campaign for the Democratic nomination…

Sn. Russ Feingold (D-WI): effective leader of the liberal wing of the party in the senate and he is quickly endorsed by a number of other liberal dems including the 04 candidate for the nomination Howard Dean which proves a big boost as Dean’s network of liberal donors soon swings in behind their new champion.

Gov. Ed Rendell (D-PA): from the opposite wing of the party to Feingold but without the stiffness and lack of charisma that often typifies DLC Democrats, with a solid centrist record as PA governor and a record as an excellent campaigner he is quickly endorsed by Senators Jo Lieberman and Evan Bayh as well as Governors Blanco (D-LA) and Warner (D-VA) and a string of other moderate democrats.

Gov. Janet Napolitano (D-AZ): with a progressive record as governor of a formerly reliably republican state that has been seen to slowly shift leftwards and a good television presence. Governor Napolitano is seen to be effectively offering herself as a compromise candidate standing between the left (Feingold) and the right (Rendell) and she receives support from the likes of Diana Feinstein and Governor Locke of Washington.

Gov. Phil Bredesen (D-TN): A moderate southerner Governor with a personable nature much like Rendell and with similar political positions, largely running as a southern alternative with none clearly available.

Fr.Sen. John Edwards (D-NC): A left leaning southern moderate and VP running mate in 2004 with John Kerry, having honed his neo populist positions and cultivated links with organised labour he is hopping for a far more solid base from which to launch is campaign for the nomination that he had in 2004.


Initially it the race is seen as a contest between Fiengold and Napolitano however towards the beginning of fall Rendell’s campaign gains momentum as Napolitano and Feingold stumbles at the same time Edward’s union support comes into play as he concentrates on the Iowa caucus as well as latter industrial states such as Michigan and California.

Iowa Caucus…

John Edwards – 35%
Ed Rendell – 32%
Russ Feingold – 15%                    
Janet Napolitano – 10%
Phil Bredesen   - 8%


New Hampshire Primary (two weeks after IA)...

Ed Rendell – 38%
John Edwards – 22%
Russ Feingold – 20%
Janet Napolitano – 11%
Phil Bredsen – 9%

After New Hampshire Edwards campaign began to lose steam as the moderate voter he was seeking to attract began to side with Rendell and the left leaning voters moved towards Feingold after losing Michigan to Rendell Edwards quit the race some time before him Bredsen (after only gaining one win in the south) also quit the race… after Edwards Napolitano (who had been buoyed by wins in New Mexico, Arizona and Nevada had stayed in the race) left the race after a diapionting finish in Missouri and soon Rendell had clinched the nomination against the leftwing challenge of Russ Feingold.

In a bit I’ll deal with the Republicans but gotta go…  

[© tweed]

Larry Sabato's map isn't for what he thinks would happen, but what the best case secario for the Dem could be.  Keep that in mind.

[Ben.]

Sorry Miami I didn’t realise that but from what I read it seems that it is just how the states would most likely be placed in a Kerry v Bush match up… but I’ll continue to outline the 2008 contest…any thoughts?    

Republicans 2008…

So after a narrow Kerry Defeat in 2004 (252 to 286) taking the situation after at the end of the second Bush term to be as I outlined in the last post and having done the Democratic candidates…here goes with the Republicans…

In April 2007 Richard Cheney officially announces that he will not seek the Republican nomination for President in 2008. The following candidates soon pile-in to seek the Republican nomination…

Sn.Bill Frist (R-TN): The former majority now minority leader in the Senate with a solidly conservative record however not so conservative that ordinary voters are tuned away…a good campaigner and a southerner who has despite his very loyal voting record has experience building bipartisan collations to push through legislation.

fr.Gov George Pataki (R-NY): After not running for a fourth term as Governor of New York (Eliot Spitzer soundly defeating the Republican candidate Mary Donohue in 2006) Pataki joined the Bush administration as Sectary of Health and Human Services. Pataki has effectively manoeuvred to place himself as heir apparent to the “Rockefeller Republican” wing of the Party that had last come close to capturing the nomination with the candidacy of John McCain in 2000 and it came as little surprise that both Colin Powel and John McCain quickly endorsed the former Governor’s candidacy.

Sn.Elizabeth Dole (R-NC): With broad executive experience working in the cabinets of both Ronald Reagan and George Bush senior as well as legislative experience as North Carolina’s junior senator Dole has a solid record with which to tout her viability to be President. As with Frist she has a voting record that while Conservative is not so conservative that it alienates independent voters and in fact on a number of issues she has staked out territory to the left of many Republicans which means that she would seem capable of fighting for the support of both the left and centre of the Party.

Sn.Orrin Hatch (R-UT): A Solidly conservative republican senator from a even more solidly conservative state, some gaffes in the past but that does not detract from his massive legislative experience and ability to appeal to the Republican base.

Gov.Haley Barbour (R-MS): A former lobbyist turned Governor of this rock solidly republican, deep southern state… with the most solidly conservative record out of all the mainstream candidates Barbour is very much able to appeal to the republican grassroots particularly those in the south and west. However in many ways Barbour seems to lack the experience or temperament to be able to be a viable candidate for President and added to this he can be seen as too conservative to win over the majority of American voters.


Alan Keyes (R-MD): Coz what would a Republican Primary season be without Alan Keyes.  

New Hampshire Primary…

George Pataki – 39%
Bill Frist – 26%
Elizabeth Dole – 17%
Orrin Hatch – 10%
Haley Barbour – 6%
Alan Keyes - 2%

In the south Frist eventually prevails over Dole while the hardline conservative largely plums for Hatch, while he does poorly in many southern states Pataki makes a very strong sowing when the primaries move back to the north again and by mid March seems to have the nomination sewn up with Frist a solid second followed by Hatch.

As before when I Have time I’ll have a go at outlining the contest between Pataki and Rendell in 2008…

Any Thoughts?      

[7,052,770]

I can't imagine Gov. Barbour running for president
But I suppose 4 years can make a lot of difference

[zachman]

Liddy Dole will suffer the same quick fate for her campaign if she ran in 2008 as she did in 2000. I can't picture Rice giving stump speeches, and I don't think she'd go for it. Pataki and Frist will be good picks. McCain will be old in 2008, I'm not sure if he will go for it again.

[GOPhound]

Some pretty entertaining stuff here.  It's interesting to see Democrats predict the GOP nominee in '08, the field you guys are predicting is pretty pathetic and old school if you ask me.  After four years of Kerry (yes regrettably I think he's going to win), the GOP is going to be fired up in '08 and ready to win at all costs, just like the Dems are this year.

The party will be looking forward, not backwards.  I think these will be some of the names:

Frist - completely boring, lacks charisma and passion. A disaster in the making.

Pataki - Similar to Frist, though brings a little more excitement.  Not good enough for President, possible VP.

Giuliani - Too liberal to get the nomination.  Too much of a 'big' personality to be VP and play second fiddle.

Santorum - excellent all around.  Telegenic, articulate,  passionate, from a key state.  Will have a problem with the media though on social issues.  I think there's a good chance he wins the nomination and presidency if he runs.

Sununu Jr. - Same as Santorum above, but with a less intense, more appealing personality.  Would obviously kick butt in NH, which as we saw this year is crucial.  I can't think of anyone better right now, he'd be my pick.  He's only 39 right now, will be 43 by the election.  Like Clinton in '92, will be a big contrast to then 64 year old Kerry.

If Sununu can get McCain to be his VP he'll be golden.  McCain will neutralize the military service issue that Kerry will play up again, and also appeal to independents and Democrats.  McCain will also add some experience and age to the ticket.  

I've heard a lot of people mention Condi, I think she's headed back to academia.  Forget Rumsfeld, McCain, Hatch, Liz Dole, Lamar Alexander, they're too old school.  

I think this is the 2008 matchup:
GOP: Sununu/McCain
Dems: Kerry/Edwards or Clark

Remember you heard it here first:)

In a closer than expected election, Sununu becomes the youngest President since JFK.  This sets up a matchup against Hillary in 2012.  Sununu goes on to defeat Hillary soundly.      



 

[Ben.]

GOPhound I'm not basing these predictions on a scenario where Kerry wins in 2004... I was responding to the original post that was based on the assumption that Kerry loses in 2004... However I STRONGLY disagree with the Bush landslide Reaganfan suggests...  

Your right about Santorum though he would defiantly be a possibility however I would predict that if both Frist and Pataki ran then he would not… having said that I think that where one of these two not to run then Santorum would proably run…

Now as I said I was assuming for my predictions that Kerry loses narrowly in 2004, however where Kerry to win I think the Republican field looking to challenge him would be somewhat different…

I think that Pataki might well still run, Frist I would bet would not, he can afford to wait to take on Kerry’s VP in 2012 but if Kerry looks weak then Frist might well throw his hat into the ring… Barbour was a bit of a joke really, I was looking for a solidly conservative southern governor with a bit of an ego and to me Barbour seemed about right (however please suggest a more plausable candidate) as with Frist I doubt “Barbour” would take on an incumbent… Liddy Dole I would imagine would not run against an incumbent President Kerry… however I think that Orrin Hatch might well…Santorum would not want to frit away time, money and credibility taking on a tough incumbent, but again where Kerry vulnerable he might consider running…

Where Kerry the incumbent in 2008 it all comes down to the reaction of the Republican base to a Democratic President with the very real possibility of Democrat gains in the Senate and the House…I doubt that the Dems would retake both the House and the Senate in 2004 in fact both will probably remain GOP but Republican majorities will be narrowed in all likelihood…this gridlock will mean that the likes of McCain and Snowe will become very important in getting legislation through… a new Democrat leader in the Senate such as Bill Nelson would be a good idea for this…so I doubt Kerry could do anything more than Clinton, but he will have a problem with the retiring Baby boomers and the massive strain this will put on social security and that could be exploited by a GOP challenger in 2008…However I doubt that there would be much “clear red water” between Kerry and his opponent in 2008 as even where the Democrats to win back the Senate and the House in 2006 Kerry would all probability would still have to govern as a moderate and so there would be little the GOP could take issue with him on that could appeal directly to Independent voters… So in 2008 I would expect a solidly conservative Republican to get the nomination defeating Pataki while Frist, Santorum and Dole sat the contest out and that November the GOP candidate is defeated by a firm margin…

That’s my two cents

PS; Even as a Dem Frist (despite his being fairly conservative) is the kinda guy I could vote for coz I trust him and he comes across as a decent guy to me… but in a face off between Kerry and Frist and if the senate and the house where close two I’d have to vote for JFK…  

[opebo]

Whoever wins in 2004, the economy will still be booming in 2008.  That's already 'baked into the cake'.  So if Bush wins, his successor will have a good economy to run on, and if Kerry wins, he'll almost certainly get re-elected.  Kerry would be held back from wrecking the boom by the Republican congress.   This incipient boom is one of the biggest reasons I think a Bush loss in 2004 would be disasterous.  If Kerry were re-elected in 2008 he would allow the tax cuts to expire, which would probably kill the good times.. but by then it would be too late.

[Reaganfan]

My 405-133 is as nice as I can think. President Bush has the good economy, sucessful war on terror, capture of Saddam, and the potential capture of UBL. If he drops Cheney, Frist, Santorum, or Giuliani would be fine. If anything a 238 to 300 margin for Bush.

[Ben.]

I’m afraid Reaganfan I just don’t see such a big win for Bush… The economy is hardly roaring back into life and jobs continue to fail to be created quickly enough, In Iraq it seems very questionable that a national government with its own capacity to defend its self will be in place in time to hand over control in the summer, Bush seems to have questions over his credibility and while the “AWOL” story is hardly very serious it would seem to further undermine Bush credibility as a war leader… The ballooning deficit is one hell of a problem and Bush’s spendthrift attitude to Government spending is very worrying while at the same time he introduces massive tax cuts that further inflate the Budget Deficit…

Now don’t get me wrong personally I see Bush as decent guy (would never vote for him) but don’t see anything duplicitous in his character… having said that I would argue that the public with the failure to finds WMDs, with the AWOL issue are beginning to see him not quite as straight  forward as they where lead to believe however this feeling seems directed more at the Administration than the President however the two are entwined to such as degree it may be difficult to separate them in voters minds.

Kerry as we see has problems but he seems to be able to aggressively campaign and rebut any Republican attacks on him…he has an excellent war record that will help personalise him for many voters while interestingly also shifting him away from his liberal record in the Senate…his problems are that record and his perceived “aloofness” however I cant see the old “liberal spendthrift” attack working this time a more sophisticated line of attack is needed and his aloofness seems to have been easily corrected as a drawback during the primary campaign…

In the end I see this race (barring any unforeseen scandal or upset) as higly competitive however a Bush win will be based on securing a few marginal states not sweeping entire regions… In many states which where close last time between Gore and Bush the “Nader factor” was very important (I strongly doubt a Nader showing even half as strong as last time seeing as how he is running (if he in fact runs) alone as an independent) In States such as Minnesota, Wisconsin, Iowa, Washington, Oregon, New Mexico, New Hampshire and Florida Nader effectively held the balance his supporters would have either boosted Gore into a solid win or as in the case of NH or FL won the states from Bush…. Bush efforts to win over Hispanics could lead NM into his column in November while in Iowa he would seem to have a good shot…Opinion polls and the 2000 results would suggest that Minnesota will go Dem, While the State government and Congressional delegation in WI is overwhelming Democratic at the same time NH showed in January that Dems and Independents are highly motivated, with the total turnout in NH coming close to what would have been required to win the state in 2000 based on how many voted then…

So finally a highly competitive race however they said that about Dukakis in 1988… but I did hear a statistic that stated that every incumbent President who has been re-elected has always lead in the polls throughout the year leading up to the election and Bush has not… but then again these arguments based on bast elections are generally bogus like “Republicans have to win Ohio” or “Democrats have to win five southern states and have a candidate from the south” are all bogus…

Well There you go… Any Thoughts?                                      

[zachman]

Picking Santorum, brings a huge counterweight to Bush and the republicans, a loss of secular America, making the country even more polarized.

[jravnsbo]

Some thoughts:)

EC Map favors GOP.  Dems have to win all gore states and then pick up 7 EV to get to 2000 levels.

Next I think it will be close at this point, but you must also remember, Bush is playing defense now and hasn't even started to tap his war chest or actively campaign to a great extent.  Kerry is essentially still paying bills as he raises money.  yes not locked in by caps, but funds are still short, especially if he needs to spend some on expensive Mar 2 days.

Kerry is a liberal, Bush is a conservative, plaina nd simple.

So that said, Kerry's record in the senate and anti-war after his return home will not play at all int eh SOuth and Kerry has said essentially he will write it off.  So for Dems to win they have 2 strategies, win int he SW> NM, AZ, NV   or Midwest> picking up an Ohio or MO.  

Bush will be able to concentrate his funds primarily on OH, PA, the upper Midwest Gore states and the SW also.  This is a big advantage as Dems MUST hold PA, MN, IA, NM which Bush has already been making a huge play for.  

Plus economy is improving, not roaring yet, but improving.  Unemployment has gone from 6.2% int he fall down to 5.6% after 9/11, corporate scandals and cheap labor overseas.  If 100k plus jobs continue to be created Bush will look very good for the election.

Terrorism/For policy.  Bush is strong here.  We caught another one of Iraqi most wanted today (#41), up to 45/55.  Plus if we would catch OBL or other key leaders in afghan raid planned for spring, WMDs are found, or countries such as Libya, Iran and N Korea continue to move towards compliance this all looks good for Bush.  Plus if power is succesffully handed ove rin Iraq, all potential pluses.  There are potential downside effects but none are on the horizon.  Plus Kerry's weak record on defense will be amplified.  he has voted agianst 27 weapons systemt he military now sees as vital, he voted to cut CIA funding and wants to rely heavily ont he UN.

Cultural issues:  a definate Bush plus category.  Kerry is all over the place on gay marriage which is coming out of his home state, OUCH!  


Int he end i think Bush still wins, as Dems need the map to fall just right for them to win.

I’m afraid Reaganfan I just don’t see such a big win for Bush… The economy is hardly roaring back into life and jobs continue to fail to be created quickly enough, In Iraq it seems very questionable that a national government with its own capacity to defend its self will be in place in time to hand over control in the summer, Bush seems to have questions over his credibility and while the “AWOL” story is hardly very serious it would seem to further undermine Bush credibility as a war leader… The ballooning deficit is one hell of a problem and Bush’s spendthrift attitude to Government spending is very worrying while at the same time he introduces massive tax cuts that further inflate the Budget Deficit…

Now don’t get me wrong personally I see Bush as decent guy (would never vote for him) but don’t see anything duplicitous in his character… having said that I would argue that the public with the failure to finds WMDs, with the AWOL issue are beginning to see him not quite as straight  forward as they where lead to believe however this feeling seems directed more at the Administration than the President however the two are entwined to such as degree it may be difficult to separate them in voters minds.

Kerry as we see has problems but he seems to be able to aggressively campaign and rebut any Republican attacks on him…he has an excellent war record that will help personalise him for many voters while interestingly also shifting him away from his liberal record in the Senate…his problems are that record and his perceived “aloofness” however I cant see the old “liberal spendthrift” attack working this time a more sophisticated line of attack is needed and his aloofness seems to have been easily corrected as a drawback during the primary campaign…

In the end I see this race (barring any unforeseen scandal or upset) as higly competitive however a Bush win will be based on securing a few marginal states not sweeping entire regions… In many states which where close last time between Gore and Bush the “Nader factor” was very important (I strongly doubt a Nader showing even half as strong as last time seeing as how he is running (if he in fact runs) alone as an independent) In States such as Minnesota, Wisconsin, Iowa, Washington, Oregon, New Mexico, New Hampshire and Florida Nader effectively held the balance his supporters would have either boosted Gore into a solid win or as in the case of NH or FL won the states from Bush…. Bush efforts to win over Hispanics could lead NM into his column in November while in Iowa he would seem to have a good shot…Opinion polls and the 2000 results would suggest that Minnesota will go Dem, While the State government and Congressional delegation in WI is overwhelming Democratic at the same time NH showed in January that Dems and Independents are highly motivated, with the total turnout in NH coming close to what would have been required to win the state in 2000 based on how many voted then…

So finally a highly competitive race however they said that about Dukakis in 1988… but I did hear a statistic that stated that every incumbent President who has been re-elected has always lead in the polls throughout the year leading up to the election and Bush has not… but then again these arguments based on bast elections are generally bogus like “Republicans have to win Ohio” or “Democrats have to win five southern states and have a candidate from the south” are all bogus…

Well There you go… Any Thoughts?                                      

[12th Doctor]

Some thoughts:)

EC Map favors GOP.  Dems have to win all gore states and then pick up 7 EV to get to 2000 levels.

Next I think it will be close at this point, but you must also remember, Bush is playing defense now and hasn't even started to tap his war chest or actively campaign to a great extent.  Kerry is essentially still paying bills as he raises money.  yes not locked in by caps, but funds are still short, especially if he needs to spend some on expensive Mar 2 days.

Kerry is a liberal, Bush is a conservative, plaina nd simple.

So that said, Kerry's record in the senate and anti-war after his return home will not play at all int eh SOuth and Kerry has said essentially he will write it off.  So for Dems to win they have 2 strategies, win int he SW> NM, AZ, NV   or Midwest> picking up an Ohio or MO.  

Bush will be able to concentrate his funds primarily on OH, PA, the upper Midwest Gore states and the SW also.  This is a big advantage as Dems MUST hold PA, MN, IA, NM which Bush has already been making a huge play for.  

Plus economy is improving, not roaring yet, but improving.  Unemployment has gone from 6.2% int he fall down to 5.6% after 9/11, corporate scandals and cheap labor overseas.  If 100k plus jobs continue to be created Bush will look very good for the election.

Terrorism/For policy.  Bush is strong here.  We caught another one of Iraqi most wanted today (#41), up to 45/55.  Plus if we would catch OBL or other key leaders in afghan raid planned for spring, WMDs are found, or countries such as Libya, Iran and N Korea continue to move towards compliance this all looks good for Bush.  Plus if power is succesffully handed ove rin Iraq, all potential pluses.  There are potential downside effects but none are on the horizon.  Plus Kerry's weak record on defense will be amplified.  he has voted agianst 27 weapons systemt he military now sees as vital, he voted to cut CIA funding and wants to rely heavily ont he UN.

Cultural issues:  a definate Bush plus category.  Kerry is all over the place on gay marriage which is coming out of his home state, OUCH!  


Int he end i think Bush still wins, as Dems need the map to fall just right for them to win.

I’m afraid Reaganfan I just don’t see such a big win for Bush… The economy is hardly roaring back into life and jobs continue to fail to be created quickly enough, In Iraq it seems very questionable that a national government with its own capacity to defend its self will be in place in time to hand over control in the summer, Bush seems to have questions over his credibility and while the “AWOL” story is hardly very serious it would seem to further undermine Bush credibility as a war leader… The ballooning deficit is one hell of a problem and Bush’s spendthrift attitude to Government spending is very worrying while at the same time he introduces massive tax cuts that further inflate the Budget Deficit…

Now don’t get me wrong personally I see Bush as decent guy (would never vote for him) but don’t see anything duplicitous in his character… having said that I would argue that the public with the failure to finds WMDs, with the AWOL issue are beginning to see him not quite as straight  forward as they where lead to believe however this feeling seems directed more at the Administration than the President however the two are entwined to such as degree it may be difficult to separate them in voters minds.

Kerry as we see has problems but he seems to be able to aggressively campaign and rebut any Republican attacks on him…he has an excellent war record that will help personalise him for many voters while interestingly also shifting him away from his liberal record in the Senate…his problems are that record and his perceived “aloofness” however I cant see the old “liberal spendthrift” attack working this time a more sophisticated line of attack is needed and his aloofness seems to have been easily corrected as a drawback during the primary campaign…

In the end I see this race (barring any unforeseen scandal or upset) as higly competitive however a Bush win will be based on securing a few marginal states not sweeping entire regions… In many states which where close last time between Gore and Bush the “Nader factor” was very important (I strongly doubt a Nader showing even half as strong as last time seeing as how he is running (if he in fact runs) alone as an independent) In States such as Minnesota, Wisconsin, Iowa, Washington, Oregon, New Mexico, New Hampshire and Florida Nader effectively held the balance his supporters would have either boosted Gore into a solid win or as in the case of NH or FL won the states from Bush…. Bush efforts to win over Hispanics could lead NM into his column in November while in Iowa he would seem to have a good shot…Opinion polls and the 2000 results would suggest that Minnesota will go Dem, While the State government and Congressional delegation in WI is overwhelming Democratic at the same time NH showed in January that Dems and Independents are highly motivated, with the total turnout in NH coming close to what would have been required to win the state in 2000 based on how many voted then…

So finally a highly competitive race however they said that about Dukakis in 1988… but I did hear a statistic that stated that every incumbent President who has been re-elected has always lead in the polls throughout the year leading up to the election and Bush has not… but then again these arguments based on bast elections are generally bogus like “Republicans have to win Ohio” or “Democrats have to win five southern states and have a candidate from the south” are all bogus…

Well There you go… Any Thoughts?                                      

acctually, they have ot pick up 10 to win.

[Michael Z]

Some pretty entertaining stuff here.  It's interesting to see Democrats predict the GOP nominee in '08, the field you guys are predicting is pretty pathetic and old school if you ask me.

I might just be getting the wrong end of the stick here, but your tone suggests you seem to think that because of our political affiliation we don't know what the hell we're talking about. But I could be wrong, and I apologise if I am.

Anyway, Dole is a pretty good example of an "old school" candidate getting the nomination. Besides, age shouldn't be a stumbling block - look at Reagan.

Should Bush lose (which, realistically speaking, probably won't happen), the GOP, like any other mainstream political party, will look for the candidate they think is most likely to win; that does not automatically have to be a young candidate.

[zachman]

If the republicans have a power struggle between 2 or more establishment candidates, a young hotshot will triumph. The question is which candidates will the party sponsor. Pataki, Giuliani, Frist, or Powell?