PDA

View Full Version : 2004 Political Prediction


adios
03-08-2003, 09:03 AM
The Democrats are going to lose and they are going to lose big time. Basically because the list of Democratic presidential candidates is abysmal to this point and I'm predicting that the Republicans will make significant gains in both houses of Congress because they'll get skonked so bad in the presidential election. Immediately eliminate the Washington insiders that the press is hyping i.e. Kerry, Lieberman, and Gephardt. Don't get me wrong, one of these three may be nominated and I'm sure the Republicans would love it if one of these three did, but I don't see any of these three mounting a serious campaign to challenge Bush. Some lesser known congressional members running:


Joe Biden - some are mentioning his name but he couldn't beat Dukaukis in 88 so I don't see him as having much chance of even getting the nomination.

Carol Moseley Braun - get real.

John Edwards - I suppose he has some chance of getting the nomination as he doesn't have a lot of political baggage and he hasn't been in Washington that long. He's a dark horse and actually might be electable. We'll see how the press treats his candidacy.

Bob Grahm - Yeah he's another guy that could get elected against Bush I feel. He's been a Senator since 86 I believe but doesn't have a lot of political baggage IMO. He's had some serious health problems and his age is somewhat of a factor. He does have a chance to win the nomination and is more electable probably than any of the other candidates coming from Congress IMO.


Dennis Kucinich - Who's he? Actually since I grew up in Cleveland I'm very familiar with Mr. Kucinich, a long time Cleveland city counciler and thorn in the side of Carl Stokes during his tenure as mayor of Cleveland. I just don't see Mr. Kucinich as a viable national candidate.

Some Washinton Outsiders

Garry Hart - Well a former insider and ah well no.

Wesley Clark - No I don't see the leap from Army General to President of the USA ala Eisenhauer.

Howard Dean - I don't think so based on some of the legislation he signed as Governor of Vermont regarding "civil unions." I respect him immensly for having the political courage to do so. Unfortunately methinks it's too much baggage although it shouldn't be. Maybe I'll be surprised.

Al Sharpton - Come on now. /forums/images/icons/smile.gif /forums/images/icons/blush.gif /forums/images/icons/wink.gif /forums/images/icons/tongue.gif /forums/images/icons/grin.gif /forums/images/icons/cool.gif /forums/images/icons/crazy.gif /forums/images/icons/confused.gif

Feel free to insert your favorite Dem candidate that I overlooked.

IrishHand
03-08-2003, 09:56 AM
I disagre with you - I think it'll be a good race. For the most part, the Dems have refrained from bashing Bush's post-9/11 policies (and certainly his foreign policies). I think that'll come to a quick close with both world opinion and increasingly domestic opinion opposed to Bush's administration's handling of the Iraq issue. Of course, the Dems ability to lay into his domestic issues goes without saying. Unless Bush can generate a positive outcome with Iraq, I'm not sure what track record he'll have to campaign on. A year ago, I would have agreed with you completely, but not any more.

Of course, I do agree that the apparent lack of candidates presents a severe problem. Guess we'll just have to see how it plays out.

Ray Zee
03-08-2003, 12:06 PM
lieberman has a shot especially if bush screws up in iraq.

but dont count out the winner of the last presidential election from doing it again. he may see that bush is in trouble and may want to contest this time, instead of waiting four additional years.

i think he bowed out so that he wouldnt be labeled as a two time loser, but with bush fading in the polls he may do the political turnaround.

adios
03-08-2003, 03:27 PM
Yeah Gore is an obvious omission. Since I'm sticking my neck out I'll really stick it out. I think that if Hussein doesn't abdicate (I know it seems like a remote possibility but it could happen and holding his feet to the fire is the only way it will ever happen) the USA will still win a decisive, easy victory in Iraq. At that point the uncertainty regarding Iraq will be dissipated and I think his, Bush's, popularity will start to rise. If the Democrats in Congress continue to stone wall his economic initiatives and the economy remains soft I do think there is a decent chance that a lot of voters will be turned off by the stone walling. If he runs against a liberal, he wins on all the other issues except maybe the abortion issue. If he runs against a centrast Democrat like Grahm he may have his hands full. However, Grahm does have a few weaknesses as I mentioned. The last person that ran and won as a member of Congress was JFK. Even though many would consider daddy Bush, LBJ, and Nixon Washington insiders; the voters IMO generally reject pols running for president from this ilk. Daddy Bush more or less rode Reagan's coattails to victory and had served for quite some time as an appointed official in various administrations. Nixon had been away from Washington for 8 years. LBJ was probably the last clear cut Washington insider that won a presidential election. Gore and Gerald Ford almost pulled out victories but not quite. We'll see what happens.

Clarkmeister
03-08-2003, 03:41 PM
Well, Tom, the beauty of the internet is you can put your money where your mouth is. The republicans are currently at -181 to win the 2004 presidential election. So just throw down $18,100 and walk away with a cool $10,000 profit.

Personally, I think its way too early to tell. Bush the First looked unbeatable about this time in his term also. Things can change in a hurry.

John Ho
03-08-2003, 04:31 PM
I think General Clark would be a good alternative to Bush. His military credentials would be popular at a time like this. Especially if the war goes poorly or new threats pop up.

I think Kerry could beat Bush as well. Don't agree with Ray that Lieberman could win. I doubt the country is ready for a Jewish president especially considering what ramifications that might have with regards to terrorism.

Dynasty
03-08-2003, 04:45 PM
Howard Dean - I don't think so based on some of the legislation he signed as Governor of Vermont regarding "civil unions." I respect him immensly for having the political courage to do so. Unfortunately methinks it's too much baggage although it shouldn't be. Maybe I'll be surprised.

I'm starting to change my initial opinion of Dean. He may become the "unknown" candidate who beats out all the established Washington Democrats. Dean may be the best bet among Democrats now.

scalf
03-09-2003, 11:56 AM
/forums/images/icons/laugh.gif i know, too soon, but in these internet years..one year is like seven old years...you laff now...hillary in 2004..gl /forums/images/icons/cool.gif

andyfox
03-10-2003, 01:00 AM
I agree: way too early to tell. Clinton was running a poor 3rd in the polls behind Bush and Perot just before the Democratic convention in 1992. And there are plenty of other examples of guys coming from nowhere to win, and guys pulling out a defeat from the jaws of victory.

Parmenides
03-15-2003, 10:48 AM
Bush will cheat again. The Republican party will permit only Christian faith based initiatives. Praying to Jesus or Moses will be allowed in public schools, but only if a child signs an affidavit declaring that the Koran was writen by Satan. Abortion will be outlawed. Corporate graft will be legal, but only if you steal over 100 million dollars (otherwise, you are a proletarian crook, and an obvious commie). Term limits for the President will be repealed. Prisons will be privatized completely. Speaking out against the President will be made a crime.

Dynasty
03-15-2003, 07:09 PM
Dean. Dean. Dean.

Everytime the Democrats have a polical rally like the one they had this weekend in California, it's Howard Dean gets the crowd roaring. If he can raise some decent money, he's going to win the nomination.

About 3 months ago, I thought Dean was destined to get 1-2% in Iowa and New Hampsire. Now, I think he's going to be the real outside threat to win the nomination.

Jimbo
03-16-2003, 02:17 AM
Getting Californians to cheer for you simply requires a liberal slant in your speech and a lot of Republican bashing. To become the parties nominee for president however requires at least some small chance to actually be elected. Being a republican I would love to see Dean become the nominee, alas those tricky democrats may not be so cooperative.

adios
03-17-2003, 12:14 PM
There was good article IMO about Dean in the Wall Street Journal last week. IMO he does have a message that is appealing to many in the electorate i.e. being liberal on personal freedom (I don't know where he stands on gun control though) and fiscally conservative. Also Dean has taken the gloves off regarding his Democratic opponents more or less stating that nominating an "inside the beltway" type would guarantee a loss for the Democrats in the next presidential election.

adios
03-17-2003, 03:52 PM
"Bush will cheat again."

Oh really I wasn't aware of any cheating in the first place. Do tell!!!!!!!!!!

"The Republican party will permit only Christian faith based initiatives. Praying to Jesus or Moses will be allowed in public schools, but only if a child signs an affidavit declaring that the Koran was writen by Satan."

Ah you're funnin me /forums/images/icons/smile.gif /forums/images/icons/grin.gif.

"Abortion will be outlawed."

Partial birth abortions are at this point. I doubt if all will be though.

"Corporate graft will be legal, but only if you steal over 100 million dollars (otherwise, you are a proletarian crook, and an obvious commie)."

I wasn't aware of any laws being repealed. Ah come on you're funnin me again.

"Term limits for the President will be repealed."

This would take an ammendment to the constitution. Is there one in the works right now? If so could you provided a link?

"Speaking out against the President will be made a crime."

I'm sure brad has a link to support this contention /forums/images/icons/smile.gif /forums/images/icons/grin.gif /forums/images/icons/cool.gif.

brad
03-17-2003, 03:59 PM
'Partial birth abortions are at this point.'

theyre illegal right now? why is legislation pending which would outlaw them?

tewall
03-17-2003, 04:08 PM
Americans are very short-sighted when it comes to presidential politics. Assuming the war goes well and the economy is improving, Bush will be unbeatable. If the economy is going poorly, Bush could be in trouble regardless of what happens with the war. The president get the blame or the credit for the economy regardless of whether he had anything to do with it. That's just the way it is.

There is one scenario where I could see Bush winning even if the economy is going poorly. That is, if there is another terroist attack or unrest of some sort going on at the time or the elections that supercedes that economy.

The fact that Bush's popularity has gone down recently doesn't mean anything. The same thing happened in the Gulf War, after which Bush Sr.'s approval rating went through the roof. Bush's popularity will no doubt rebound in the next few weeks, but there's a long way to go until the election.

tewall
03-17-2003, 04:12 PM
I'm confused. The winner of the last presidential election was Bush. So Bush may see that Bush is in trouble and may want to contest this time instead of waiting 4 more years?

adios
03-17-2003, 06:50 PM
Yes I'm jumping the gun.

Dynasty
08-28-2003, 12:27 AM
[ QUOTE ]
3/15/03

Dean. Dean. Dean.

Everytime the Democrats have a polical rally like the one they had this weekend in California, it's Howard Dean gets the crowd roaring. If he can raise some decent money, he's going to win the nomination.

About 3 months ago, I thought Dean was destined to get 1-2% in Iowa and New Hampsire. Now, I think he's going to be the real outside threat to win the nomination.

[/ QUOTE ]

Dean is having little trouble raising money. Now he's in the lead in New Hampshire and in good shape in Iowa.

http://www.msnbc.com/news/958142.asp

I've made my pick. Dean is going to get the nomination in 2004. He's the Jimmy Carter/Michael Dukakis/Bill Clinton/George W. Bush Governor-that-most-people-have-never-heard-of that's going to win the opposition party's nomination.

Mark Heide
08-28-2003, 03:33 AM
Tom,

I am baised against Bush and would vote for anyone that ran against him. But, I still think it's too early to tell. Furthermore, will we have an independent like Ralph Nader run again? If so, this could change the outcome.

I think out of the democrats Wesley Clark and Howard Dean have the best chance, but it usually depends on how much money is behind them.

Lastly, I think it will hurt Bush's chances if he doesn't wrap up the Iraq and Afganistan issues soon, along with the jobless recovery. The Economy killed his fathers chances last time.

Good Luck

Mark

adios
08-28-2003, 04:29 AM
Hi Mark,

I agree about the economy. If the unemployment rate isn't a lot lower, I can see people just voting against him to try someone else. Don't know much about Wesley Clark but Howard Dean seems to have a poplulist message that's appealing to a lot of people. Supposedly Bush's closest advisors relish the thought of a possible race against Dean. I think they should be careful of what they wish for.

Tom

ripdog
08-28-2003, 04:59 AM
I too am obviously biased against Bush, but I don't know if I'll just vote for any old democrat that runs against him. I certainly won't cast my vote for him, but I want to hear some tough talk on Bush's screw-ups from them first. The deficit, tax cuts, destroying US credibility with the rest of the world, etc. I don't know if this country can withstand another 4 years with Bush at the helm. Can anybody recall the last president who didn't lie in our faces? Jimmy Carter, maybe?

Wake up CALL
08-28-2003, 12:41 PM
[ QUOTE ]
I too am obviously biased against Bush, but I don't know if I'll just vote for any old democrat that runs against him. I certainly won't cast my vote for him, but I want to hear some tough talk on Bush's screw-ups from them first. The deficit, tax cuts, destroying US credibility with the rest of the world, etc. I don't know if this country can withstand another 4 years with Bush at the helm. Can anybody recall the last president who didn't lie in our faces? Jimmy Carter, maybe?

[/ QUOTE ]

If Jimmy Carter is your best example I'll take Richard Nixon back. My favorite Carter quote, "Infaltion is our friend". Gotta love the spend and tax platform.

Mark Heide
08-28-2003, 01:16 PM
ripdog,

"Read my lips...no new taxes!" /images/graemlins/grin.gif

Actually, Jimmy Carter, in my opinion, had the most integrety and he still makes an effort to help the less fortunate.

Mark

adios
08-28-2003, 01:52 PM
All the issues you enumerated are legitimate campaign issues IMO. So the following only applies to them in an abstract sense. How candid should a president be and if it's really important it certainly isn't sufficient in and of itself. Hitler was honest for instance in that he basically stated what he'd do long before he came to power. As a thought experiment let's say that Howard Dean gets elected. One of his main issues is fiscal responsibility i.e. balancing the budget. Let's say that after he's elected he doesn't push to eliminate tax cuts and doesn't do much for the budget deficit (it's already a given that a stronger economy will help a lot in trimming the deficit). However, he does restore US credibility with the rest of the world for instance and say does do something about medicare/medicaid to make it more cost effective and efficient. Well he lied about fiscal responsibility but did a lot of other good things. Would he really be that bad? Politicians lie all the time but I submit part of the problem is the US electorate.

adios
08-28-2003, 01:54 PM
In my original post I stated that Dean's position regarding civil unions might be a detriment. Not sure now. FWIW I agree with your analysis.

brad
08-28-2003, 02:10 PM
not to mention direct support of genocide in east timor.

what a guy.

scalf
08-28-2003, 05:09 PM
/images/graemlins/grin.gifreal obvious...hillary is only dem who can win...she may get the call next year...otherwise she's a shoe-in in o8...no joke...gl /images/graemlins/laugh.gif /images/graemlins/spade.gif

John Cole
08-28-2003, 11:04 PM
I watched the last "debate" (or whatever the hell you call that stuff they do with a stage full of candidates). Dean failed to impress the audience, mostly all union members. Lieberman not only failed to impress, but drew boos for his anti-union stance on school vouchers. When he heard the boos, he told the crowd that he would not simply play to them but, instead, speak for those positions he believed in. Kerry seemed polished and slick, too much so, and I think the voters in the audience picked up on this. Sharpton, of course, drew the greatest response because he effectively played to the crowd. Graham's performance was careful and measured, and the audience seemed to listen carefully. I was most surprised by Braun who did a fine job (I expected much worse.)

I don't think Dean will make it; Kerry should be the favorite, but he needs to let his better nature come out and avoid the slick one-liners. Lieberman will simply tell the truth, and that's political suicide--even though it shouldn't be.