Jump to content
Political Discussion Forums
Sign in to follow this  
moderateamericain

U.S. Presidential Elections 2008

Recommended Posts

Your fascination or opinions about American elections lost or "stolen" remain just that, and hardly are justification for changing how Americans vote.

That American politics enjoys its own dedicated enclave on MLW compared to the rest of the whole frickin' world speaks volumes. We must be doing OK.

I think I was quite clear that I didn't think that the election Bush won over Gore was stolen. I said Nader was a spoiler who hurt Gore's chances in close a close election.

As for stolen elections, I have no idea if Kennedy actually stole an election but Chicago was very suspicious.

I also have no idea what system of voting would be best for Americans. I suppose you are happy with it then that's great.

I think it's great there is a thread specifically for American topics on this forum. The U.S. is our closest neighbor, biggest trading partner and the oldest peaceful relation between nations that share a border. Obviously, being a big as the U.S. is, it has a lot more influence on Canada than vice versa.

In fact, many people in Canada feel a certain relief that there isn't a higher awareness of Canada in the U.S.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I think it's great there is a thread specifically for American topics on this forum. The U.S. is our closest neighbor, biggest trading partner and the oldest peaceful relation between nations that share a border. Obviously, being a big as the U.S. is, it has a lot more influence on Canada than vice versa.

If those be the criteria, I look forward to a dedicated area for "Chinese Politics", but won't hold my breath waiting.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
If those be the criteria, I look forward to a dedicated area for "Chinese Politics", but won't hold my breath waiting.

One of the keys here is shares a border. That is something you should be thankful you don't do with the Chinese. Otherwise, I think it would be you had an exclusive Chinese forum.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
One of the keys here is shares a border. That is something you should be thankful you don't do with the Chinese. Otherwise, I think it would be you had an exclusive Chinese forum.

No problem...I've spent more time in China than Canada. But as you wish....I wonder if the Mexicans obsess on US politics...they are a far more significant factor than Canadians.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/Decision2008/popup?id=3436820

It's interesting how the msm is so completely ignoring Paul's popularity. I guess they don't know what to do when truths are spoken - must be a foriegn language to them.

Well I have to give it to the Ron Paul idiots...they sure know how to manipulate straw polls. On Little Green Footballs it's even a running joke...Ron Paul apparently has a site that mobilizes his paltry minions to vote in every internet straw poll out there.

http://littlegreenfootballs.com/weblog/?en...ebate_Poll&only

LGF

http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?t=10635

So much for integrity.

Edited by ScottSA

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
It's interesting how the msm is so completely ignoring Paul's popularity.

Rep. Ron Paul is a non-factor. He is not going to get major party nomination, and he can't expect the level of success that even Ross Perot had in '92 or '96 as an independent. He has neither the funding or political machine needed to win the US presidency, and although this is the appeal to his minions, it means he will not prevail. At best, the media need him as filler to round out the political circus, along with hundreds of other wannabees who will never appear on a state ballot.

Dr. No will get a taste of his own medicine.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
No problem...I've spent more time in China than Canada. But as you wish....I wonder if the Mexicans obsess on US politics... they are a far more significant factor than Canadians.

Thank you.

That hammer blow, although slightly subtle, elicited a huge shriek of laughter. Frightening the cat!

`

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

An interesting article. A point I've made before. The country has been moving right for the last 3 decades. No matter how much Daily Kos claims they are seeing a turnaround in that trend, the positions of the democratic party imply a status qio is bing maintained or, arguably, the center is continuing to shift right.

http://www.thedemocraticstrategist.org/str...to_the_left.php

if YearlyKos were genuinely more substantively powerful than the DLC, you'd see the big three candidates taking public positions considerably to the left of the party's positions ten years ago. If that's the case, though, I've missed it. No one's talking about rolling back welfare reform. No one's proposed a healthcare initiative even half as comprehensive as the 1994 Clinton plan. All three candidates continue to claim they're personally opposed to gay marriage. Their rhetoric on guns and abortion is much more muted than in the past. They mostly agree that some of the Bush tax cuts should be allowed to expire, but not much more. They want to get out of Iraq, but that's a thoroughly mainstream position, and none of them are willing to commit to a complete withdrawal in any case.

While this speaks to where the dem candidates sit, usually one can spot the center by finding the most popular candidates of the two parties. This is, of course, bacuse the shape of the curve of voters on a political spectrum axis is that of a bell. Most voters cluster around a center. As the center moves, the curve also moves. The center-feeders (ie. those who are actually trying to win rather than make intellectual and political points) will move with it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
An interesting article. A point I've made before. The country has been moving right for the last 3 decades. No matter how much Daily Kos claims they are seeing a turnaround in that trend, the positions of the democratic party imply a status qio is bing maintained or, arguably, the center is continuing to shift right.

http://www.thedemocraticstrategist.org/str...to_the_left.php

While this speaks to where the dem candidates sit, usually one can spot the center by finding the most popular candidates of the two parties. This is, of course, bacuse the shape of the curve of voters on a political spectrum axis is that of a bell. Most voters cluster around a center. As the center moves, the curve also moves. The center-feeders (ie. those who are actually trying to win rather than make intellectual and political points) will move with it.

Nice to see sane commentary here. Sometimes, however, a candidate can take a position to the left or right of center and MAKE it a centrist position (Trudeau, Reagan), or alternatively divert the vote by personality appeal (Trudeau, Kennedy). But I agree, in the tepid soundbyte politics of democracy-without-the-demos today, the candidates chase the center like wolfhounds. Except stupid candidates, like Kerry, who imagine the center to be stuck in Vietnam.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Rep. Ron Paul is a non-factor. He is not going to get major party nomination, and he can't expect the level of success that even Ross Perot had in '92 or '96 as an independent. He has neither the funding or political machine needed to win the US presidency, and although this is the appeal to his minions, it means he will not prevail. At best, the media need him as filler to round out the political circus, along with hundreds of other wannabees who will never appear on a state ballot.

Dr. No will get a taste of his own medicine.

I would not count out the Internets out as a medium to send out a message to the masses. Much of the youth is connected to the Internet at the freakin hip. Text messaging on cell phones, Internet on cell phones, PDA's. Have laptop? Any net cafe, hot spot, ect. The thing is about the Internet, you do not need a huge ass bank roll to get the message out to just as many people as you do on TV. So campaign money is not much of an issue. Hell, look at Mr. John McCain. Down and out it seems. Even money cannot help you if your staff decides to bail on you. Ron Paul is getting great exposure on the TV as well through these debates. He is getting the best of both worlds for the lowest dollar possible. Pretty smart strategy. I am pretty certain you will see Paul go till the last ballot is cast. Guiliani will be the next to bow out of this race within the next month.

Mind you now, most of the candidates are very much aware of the Internet and how it has infiltrated our daily lives that part of your work these days involves the Internet in some fashion. Those news blogs seem to have an influence on things as well. So the candidates are aware and have that online presence to get more votes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Fred Thomson on abortion.

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/

Showing his conservative stripes, Thompson said he would push for a constitutional amendment banning gay marriage and would overturn Roe v. Wade.

“I don’t think that one state ought to be able to pass a law requiring gay marriage or allowing gay marriage and have another state be required to follow along,” Thompson explained. Thompson said that the U.S. Supreme Court decision legalizing abortion “was bad law and bad medicine.”

I guess you can't more definitive than that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I was reading Newsweek and Clift was saying that it isn't just questions on abortion that should raise concerns with voters but the whole issue of birth control.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/20322033/site/newsweek/

Family planning is an issue Republicans generally like to avoid because it threatens the coalition between economic conservatives and the religious right. Business types tend to be live-and-let-live, while a segment of social conservatives oppose birth control with almost the same fervor they oppose abortion. Family planning is such an under-the-radar issue for Republicans that Nancy Keenan, president of NARAL Pro-Choice America, says the Right to Life organization doesn’t advertise a birth-control position. “But you find in that movement—and they’ve become much more assertive about it—if you use birth control, you are stopping a life and that’s not acceptable,” she says. Listen to right-wing talk radio and you’ll hear how making birth control available or teaching sex-ed in public schools leads to sex. That's an argument equivalent to believing that putting air bags in cars causes accidents, says Keenan.

I wonder if some of the candidates have positions on birth control.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Latest poll on the U.S. Presidential election puts Clinton on top over any Republican challenger.

http://www.angus-reid.com/polls/index.cfm/...em/itemID/16947

Democrat Hillary Rodham Clinton is the top presidential contender for voters in the United States, according to a poll by the Quinnipiac University Polling Institute. At least 46 per cent of respondents would vote for the New York senator in head-to-head 2008 contests.

Rodham Clinton holds a three-point lead over former New York City mayor Rudy Giuliani, a six-point advantage over Arizona senator John McCain, and an 11-point lead over actor and former Tennessee senator Fred Thompson.

In other match-ups, Illinois senator Barack Obama is tied with Giuliani, but holds a four-point lead over McCain and an 11-point advantage over Thompson. Former North Carolina senator John Edwards trails Giuliani by a point, but holds an eight-point lead over McCain, and a 17-point advantage over Thompson.

I personally think it is still too early to tell what will happen but one thing is clear and that is Clinton continuing to build month by month on her lead.

Edited by jdobbin

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I personally think it is still too early to tell what will happen but one thing is clear and that is Clinton continuing to build month by month on her lead.

You are correct.....it means absolutely nothing, as we are only experiencing presidential election foreplay and money gathering. Normally, August of next year is when one could begin to entertain such outcomes. Senator Clinton would have a very difficult time trying to win the general election, and if she moves right to woo more moderates, she will alienate the rabid left and part of her presumed base.

The last two successful Democratic candidates since 1976 (Jimmy Carter, Bill Clinton), were not even on the radar so early in the cycle, and not even first ballot successes at the nominating convention. Earlier primaries may move up the schedule next year, but as of today it's all just noise.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
You are correct.....it means absolutely nothing, as we are only experiencing presidential election foreplay and money gathering. Normally, August of next year is when one could begin to entertain such outcomes. Senator Clinton would have a very difficult time trying to win the general election, and if she moves right to woo more moderates, she will alienate the rabid left and part of her presumed base.

The last two successful Democratic candidates since 1976 (Jimmy Carter, Bill Clinton), were not even on the radar so early in the cycle, and not even first ballot successes at the nominating convention. Earlier primaries may move up the schedule next year, but as of today it's all just noise.

National polls mean nothing now but polls in Iowa and New Hampshire mean something.

I think it's hard to capture the nomination unless someone does reasonably well in the Iowa caucuses and the NH primary (although it's possible).

Something else. At this stage, candidates have to play to their core supporters and this forces them to take strong positions. In the general campaign, the candidate must shift to the centre.

In this, Clinton has moved the least and is well placed for a general campaign. I'm surprised about Romney's and Thompson's hard stand on abortion. This will hurt the Republicans in a general campaign.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
In this, Clinton has moved the least and is well placed for a general campaign. I'm surprised about Romney's and Thompson's hard stand on abortion. This will hurt the Republicans in a general campaign.

I suspect Guiliani's soft stand on abortion will be a huge burden to overcome if he wants to win the Republican nomination. He may be better equipped to take on someone like Clinton but I doubt very much that he will get the chance.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Latest poll on the U.S. Presidential election puts Clinton on top over any Republican challenger.

http://www.angus-reid.com/polls/index.cfm/...em/itemID/16947

I personally think it is still too early to tell what will happen but one thing is clear and that is Clinton continuing to build month by month on her lead.

It looks like she may have to shore up some areas as she nurses her lead. Recently I heard that Clinton has low approval ratings from voters. Although she's a darling to dems, she has some major work to do regarding the rest of the voters.

Kind of funny that she blames these approval ratings on years of Republican attacks. It sounds much like her Vast Conservative Conspiracy back when Bubba was in the House.

Edited by sharkman

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
It looks like she may have to shore up some areas as she nurses her lead. Recently I heard that Clinton has low approval ratings from voters. Although she's a darling to dems, she has some major work to do regarding the rest of the voters.

Kind of funny that she blames these approval ratings on years of Republican attacks. It sounds much like her Vast Conservative Conspiracy back when Bubba was in the House.

Her approval rating only has to be higher than the Republicans. At present, she leads all of them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's not higher than her competition for the nomination and they might have a thing or two to say about it. I haven't seen numbers for the Republican race, but at any rate the race is young.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
It's not higher than her competition for the nomination and they might have a thing or two to say about it. I haven't seen numbers for the Republican race, but at any rate the race is young.

The latest poll has her ahead of any Democratic or Republican candidate.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have been having trouble finding results of this poll that specifically addresses Hillary's high negative ratings. Do you have a link for this, or are you refering only to her general poll ratings. I would like to compare her negative ratings (which she specifically addresses in my link above, blaming Repubicans for the results) to the same ratings of other Democrats.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I have been having trouble finding results of this poll that specifically addresses Hillary's high negative ratings. Do you have a link for this, or are you refering only to her general poll ratings. I would like to compare her negative ratings (which she specifically addresses in my link above, blaming Repubicans for the results) to the same ratings of other Democrats.

I was referring to her general poll numbers when she is placed alongside both Democrat and Republican candidates.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Looks like Mitt Romney doesn't like to be asked about his previous stance on same sex marriage.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/20652508/

Mitt Romney seemed comfortable as a group of gay Republicans quizzed him over breakfast one morning in 2002. Running for governor of Massachusetts, he was at a gay bar in Boston to court members of Log Cabin Republicans.

Mr. Romney explained to the group that his perspective on gay rights had been largely shaped by his experience in the private sector, where, he said, discrimination was frowned upon. When the discussion turned to a court case on same-sex marriage that was then wending its way through the state’s judicial system, he said he believed that marriage should be limited to the union of a man and a woman. But, according to several people present, he promised to obey the courts’ ultimate ruling and not champion a fight on either side of the issue.

“I’ll keep my head low,” he said, making a bobbing motion with his head like a boxer, one participant recalled.

I wonder if any Republicans are actually buying his campaign since it seems to flexible to the whims of where he thinks the wind is blowing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I wonder if any Republicans are actually buying his campaign since it seems to flexible to the whims of where he thinks the wind is blowing.

Yes they are....campaign funding (money) talks....BS walks. Same gender marriage is not the hotbed feelgood human rights issue for either major party platform. Yawn......

Edited by bush_cheney2004

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...