Who will (not should) be the Democratic presidential nominee in 2008?

[albionmoonlight]

Originally Posted by bsak16

That makes two of us!

And the comments here are a ton more uninformed opinions. More than anyone could ever want: http://www.politico.com/blogs/bensmi....html#comments

[Kodos]

Dang. Edwards was still my choice out of those still left. I knew he didn't have chance, but still disappointing.

[Galaril]

Originally Posted by bsak16

That makes two of us!

I also agree with bsak. I think most "VOTERS" not people since alot of people don't vote or aren't Dems, consider Obama-Edwards to be the the anti-Hillary choice. I think the states of IOWA,NH,SC,is an accurate gauge of the average american voter. I belive even without an endorsement for Obama by Edwards which is very llikely by Super Tuesday this is good for 5-7 points for Obama. Considering a few of the states are pretty tight this is big. Also, I think Barack has done a decent job of expressing his desire to reach out to the Repubs enough to snag alot of the independents and even some mod Repubs.

[ISiddiqui]

But haven't exit polls showed the Edwards voters were generally split in their support for Clinton and Obama if Edwards wasn't there?

[Dutch]

Originally Posted by Galaril

Also, I think Barack has done a decent job of expressing his desire to reach out to the Repubs enough to snag alot of the independents and even some mod Repubs.

How so?

[Young Drachma]

Originally Posted by Dutch

How so?

In pretty much every speech, he mentions Republicans and "breaking down the divisions" of Washington.

He's painting his as a coalition of those disaffected with "politics as usual" and that theirs is a group that transcends race, gender and politics.

[Young Drachma]

From Joe Klein from this story on CNN.com today:

An aide said Edwards does not plan to endorse either Clinton or Obama at this time but he may do so in the future.

"The cynics will say that with Edwards out of the race, a lot of the white working-class people who voted for him will now vote for Hillary Clinton; they'll see it in racial terms," said Time magazine journalist Joe Klein. "On the other hand, you could just as easily say that with Edwards out of the race, those people who are more interested in change who were part of his constituency, will go vote for Obama."

He added, "I don't think he endorses Hillary Clinton. The question is whether or not he endorses Barack Obama."

Klein contends that Clinton "represents a lot of the things that [Edwards] campaigned against, you know, the old Washington Democratic establishment that he believes got too close to the corporations in the '90s."

[Bubba Wheels]

Originally Posted by chesapeake

I worked with the committee, led by House Republicans, that investigated that technology transfer to China. With all due respect, your statement on this is wrong.

I am more than willing to be corrected on this, if that is the case. From what I have understood, it was under Clinton that dual tech transfers (both civilian and military use) was moved from Dept. of Defense to under the Treasury's jurisdiction.

[Bubba Wheels]

Originally Posted by path12

Wasn't it Bush that tried to have the US Ports run by that Dubai company? And walking hand in hand with the Saudi princes? You sure you want to toss those stones at Clinton?

As someone that feels NAFTA is actually SHAFTA, and that Fair Trade is good for American workers while Free Trade is what the country-club shafters have given us, I have long ago cut ties with Mr. W.

[chesapeake]

At this point in the campaign, I think most of the Edwards voters had been whittled down to those who were voting for him, not against someone else. The anti-Hillary crowd had mostly gravitated to Obama already.

As to how those folks may break, Edwards' fire on the stump appealed to the angry part of the Democratic party -- namely my father and my wife. My dad doesn't think Hillary can win, so I expect he will support Obama in the CA primary. When VA votes, I think my wife will go for Hillary. I think the greater split will also be fairly even, with a slight edge to Hillary. From what I've seen of the demographics of Edwards voters, they have skewed more towards her than Obama.

[Mizzou B-ball fan]

Originally Posted by Dark Cloud

In pretty much every speech, he mentions Republicans and "breaking down the divisions" of Washington.

He's painting his as a coalition of those disaffected with "politics as usual" and that theirs is a group that transcends race, gender and politics.

As a voter that is a moderate Republican who 'swings both ways', all of the talk you just mentioned tells me he's really good at being a politician and tells me nothing about whether he'll be a good president. I'm sure that he'll lay out a few more details if/when he secures the nomination and maybe I'll know a bit more about him then. Right now, I don't know anything about him outside of his messages about cats and dogs living in harmony. I'm here to tell him he's living a pipe dream if he thinks that will occur if he becomes president.

[chesapeake]

Originally Posted by Bubba Wheels

I am more than willing to be corrected on this, if that is the case. From what I have understood, it was under Clinton that dual tech transfers (both civilian and military use) was moved from Dept. of Defense to under the Treasury's jurisdiction.

Your earlier statement claimed that Clinton sold gyroscope technology to China. There is not even a tiny factual basis for that statement. I refer you to the (unbelievably named) Cox-Dicks report if you want hard details on what happened. You probably can still find it on the internet somewhere.

In a nutshell, in 1996 Loral Space and Commications and Hughes Electronics were using a Chinese rocket to launch their satellite. The rocket went boom. Loral and Huges determined what they believed to be the cause and improperly shared their findings to their Chinese launch partners, which likely enabled the Chinese to make a better rocket.

The NYT picked up on the story in 1998. GOP blowhards at the time, wanting to bash the President, blamed it on the decision of the Clinton Administration to move licensing authority for satellite launches from the Department of State to Commerce (DoD was never in the picture). The decision to move the authority, however, happened later in 1996 -- after the launch accident and tech transfer took place. State had licensed that launch, not Commerce.

I hope this helps.

[ISiddiqui]

Originally Posted by Mizzou B-ball fan

As a voter that is a moderate Republican who 'swings both ways', all of the talk you just mentioned tells me he's really good at being a politician and tells me nothing about whether he'll be a good president. I'm sure that he'll lay out a few more details if/when he secures the nomination and maybe I'll know a bit more about him then. Right now, I don't know anything about him outside of his messages about cats and dogs living in harmony. I'm here to tell him he's living a pipe dream if he thinks that will occur if he becomes president.

That is a lot of the reservations I've heard about him from Republicans. They don't know anything about his policies. All they know is "unity", but what exactly does that mean? One thing is for sure, if he tries to push for "lefty" programs, he isn't going to find a lot of unity from the right.

I'm not sure that the Kennedies fawning all over him helped in Republican estimations as well. They usually don't particularly like JFK.

[Arles]

Originally Posted by ISiddiqui

That is a lot of the reservations I've heard about him from Republicans. They don't know anything about his policies. All they know is "unity", but what exactly does that mean? One thing is for sure, if he tries to push for "lefty" programs, he isn't going to find a lot of unity from the right.

I'm not sure that the Kennedies fawning all over him helped in Republican estimations as well. They usually don't particularly like JFK.

Obama has come out as a social liberal, in favor of raising taxes on "the rich" (ie, anyone making over 75K) and universal health. Hardly a platform that will attract many conservatives. once the debates start between party candidates and all the platitudes go away, I doubt Obama gets much republican support. Still, I think he wins over McCain as republicans may not even show up. And no vote from a republican is as good as a vote for Obama.

[Young Drachma]

Story

WASHINGTON (CNN) – Democrat Barack Obama praised John Edwards and his wife Elizabeth Wednesday, in a statement issued shortly after news surfaced the former North Carolina senator plans to drop his presidential bid.

“John Edwards has spent a lifetime fighting to give voice to the voiceless and hope to the struggling, even when it wasn’t popular to do or covered in the news," he said. "At a time when our politics is too focused on who’s up and who’s down, he made a nation focus again on who matters – the New Orleans child without a home, the West Virginia miner without a job, the families who live in that other America that is not seen or heard or talked about by our leaders in Washington."

"John and Elizabeth Edwards have always believed deeply that we can change this – that two Americans can become one, and that our country can rally around this common purpose," Obama continued. "So while his campaign may end today, the cause of their lives endures for all of us who still believe that we can achieve that dream of one America."

[Warhammer]

Originally Posted by ISiddiqui

I'm not sure that the Kennedies fawning all over him helped in Republican estimations as well. They usually don't particularly like JFK.

Republicans not like JFK? Good grief! If a democrat ran on JFK's platform a good number of Republicans would get on board with him.

[Alan T]

Originally Posted by Warhammer

Republicans not like JFK? Good grief! If a democrat ran on JFK's platform a good number of Republicans would get on board with him.

Yeah, this one had me puzzled too.. Perhaps its because I grew up in the south where Democrats were often on the conservative side.

[Mizzou B-ball fan]

Never fear. Jimmy Carter is getting involved. He's "titillated"...............

One former president has long assumed a very outspoken role in the presidential race. Now another is speaking up.

Jimmy Carter says he's not formally endorsing any candidate, but in an interview with the Wall Street Journal, the former president lavished praise on Barack Obama, calling his campaign "extraordinary"

"Obama's campaign has been extraordinary and titillating for me and my family," Carter told the newspaper in an interview published in its Wednesday edition. According to the paper, Carter was particularly praiseworthy of the Illinois senator's rhetorical skills, comparing them to those of Martin Luther King, Jr.

Carter also said Obama "will be almost automatically a healing factor in the animosity now that exists, that relates to our country and its government."

Carter, a onetime governor of Georgia and one of only two Democrats to win the White House in the last forty years, also said he thinks Obama's candidacy could put several southern states in play in a general election match up.

Carter also commented on the recent criticism surrounding Bill Clinton, following that former president's comments on the campaign trail that some have viewed as racially divisive. Carter said Clinton personally called him to explain the remarks.

"He doesn't call me often, but the fact that he called me this morning and spent a long time explaining his position indicates that it's troublesome to them, the adverse reaction," he said.

"I told him I hoped it would die down. — the charged atmosphere concerning the race issue," Carter said

[ISiddiqui]

Originally Posted by Warhammer

Republicans not like JFK? Good grief! If a democrat ran on JFK's platform a good number of Republicans would get on board with him.

You mean like increasing the minimum wage and massive increases in federal spending on housing, unemployment, education, and medical care?

[Young Drachma]

Originally Posted by Mizzou B-ball fan

Never fear. Jimmy Carter is getting involved. He's "titillated"...............

Haha...first Ted Kennedy and now this. With friends like these.....

[Bubba Wheels]

Originally Posted by chesapeake

Your earlier statement claimed that Clinton sold gyroscope technology to China. There is not even a tiny factual basis for that statement. I refer you to the (unbelievably named) Cox-Dicks report if you want hard details on what happened. You probably can still find it on the internet somewhere.

In a nutshell, in 1996 Loral Space and Commications and Hughes Electronics were using a Chinese rocket to launch their satellite. The rocket went boom. Loral and Huges determined what they believed to be the cause and improperly shared their findings to their Chinese launch partners, which likely enabled the Chinese to make a better rocket.

The NYT picked up on the story in 1998. GOP blowhards at the time, wanting to bash the President, blamed it on the decision of the Clinton Administration to move licensing authority for satellite launches from the Department of State to Commerce (DoD was never in the picture). The decision to move the authority, however, happened later in 1996 -- after the launch accident and tech transfer took place. State had licensed that launch, not Commerce.

I hope this helps.

Good stuff, thanks for the correction. Always willing to look at facts. Guess with all the Britney/Paris/Lindsey news to put out by the stalwart media a little thing like the Chinese suddenly being able to nuke us (for reasons different than I first thought) gets some short shrift.

I mean, with all the problems Michigan is having in particular, local Fox News channel 2 Detroit anchor thought we should know that Justin Timberlake was seen kissing someone other than his steady girlfriend in NYC recently. And, I know it was Fox, but I channel surf. Its all like that.

[Galaril]

Originally Posted by ISiddiqui

You mean like increasing the minimum wage and massive increases in federal spending on housing, unemployment, education, and medical care?

And what is wrong with spending money in those areas? Not enough bombs in our arsenal for ya?

[ISiddiqui]

Originally Posted by Galaril

And what is wrong with spending money in those areas? Not enough bombs in our arsenal for ya?

Have you not met any Republicans?

[Subby]

[path12]

Originally Posted by chesapeake

I refer you to the (unbelievably named) Cox-Dicks report if you want hard details on what happened.

That may be the most awesome sentence ever.

[Galaril]

Originally Posted by ISiddiqui

Have you not met any Republicans?

lol

[Flasch186]

Originally Posted by Bubba Wheels

Good stuff, thanks for the correction. Always willing to look at facts.

Color me skeptical after you shrug off the Bush Dubai Ports thing which totally Pwned you. care to make commentary on that? Perhaps you posted something in the thread way back when it occurred to show your consistency?

[JPhillips]

The latest poll has Obama within the margin of error in California.

[Bubba Wheels]

Originally Posted by Flasch186

Color me skeptical after you shrug off the Bush Dubai Ports thing which totally Pwned you. care to make commentary on that? Perhaps you posted something in the thread way back when it occurred to show your consistency?

Excuse me? About the only theme I have ever posted on Bush is in regards to him running as a Reagan Conservative and turning out to be a Corporate "Country Clubber." Given the expectations, perhaps the most dissappointing President in my lifetime, but still lightyears better than Billary looming on the horizon.

[chesapeake]

Originally Posted by Flasch186

Color me skeptical after you shrug off the Bush Dubai Ports thing which totally Pwned you. care to make commentary on that? Perhaps you posted something in the thread way back when it occurred to show your consistency?

In fairness to our Republican friends, the port thing was (and is) a massive red herring.

In our country, most ports are public entities, run either by elected commissioners or appointed by elected officials. The ports at which Dubai Ports World (DPW) was seeking to operate terminals were all public facilities.

At the risk of overexplaining this, ports are made up of many terminals, most of which are leased and operated by private entities. Most of these private entities are headquartered overseas -- EU, South Korea, Japan, China, although some are US. This is international trade we are talking about. Foreign countries and companies do need to be involved. DPW is one of these companies and, by and large, a widely respected terminal operator.

At no point in time was there ever a proposal on the table for DPW to operate a US port. Just terminals. The security risks were blown way out of proportion; although terminal operators bear some responsibility for security within the terminals they operate, port authorites, US Customs and Border Protection and the US Coast Guard are responsible for security at US ports and do a pretty good job.

[GrantDawg]

Originally Posted by Dark Cloud

Haha...first Ted Kennedy and now this. With friends like these.....

...you can win the Democratic nomination. You can down-play these guys once you achieve the nom, but they will definitely help you with getting to the nom. It is a sign that the democratic political machine is pulling away from Clinton, and that is very good for Obama.

[ISiddiqui]

To be fair though, it isn't like Ted Kennedy hasn't been a part of the Democratic political machine (at least in the national party) any time lately. He likes to march to his own beat. The DNC brings him out for conventions, but usually doesn't consult him that much.

[Mizzou B-ball fan]

Originally Posted by ISiddiqui

The DNC brings him out for conventions, but usually doesn't consult him that much.

That's totally inaccurate. I know for a fact that he is asked to hand select the booze for each of the Democratic fundraisers.

[Bubba Wheels]

In the next episode of "Bonnie and Clyde vs. the County Sheriff," Bonnie and the Sheriff plan a shootout tonight while Clyde does some 'global gold-digging' of his own! http://www.nytimes.com/2008/01/31/us...gewanted=print

Stay tuned!

[Big Fo]

Originally Posted by JPhillips

The latest poll has Obama within the margin of error in California.

It begins. Looking at our poll results FOFC called it way before the media. Obama should get the majority of the Edwards crowd, people are either for Clinton or find her to be detestable. Can't wait to see his inauguration.

[st.cronin]

Originally Posted by st.cronin

My gut feeling is that Obama will win this nomination. Obama vs. McCain is how I see the general. (This could very well be wishful thinking on my part.)

Originally Posted by Jas_lov

It is. Romney and Hillary will meet in the general election. No doubt about it. McCain and Romney are now dead even in Florida as Romney is capitalizing on his business background, the terrible economy, and Washington being broken. At the debate last night, everybody was saying how Romney won the economy part hands down while McCain looked like an idiot without the focus being on the Iraq war. Giuliani has fallen off and will probably finish 3rd in Florida, his highest finish yet. He might be done. All indications are that Huckabee is out of money. Obama will win S.C., but Hillary will win big on Super Tuesday. In any closed primary, she has the advantage as does Romney on the Republican side.

Originally Posted by Bubba Wheels

Romney vs. Hillary. Practically guaranteed now. Love or hate Bill O'Reilly, he did predict this over a year ago.

[albionmoonlight]

Originally Posted by st.cronin

You do realize that if it ends up being Romney v. Hillary, you will get this smile quoted back to you. In Mockery.

[st.cronin]

Originally Posted by albionmoonlight

You do realize that if it ends up being Romney v. Hillary, you will get this smile quoted back to you. In Mockery.

Oh, definitely. I don't think I was being especially wise, either. As I said it was more wishful thinking than anything else.

[-apoc-]

Originally Posted by Big Fo

It begins. Looking at our poll results FOFC called it way before the media. Obama should get the majority of the Edwards crowd, people are either for Clinton or find her to be detestable. Can't wait to see his inauguration.

I wouldn't go that far because 2 days ago Hillary was ahead by a vote. I really do hope Obama pulls it off just because it would be something different. Obama and McCain would be perfect because then I would actually have 2 candidates that I would be willing to vote for rather than having to vote against someone.

[panerd]

Is there any chance that Hilary/Obama selects the other as their running mate? What about Edwards running for VP again? I don't have any real insight except that I would think Hilary would never want to play second fiddle while Obama might. But I thought you guys may actually have some insight or ideas on who might run with either of the canidates.

[Young Drachma]

Originally Posted by panerd

Is there any chance that Hilary/Obama selects the other as their running mate? What about Edwards running for VP again? I don't have any real insight except that I would think Hilary would never want to play second fiddle while Obama might. But I thought you guys may actually have some insight or ideas on who might run with either of the canidates.

Hillary/Obama won't happen. Too much personality and well, it's just a bad idea. Edwards has an outside shot, but I seriously doubt he wants to go through the 2nd fiddle thing again and he can't deliver the South making him a really bad choice. Edwards is likely going to be someone's Attorney General of the Dems win.

If you go back a page, you'll see a list of random ideas for VPs we discussed. A few interesting ideas were thrown out there.

[larrymcg421]

Hillary/Obama is possible. Obama/Hillary is not.

I think the most likely running mates are Bill Richardson, Wesley Clark, Evan Bayh, and Jim Webb.

[Swaggs]

Is there any word on whether or not Mark Warner is going to run for the VA senate spot that John Warner is retiring from?

He could be an interesting VP choice and could certainly put Virginia into play as a swing state.

[yacovfb]

Originally Posted by Swaggs

Is there any word on whether or not Mark Warner is going to run for the VA senate spot that John Warner is retiring from?

He could be an interesting VP choice and could certainly put Virginia into play as a swing state.

I'm pretty sure he is running for the Senate.

[flere-imsaho]

Originally Posted by chesapeake

In fairness to our Republican friends, the port thing was (and is) a massive red herring.

Oh absolutely. I mean, I was happy to see it get blown out of proportion in the media to discomfort the Administration, but yeah, it was completely a non-issue.

Originally Posted by JPhillips

The latest poll has Obama within the margin of error in California.

Wow. Unless I'm seriously mistaken, last I heard he was behind by a good margin.

Originally Posted by Swaggs

Is there any word on whether or not Mark Warner is going to run for the VA senate spot that John Warner is retiring from?

He announced two weeks after John Warner announced he wasn't running for re-election. I think Mark Warner decided not to run for Pres because he didn't want to turn his family upside-down. Being a senator from Virginia (next to D.C.) is perfect for him, so I'd be surprised if he wanted to be Veep (Veep's typically do a lot of travel, never mind campaigning).

[Swaggs]

Latest Rasmussen poll had Hillary leading Obama by 3 points prior to Edwards dropping out. Right now, it is a big outlier, but it is the most recent poll.

[DaddyTorgo]

during our dinner table conversation tonight I sorta started to talk myself into voting for hillary. idk

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally Posted by Swaggs

Is there any word on whether or not Mark Warner is going to run for the VA senate spot that John Warner is retiring from?

I'm hoping the Warner sister Dot will decide to run instead

[-apoc-]

Originally Posted by JonInMiddleGA

I'm hoping the Warner sister Dot will decide to run instead

Dude I almost spit out my drink laughing at that. Good show Good show

[Flasch186]

Originally Posted by chesapeake

In fairness to our Republican friends, the port thing was (and is) a massive red herring.

not the case as applied to the context in which the idea of foreign involvement/investment/donations as a negative, BW brought it up in this thread.