Predictions for 2008

C

coffman

CAGiversary!
I know it's waaaay to early to really think much about this, but after seeing all of the results come in it is obvious that the democratic party is in shambles. I expect the 2006 elections will retain the status quo, but for the next presidential election the democrats will need a big name, someone who is very popular. That list is extremely small, so small in fact that I believe there is only one likely candidate. Therefore, I predict that the democrats will field Hillary Clinton for president. For some reason, the Clinton name inspires people to vote for them. (For the record, I don't think Bill Clinton was a very good president, although I think he was better than George W. Bush). Not to be outdone, the republicans will field Elizabeth Dole. This means 2008 will be a landmark year for America.... the first woman president in our country's history. (Plus a Clinton-Dole rematch to boot).
 
Dole already lost her bid in the last Republican primary (pre-2000). I voted for her actually. I don't think she'll consider another presidential bid.
 
Coffman: I agree that the Democrats will field Hillary Clinton. And that scares me, to be honest.
 
Hillary is an outside possiblity, but I find it highly, highly, HIGHLY doubtful that Elizabeth Dole will get the Repubican endorsement. Unlikely, verging on ridiculous.

Personally, I rather doubt that Hillary will get the Democratic nomination, either, though. Nominating Hillary would essentially be an admission of defeat from the Democrats in 2008. The simple fact that she's a woman would automatically lose them 10%+ of the vote. The fact that she's Hillary would lose them another 10%, easily. She'd be starting from such a massive vote deficit just starting out that the Republicans could probably run Dan Quayle and STILL easily win the election.

Personally, I really don't know who the Democrats will field in 2008. It may be Hillary just be default because they simply don't have any other big-hitters.
 
crybabydem.jpg
 
Yeah, you've posted that twice now.

And, yeah, it's too early to worry about 2008 now, I don't have a clue what'll happen until then.
 
I wonder if Barack Obama could pull it off in 2008. He'll be president of this country someday, it's all just a question of when.
 
I say:
Hillary Clinton or Barack Obama (D)
versus
Rudy Giuliani or John McCain (R)

I think Jeb will eventually run, but not for at least another 10 years
 
McCain would probably be pretty good. I don't know his stance on a lot of policies, but I like him in general.

The only things I know about Jeb are negative:
1) he's a Bush
2) that whole feeding tube thing where he wouldn't let them remove the tube from that chick who was basically a vegetable
 
[quote name='CaptainObviousXl']clinton was a great president[/quote]

I find it funny that Republicans are very quick to criticize you if you don't agree that Reagan was a "great president", yet they refuse to give Clinton any credit. But yes, he was.
 
I really hope Obama DOESN'T run in 2008. I think he has the makings of a potential great president, but I don't think he's ready yet. He's too young and inexperienced. He needs to spend a few terms in Congress to 'ripen' first. Even if he would manage to run and win in 2008, I think he would at best be a semi-decent president, far from the great leader that I suspect he could become in time.

Actually, I pretty much feel the same way about Edwards: there's potential for him to grow into a great leader, but it simply hasn't matured yet. I'm kind of afraid that this bid for the vice-presidency may have spoiled that, like a bottle of wine that's been opened before its been properly aged. He may still manage to grow into to leader he has the potential to be, but he would have been better served focusing on his congressional duties.

Since Clinton has already been brought up: he's another one that was pushed to the fore-front a bit too fast. I think the world would be a much better place if Bush Sr would have won in 1992. Clinton was and is a strong enough personality that he would have become president eventually anyway, most likely in 1996, but his loss in '92 would almost certainly have helped mature him a bit, bringing out the great leader that he almost was. As it is, I think he was at most a good president. He simply didn't manage to fulfill his potential.
 
Ok, I just posted this, but for some reason, it showed up in the middle of the thread in the wrong place. Lets try this again just to see what's up...

I really hope Obama DOESN'T run in 2008. I think he has the makings of a potential great president, but I don't think he's ready yet. He's too young and inexperienced. He needs to spend a few terms in Congress to 'ripen' first. Even if he would manage to run and win in 2008, I think he would at best be a semi-decent president, far from the great leader that I suspect he could become in time.

Actually, I pretty much feel the same way about Edwards: there's potential for him to grow into a great leader, but it simply hasn't matured yet. I'm kind of afraid that this bid for the vice-presidency may have spoiled that, like a bottle of wine that's been opened before its been properly aged. He may still manage to grow into to leader he has the potential to be, but he would have been better served focusing on his congressional duties.

Since Clinton has already been brought up: he's another one that was pushed to the fore-front a bit too fast. I think the world would be a much better place if Bush Sr would have won in 1992. Clinton was and is a strong enough personality that he would have become president eventually anyway, most likely in 1996, but his loss in '92 would almost certainly have helped mature him a bit, bringing out the great leader that he almost was. As it is, I think he was at most a good president. He simply didn't manage to fulfill his potential.
 
Hillary Clinton v Rudy Giuliani, with Rudy winning. Or if they change the laws perhaps Arnold will run (shudder), but they won't so no worries.
 
[quote name='Backlash']Powell for pres. Too bad he missed his chance :([/quote]

He could still probably be elected if he wanted to run. I don't think he is going to want to, though.
 
[quote name='elprincipe']Hillary Clinton v Rudy Giuliani, with Rudy winning. Or if they change the laws perhaps Arnold will run (shudder), but they won't so no worries.[/quote]

I like Arnold, but I hope they dont change the law.
 
[quote name='buster90']Jeb Bush will probably run for president in 2009. The Bush legacy isn't over till well never. :([/quote]

Id like to see him run in 2009, spend all that money, and then relize he's a year late...that would be hysterically funny :rofl:
 
I'd like to see Obama vs. Powell, since I actually kind of like Powell, so if he did end up winning I wouldn't mind it that much. But he probably isn't going to run, and I agree that 2008 is probably a little early for Obama, so I doubt that it will happen. I just hope it doesn't end up being Hillary vs. Jeb. If that's the case, Canada will start to look awfully inviting.
 
[quote name='Zman310']I'd like to see Obama vs. Powell, since I actually kind of like Powell, so if he did end up winning I wouldn't mind it that much. But he probably isn't going to run, and I agree that 2008 is probably a little early for Obama, so I doubt that it will happen. I just hope it doesn't end up being Hillary vs. Jeb. If that's the case, Canada will start to look awfully inviting.[/quote]

Powell wont run. He got so many death threats last time.
 
[quote name='bignick'][quote name='Zman310']I'd like to see Obama vs. Powell, since I actually kind of like Powell, so if he did end up winning I wouldn't mind it that much. But he probably isn't going to run, and I agree that 2008 is probably a little early for Obama, so I doubt that it will happen. I just hope it doesn't end up being Hillary vs. Jeb. If that's the case, Canada will start to look awfully inviting.[/quote]

Powell wont run. He got so many death threats last time.[/quote]

He is a tool, more so than even Nader.
 
[quote name='buster90']God I hope Hiliry does not run...no offense to women but I really do not want a woman president in this country.[/quote]

Funniest thing I've read all night, hands down. Hands down.
 
[quote name='camoor'][quote name='buster90']God I hope Hiliry does not run...no offense to women but I really do not want a woman president in this country.[/quote]

Funniest thing I've read all night, hands down. Hands down.[/quote]

America isn't ready for a woman president. It just won't happen.
 
If the Republicans would field a woman canidate, I think there'd be a rather high chance of victory. I think they'd steal a huge chunk of the female voters that usually vote Democrat without _too_ badly alienating more conservative voters. The same thing would happen with a minority canidate, especially if they were black. Ultimately, though, I think its unlikely that the Republicans will be willing to put a female or minority up for president any time soon - there's just too many hardcore conservatives standing in the way of the nomination. Maybe in another 10-20 years...

Any female nominated by the Democrats is almost doomed to lose. No matter who it is, they're going to lose at least a few voters simply because it a woman, and they're not going to pick up anything from the other party (and, in fact, are far more likely to strongly mobilize the Republicans into voting in record numbers.) A black (male) Democrat canidate MIGHT have a shot, by virtue of motivating black voters to show up in record numbers (not hard to do, considering how terrible black voter turnout usually is...)

I'm not trying to offend anyone here. That's just my own opinion, what I consider the simple reality of the situation. Also note that all of the above goes out the window if Oprah would run. Oprah would win hands-down, no matter what party she went with, even if she ran as an independent. She MIGHT lose a couple southern states, but overall, she'd win in a landslide not seen since George Washington.
 
[quote name='Quackzilla'][quote name='bignick'][quote name='Zman310']I'd like to see Obama vs. Powell, since I actually kind of like Powell, so if he did end up winning I wouldn't mind it that much. But he probably isn't going to run, and I agree that 2008 is probably a little early for Obama, so I doubt that it will happen. I just hope it doesn't end up being Hillary vs. Jeb. If that's the case, Canada will start to look awfully inviting.[/quote]

Powell wont run. He got so many death threats last time.[/quote]

He is a tool, more so than even Nader.[/quote]

Right back at ya, buddy.
 
[quote name='Drocket']If the Republicans would field a woman canidate, I think there'd be a rather high chance of victory. I think they'd steal a huge chunk of the female voters that usually vote Democrat without _too_ badly alienating more conservative voters. The same thing would happen with a minority canidate, especially if they were black. Ultimately, though, I think its unlikely that the Republicans will be willing to put a female or minority up for president any time soon - there's just too many hardcore conservatives standing in the way of the nomination. Maybe in another 10-20 years...

Any female nominated by the Democrats is almost doomed to lose. No matter who it is, they're going to lose at least a few voters simply because it a woman, and they're not going to pick up anything from the other party (and, in fact, are far more likely to strongly mobilize the Republicans into voting in record numbers.) A black (male) Democrat canidate MIGHT have a shot, by virtue of motivating black voters to show up in record numbers (not hard to do, considering how terrible black voter turnout usually is...)

I'm not trying to offend anyone here. That's just my own opinion, what I consider the simple reality of the situation. Also note that all of the above goes out the window if Oprah would run. Oprah would win hands-down, no matter what party she went with, even if she ran as an independent. She MIGHT lose a couple southern states, but overall, she'd win in a landslide not seen since George Washington.[/quote]

I agree up to the Oprah part. Oprah? Get real. Most of us with a job have only heard of her name.
 
[quote name='Kaijufan']Im sure Hillary will run, but Im not sure who will run for the Republicans.[/quote]

Hilary will never get through the primaries. The next candidate will be a centrist.
 
[quote name='xzafixz'][quote name='camoor'][quote name='buster90']God I hope Hiliry does not run...no offense to women but I really do not want a woman president in this country.[/quote]

Funniest thing I've read all night, hands down. Hands down.[/quote]

America isn't ready for a woman president. It just won't happen.[/quote]

I think Hilary would have a bigger problem with the female vote than the male.
 
Too early for Obama to run.

I predict a heavy NY showing, with either Clinton, Guliani or Bloomberg in the race--or maybe all 3.

Guliani has big NY loyalty--maybe not enough to carry NY's electoral 33 to the Red side, but enough to make it a tough race.

Bloomberg is almost a democrat--altough is NYers don't like him much, so he maybe a good central candidate for the Repubs.

Hill and Mayor Mike were both on my beat when I was working at the newspaper, and I hate to ever choose on character, but I like Mike more than Hillary.

Either way, I bought 5 shares of Guliani at $23 at Play4Kicks to be the nominee. I could win ~$500 in 2008, which--with Bush in office--will probably be enough to pay for subway fare to collect my unemployment check.
 
Jeb Bush will defeat Hillary Clinton by at least 60/40.

Though I think if Powell ran he probably wouldn't get out of the Republican primary. if he did get a chance at a national election, say a choice between Jeb Bush and Powell, he would beat Jeb easily.

As an aside, it should never be forgotten that Hillary Clinton has become posessed by the spirit of Richard Nixon.
 
Jeb has a better shot than george (if you were starting with a blank slate that is), he's smarter and seems more moderate. I personally love strong women, and love many of the things hillary stands for, for example, I wouldn't want her to make much of it during the election, but if she won I'd hope her free health care plan would resurface. I think she's the only one in the democratic party (with the exception of maybe obama, though it would really be a situation where you send him out in the ocean and see if he sinks or floats, since he would be entering a new realm, and moving up very very quickly) who can win. This will probably change, but right now they seem to be the only ones with the strength left for next election. Though hillary gets both a bonus and a negative for being a women, I really have no idea how many men would oppose her for being a woman, and how many women would vote for her just because she's a woman. Obama will lose votes because he's black (people are much more racist than they admit, even if it isn't always conscious, but in the privacy of a voting booth they have to admit nothing), and blacks are too small of a minority, and don't vote enough, to have a good chance at changing things. Though I admit, if the republicans field a woman or a black person they have an extremely good chance of winning, since the far right will have no one else to support, and liberal areas would be much less opposed to the idea.
 
Republicans field a black person - ha ha. The same huge religious base that helped elect Bush would not vote for a black person (not all of them, but especially in the south racism is very much alive, though less strong). Which sucks, b/c I do like Powell, as I said.
 
[quote name='Quackzilla']Obama should run in 2012 or 2016.

But I agree Hillary should run in 2008, but I doubt many Amerikans would vote for a woman.[/quote]
AMerican's specifically voted for bush in the southern states due to homophobic tendencies. There's no way those uneducated heathen's in the south would vote for a woman...they want a good ol boy redneck....
 
[quote name='pfunkpearl'][quote name='Quackzilla']Obama should run in 2012 or 2016.

But I agree Hillary should run in 2008, but I doubt many Amerikans would vote for a woman.[/quote]
AMerican's specifically voted for bush in the southern states due to homophobic tendencies. There's no way those uneducated heathen's in the south would vote for a woman...they want a good ol boy redneck....[/quote]

I wouldnt vote for her because she is a femma-nazi.
 
You know, it would be really interesting if Giuliani instead challenged Hillary in 2006 for her Senate seat. A loss for her there might doom her chances for the presidency. Alternatively, she could just choose not to run for re-election and start campaigning for the presidency 2-2.5 years from now.

I really dislike Hillary and her views, but it would be interesting I think to see how a female candidate would fare. At the same time, I don't want our first female president to be Hillary Clinton. It would make it much easier for me to vote Republican in that election than it was to vote for Bush this time around.
 
Any republican would get stampeded in the north and westcoast, and any democrat will get bulldozed in the heartland. It's down to finding one or two borderline states and seeing who can pick off the most. Assuming how her being a woman plays out, she has a very good shot at winning the states kerry won. She is also a better politician (kerry is a great politician as well, with a longer history, but hillary is smarter and just overall better at it), and there's no chance anyone is going to portray her as weak and indecisive. If hillary can pick off one or two states (colorado, missourii, new mexico, something), she stands an excellent chance of winning. And remember, the public loved bill clinton, republicans hated him, but overall the public loved him. To many it would be almost as if they were bringing him back. Then again, if you ask people like limbaugh it would be hillary's 3rd term.
 
[quote name='bignick'][quote name='pfunkpearl'][quote name='Quackzilla']Obama should run in 2012 or 2016.

But I agree Hillary should run in 2008, but I doubt many Amerikans would vote for a woman.[/quote]
AMerican's specifically voted for bush in the southern states due to homophobic tendencies. There's no way those uneducated heathen's in the south would vote for a woman...they want a good ol boy redneck....[/quote]

I wouldnt vote for her because she is a femma-nazi.[/quote]

spoken like a true shovenistic male..
 
[quote name='pfunkpearl'][quote name='bignick'][quote name='pfunkpearl'][quote name='Quackzilla']Obama should run in 2012 or 2016.

But I agree Hillary should run in 2008, but I doubt many Amerikans would vote for a woman.[/quote]
AMerican's specifically voted for bush in the southern states due to homophobic tendencies. There's no way those uneducated heathen's in the south would vote for a woman...they want a good ol boy redneck....[/quote]

I wouldnt vote for her because she is a femma-nazi.[/quote]

spoken like a true shovenistic male..[/quote]

That's chauvinistic. Ok, carry on.
 
I think we would probably see someone run who is not even on the radar right now. How many people mentioned Bush running in 2000 back in 1996? How many people mention Clinton running in 1988?
 
[quote name='Quackzilla']Why would Jeb Bush run?

He is a horrible example of a human being, very cruel and no morals at all.[/quote]

And that's why he'll win, too.
 
[quote name='sblymnlcrymnl'][quote name='Quackzilla']Why would Jeb Bush run?

He is a horrible example of a human being, very cruel and no morals at all.[/quote]

And that's why he'll win, too.[/quote]

Sadly, quite true.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
bread's done
Back
Top