Welcome to European Tribune. It's gone a bit quiet around here these days, but it's still going.

My Iowa Predictions

by ATinNM Thu Jan 3rd, 2008 at 05:42:20 PM EST

Every blog in the entire frickin' Universe has an Iowa Prediction diary.

Why should ET be any different?

Instead of giving percentages I will give my top 3 predictions and why I put them there.

from the diaries. Use as a results thread when they come out. -- Jérôme


My Predictions:

DEM

  1.  Edwards
  2.  Clinton
  3.  Obama

Edwards: he has been campaigning in Iowa since 2003.  Has a lot of carry-over of support and a solid, in place precinct organization with experience of and working within the caucuses .  He is the largest 2nd choice Candidate and so will gather votes when Obama isn't viable from the 'Not Clinton' people and from the Clinton people when Hillary isn't viable.  That's a major, major, advantage and I think will put him over the top.

Clinton:  She is the establishment candidate.  The Clinton DLC faction will pull in enough 1st Choice votes to bring her into 2nd.  She has little 2nd choice support & that's why she won't win.  

Obama:  he will get some votes but the expectation of a mass turn-out of young people won't happen.  He lacks the precinct organizations of Clinton and Edwards.  He lacks the backing of the Establishment Democrats in Iowa.  He comes in 2nd in 2nd Choice preference and that's not enough to kick him over the top.

GOP

  1.  Huckabee
  2.  Romney
  3.  McCain

Huckabee -- he is exactly the candidate that will appeal to the southern and northern tier of counties.  He won't do all that great along the I-80 corridor but the western counties will pitch in to help him take it.

Romney -- The 'eh?' candidate.  People aren't thrilled about him but he has spent the bucks and has a sufficient precinct organization to carry him to second place.  The I-80 corridor will go heavy for him & that's how he gets to be #2.

McCain -- The 'Aw-heck' candidate.  He will come in third because he's not one of the other guys.  He is enough 'Not the Other Guys' and has the name recognition to pick-up enough scattered support to eke out a 3rd.  

Display:
I think that the narrative coming out of Iowa on the Democratic side is going to be how Obama failed to meet expectations.

They opened the dorms at the University of Iowa for students who wanted to come back early to caucus.  Only two did.  That's pretty shocking.  My suspcion is that Obama simply fails to even be meet viability in many rural precints, and that Des Moines turns out hard for Edwards.  And that Edwards takes 40%+ of the delegates in  Iowa.  

I think that the weathers going to really reduce the number of Hillary voters, they're looking to older women voters. And right now its cold in most of Iowa. Well below freezing, and it's icy out.

And I'll give my consent to any government that does not deny a man a living wage-Billy Bragg

by ManfromMiddletown (manfrommiddletown at lycos dot com) on Thu Jan 3rd, 2008 at 03:18:07 AM EST
A good friend of mine works for the Edwards campaign in Iowa, in some of the rural counties, and says that out there their main competition is Biden and Richardson (whose support is understated in the polls). Edwards does quite well in rural Iowa and I expect that will combine with enough support for him from folks in the cities to give him the victory.

My prediction is Edwards, Obama, Clinton (but I wouldn't be surprised to see Obama place third).

And the world will live as one

by Montereyan (robert at calitics dot com) on Thu Jan 3rd, 2008 at 01:52:02 PM EST
[ Parent ]
I really hope you are right about Edwards...but his winning is my prediction too! I think the battle over the next 2 months will be Hillary vs Edwards. Lets see what happens tonight!

"Once in awhile we get shown the light, in the strangest of places, if we look at it right" - Hunter/Garcia
by whataboutbob on Thu Jan 3rd, 2008 at 04:26:12 AM EST
How does Edwards' organisation look outside of Iowa? If Obama were to win Iowa and New Hampshire, he would probably be able to get the nomination (not that would necessarily be a good thing). My "fear" is Edwards might not have the resources to beat Clinton.

"The basis of optimism is sheer terror" - Oscar Wilde
by NordicStorm (m<-at->sturmbaum.net) on Thu Jan 3rd, 2008 at 05:33:17 AM EST
[ Parent ]
There's not much outside Iowa. Around August or September of 2007 they pulled their staffers from other early states like Nevada to concentrate everything on Iowa. Staffers in Iowa will be reassigned to NH, SC, or NV beginning tomorrow, but they aren't going to be paid.

Edwards is going to have to rely on the grassroots to be the building block of his campaign in the other early states, and hope that an Iowa win translates into a lot of donations. Obama and Clinton are MUCH better organized in NH and SC in particular, but also in states like California.

And the world will live as one

by Montereyan (robert at calitics dot com) on Thu Jan 3rd, 2008 at 01:54:00 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Quit that line of thinking.  This is not an auction.  Vote for the guy you want.  If he wins elections, he is "viable" whether or not he has $50 million laying around.
by paving on Thu Jan 3rd, 2008 at 02:51:36 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Well, the guy I want isn't running, and at any rate I don't get to vote. It is merely my most humble opinion that if it comes down to Edwards vs. Clinton, Edwards doesn't have the resources or the organisation to come out on top. Wasn't my intent to discourage anyone from voting for their preferred candidate.

"The basis of optimism is sheer terror" - Oscar Wilde
by NordicStorm (m<-at->sturmbaum.net) on Thu Jan 3rd, 2008 at 05:12:16 PM EST
[ Parent ]
In primary season, you don't need either an organization or resources.

If you win a few early, people will come flocking.

Kerry lat time was reduced to 2 or 3 staffers, no energy at all, and then he caught fire.

by Upstate NY on Thu Jan 3rd, 2008 at 05:55:35 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Yes, Americans will coalesce around a "winner" after Iowa.  That's the way this b/s works here.  Sad, but that's the predicament with our media and campaign rules.  Any statement about someone's "lack of viability" is designed to make people think they are backing a losing horse.  
by paving on Thu Jan 3rd, 2008 at 06:24:22 PM EST
[ Parent ]
That hasn't been the case in the past. Look at the results from past elections. The Iowa winner hasn't won the nomination plenty of times.
by Upstate NY on Thu Jan 3rd, 2008 at 10:07:13 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Here's the wikipedia history on the Iowa Caucuses. It's a predictor only 50% of the time:

History

The Iowa caucus is commonly recognized as the first step in the U.S. presidential nomination process for both the Democratic and the Republican Parties. It came to national attention in 1972, with a series of articles in the New York Times on how non-primary states would choose their delegates for the national conventions. Democratic operative Norma S. Matthews, state co-chair of the George McGovern campaign, helped engineer the early January start for Iowa. McGovern finished second to Edmund Muskie in the first early Hawkeye state caucus, but the momentum was palpable for an ultimate Democratic nomination in 1972 for McGovern in Miami. Four years later, the Iowa Republican Party scheduled its party caucuses on the same date as the Democrats.

In 1976 an uncommitted slate received the most support, followed by former Georgia governor Jimmy Carter, who came in a distant second, but won the most votes of any actual candidate. With no dominant front runner at the time, Carter was able to use the publicity of his "win" to achieve victory in the New Hampshire primary, and then to win his party's nomination and eventually the Presidency. Since then, Presidential candidates have increased their focus on winning the Iowa caucus.

In 1980 Republicans began the tradition of holding a straw poll at their caucuses, giving the appearance of a primary election. George H. W. Bush campaigned extensively in Iowa, defeating Ronald Reagan, but ultimately failed to win the nomination.

While they have been a financial boon to the state, the political value of the Iowa caucuses has gone up and down over the years. In 1988, for example, the candidates who eventually won the nominations of both parties came in third in Iowa. In elections without a sitting President or Vice President, the Iowa winner has gone on to the nomination only about half the time (see below).

When Iowa Senator Tom Harkin ran for the Democratic nomination in 1992, none of the other Democratic candidates chose to compete in Iowa, which minimized its importance in the nomination process. President Bush was unopposed on the Republican side.

While the Democrats have tried to preserve the position of Iowa and New Hampshire in their nominating schedules, the Republicans have not. Alaska and Hawaii generally have their caucuses before Iowa, and in 1988 the Hawaii victory of Pat Robertson and the 1996 Louisiana victory of Pat Buchanan over Senator Phil Gramm had a significant impact on the results in Iowa.

The caucuses are closely followed by the media and can be an important factor in determining who remains in the race and who drops out. However, the only non-incumbent candidate to win his party's caucus and go on to win the general election was George W. Bush in 2000. Neither Reagan nor Clinton won prior to their first terms. No incumbent President has run opposed in his own party's caucus since Jimmy Carter in 1980.

In the months leading up to the 2004 caucus, predictions showed candidates Dick Gephardt and Howard Dean neck-and-neck for first place, with John Kerry and John Edwards far behind them. Negative campaign ads attacking each other by the two front runners soured the voters on them, and a last minute decision by Kerry to put all his remaining money in Iowa swung voters towards him. Gephardt's presidential hopes were dashed and Dean's badly battered, as Kerry went on to become the second non-incumbent to win both Iowa and New Hampshire since Edmund Muskie in 1972.

by Upstate NY on Thu Jan 3rd, 2008 at 10:09:46 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Edwards may have an advantage over Obama and Clinton in that he has opted for spending limits and public matching funds. All of the candidates have been burning through cash in Iowa, but Obama and Clinton have been outspending Edwards by a factor of 3:1 and 4:1 respectively.  Edwards is going to get $8.825 million in matching funds in either February or March of 2008.  If it's a close race that could place Edwards with a cash advantage as we move into the last set of states to vote.

And I'll give my consent to any government that does not deny a man a living wage-Billy Bragg
by ManfromMiddletown (manfrommiddletown at lycos dot com) on Thu Jan 3rd, 2008 at 07:19:13 PM EST
[ Parent ]
... NH and SC ... the rest of the way to Feb 5 its just a skeleton structure waiting to be filled in, basically if he should score a win tonight.

It would, of course, by more dominated by volunteers and grass roots organizations than the other candidates, because he is under the campaign finance spending cap. But that's not a major problem for him, as if he is seen as a front-runner, he'll be able to attract the volunteers and grass roots supporters.

If he finishes second in Iowa, it had better be behind Obama, since he is never going to beat Clinton if Clinton goes into NH with a bump from an IA victory.


I've been accused of being a Marxist, yet while Harpo's my favourite, it's Groucho I'm always quoting. Odd, that.

by BruceMcF (agila61 at netscape dot net) on Thu Jan 3rd, 2008 at 07:35:03 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Ah, you beat me to it!  I'd like to agree, but I'll go with these:

1.Obama
2.Edwards
3.Clinton

1.Huckabee
2.Romney
3.McCain

Edwards and Obama each get a good chunk of undecideds, putting them above Clinton.

Be nice to America. Or we'll bring democracy to your country.

by Drew J Jones (pedobear@pennstatefootball.com) on Thu Jan 3rd, 2008 at 05:03:26 AM EST
Scratch that.  I meant:

  1. Romney
  2. Huckabee


Be nice to America. Or we'll bring democracy to your country.
by Drew J Jones (pedobear@pennstatefootball.com) on Thu Jan 3rd, 2008 at 05:05:01 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Your first prediction was 100% right.
In the morning TV stations translated speeches of candidates and I had impression that aenemic Republican campaign not started yet as the only electable person on Rep side Juliani kept low-profile, while Dems have fierce competition as they are poised for final Nov victory  with 99% probability.

I didn't follow American presidential campaign and have no clear opinion even as outsider. Just noticed Hillary was flanked by Bill and daughter from one side and from the other was no one but Madlein Albright!

Do Democrats know how hated Albright around the world, surely not less than any Republican foreign policy maker?

by FarEasterner on Thu Jan 3rd, 2008 at 11:58:16 PM EST
[ Parent ]
I'm not sure if Americans know the world hates Albright.  (I have to admit that I didn't, but I was really politically conscious during her time at State.)  Albright is an establishment Clintonian figure.

Be nice to America. Or we'll bring democracy to your country.
by Drew J Jones (pedobear@pennstatefootball.com) on Fri Jan 4th, 2008 at 12:20:22 AM EST
[ Parent ]
That's Americans main problem they do not seem to understand that Albright foreign policy was not much different if at all different from Rice' and Hillary bold claim she will be a leader of the country respected not hated in the world sounds hollow.
by FarEasterner on Fri Jan 4th, 2008 at 12:54:07 AM EST
[ Parent ]
I think Edwards and Huckabee will win their respective party caucus as well. Alas, I don't think it will dent Clinton enough to deny her the nomination.
If McCain finishes third, having barely campaigned in Iowa, and wins New Hampshire, he might actually get the nod. Huckabee apparently bet just about everything on Iowa and don't have much of an organisation outside of it, and Romney, while having plenty of cash, is still...well, Romney.

(This post is going to be awfully embarrassing in a couple of months, when everything herein is proven to be absolutely wrong ;-)

"The basis of optimism is sheer terror" - Oscar Wilde

by NordicStorm (m<-at->sturmbaum.net) on Thu Jan 3rd, 2008 at 05:04:31 AM EST
.

"Life shrinks or expands in proportion to one's courage." - Anaïs Nin
by Crazy Horse on Thu Jan 3rd, 2008 at 05:14:06 AM EST
Bruce McF's diary is for that sort of comment !!

keep to the Fen Causeway
by Helen (lareinagal at yahoo dot co dot uk) on Thu Jan 3rd, 2008 at 09:26:41 AM EST
[ Parent ]
..

I've been accused of being a Marxist, yet while Harpo's my favourite, it's Groucho I'm always quoting. Odd, that.
by BruceMcF (agila61 at netscape dot net) on Thu Jan 3rd, 2008 at 05:45:29 PM EST
[ Parent ]
That's totally crap and you know it.  I was actually making a .

Do0 i dare insert a smiley here?

"Life shrinks or expands in proportion to one's courage." - Anaïs Nin

by Crazy Horse on Thu Jan 3rd, 2008 at 05:57:54 PM EST
[ Parent ]
... ?

I've been accused of being a Marxist, yet while Harpo's my favourite, it's Groucho I'm always quoting. Odd, that.
by BruceMcF (agila61 at netscape dot net) on Thu Jan 3rd, 2008 at 06:01:48 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Whomever wins America is f*#ked. No one can change things enough until the arrival of another great depression as many around here are predicting. And the best person then would be ?.

Hey, Grandma Moses started late!
by LEP on Thu Jan 3rd, 2008 at 06:31:33 AM EST
Paul Krugman, of course.

Alas, he won't run.

Earth provides enough to satisfy every man's need, but not every man's greed. Gandhi

by Cyrille (cyrillev domain yahoo.fr) on Thu Jan 3rd, 2008 at 07:13:26 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Nah, he'd be terrible on the stump.  I love Krugman, but, when you see him on television, he's a pretty quiet guy, not at all cut out for politics.

It's a shame, because he'd be a phenomenal president.

Be nice to America. Or we'll bring democracy to your country.

by Drew J Jones (pedobear@pennstatefootball.com) on Thu Jan 3rd, 2008 at 07:50:52 AM EST
[ Parent ]
I bet he will be onthe phone for a Clinton or an Edwards presidency...

I am not so sure about an Obama presidency.. Krugman is so.. so... un-serious people...even shrill.

A pleasure

I therefore claim to show, not how men think in myths, but how myths operate in men's minds without their being aware of the fact. Levi-Strauss, Claude

by kcurie on Thu Jan 3rd, 2008 at 09:52:38 AM EST
[ Parent ]
No, at the end of the day, Krugman will go for whomever the nominee is.  Obama made a mistake dragging our party's resident lion-hearted economist into a fight, but my read of Krugman suggests that, at base, he's quite happy with the candidates and ready to kick ass and take names in November.

And most Democrats, I think, mirror that happiness and readiness, despite what some on Daily Kos would seem to suggest with all the anger directed at this or that candidate.  Reading undecided voters' statements in Iowa reveals that they find the field too good to narrow it down to one candidate in most cases.

The truth, in my view, is that we have a much better set of candidates than in 2004.  Even though I'm not a fan of Hillary, there are, as I mentioned, things I admire about her.  And there are things I admire about all of the candidates, honestly.  All are stronger than Kerry.  All are stronger than the Al Gore of 2000.  All brought something important into the race -- Edwards pulling us to the left and making us remember who the party is supposed to stand for, Obama bringing us swing voters, Clinton getting us ready to brutalize the opposition, Richardson keeping Iraq on the table and proving that even obese old hippie stoners can run for the White House ;), Biden bringing humor and seriousness, and so on.

It's been a good run-up to the primary season.  They've united around some basic proposals, haven't sniped at each other too much (while the GOP is in chaos with people hating on each other's preference), proven they can slaughter the Republicans with grassroots fundraising, and got the base so cranked up that we're likely to see record turnout tonight.  And, most importantly, the public seems poised to elect a Democrat with increased majorities in Congress.

All things considered, it could be a lot worse.

Be nice to America. Or we'll bring democracy to your country.

by Drew J Jones (pedobear@pennstatefootball.com) on Thu Jan 3rd, 2008 at 10:08:18 AM EST
[ Parent ]
I'm glad there are some who are happy with this field.

The Hun is always either at your throat or at your feet. Winston Churchill
by r------ on Thu Jan 3rd, 2008 at 11:04:10 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Well, I'm in a good mood and very excited.  Ask me again tonight when the results are in.  I may change my mind.

Be nice to America. Or we'll bring democracy to your country.
by Drew J Jones (pedobear@pennstatefootball.com) on Thu Jan 3rd, 2008 at 11:10:08 AM EST
[ Parent ]
This is the US Democratic Party after all. It's a good field.

We have met the enemy, and he is us — Pogo
by Migeru (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Thu Jan 3rd, 2008 at 04:34:32 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Well - relatively. Although there's some evidence of personality disorders, none of the three front-runners are as batshit barking as the main Republican picks.

Maybe I'm just old-fashioned, but I'm not sure that 'Vote for me, I'm not completely eye-poppingly splutteringly chicken-explodingly insane' should really count as an election winning platform.

Edwards comes closes to having a real message. The others seem like more walking examples of triangulated expediency - tough on populism, tough on the causes of populism.

I still haven't forgiven Gore for not stepping up to the plate. Not that he would have been perfect, but he might have been less likely to drive right off the cliff without trying to turn the engine off.

by ThatBritGuy (thatbritguy (at) googlemail.com) on Thu Jan 3rd, 2008 at 05:24:42 PM EST
[ Parent ]
I wonder whether Gore supporters couldn't muster the 15% for viability in some precincts...

We have met the enemy, and he is us — Pogo
by Migeru (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Thu Jan 3rd, 2008 at 05:26:07 PM EST
[ Parent ]
"Tough on ... populism, tough on the causes ... of populism".

After all, cadence is everything.


I've been accused of being a Marxist, yet while Harpo's my favourite, it's Groucho I'm always quoting. Odd, that.

by BruceMcF (agila61 at netscape dot net) on Thu Jan 3rd, 2008 at 05:48:32 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Maybe I'm just old-fashioned, but I'm not sure that 'Vote for me, I'm not completely eye-poppingly splutteringly chicken-explodingly insane' should really count as an election winning platform.

H'mmmm.  Well.  Yeah.  And if the average political reporter, average commentator, and average voter in the US had the average intelligence of the average turnip it wouldn't be that effective.

But with the GOPs field is running around proclaiming, "Vote for me! I am completely eye-poppingly splutteringly chicken-explodingly insane."

It works.


She believed in nothing; only her skepticism kept her from being an atheist. -- Jean-Paul Sartre

by ATinNM on Thu Jan 3rd, 2008 at 06:01:46 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Um - yeah. Point.
by ThatBritGuy (thatbritguy (at) googlemail.com) on Thu Jan 3rd, 2008 at 06:08:59 PM EST
[ Parent ]
But.. as a better set of candidate.. the thing that makes them better than the rest is the health care plan and the inderect carbon tax they propose.

But in the other two fundamental issues: Pentagon budget and Fear/drug war, they stand ont he same side... with no end in sight for the way the US system works.

So, it is normal that a lot of Europeans do not expect great things for the rest of the world with an Obama or Clinton presidency.

And I am still not sure if Edwards wouold change the War on drugs/Fear dynamics as he seems to hint sometimes.

A pleasure


I therefore claim to show, not how men think in myths, but how myths operate in men's minds without their being aware of the fact. Levi-Strauss, Claude

by kcurie on Thu Jan 3rd, 2008 at 11:12:36 AM EST
[ Parent ]
... revolutionize the Fear/War/Empire locus as dramatically as most on ET would hope, but I seriously do think he can and will try to pull the Overton Window in the direction of reality.

Indeed, I wouldn't venture to say whether he would be doing so if reality was close to peaking through one edge of the frame, but given the current limits on the political discourse, and where he is standing, its to his advantage to shift it toward reality.

And I haven't seen even that much from either Senator Clinton or Obama ... both of them, for example, are on board for the expansion of the size of the Army and Marines, which is only required if the US is to be engaged "hot" occupations of the size of pre-surge Iraq for the indefinite future, while Edwards made the straightforward point that we should get out of Iraq first, before we look at long term force structure.


I've been accused of being a Marxist, yet while Harpo's my favourite, it's Groucho I'm always quoting. Odd, that.

by BruceMcF (agila61 at netscape dot net) on Thu Jan 3rd, 2008 at 06:48:34 PM EST
[ Parent ]
I'll go back to what I said at the start of this very long thread, some 12 hours ago: no one will have the power to make fundamental changes to the current political, economic, financial, military structures in the U.S., absent a massive train wreck in the U.S.

Hey, Grandma Moses started late!
by LEP on Thu Jan 3rd, 2008 at 07:36:47 PM EST
[ Parent ]
... that the movement conservatives wrought in America, in 1976. They didn't do it in one step, but in a series of efforts to budge the Overton window when it was a strain, and to move it as hard and as fast as they could when there was an opening. They took the festering through the middle of the American body politic and instead of treating the infection, harnessed the fever to their ends.

And now the opportunity is coming for a change election ... which is a substantially rarer thing in a Madisonian system than in a parliamentary system ... and the key is to get some effective movement back in the direction of reality. We have moved so far out into a narcissistic political fantasy that there is no hope of getting reality in the frame within eight years ... but unless we start making progress in the next eight years, there won't be anywhere near the same prospect of getting reality in the frame in the next thirty.


I've been accused of being a Marxist, yet while Harpo's my favourite, it's Groucho I'm always quoting. Odd, that.

by BruceMcF (agila61 at netscape dot net) on Fri Jan 4th, 2008 at 12:25:28 AM EST
[ Parent ]
What Bruce said.  

This is why Obama is so frustrating.  We've a once in a lifetime chance to really change the US political system and what do we get?

Kumbaya, My Lord.  Kumbaya.

"Can't we all get along in the most wonderful country with the most wonderful people, in the wonderfulmostest wonderification-ness of it all?"

Pardon me whilst I wonderfully goeth & barf.

She believed in nothing; only her skepticism kept her from being an atheist. -- Jean-Paul Sartre

by ATinNM on Fri Jan 4th, 2008 at 02:14:35 AM EST
[ Parent ]
I don't necessarily disagree with what you all are saying. But, in my opinion, change will only come with a major crisis, probably economic. Who would react the best from our point of view? Who can say? A minor or semi-major economic recession? Forget any change. We need 15 % unemployment and massive forclosures. God strike me dead for saying that!

Hey, Grandma Moses started late!
by LEP on Fri Jan 4th, 2008 at 05:19:28 AM EST
[ Parent ]
The major crisis is really just there to remind people that there's a thing called reality happening outside their teeeeveees, and reality doesn't give a crap what Rush or Coulter or even Olbermann thinks.

Unfortunately in a crisis people are more likely to retreat to simple-minded narratives than move towards nuance and sophistication. So without good leadership, a crisis will just edge the Overton window further in the direction of insanity.

Obama is not the leader to deal with a crisis. He's too cosseted, too secretively smug, too intellectual and too unimaginative to cope with reality. He likes the old narrative just fine and he doesn't have any plans to change it.

Imagine a Depression without a New Deal.

That's what's going to happen now. And it's going to breed monsters.

by ThatBritGuy (thatbritguy (at) googlemail.com) on Fri Jan 4th, 2008 at 10:05:42 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Name me one political leader in America that you would have confidence in to lead in the event of major crisis?
Name me one in the UK, France, Germany, etc. etc.
I always thought Gore but he's not shown up. In the event of a major crisis, I would probably have to go with the Clintons, as sick as I am of Bush-Clinton-Bush.

Hey, Grandma Moses started late!
by LEP on Fri Jan 4th, 2008 at 12:03:36 PM EST
[ Parent ]
What do you mean he's not shown up in the event of a major crisis?



We have met the enemy, and he is us — Pogo

by Migeru (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Fri Jan 4th, 2008 at 12:20:30 PM EST
[ Parent ]
I meant to run for president in 2008.

Hey, Grandma Moses started late!
by LEP on Fri Jan 4th, 2008 at 01:27:30 PM EST
[ Parent ]
ThatBritGuy:

Imagine a Depression without a New Deal.

That's what's going to happen now. And it's going to breed monsters.

Yikes!

We have met the enemy, and he is us — Pogo
by Migeru (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Fri Jan 4th, 2008 at 12:22:07 PM EST
[ Parent ]
We fairly well know what the alternative to the New Deal looked like.

Business Plot - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The Business Plot, the Plot Against FDR, or the White House Putsch, was a conspiracy involving several wealthy businessmen to overthrow the presidency of Franklin D. Roosevelt in 1933.

Details of the matter came to light when retired Marine Corps Major General Smedley Butler testified before a Congressional committee that a group of men had attempted to recruit him to serve as the leader of a plot and to assume and wield power once the coup was successful. Butler testified before the McCormack-Dickstein Committee in 1934 [1]. In his testimony, Butler claimed that a group of several men had approached him as part of a plot to overthrow Roosevelt in a military coup. One of the alleged plotters, Gerald MacGuire, vehemently denied any such plot. In their final report, the Congressional committee supported Butler's allegations on the existence of the plot,[2] but no prosecutions or further investigations followed, and the matter was mostly forgotten.

General Butler claimed that the American Liberty League was the primary means of funding the plot. The main backers were the Du Pont family, as well as leaders of U.S. Steel, General Motors, Standard Oil, Chase National Bank, and Goodyear Tire and Rubber Company. A BBC documentary claims Prescott Bush, father and grandfather to the 41st and 43rd US Presidents respectively, was also connected.[3]

End result: Fascism, american style.

Sweden's finest (and perhaps only) collaborative, leftist e-newspaper Synapze.se

by A swedish kind of death on Fri Jan 4th, 2008 at 05:06:49 PM EST
[ Parent ]
... unless the ground work has been done and the foundation has been laid.

I guess what I am saying is that, yeah, sure, change dramatic enough to bring American within squinting distance of having any resemblance to our national mythos would require a massive shock.

But that's only necessary ... its not sufficient.

And there's no question in my mind that we already have the massive shocks lined up in the thirty years ahead, so what is really urgent is getting that groundwork done and getting the foundation laid. Otherwise we are heading even further into V is Vendetta terrain when a shock comes along that is even more traumatic in its impact than our month/year version of 9/11.


I've been accused of being a Marxist, yet while Harpo's my favourite, it's Groucho I'm always quoting. Odd, that.

by BruceMcF (agila61 at netscape dot net) on Fri Jan 4th, 2008 at 02:06:15 PM EST
[ Parent ]
I hope you're right with all your predictions, they make for the most interesting race going forward on the R side (a Romney washout is too much to hope for) and they sync with my preferences on the D side.

But, I think Obama's ground game is much better than Howard Dean's was (the archetypal candidate with wide national support but no understanding of how to turn it into Iowa caucus numbers) and I think he'll come in ahead of Edwards. In particular, he strategy of "running against the lefties" will, thanks to the Iowa rules, allow him to bus in "Independents" and "soft Republicans" (who are apathetic about the R primary) and slap Edwards down from the right.

At which point he's likely to roll all the way to the nomination. But I hope I'm wrong and you're right.

by Metatone (metatone [a|t] gmail (dot) com) on Thu Jan 3rd, 2008 at 08:17:33 AM EST
That may play a role, but, while independents seem to like people who'll take shots at their own parties (insert various McCain examples here), Obama's statements haven't been making headlines outside of Daily Kos and a few of the other liberal blogs.  (And, to be fair, several of these things were third-hand "knowledge," without any serious sourcing, as in the case of the "bash Gore and Kerry" incident.)

One thing I'll say for Obama, as an aside: I think what Obama got right, win or lose, that the eventual nominee should note was tying together an infinitely superior general election theme.  Edwards's theme is great for primaries, but I think Jonathon Alter of Newsweek made a fair point when he said that you have to be careful with the confrontational style.  Played correctly, it's solid.  But, played incorrectly, it will turn people off, allow your opponent to attack from a defensive position (or, worse, belittle you the way Cheney was able to do to Edwards in 2004) and destroy your campaign.  Edwards can deliver such a theme convincingly, and I hope that if he does win tonight he'll have taken note.

The reason I don't see Edwards winning is that I think he's going to pay a price -- a small one but a real one, unfortunately -- for a certain depression factor.  I think there will be a few people who, despite leaning towards Edwards, go for Obama working with the assumption that Edwards won't beat Hillary.

It's a dumb assumption to work with, in my view, because people should, to put it in as cheesy a way as possible, "vote their hopes, not their fears," but that's the major problem I see for Edwards.  And, as it hasn't really been discussed directly in the non-blogosphere arenas, it hasn't really been addressed directly.

Maybe I'm wrong, but I see him losing a bit for that, and a bit lost is a catastrophic loss for Edwards, I'm afraid.  (That's one point on which I think the press got it right without needing to manufacture a gain or loss of momentum.)  His campaign is sort of like the NFL teams who have to pray for a certain combination of wins and losses from others in order to make the playoffs and have a shot at the Super Bowl.  Or, for the one-game analogy, it's a bit like hoping for the (one-win) Miami Dolphins to beat the (undefeated) New England Patriots.  There was a chance, and it had its exciting moments, but (hope though we Dolphins fans did) it just didn't happen.

I believe beating Hillary is critical to the next four years.  Again, that's not because I think she'd be a bad president or because I hate her or because she's a woman.  Hillary is incredibly intelligent, hard-working and probably tougher than I could ever dream of being.  I really do admire her for putting up with all of the horseshit -- from the Republicans, from the press, from her white-trash husband, all of it -- she's had to put up with for so long.  But I believe we've got to beat her, because she'd be mediocre (as Clintons tend to be) at a time that really and truly calls for a candidate with the potential for transformational leadership.  Any of the others in the top five, with the possible exception of Richardson, have that potential.  All that said, I must admit I, too, am fearful that Hillary would bury Edwards.

Be nice to America. Or we'll bring democracy to your country.

by Drew J Jones (pedobear@pennstatefootball.com) on Thu Jan 3rd, 2008 at 08:59:49 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Hope you're right.

The Hun is always either at your throat or at your feet. Winston Churchill
by r------ on Thu Jan 3rd, 2008 at 08:35:54 AM EST
when do we get to know ? tomorrow morning london time ?

keep to the Fen Causeway
by Helen (lareinagal at yahoo dot co dot uk) on Thu Jan 3rd, 2008 at 09:29:17 AM EST
Around 2AM London time, I believe.

Be nice to America. Or we'll bring democracy to your country.
by Drew J Jones (pedobear@pennstatefootball.com) on Thu Jan 3rd, 2008 at 09:30:46 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Well I suppose I'll just have to stay awake till midnight in snow encrusted Finland.

You can't be me, I'm taken
by Sven Triloqvist on Thu Jan 3rd, 2008 at 12:11:45 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Bush won't be waiting up with you.  Which should make you feel a little better about it, right?

I think it's telling that the White House press secretary  doesn't seem to have a clue what time the results will come in.  But then, we've already established that she doesn't have a clue about much, anyway.

by the stormy present (stormypresent aaaaaaat gmail etc) on Thu Jan 3rd, 2008 at 12:25:44 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Oh yes, I feel much better. Having a greater attention span than a thick plank is most comforting...

You can't be me, I'm taken
by Sven Triloqvist on Thu Jan 3rd, 2008 at 01:14:24 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Well, give the guy a break. He's been meaning to finish reading "My Pet Goat" for years now...

"The basis of optimism is sheer terror" - Oscar Wilde
by NordicStorm (m<-at->sturmbaum.net) on Thu Jan 3rd, 2008 at 05:25:20 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Hey, have you ever read My Pet Goat?  The most Deridaful analysis of global politics since Soponge Bobe!

"Life shrinks or expands in proportion to one's courage." - Anaïs Nin
by Crazy Horse on Thu Jan 3rd, 2008 at 06:02:01 PM EST
[ Parent ]
For some reason that made me think of Bush and Derrida in the same sentence.

I think my brain may have just melted.

Ow.

by ThatBritGuy (thatbritguy (at) googlemail.com) on Thu Jan 3rd, 2008 at 06:37:06 PM EST
[ Parent ]
You can clean brains out of the couch with a little club soda and some salt.
by the stormy present (stormypresent aaaaaaat gmail etc) on Thu Jan 3rd, 2008 at 06:41:40 PM EST
[ Parent ]
I was watching Pulp Fiction the other night...

We have met the enemy, and he is us — Pogo
by Migeru (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Thu Jan 3rd, 2008 at 06:55:34 PM EST
[ Parent ]
is this from experience?

Any idiot can face a crisis - it's day to day living that wears you out.
by ceebs (ceebs (at) eurotrib (dot) com) on Thu Jan 3rd, 2008 at 07:00:43 PM EST
[ Parent ]
..And I am so not going to ask how you know this.
by ThatBritGuy (thatbritguy (at) googlemail.com) on Thu Jan 3rd, 2008 at 07:00:51 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Dude, you can clean everything with club soda and a little salt.
by the stormy present (stormypresent aaaaaaat gmail etc) on Fri Jan 4th, 2008 at 04:38:55 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Well if he's not waiting up because he's going to declare himself caesar before the end of the year so it doesn't metter, that might not make me feel better.

Any idiot can face a crisis - it's day to day living that wears you out.
by ceebs (ceebs (at) eurotrib (dot) com) on Thu Jan 3rd, 2008 at 01:51:55 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Even the Caesars knew they had to fear the people. I don't think anyone can provide that much panem et circenses.

Anyway, here's my prediction:

  1. Huckabee
  2. Romney
  3. McCain

  4. Obama
  5. Clinton
  6. Edwards

/will stay up tonight

"If you know your enemies and know yourself, you will not be imperiled in a hundred battles." Sun Tzu
by Turambar (sersguenda at hotmail com) on Thu Jan 3rd, 2008 at 03:42:40 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Well by coincidence I need to be out in my back garden to see if I can see the Quadrantids tonight, they should peak at about 2 in the morning here. so I should be up for the result too.

Prediction

1 Huckabee
2 Romney
3 McCain

1 Obama
2 Edwards
3 Clinton


Any idiot can face a crisis - it's day to day living that wears you out.

by ceebs (ceebs (at) eurotrib (dot) com) on Thu Jan 3rd, 2008 at 05:34:26 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Wow I was right!

Any idiot can face a crisis - it's day to day living that wears you out.
by ceebs (ceebs (at) eurotrib (dot) com) on Fri Jan 4th, 2008 at 06:08:38 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Damn, I missed the Dems by 0,2% (Edwards beats Clinton) and the Reps by less than 300 votes (Thompson beats McCain). Had anybody Thompson in third place?

"If you know your enemies and know yourself, you will not be imperiled in a hundred battles." Sun Tzu
by Turambar (sersguenda at hotmail com) on Fri Jan 4th, 2008 at 10:33:43 AM EST
[ Parent ]
I admit I don't know either. When are the results in?

*Lunatic*, n.
One whose delusions are out of fashion.
by DoDo on Thu Jan 3rd, 2008 at 05:22:23 PM EST
[ Parent ]
The Call to Order happens at 6:30 PM Central Time, or 12:30 AM GMT.  Figure 30 minutes of miscellaneous business (eating donuts, drinking coffee, talking to neighbors -- the important stuff.)  Around 7:00 (1:00 GMT) they should start the process and by 7:30 returns from the lower population/turnout precincts should begin to come in.  

Interesting things to look for:

  1.  Turn-out.  Heavy turn-out is required for Obama to win.  (It won't happen, but you can look for it.  ;0

  2.  Edwards MUST do well in the early returns.  The rural precincts will be reporting first and he needs to really do well to overcome Clinton's advantage in the I-80 corridor where the big cities are.

  3.  If a surprise comes it will be noted in these early returns.

  4.  Look for turn-out numbers in Des Moines (Polk County,) Cedar Rapids (Lynn County,) and especially Iowa City (Johnson County) and Ames (Story County.)  The last two are home to the Univ. of Iowa and Iowa State, repectively, and for Obama to win there must be an unusually large turn-out.  

  5.  Des Moines is the state capital and center of the Establishment Dem organization.  If Clinton loses this area she is scrod.

  6.  On the GOP side look for the returns from Mason City (Cerro Gordo County - IIRC,) Sioux City (Woodbury County), and Council Bluffs (Pottawattamie County.)  If Huckabee wins here he wins big.

  7.  Huck-a-duck-a-bumblebee also needs to do well in the early returns.

  8.  The number 3 on the GOP side should emerge early.


She believed in nothing; only her skepticism kept her from being an atheist. -- Jean-Paul Sartre
by ATinNM on Thu Jan 3rd, 2008 at 05:46:48 PM EST
[ Parent ]
First glimpse of results (from CNN) gives Edwards the lead with 45% in 2% of the caucuses (and a large turnout)

The road of excess leads to the palace of wisdom - William Blake
by talos (mihalis at gmail dot com) on Thu Jan 3rd, 2008 at 08:30:55 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Correction 42 - now going to 36% at 5% with Obama at 33%

The road of excess leads to the palace of wisdom - William Blake
by talos (mihalis at gmail dot com) on Thu Jan 3rd, 2008 at 08:33:39 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Final Zogby-Reuters-CSPAN Daily Tracking Poll:

Obama 31
Edwards 27
Clinton 24

Obama's up four points since December 30th.  Edwards is up three points.  Clinton is down seven.

Huckabee 31
Romney 25
Thompson 11
McCain 10

From the 30th, Huck's up two.  Mitt's down three.  Thompson's up three.  McCain's down one.

Be nice to America. Or we'll bring democracy to your country.

by Drew J Jones (pedobear@pennstatefootball.com) on Thu Jan 3rd, 2008 at 10:13:20 AM EST
FYI: Margin of Error is 3.3%.  So Clinton is significantly down, and Obama's significantly up.  Nothing statistically significant on Edwards.

My read of this is that the undecideds are breaking, and they're breaking for the Darkie McCrackhead and his Trial-Lawyer life partner, as I expected.  Reports on the ground that I've read support that, but make of it what you will.

It's going to be an interesting night.

Be nice to America. Or we'll bring democracy to your country.

by Drew J Jones (pedobear@pennstatefootball.com) on Thu Jan 3rd, 2008 at 10:18:18 AM EST
[ Parent ]
the effect of peer-pressure/groupthink is what will really determine this outcome.  I expect that actual event to take away from Obama's polling %'s, similar to what happened with Dean (who had other issues, too).

Word on the street is that Edwards has reached into the deeper/rural precincts, playing the numbers game.  I expect his support is probably going to increase on this basis.

Common wisdom is that bad weather is bad for Obama, possibly bad for Clinton and a wash for Edwards.

Also, the 2004 edition had a ton of Republicans show up b/c they didn't have any election of their own to attend.  This probably has something to do with the way things went that year.

Remember that Iowa is a midwestern, conservative, older state with a Democratic history.  It's a quiet, under-stated kind of liberal place.  My feeling is that  a drumbeat of change won't work so well there and neither will talking down to the plebs, which is why I gotta say Edwards is in good position.

The real trouble is the backroom scheming that happens.  Campaigns and dirty tricks are the real story tonight with how they move groups back and forth, etc.  The on-the-ground-in-the-room dynamics are key and Edwards has done this recently in Iowa, Clinton has done it in the past and Obama's team has done it for others but he himself has not.  All three are lawyers so I'm sure they know how to game a system but Edwards did a great job of it in 2004 so I'm going to guess that he knows something about how to work this particular system.

by paving on Thu Jan 3rd, 2008 at 04:08:56 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Forgot to mention:

Ron Paul 10%

Ron Paul is tied with McCain and Thompson.  I'd been expecting a big surprise from somewhere, and John McCain being buried by Ron Paul may be it.

Be nice to America. Or we'll bring democracy to your country.

by Drew J Jones (pedobear@pennstatefootball.com) on Thu Jan 3rd, 2008 at 11:08:56 AM EST
[ Parent ]
I can't quite put a finger on it, exactly, but I find myself increasingly disliking Obama. Something about playing nice to the Rightwing and almost putting down the Left really gnaws at me. I'd rather have a person who is passionate and outspoken, which the Dems haven't had in a long time. And a lot of people say a candidate can't be too confrontational, but you better be ready for yome tough play when it comes to running against the Republicans. I really think Dean would have beaten Bush if he had won the nomination in 2004, but he wasn't organized well enough in Iowa and New Hampshire. (Iowa and New Hampshire!! How did these two small, very white, conservative states get in the position to heavily influence who are the candidates??)

"Once in awhile we get shown the light, in the strangest of places, if we look at it right" - Hunter/Garcia
by whataboutbob on Thu Jan 3rd, 2008 at 12:27:48 PM EST
Well, Kerry did beat Bush (and deservedly so).

They would just have rigged the election more had it been Dean.

Earth provides enough to satisfy every man's need, but not every man's greed. Gandhi

by Cyrille (cyrillev domain yahoo.fr) on Thu Jan 3rd, 2008 at 12:58:49 PM EST
[ Parent ]
whataboutbob:
I can't quite put a finger on it, exactly, but I find myself increasingly disliking Obama.

I've been cheerfully posting Obama hit comments over at the Big Orange for a couple of months now.

Obama has always creeped me out. He just seems like all PR, all the time, and then once in a while the mask slips and you can see a quiet seething patrician contempt for the little people.

He's happy to farm the little people with his charm, and he's happy to consider condescending to help them once in a while. But he doesn't really see them as equals, and I suspect he's only interested in their lives to the extent that they can help him fulfill his ambitions and vision for himself.

Edwards seems to actually care in a genuine and connected way. I suppose that could just be an act too, but I have a much harder time seeing Edwards as a faker, if only because he'll have burnt a lot of bridges and made a lot of enemies in this campaign.

by ThatBritGuy (thatbritguy (at) googlemail.com) on Thu Jan 3rd, 2008 at 05:16:43 PM EST
[ Parent ]
I find Hillary's utter lack of charm and pretense of caring about the little people somehow comforting.  I don't trust Obama, despite his pretty reassurances, and I wonder whether I can trust Edwards (based on what?)

I know I can't trust Hillary to care about me.  Therefore, she can't play me, and I can't be deeply disappointed when she sells us out.  

I know.  It's a sick game of lowered expectations.  But it gets rid of the stress of the voters and candidates pretending to like each other...

You all have a month to talk me out of this.

"Pretending that you already know the answer when you don't is not actually very helpful." ~Migeru.

by poemless on Thu Jan 3rd, 2008 at 05:33:33 PM EST
[ Parent ]
I for one wouldn't try, On your own concience be it ;-)

(not that I have a personal choice, apart from none of the other side)

Any idiot can face a crisis - it's day to day living that wears you out.

by ceebs (ceebs (at) eurotrib (dot) com) on Thu Jan 3rd, 2008 at 05:36:47 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Why don't you just vote for someone who you like but won't win anyway? That way you won't be disappointed.

We have met the enemy, and he is us — Pogo
by Migeru (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Thu Jan 3rd, 2008 at 05:41:58 PM EST
[ Parent ]
I would, if there were someone I liked!!!

"Pretending that you already know the answer when you don't is not actually very helpful." ~Migeru.
by poemless on Thu Jan 3rd, 2008 at 05:42:31 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Write in Gore, then.

We have met the enemy, and he is us — Pogo
by Migeru (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Thu Jan 3rd, 2008 at 05:50:31 PM EST
[ Parent ]
And have my ballot thrown out?  (Yes, they can do that.)  There are down-ballot races I am actually excited about, and want to vote for.  So I want my vote to be counted.

"Pretending that you already know the answer when you don't is not actually very helpful." ~Migeru.
by poemless on Thu Jan 3rd, 2008 at 05:55:30 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Well if there's not someone you want to vote for, theres definitely someone you want to vote against, that should cut the field down.

Any idiot can face a crisis - it's day to day living that wears you out.
by ceebs (ceebs (at) eurotrib (dot) com) on Thu Jan 3rd, 2008 at 06:06:39 PM EST
[ Parent ]
There is?  Who?  Any of them would be an improvement.


"Pretending that you already know the answer when you don't is not actually very helpful." ~Migeru.
by poemless on Thu Jan 3rd, 2008 at 06:08:15 PM EST
[ Parent ]
well who do you like least?

Any idiot can face a crisis - it's day to day living that wears you out.
by ceebs (ceebs (at) eurotrib (dot) com) on Thu Jan 3rd, 2008 at 06:09:21 PM EST
[ Parent ]
They are all pretty unlikeable.  Kucinich perhaps more than the others.  I like him the least.  But this should not be about who I like.  It should be about who I want running the country.

Who do I want to run the country?  Gore?  Bill Moyers?  Putin?  Unicorns?  

I have to make a choice.   I guess I will take comfort in the fact that my choice has not made a difference in 15 years.

"Pretending that you already know the answer when you don't is not actually very helpful." ~Migeru.

by poemless on Thu Jan 3rd, 2008 at 06:14:10 PM EST
[ Parent ]
So it's all about picking the winner?

We have met the enemy, and he is us — Pogo
by Migeru (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Thu Jan 3rd, 2008 at 06:25:37 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Poemless: Who do I want to run the country?  Gore?  Bill Moyers?  Putin?  Unicorns?

Migeru: So it's all about picking the winner?

...

Do you have access to some information I don't?  Please share!


"Pretending that you already know the answer when you don't is not actually very helpful." ~Migeru.

by poemless on Fri Jan 4th, 2008 at 01:22:37 PM EST
[ Parent ]
No, no, I'm replying to my choice has not made a difference in 15 years.

Is picking the winner the only way that your vote makes a difference?

We have met the enemy, and he is us — Pogo

by Migeru (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Fri Jan 4th, 2008 at 01:33:50 PM EST
[ Parent ]
How else would my vote make a difference?  I suppose that if I lived in FL in 2000 that might be true, that I would have made a difference by voting for someone who lost anyway- Nader.  

I hate it when you do this thing where you understand every well what I meant to say : the person I voted for has lost, but act like you don't.

"Pretending that you already know the answer when you don't is not actually very helpful." ~Migeru.

by poemless on Fri Jan 4th, 2008 at 01:45:22 PM EST
[ Parent ]
With that reasoning, your vote only makes a difference, regardless of who you vote for, if the election is decided by a few votes. If you vote for the winner but they win in a landslide, your vote was also inconsequential.

But that can't be the point of voting, can it?

We have met the enemy, and he is us — Pogo

by Migeru (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Fri Jan 4th, 2008 at 05:09:55 PM EST
[ Parent ]
This line of reasoning is how I concluded that voting is tribal. Since your vote does not change anything, the point must be found in the voter, not the vote.

My conclusion is that you vote to express your part in, and support for, your group (however you define it). Getting a candidate accepted as the probable winner gets the people who wants to identify with the winning party. Getting a candidate defined as the underdog gets those that wants to identify with the underdog. And so on.

Sweden's finest (and perhaps only) collaborative, leftist e-newspaper Synapze.se

by A swedish kind of death on Fri Jan 4th, 2008 at 07:30:25 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Exactly, the value of the vote is in actually casting it.

There was a point made that on the referendum on the Spanish Constitution of 1978 a lot of the campaigning was against abstention. Those unreconstructed fascists who voted against fell in the trap of validating the democratic system by casting a vote.

We have met the enemy, and he is us — Pogo

by Migeru (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Fri Jan 4th, 2008 at 07:49:31 PM EST
[ Parent ]
I suppose I should have said Like for the job least.

Any idiot can face a crisis - it's day to day living that wears you out.
by ceebs (ceebs (at) eurotrib (dot) com) on Thu Jan 3rd, 2008 at 06:35:37 PM EST
[ Parent ]
What do you dislike about Gravel and Kuchinich?

Sweden's finest (and perhaps only) collaborative, leftist e-newspaper Synapze.se
by A swedish kind of death on Thu Jan 3rd, 2008 at 06:31:45 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Well, Dean's biggest problem was his campaign team. He had a few people on board that just weren't up for it and I think gave him bad advice.  The institutional opposition to him in favor of Kerry was far stronger in 2004 than we see with Hillary/Obama against Edwards.  I think anyone who watched closely and understands politics can see that Dean would have had a very strong chance of beating Bush in 2004 and the Republicans knew that.  A very large number of non-democrats caucused in Iowa in 2004 because there wasn't a Republican caucus they had to attend instead.  

The media of course was very against Dean as soon as he opened his mouth about media regulation, big surprise.  Edwards has done the same this time around but knew going in what the effect would be.  Edwards is much savvier than Dean and has a far greater grasp of long-term strategy in a political situation, his trial lawyer experience is huge here.  Remember that Edwards is a guy who won a senate seat in North Carolina as a DEMOCRAT in the late 90's.  That is some miraculous stuff.

In terms of "aggression" or "rhetoric" or primary/general election differences it's all b/s.  Nothing said the past two months will be remembered come August/September.  How one wins the primary is not especially important in a general election when you have a party apparatus behind you going against an "enemy" who is genuinely not on your side.  

Tonight is really fascinating because there are 8 or 9 people who might be the next US President and that picture will clarify greatly after all is done in Iowa.  Even the mere thought of someone other than Bush being the President is inspiring.

I also see major potential for party re-alignments depending on how things shake out.  The Republican Party is dangerously close to a split on coalition lines.   I also think that if the GOP genuinely splits the Democrats will be right behind them.  The political realignment will look as such:

Right Wing/Christian Party (15% base)
Libertarian Party (10%)
Centrist Party (left wing Repubs and "moderate" Democrats - 30%)
Corporatist Party (Romney/Giuliani's/Lieberman's - 25%)
Progressive/Green Party - (left wing Dems and Greens/Nader/Kucinich types 15%)

That represents a clearer view of the actual political breakdown in the US, in my opinion and the failure to nominate party-uniting candidates can push a split here.  The Republicans will go first but the Democrats will immediately follow, being abandoned by a left-wing that is only there to keep Republicans out of office, once the GOP block is broken the left wing block can leave in peace and the Democrats/Centrists will still be a "majority" party able to block rightwingers from the big office.

by paving on Thu Jan 3rd, 2008 at 06:41:30 PM EST
[ Parent ]
The Republican Party is dangerously close to a split on coalition lines.   I also think that if the GOP genuinely splits the Democrats will be right behind them.

I agree.

I'd rearrange your political list to put the Corporate Party above the Centrist Party (to the Right), but that's me.

I hope and actually think the Progressive/Green Party did better than 15%.  How much?  shrug  20%?  Maybe even as high as 25% depending on the leaders and the message.

There is a not-so underground wave of anger building in the US that either of the establishment Parties, as currently constituted, are prepared to handle.  


She believed in nothing; only her skepticism kept her from being an atheist. -- Jean-Paul Sartre

by ATinNM on Thu Jan 3rd, 2008 at 06:59:33 PM EST
[ Parent ]
... entrenchment of two party politics, so it is far more likely that if the Republicans are burst asunder either they will be rebuilt on new lines or a new second party will rise in their place.

Without even OSP (Optional Second Preference) Voting, let alone IRV, and with fusion tickets illegal in most states (joint candidate on the ballot for multiple parties), the only way for a third party to gain power in first past the post districts is to be the first or second party on a state or regional basis ... and in that case, as with the Farmers-Labor party of Minnesota, there is a strong incentive to join the national major party where it is possible to find the most allies.


I've been accused of being a Marxist, yet while Harpo's my favourite, it's Groucho I'm always quoting. Odd, that.

by BruceMcF (agila61 at netscape dot net) on Thu Jan 3rd, 2008 at 07:00:31 PM EST
[ Parent ]
The way in which, if a presidential election doesn't result in a candidate with an absolute majority of electoral college votes, the election falls back on the Congress makes third parties unviable at the national level. Also the way the House and Senate majorities work.

We have met the enemy, and he is us — Pogo
by Migeru (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Thu Jan 3rd, 2008 at 07:06:21 PM EST
[ Parent ]
In the US any third party able to elect members to Congress immediately would be "viable" in such a scenario.  I think all of these groups have an existing party-apparatus to build upon and existing geographic strongholds where they could elect sitting members of Congress, local councils and state assemblies/senates.

A few of them could easily win electoral votes in a Presidential election, thanks to our much-maligned but in my opinion geographically-sound and well thought-out electoral college system.  If a candidate fails to reach the majority # of electoral votes the election returns to Congress, which has decided US Presidential elections in the past.  At that moment your ability to form coalitions with other parties would become very important.

Most important culturally the existing "Democrat" and "Republican" type parties would essentially remain with less conflicted bases and would likely be relatively the two largest parties, preserving a significant amount of the existing political climate.  The key is that the incentive for say left wing Democrats to throw in their hat with them is reduced because the liklihood of a rightwinger getting elected is still about the same as it is today.  The difference is now their values are actually represented, potentially growing and there is an actual platform.

A Progressive/Green coalition party in the US, if able to steal the left wing of the Democratic party, would be very legitimately powerful immediately.  Consider that they would most likely have a couple sitting senators and a number of congressman from day one.

by paving on Thu Jan 3rd, 2008 at 07:29:20 PM EST
[ Parent ]
... in the later 1800's, which is home "fusion tickets" came to be outlawed in the first place. As Republicans argued at the time, they could beat the Democrats, and they could beat the Progressives, but if they were forced to run against both the Democrats and the Progressives at the same time, they might not beat them.


I've been accused of being a Marxist, yet while Harpo's my favourite, it's Groucho I'm always quoting. Odd, that.
by BruceMcF (agila61 at netscape dot net) on Thu Jan 3rd, 2008 at 07:30:33 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Sounds reasonable!

But as a neighbor to Iowa, I do NOT make predictions about their caucuses--too many variables.

Fun to watch though.  And turnout should be good.  After a pretty serious cold spell that has lasted since before Christmas, it is sunny and reasonably warm.  It might even be thawing in Des Moines.

"Remember the I35W bridge--who needs terrorists when there are Republicans"

by techno (reply@elegant-technology.com) on Thu Jan 3rd, 2008 at 04:37:41 PM EST
I watch this race with mixed feelings. It's not that I'd expect the top candidates to champion truly serious policy changes. But even just watching them, I get a creepy feeling.

The lady formerly keeping the name Rodham is so stage-managed as if she runs on remote control, and even if there is speculation that she'd show the now 0hidden face of a vengeful fury once elected, instead I dread the image of a President acting out a role 24/7/365.

There's some "I got you suckers!" in Obama's appearance, and all the empty bland words just increase my feeling that it's him whom I know least what to really expect from if elected.

Edwards should be my choice, expect his zeal and weaponised looks remind me of the young Tony Bliar, and what became of him.

*Lunatic*, n.
One whose delusions are out of fashion.

by DoDo on Thu Jan 3rd, 2008 at 05:40:26 PM EST
BTW I am astoundingly late for the party, having semi-consciously avoided all US election diaries, but what diaries beyond Helen's would be worth reading back?

*Lunatic*, n.
One whose delusions are out of fashion.
by DoDo on Thu Jan 3rd, 2008 at 05:45:46 PM EST
[ Parent ]
You might try theIowa Caucus -- More Than You Want to Know Diary.

Written by one of the towering intellects in current American intellectual life.

She believed in nothing; only her skepticism kept her from being an atheist. -- Jean-Paul Sartre

by ATinNM on Thu Jan 3rd, 2008 at 05:53:26 PM EST
[ Parent ]
MY thoughts exactlium.  i have always thought waitresses (and waitreseurs) should have caucus power, because without that you would have Nebraska.  And that begs Texas.  Where i have trained my trained chickens to shoot on contact.

i love democracy, where i could be living in Germany, but on windpower work in Des Moines, Iowa, i could actually meet a candidate fur President of the United States of America.  Sitting two tables away, as was prophesized in the bibble, was a former Sec En named Richardson.  i spent twenty minutes with him.  He's the most renewable savvy candidate of all, yet he had more interest in the woman (leader of all community based energy policy in america) i was sitting with than in what i was saying.  His staff knew details on every issue i brought up, but he was only interested in "relaxing" from the campaign.

At the end of the night, i trust only those of us who are willing to put their reality, daily, warts and all, on the net, like us.

"Life shrinks or expands in proportion to one's courage." - Anaïs Nin

by Crazy Horse on Thu Jan 3rd, 2008 at 06:17:49 PM EST
[ Parent ]
CNN saying 65% of republican caucus goers in areas they have asked describe themselves as born again, and say their most important issue is immigration.

Any idiot can face a crisis - it's day to day living that wears you out.
by ceebs (ceebs (at) eurotrib (dot) com) on Thu Jan 3rd, 2008 at 08:24:36 PM EST
Early results 2% of results in

edwards 42%
clinton  33%
obama  25%

Any idiot can face a crisis - it's day to day living that wears you out.

by ceebs (ceebs (at) eurotrib (dot) com) on Thu Jan 3rd, 2008 at 08:27:04 PM EST
via kos:

Iowa Democratic Party Caucus Results

Senator John Edwards : 36.65%
Senator Hillary Clinton : 30.96%
Senator Barack Obama : 28.37%
Senator Joe Biden : 2.08%
Governor Bill Richardson : 1.29%
Senator Chris Dodd : 0.37%
Uncommitted : 0.28%
Precincts Reporting: 91 of 1781

Now flooding. Rural vote looking good for Edwards.

*Lunatic*, n.
One whose delusions are out of fashion.

by DoDo on Thu Jan 3rd, 2008 at 08:31:20 PM EST
[ Parent ]
apparently 50% are first time caucus goers, and a vast majority looking for change over experience (What exactly that means who knows)

Any idiot can face a crisis - it's day to day living that wears you out.
by ceebs (ceebs (at) eurotrib (dot) com) on Thu Jan 3rd, 2008 at 08:34:19 PM EST
[ Parent ]
SENATOR JOHN EDWARDS : 33.38%
SENATOR HILLARY CLINTON : 32.40%
SENATOR BARACK OBAMA : 30.76%
GOVERNOR BILL RICHARDSON : 2.03%
SENATOR JOE BIDEN : 1.16%
SENATOR CHRIS DODD : 0.15%
UNCOMMITTED : 0.12%
PRECINCTS REPORTING: 191 OF 1781

Be nice to America. Or we'll bring democracy to your country.
by Drew J Jones (pedobear@pennstatefootball.com) on Thu Jan 3rd, 2008 at 08:38:27 PM EST
[ Parent ]
You beat me by 23 seconds!

We have met the enemy, and he is us — Pogo
by Migeru (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Thu Jan 3rd, 2008 at 08:39:46 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Ha!  You beat me before!  In the immortal words of Darrel Hammond playing Bill Clinont:  Suck. On. It. :D

Be nice to America. Or we'll bring democracy to your country.
by Drew J Jones (pedobear@pennstatefootball.com) on Thu Jan 3rd, 2008 at 08:49:29 PM EST
[ Parent ]
AP are reporting Heavy turnout could cause delays in results.

Any idiot can face a crisis - it's day to day living that wears you out.
by ceebs (ceebs (at) eurotrib (dot) com) on Thu Jan 3rd, 2008 at 08:43:01 PM EST
[ Parent ]
How heavy? Any figures?

*Lunatic*, n.
One whose delusions are out of fashion.
by DoDo on Thu Jan 3rd, 2008 at 08:44:23 PM EST
[ Parent ]
some precincts are reporting 150% of expected numbers just saw on sky

Any idiot can face a crisis - it's day to day living that wears you out.
by ceebs (ceebs (at) eurotrib (dot) com) on Thu Jan 3rd, 2008 at 08:48:39 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Des Moines anecdotes show turnout three to four times higher than 2004.

Be nice to America. Or we'll bring democracy to your country.
by Drew J Jones (pedobear@pennstatefootball.com) on Thu Jan 3rd, 2008 at 08:50:59 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Also, apparently the youngin's did show up for the first time...ever.

Be nice to America. Or we'll bring democracy to your country.
by Drew J Jones (pedobear@pennstatefootball.com) on Thu Jan 3rd, 2008 at 08:51:37 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Looks stable for a while. But if the larger city caucuses go Clinton or Obama...

Senator John Edwards : 33.90%
Senator Hillary Clinton : 32.00%
Senator Barack Obama : 31.28%
Governor Bill Richardson : 1.75%
Senator Joe Biden : 0.89%
Senator Chris Dodd : 0.10%
Uncommitted : 0.08%
Precincts Reporting: 258 of 1781

*Lunatic*, n.
One whose delusions are out of fashion.

by DoDo on Thu Jan 3rd, 2008 at 08:42:26 PM EST
[ Parent ]
At 25%, Obama overtakes Clinton:

Senator John Edwards : 32.62%
Senator Hillary Clinton : 32.30%
Senator Barack Obama : 32.30%
Governor Bill Richardson : 1.89%
Senator Joe Biden : 0.75%
Senator Chris Dodd : 0.11%
Uncommitted : 0.04%
Precincts Reporting: 461 of 1781

*Lunatic*, n.
One whose delusions are out of fashion.

by DoDo on Thu Jan 3rd, 2008 at 08:51:45 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Obama in the lead.

Senator Barack Obama : 32.70%
Senator John Edwards : 32.38%
Senator Hillary Clinton : 32.02%
Governor Bill Richardson : 1.79%
Senator Joe Biden : 0.96%
Senator Chris Dodd : 0.09%
Uncommitted : 0.06%
Precincts Reporting: 530 of 1781

*Lunatic*, n.
One whose delusions are out of fashion.

by DoDo on Thu Jan 3rd, 2008 at 08:56:22 PM EST
[ Parent ]
50 more precincts...

Senator Barack Obama : 32.98%
Senator John Edwards : 32.29%
Senator Hillary Clinton : 31.88%
Governor Bill Richardson : 1.70%
Senator Joe Biden : 1.01%
Senator Chris Dodd : 0.08%
Uncommitted : 0.06%
Precincts Reporting: 586 of 1781
(Percentages are State Delegate Equivalents.)

We have met the enemy, and he is us — Pogo

by Migeru (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Thu Jan 3rd, 2008 at 08:58:46 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Senator Barack Obama : 34.06%
Senator John Edwards : 31.71%
Senator Hillary Clinton : 31.45%
Governor Bill Richardson : 1.76%
Senator Joe Biden : 0.94%
Senator Chris Dodd : 0.05%
Uncommitted : 0.03%
Precincts Reporting: 923 of 1781
(Percentages are State Delegate Equivalents.)

>50% counted

Sweden's finest (and perhaps only) collaborative, leftist e-newspaper Synapze.se

by A swedish kind of death on Thu Jan 3rd, 2008 at 09:10:32 PM EST
[ Parent ]
At almost precisely 50%, Clinton still narrowly behind Edwards, Obama in clear lead:

enator Barack Obama : 33.88%
Senator John Edwards : 31.84%
Senator Hillary Clinton : 31.60%
Governor Bill Richardson : 1.68%
Senator Joe Biden : 0.93%
Senator Chris Dodd : 0.05%
Uncommitted : 0.03%
Precincts Reporting: 889 of 1781

*Lunatic*, n.
One whose delusions are out of fashion.

by DoDo on Thu Jan 3rd, 2008 at 09:10:13 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Official results here

Senator John Edwards : 37.40%
Senator Hillary Clinton : 31.11%
Senator Barack Obama : 27.10%
Senator Joe Biden : 1.93%
Governor Bill Richardson : 1.91%
Senator Chris Dodd : 0.32%
Uncommitted : 0.24%
Precincts Reporting: 103 of 1781
(Percentages are State Delegate Equivalents.)

And I'll give my consent to any government that does not deny a man a living wage-Billy Bragg

by ManfromMiddletown (manfrommiddletown at lycos dot com) on Thu Jan 3rd, 2008 at 08:32:17 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Senator John Edwards : 34.51%
Senator Hillary Clinton : 31.63%
Senator Barack Obama : 30.34%
Governor Bill Richardson : 1.77%
Senator Joe Biden : 1.38%
Senator Chris Dodd : 0.21%
Uncommitted : 0.16%
Precincts Reporting: 144 of 1781

Any idiot can face a crisis - it's day to day living that wears you out.
by ceebs (ceebs (at) eurotrib (dot) com) on Thu Jan 3rd, 2008 at 08:35:27 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Huge turnout apparently.

Be nice to America. Or we'll bring democracy to your country.
by Drew J Jones (pedobear@pennstatefootball.com) on Thu Jan 3rd, 2008 at 08:39:43 PM EST
[ Parent ]
This is a virtual 3-way tie:
Senator John Edwards : 33.38%
Senator Hillary Clinton : 32.40%
Senator Barack Obama : 30.76%
Governor Bill Richardson : 2.03%
Senator Joe Biden : 1.16%
Senator Chris Dodd : 0.15%
Uncommitted : 0.12%
Precincts Reporting: 191 of 1781
(Percentages are State Delegate Equivalents.)


We have met the enemy, and he is us — Pogo
by Migeru (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Thu Jan 3rd, 2008 at 08:38:50 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Senator John Edwards : 34.24%
Senator Hillary Clinton : 32.12%
Senator Barack Obama : 30.28%
Governor Bill Richardson : 2.02%
Senator Joe Biden : 1.11%
Senator Chris Dodd : 0.14%
Uncommitted : 0.10%
Precincts Reporting: 205 of 1781
(Percentages are State Delegate Equivalents.)

And I'll give my consent to any government that does not deny a man a living wage-Billy Bragg
by ManfromMiddletown (manfrommiddletown at lycos dot com) on Thu Jan 3rd, 2008 at 08:39:41 PM EST
[ Parent ]
SENATOR JOHN EDWARDS : 34.05%
SENATOR HILLARY CLINTON : 32.09%
SENATOR BARACK OBAMA : 30.86%
GOVERNOR BILL RICHARDSON : 1.81%
SENATOR JOE BIDEN : 0.98%
SENATOR CHRIS DODD : 0.12%
UNCOMMITTED : 0.09%
PRECINCTS REPORTING: 237 OF 1781

If these are rural, as AT thought, Edwards is done.

Be nice to America. Or we'll bring democracy to your country.

by Drew J Jones (pedobear@pennstatefootball.com) on Thu Jan 3rd, 2008 at 08:41:59 PM EST
[ Parent ]
I say again:  Regardless of who wins, look at this.  A virtual three-way tie.

What a fantastic and exciting race this turned into.  I love it.

Be nice to America. Or we'll bring democracy to your country.

by Drew J Jones (pedobear@pennstatefootball.com) on Thu Jan 3rd, 2008 at 08:43:23 PM EST
[ Parent ]
SENATOR JOHN EDWARDS : 34.00%
SENATOR HILLARY CLINTON : 31.91%
SENATOR BARACK OBAMA : 31.26%
GOVERNOR BILL RICHARDSON : 1.88%
SENATOR JOE BIDEN : 0.79%
SENATOR CHRIS DODD : 0.09%
UNCOMMITTED : 0.07%
PRECINCTS REPORTING: 296 OF 1781

Be nice to America. Or we'll bring democracy to your country.
by Drew J Jones (pedobear@pennstatefootball.com) on Thu Jan 3rd, 2008 at 08:44:17 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Senator John Edwards : 33.18%
Senator Hillary Clinton : 32.47%
Senator Barack Obama : 31.52%
Governor Bill Richardson : 1.90%
Senator Joe Biden : 0.81%
Senator Chris Dodd : 0.07%
Uncommitted : 0.05%
Precincts Reporting: 346 of 1781
(Percentages are State Delegate Equivalents.)

Still very even.

Sweden's finest (and perhaps only) collaborative, leftist e-newspaper Synapze.se

by A swedish kind of death on Thu Jan 3rd, 2008 at 08:47:38 PM EST
[ Parent ]
SENATOR JOHN EDWARDS : 33.44%
SENATOR HILLARY CLINTON : 32.24%
SENATOR BARACK OBAMA : 31.63%
GOVERNOR BILL RICHARDSON : 1.80%
SENATOR JOE BIDEN : 0.78%
SENATOR CHRIS DODD : 0.07%
UNCOMMITTED : 0.05%
PRECINCTS REPORTING: 367 OF 1781

Be nice to America. Or we'll bring democracy to your country.
by Drew J Jones (pedobear@pennstatefootball.com) on Thu Jan 3rd, 2008 at 08:48:44 PM EST
[ Parent ]
SENATOR JOHN EDWARDS : 33.25%
SENATOR HILLARY CLINTON : 32.19%
SENATOR BARACK OBAMA : 31.93%
GOVERNOR BILL RICHARDSON : 1.79%
SENATOR JOE BIDEN : 0.71%
SENATOR CHRIS DODD : 0.08%
UNCOMMITTED : 0.04%
PRECINCTS REPORTING: 415 OF 1781

Tightening very quickly.

Be nice to America. Or we'll bring democracy to your country.

by Drew J Jones (pedobear@pennstatefootball.com) on Thu Jan 3rd, 2008 at 08:50:21 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Senator John Edwards : 33.06%
Senator Barack Obama : 32.20%
Senator Hillary Clinton : 32.14%
Governor Bill Richardson : 1.78%
Senator Joe Biden : 0.70%
Senator Chris Dodd : 0.08%
Uncommitted : 0.04%
Precincts Reporting: 433 of 1781
(Percentages are State Delegate Equivalents.)

Obama second.

Sweden's finest (and perhaps only) collaborative, leftist e-newspaper Synapze.se

by A swedish kind of death on Thu Jan 3rd, 2008 at 08:51:34 PM EST
[ Parent ]
How tight can this race get?  Jesus Christ.  The second tier completely collapsed.

Be nice to America. Or we'll bring democracy to your country.
by Drew J Jones (pedobear@pennstatefootball.com) on Thu Jan 3rd, 2008 at 08:52:26 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Senator John Edwards : 32.62%
Senator Hillary Clinton : 32.30%
Senator Barack Obama : 32.30%
Governor Bill Richardson : 1.89%
Senator Joe Biden : 0.75%
Senator Chris Dodd : 0.11%
Uncommitted : 0.04%
Precincts Reporting: 461 of 1781
(Percentages are State Delegate Equivalents.)

Sweden's finest (and perhaps only) collaborative, leftist e-newspaper Synapze.se
by A swedish kind of death on Thu Jan 3rd, 2008 at 08:53:06 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Wanted to capture that - Clinton and Obama tied.

Sweden's finest (and perhaps only) collaborative, leftist e-newspaper Synapze.se
by A swedish kind of death on Thu Jan 3rd, 2008 at 08:53:49 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Senator Barack Obama : 32.70%
Senator John Edwards : 32.38%
Senator Hillary Clinton : 32.02%
Governor Bill Richardson : 1.79%
Senator Joe Biden : 0.96%
Senator Chris Dodd : 0.09%
Uncommitted : 0.06%
Precincts Reporting: 530 of 1781
(Percentages are State Delegate Equivalents.)

Obama in the lead.

Sweden's finest (and perhaps only) collaborative, leftist e-newspaper Synapze.se

by A swedish kind of death on Thu Jan 3rd, 2008 at 08:56:48 PM EST
[ Parent ]
SENATOR JOHN EDWARDS : 32.53%
SENATOR BARACK OBAMA : 32.47%
SENATOR HILLARY CLINTON : 32.25%
GOVERNOR BILL RICHARDSON : 1.85%
SENATOR JOE BIDEN : 0.76%
SENATOR CHRIS DODD : 0.10%
UNCOMMITTED : 0.03%
PRECINCTS REPORTING: 486 OF 1781

Be nice to America. Or we'll bring democracy to your country.
by Drew J Jones (pedobear@pennstatefootball.com) on Thu Jan 3rd, 2008 at 08:53:18 PM EST
[ Parent ]
SENATOR JOHN EDWARDS : 32.52%
SENATOR BARACK OBAMA : 32.41%
SENATOR HILLARY CLINTON : 32.15%
GOVERNOR BILL RICHARDSON : 1.91%
SENATOR JOE BIDEN : 0.84%
SENATOR CHRIS DODD : 0.10%
UNCOMMITTED : 0.07%
PRECINCTS REPORTING: 503 OF 1781

Be nice to America. Or we'll bring democracy to your country.
by Drew J Jones (pedobear@pennstatefootball.com) on Thu Jan 3rd, 2008 at 08:54:41 PM EST
[ Parent ]
That is tight! All three within .28% of each other!

We have met the enemy, and he is us — Pogo
by Migeru (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Thu Jan 3rd, 2008 at 08:55:06 PM EST
[ Parent ]
I'm telling you, fantastic race.

Be nice to America. Or we'll bring democracy to your country.
by Drew J Jones (pedobear@pennstatefootball.com) on Thu Jan 3rd, 2008 at 08:56:52 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Senator John Edwards : 32.53%
Senator Barack Obama : 32.47%
Senator Hillary Clinton : 32.25%
Governor Bill Richardson : 1.85%
Senator Joe Biden : 0.76%
Senator Chris Dodd : 0.10%
Uncommitted : 0.03%
Precincts Reporting: 486 of 1781
(Percentages are State Delegate Equivalents.)

This close.

And I'll give my consent to any government that does not deny a man a living wage-Billy Bragg

by ManfromMiddletown (manfrommiddletown at lycos dot com) on Thu Jan 3rd, 2008 at 08:53:42 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Wait until the end. I predict Obama 35% Clinton 33% Edwards 31%....

*Lunatic*, n.
One whose delusions are out of fashion.
by DoDo on Thu Jan 3rd, 2008 at 08:54:22 PM EST
[ Parent ]
I'll take the same, but flip Clinton and Edwards.

Be nice to America. Or we'll bring democracy to your country.
by Drew J Jones (pedobear@pennstatefootball.com) on Thu Jan 3rd, 2008 at 08:55:37 PM EST
[ Parent ]
SENATOR BARACK OBAMA : 32.70%
SENATOR JOHN EDWARDS : 32.38%
SENATOR HILLARY CLINTON : 32.02%
GOVERNOR BILL RICHARDSON : 1.79%
SENATOR JOE BIDEN : 0.96%
SENATOR CHRIS DODD : 0.09%
UNCOMMITTED : 0.06%
PRECINCTS REPORTING: 530 OF 1781

Be nice to America. Or we'll bring democracy to your country.
by Drew J Jones (pedobear@pennstatefootball.com) on Thu Jan 3rd, 2008 at 08:56:00 PM EST
[ Parent ]
SENATOR BARACK OBAMA : 32.70%
SENATOR JOHN EDWARDS : 32.38%
SENATOR HILLARY CLINTON : 32.02%
GOVERNOR BILL RICHARDSON : 1.79%
SENATOR JOE BIDEN : 0.96%
SENATOR CHRIS DODD : 0.09%
UNCOMMITTED : 0.06%
PRECINCTS REPORTING: 530 OF 1781

Obama takes the lead.

Be nice to America. Or we'll bring democracy to your country.

by Drew J Jones (pedobear@pennstatefootball.com) on Thu Jan 3rd, 2008 at 08:56:23 PM EST
[ Parent ]
SENATOR BARACK OBAMA : 32.79%
SENATOR JOHN EDWARDS : 32.35%
SENATOR HILLARY CLINTON : 32.02%
GOVERNOR BILL RICHARDSON : 1.73%
SENATOR JOE BIDEN : 0.97%
SENATOR CHRIS DODD : 0.09%
UNCOMMITTED : 0.06%
PRECINCTS REPORTING: 554 OF 1781

Be nice to America. Or we'll bring democracy to your country.
by Drew J Jones (pedobear@pennstatefootball.com) on Thu Jan 3rd, 2008 at 08:57:42 PM EST
[ Parent ]
SENATOR BARACK OBAMA : 32.98%
SENATOR JOHN EDWARDS : 32.29%
SENATOR HILLARY CLINTON : 31.88%
GOVERNOR BILL RICHARDSON : 1.70%
SENATOR JOE BIDEN : 1.01%
SENATOR CHRIS DODD : 0.08%
UNCOMMITTED : 0.06%
PRECINCTS REPORTING: 586 OF 1781

The O rising.  Clinton fading.  Edwards not moving much.

Be nice to America. Or we'll bring democracy to your country.

by Drew J Jones (pedobear@pennstatefootball.com) on Thu Jan 3rd, 2008 at 08:59:12 PM EST
[ Parent ]
SENATOR BARACK OBAMA : 33.20%
SENATOR JOHN EDWARDS : 32.09%
SENATOR HILLARY CLINTON : 31.77%
GOVERNOR BILL RICHARDSON : 1.79%
SENATOR JOE BIDEN : 1.02%
SENATOR CHRIS DODD : 0.07%
UNCOMMITTED : 0.05%
PRECINCTS REPORTING: 630 OF 1781

We're about 1/3 done.

NOTE:  HUCKABEE PROJECTED TO WIN GOP CAUCUS.

Be nice to America. Or we'll bring democracy to your country.

by Drew J Jones (pedobear@pennstatefootball.com) on Thu Jan 3rd, 2008 at 09:01:01 PM EST
[ Parent ]
SENATOR BARACK OBAMA : 33.33%
SENATOR JOHN EDWARDS : 32.10%
SENATOR HILLARY CLINTON : 31.75%
GOVERNOR BILL RICHARDSON : 1.72%
SENATOR JOE BIDEN : 0.99%
SENATOR CHRIS DODD : 0.07%
UNCOMMITTED : 0.05%
PRECINCTS REPORTING: 687 OF 1781

Be nice to America. Or we'll bring democracy to your country.
by Drew J Jones (pedobear@pennstatefootball.com) on Thu Jan 3rd, 2008 at 09:02:05 PM EST
[ Parent ]
This is where the results site would benefit from a graph with the number of precincts on the horizontal axis and the percentages (in logit terms) on the vertical axis.

We have met the enemy, and he is us — Pogo
by Migeru (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Thu Jan 3rd, 2008 at 09:01:32 PM EST
[ Parent ]
SENATOR BARACK OBAMA : 33.30%
SENATOR JOHN EDWARDS : 32.12%
SENATOR HILLARY CLINTON : 31.80%
GOVERNOR BILL RICHARDSON : 1.72%
SENATOR JOE BIDEN : 0.95%
SENATOR CHRIS DODD : 0.06%
UNCOMMITTED : 0.04%
PRECINCTS REPORTING: 717 OF 1781

Be nice to America. Or we'll bring democracy to your country.
by Drew J Jones (pedobear@pennstatefootball.com) on Thu Jan 3rd, 2008 at 09:03:00 PM EST
[ Parent ]
SENATOR BARACK OBAMA : 33.48%
SENATOR JOHN EDWARDS : 31.97%
SENATOR HILLARY CLINTON : 31.76%
GOVERNOR BILL RICHARDSON : 1.73%
SENATOR JOE BIDEN : 0.96%
SENATOR CHRIS DODD : 0.06%
UNCOMMITTED : 0.04%
PRECINCTS REPORTING: 750 OF 1781

Be nice to America. Or we'll bring democracy to your country.
by Drew J Jones (pedobear@pennstatefootball.com) on Thu Jan 3rd, 2008 at 09:03:57 PM EST
[ Parent ]
SENATOR BARACK OBAMA : 33.50%
SENATOR JOHN EDWARDS : 32.04%
SENATOR HILLARY CLINTON : 31.71%
GOVERNOR BILL RICHARDSON : 1.73%
SENATOR JOE BIDEN : 0.93%
SENATOR CHRIS DODD : 0.06%
UNCOMMITTED : 0.04%
PRECINCTS REPORTING: 784 OF 1781

Be nice to America. Or we'll bring democracy to your country.
by Drew J Jones (pedobear@pennstatefootball.com) on Thu Jan 3rd, 2008 at 09:05:29 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Edwards drops below 32%...

Senator Barack Obama : 33.48%
Senator John Edwards : 31.97%
Senator Hillary Clinton : 31.76%
Governor Bill Richardson : 1.73%
Senator Joe Biden : 0.96%
Senator Chris Dodd : 0.06%
Uncommitted : 0.04%
Precincts Reporting: 750 of 1781
(Percentages are State Delegate Equivalents.)

We have met the enemy, and he is us — Pogo

by Migeru (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Thu Jan 3rd, 2008 at 09:04:39 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Nope!  Back above.  Keep up!

Be nice to America. Or we'll bring democracy to your country.
by Drew J Jones (pedobear@pennstatefootball.com) on Thu Jan 3rd, 2008 at 09:06:04 PM EST
[ Parent ]
SENATOR BARACK OBAMA : 33.65%
SENATOR JOHN EDWARDS : 31.99%
SENATOR HILLARY CLINTON : 31.63%
GOVERNOR BILL RICHARDSON : 1.69%
SENATOR JOE BIDEN : 0.94%
SENATOR CHRIS DODD : 0.05%
UNCOMMITTED : 0.04%
PRECINCTS REPORTING: 809 OF 1781

Be nice to America. Or we'll bring democracy to your country.
by Drew J Jones (pedobear@pennstatefootball.com) on Thu Jan 3rd, 2008 at 09:07:06 PM EST
[ Parent ]
SENATOR BARACK OBAMA : 33.93%
SENATOR JOHN EDWARDS : 31.83%
SENATOR HILLARY CLINTON : 31.56%
GOVERNOR BILL RICHARDSON : 1.69%
SENATOR JOE BIDEN : 0.90%
SENATOR CHRIS DODD : 0.05%
UNCOMMITTED : 0.03%
PRECINCTS REPORTING: 861 OF 1781

Edwards and Clinton "fading".

Be nice to America. Or we'll bring democracy to your country.

by Drew J Jones (pedobear@pennstatefootball.com) on Thu Jan 3rd, 2008 at 09:08:21 PM EST
[ Parent ]
SENATOR BARACK OBAMA : 33.88%
SENATOR JOHN EDWARDS : 31.84%
SENATOR HILLARY CLINTON : 31.60%
GOVERNOR BILL RICHARDSON : 1.68%
SENATOR JOE BIDEN : 0.93%
SENATOR CHRIS DODD : 0.05%
UNCOMMITTED : 0.03%
PRECINCTS REPORTING: 889 OF 1781

Be nice to America. Or we'll bring democracy to your country.
by Drew J Jones (pedobear@pennstatefootball.com) on Thu Jan 3rd, 2008 at 09:09:46 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Senator Barack Obama : 34.00%
Senator John Edwards : 31.86%
Senator Hillary Clinton : 31.47%
Governor Bill Richardson : 1.65%
Senator Joe Biden : 0.93%
Senator Chris Dodd : 0.05%
Uncommitted : 0.04%
Precincts Reporting: 835 of 1781

Any idiot can face a crisis - it's day to day living that wears you out.
by ceebs (ceebs (at) eurotrib (dot) com) on Thu Jan 3rd, 2008 at 09:07:43 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Obama climbs above 34%

Senator Barack Obama : 34.00%
Senator John Edwards : 31.86%
Senator Hillary Clinton : 31.47%
Governor Bill Richardson : 1.65%
Senator Joe Biden : 0.93%
Senator Chris Dodd : 0.05%
Uncommitted : 0.04%
Precincts Reporting: 835 of 1781
(Percentages are State Delegate Equivalents.)

We have met the enemy, and he is us — Pogo

by Migeru (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Thu Jan 3rd, 2008 at 09:07:29 PM EST
[ Parent ]
SENATOR BARACK OBAMA : 34.06%
SENATOR JOHN EDWARDS : 31.71%
SENATOR HILLARY CLINTON : 31.45%
GOVERNOR BILL RICHARDSON : 1.76%
SENATOR JOE BIDEN : 0.94%
SENATOR CHRIS DODD : 0.05%
UNCOMMITTED : 0.03%
PRECINCTS REPORTING: 923 OF 1781

Thompson beating McCain.  Ron Paul very close to topping McCain.

Be nice to America. Or we'll bring democracy to your country.

by Drew J Jones (pedobear@pennstatefootball.com) on Thu Jan 3rd, 2008 at 09:10:47 PM EST
[ Parent ]
SENATOR BARACK OBAMA : 34.09%
SENATOR JOHN EDWARDS : 31.66%
SENATOR HILLARY CLINTON : 31.43%
GOVERNOR BILL RICHARDSON : 1.75%
SENATOR JOE BIDEN : 1.00%
SENATOR CHRIS DODD : 0.04%
UNCOMMITTED : 0.03%
PRECINCTS REPORTING: 943 OF 1781

Be nice to America. Or we'll bring democracy to your country.
by Drew J Jones (pedobear@pennstatefootball.com) on Thu Jan 3rd, 2008 at 09:11:32 PM EST
[ Parent ]
It's over.

It looks like Obama vs Huckabee.

On that basis I'd guess a solid win, edging towards a landslide, for Obama. Huckabee might as well give up now.

by ThatBritGuy (thatbritguy (at) googlemail.com) on Thu Jan 3rd, 2008 at 09:13:52 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Wait until the drop-outs declare preference in the Dem field. Clinton could still pull it home.

*Lunatic*, n.
One whose delusions are out of fashion.
by DoDo on Thu Jan 3rd, 2008 at 09:16:22 PM EST
[ Parent ]
SENATOR BARACK OBAMA : 34.62%
SENATOR JOHN EDWARDS : 31.48%
SENATOR HILLARY CLINTON : 31.13%
GOVERNOR BILL RICHARDSON : 1.64%
SENATOR JOE BIDEN : 1.03%
UNCOMMITTED : 0.07%
SENATOR CHRIS DODD : 0.04%
PRECINCTS REPORTING: 1078 OF 1781

Yes, she could.

Be nice to America. Or we'll bring democracy to your country.

by Drew J Jones (pedobear@pennstatefootball.com) on Thu Jan 3rd, 2008 at 09:17:56 PM EST
[ Parent ]
SENATOR BARACK OBAMA : 34.81%
SENATOR JOHN EDWARDS : 31.34%
SENATOR HILLARY CLINTON : 31.04%
GOVERNOR BILL RICHARDSON : 1.69%
SENATOR JOE BIDEN : 1.00%
UNCOMMITTED : 0.07%
SENATOR CHRIS DODD : 0.04%
PRECINCTS REPORTING: 1108 OF 1781

Be nice to America. Or we'll bring democracy to your country.
by Drew J Jones (pedobear@pennstatefootball.com) on Thu Jan 3rd, 2008 at 09:18:59 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Hillary apparently played well with older women, but she lost to Obama among younger women.

Be nice to America. Or we'll bring democracy to your country.
by Drew J Jones (pedobear@pennstatefootball.com) on Thu Jan 3rd, 2008 at 09:19:36 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Kucinich is going Obama, looks like Richardson is, too.
by nanne (zwaerdenmaecker@gmail.com) on Thu Jan 3rd, 2008 at 09:20:21 PM EST
[ Parent ]
SENATOR BARACK OBAMA : 34.99%
SENATOR JOHN EDWARDS : 31.26%
SENATOR HILLARY CLINTON : 30.96%
GOVERNOR BILL RICHARDSON : 1.70%
SENATOR JOE BIDEN : 0.95%
UNCOMMITTED : 0.11%
SENATOR CHRIS DODD : 0.03%
PRECINCTS REPORTING: 1212 OF 1781

So Obama wins.  Can Edwards hold on to possible put away Clinton?

Be nice to America. Or we'll bring democracy to your country.

by Drew J Jones (pedobear@pennstatefootball.com) on Thu Jan 3rd, 2008 at 09:23:28 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Obama above 35% now

Senator Barack Obama : 35.09%
Senator John Edwards : 31.16%
Senator Hillary Clinton : 30.89%
Governor Bill Richardson : 1.78%
Senator Joe Biden : 0.94%
Uncommitted : 0.11%
Senator Chris Dodd : 0.03%
Precincts Reporting: 1247 of 1781
(Percentages are State Delegate Equivalents.)

We have met the enemy, and he is us — Pogo

by Migeru (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Thu Jan 3rd, 2008 at 09:24:44 PM EST
[ Parent ]
MSNBC calls it for Obama.  Chris Matthews is clearly about to ejaculate after getting his predictions right.

SENATOR BARACK OBAMA : 35.21%
SENATOR JOHN EDWARDS : 31.08%
SENATOR HILLARY CLINTON : 30.82%
GOVERNOR BILL RICHARDSON : 1.79%
SENATOR JOE BIDEN : 0.97%
UNCOMMITTED : 0.11%
SENATOR CHRIS DODD : 0.03%
PRECINCTS REPORTING: 1286 OF 1781


Be nice to America. Or we'll bring democracy to your country.

by Drew J Jones (pedobear@pennstatefootball.com) on Thu Jan 3rd, 2008 at 09:26:33 PM EST
[ Parent ]
That 0.3+/-0.05 difference looka remarkably stable.

*Lunatic*, n.
One whose delusions are out of fashion.
by DoDo on Thu Jan 3rd, 2008 at 09:26:39 PM EST
[ Parent ]
CNN projects Obama to win

Any idiot can face a crisis - it's day to day living that wears you out.
by ceebs (ceebs (at) eurotrib (dot) com) on Thu Jan 3rd, 2008 at 09:28:38 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Yeah, it's not a question of who wins but of who comes in second.  Clinton is closing on Edwards very slowly.  It's going to be tight.

Be nice to America. Or we'll bring democracy to your country.
by Drew J Jones (pedobear@pennstatefootball.com) on Thu Jan 3rd, 2008 at 09:30:36 PM EST
[ Parent ]
it's widening slightly again now

Any idiot can face a crisis - it's day to day living that wears you out.
by ceebs (ceebs (at) eurotrib (dot) com) on Thu Jan 3rd, 2008 at 09:54:47 PM EST
[ Parent ]
looking at the county maps on CNN

clinton appears to lead in the west and the north, Obama throughout the middle, and Edwards throughout the south, edwards appears to be winning in about twice as many counties as Clinton.

Any idiot can face a crisis - it's day to day living that wears you out.

by ceebs (ceebs (at) eurotrib (dot) com) on Thu Jan 3rd, 2008 at 09:26:44 PM EST
[ Parent ]
The site to watch for the Dem's results.

"If you know your enemies and know yourself, you will not be imperiled in a hundred battles." Sun Tzu
by Turambar (sersguenda at hotmail com) on Thu Jan 3rd, 2008 at 08:32:42 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Did somebody say the Internet is a fast medium?

"If you know your enemies and know yourself, you will not be imperiled in a hundred battles." Sun Tzu
by Turambar (sersguenda at hotmail com) on Thu Jan 3rd, 2008 at 08:34:09 PM EST
[ Parent ]
I tried to check the republican results at Republican Party of IOWA but that was really hopeless.

Sweden's finest (and perhaps only) collaborative, leftist e-newspaper Synapze.se
by A swedish kind of death on Thu Jan 3rd, 2008 at 08:44:38 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Aren't we a couple of mad political junkies, staying up until 3am or more...

*Lunatic*, n.
One whose delusions are out of fashion.
by DoDo on Thu Jan 3rd, 2008 at 08:48:09 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Make it three...

"Dieu se rit des hommes qui se plaignent des conséquences alors qu'ils en chérissent les causes" Jacques-Bénigne Bossuet
by Melanchthon on Thu Jan 3rd, 2008 at 08:50:44 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Can we get some faster counters over there so I can get some sleep soon?

Maybe I should make some popcorns...

Sweden's finest (and perhaps only) collaborative, leftist e-newspaper Synapze.se

by A swedish kind of death on Thu Jan 3rd, 2008 at 09:07:56 PM EST
[ Parent ]
15% of Repub results in

Huckabee 36%
romnee   23%
Thompson 15%
McCain   12%

Any idiot can face a crisis - it's day to day living that wears you out.

by ceebs (ceebs (at) eurotrib (dot) com) on Thu Jan 3rd, 2008 at 08:53:29 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Where did you find that?

Sweden's finest (and perhaps only) collaborative, leftist e-newspaper Synapze.se
by A swedish kind of death on Thu Jan 3rd, 2008 at 08:55:16 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Switching between channels, it was on a screen over a hosts shoulder on CNN

Any idiot can face a crisis - it's day to day living that wears you out.
by ceebs (ceebs (at) eurotrib (dot) com) on Thu Jan 3rd, 2008 at 08:56:19 PM EST
[ Parent ]
What, they are reporting this offline too?

Then it must be popular...

Sweden's finest (and perhaps only) collaborative, leftist e-newspaper Synapze.se

by A swedish kind of death on Thu Jan 3rd, 2008 at 08:58:23 PM EST
[ Parent ]
They've just predicted Huckabee to win

Any idiot can face a crisis - it's day to day living that wears you out.
by ceebs (ceebs (at) eurotrib (dot) com) on Thu Jan 3rd, 2008 at 08:59:19 PM EST
[ Parent ]
There are reports of increased turnout.  At one (GOP) "affluent suburb" of Des Moines they ran out of ballots when 700 people showed-up.  They were expecting 200.

She believed in nothing; only her skepticism kept her from being an atheist. -- Jean-Paul Sartre
by ATinNM on Thu Jan 3rd, 2008 at 08:59:01 PM EST
CNN is projecting Huckabee will win.

She believed in nothing; only her skepticism kept her from being an atheist. -- Jean-Paul Sartre
by ATinNM on Thu Jan 3rd, 2008 at 09:00:26 PM EST
Senator Barack Obama : 33.20%
Senator John Edwards : 32.09%
Senator Hillary Clinton : 31.77%
Governor Bill Richardson : 1.79%
Senator Joe Biden : 1.02%
Senator Chris Dodd : 0.07%
Uncommitted : 0.05%

I think Obama is going to win this now. Clinton probably second as her machine picks up the urban votes.

by ThatBritGuy (thatbritguy (at) googlemail.com) on Thu Jan 3rd, 2008 at 09:01:46 PM EST
Obama leads with 2,7% now. He's definitely won.

"If you know your enemies and know yourself, you will not be imperiled in a hundred battles." Sun Tzu
by Turambar (sersguenda at hotmail com) on Thu Jan 3rd, 2008 at 09:12:48 PM EST
[ Parent ]
What happens if Hillary finishes 3rd?

We have met the enemy, and he is us — Pogo
by Migeru (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Thu Jan 3rd, 2008 at 09:13:50 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Daily Kos: State of the Nation
From a pure horserace view, this is the most fun set of scenarios, because they lead to the most uncertain result.  I suspect Obama would get most of Clinton's African-American  support, but I think it becomes a fairly wide-open contest, with the starkest contrast in messages and agendas.  Obama would have a big edge in financial resources, but endorsements by people with lots of operatives and good lists, like mayors and governors, would be crucial, because they can activate GOTV networks that won't be created in the month between now and Super Tuesday.  Also, labor endorsements would matter a lot, because even Obama wouldn't be able to spend massive amounts of money on paid media in that many states.  Edwards has four international unions, Obama has none; would labor stay out of the race, or would they sense an opportunity for them to provide the decisive support to a candidate, thus making him even more beholden to them for their support in securing the nomination?  I think it could lean slightly Obama, but in that pairing, Edwards just might win it.


Any idiot can face a crisis - it's day to day living that wears you out.
by ceebs (ceebs (at) eurotrib (dot) com) on Thu Jan 3rd, 2008 at 09:18:00 PM EST
[ Parent ]
A combined Obama/Edwards ticket would sweep the floor with any Republican in the General Election.

We have met the enemy, and he is us — Pogo
by Migeru (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Thu Jan 3rd, 2008 at 09:20:47 PM EST
[ Parent ]
How many non-sitting veeps have run for veep twice?
by nanne (zwaerdenmaecker@gmail.com) on Thu Jan 3rd, 2008 at 09:27:41 PM EST
[ Parent ]
That would be a smart tactical choice.

Hillary is out of it now. And if Obama and Edwards start negotiating, this election is already over.

Of course he could still do something stupid like offer to make her veep instead.

by ThatBritGuy (thatbritguy (at) googlemail.com) on Thu Jan 3rd, 2008 at 09:31:08 PM EST
[ Parent ]
No, won't happen.  Obama's got some f the nastiest, sharpest guys in the business behind him.  He'll choose Edwards, Biden or Richardson if he does, indeed, win the nod.

No sense in giving the Reps a reason to get out and vote.

Be nice to America. Or we'll bring democracy to your country.

by Drew J Jones (pedobear@pennstatefootball.com) on Thu Jan 3rd, 2008 at 09:33:34 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Not to mention Clinton's crack-smoking madrassa election tactics.

We have met the enemy, and he is us — Pogo
by Migeru (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Thu Jan 3rd, 2008 at 09:35:21 PM EST
[ Parent ]
That, too.

Be nice to America. Or we'll bring democracy to your country.
by Drew J Jones (pedobear@pennstatefootball.com) on Thu Jan 3rd, 2008 at 09:53:59 PM EST
[ Parent ]
No sense in giving the Reps a reason to get out and vote.

As if having an African-American candidate isn't going to be enough...
(I suppose it would be a bonus to the repubs to add Woman and Clinton to the pack though)

Any idiot can face a crisis - it's day to day living that wears you out.

by ceebs (ceebs (at) eurotrib (dot) com) on Thu Jan 3rd, 2008 at 09:37:59 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Race, in my view, is actually going to be an asset against the Reps if Obama is the nominee.  Hear me out, and bear in mind that I am ET's resident God of Democratic Predictions now from 2006 to tonight's outcome. ;)

I think there's a good chunk, maybe up to 25%, of Republicans and clear Republican-leaners who would really like to put the GOP's racist past behind them.  And I think Obama appeals to them on top of that for various reasons.

Everyone's worried about race and gender.  Maybe it's my occasionally contrarian tendency, but, to me, it's so unbelievably obvious they are assets that I can't understand the fear.  I could be wrong, but I don't think so.  It's not 1980 anymore, and America is not Philadelphia, MS.  The numbers just don't add up anymore for the GOP.

Be nice to America. Or we'll bring democracy to your country.

by Drew J Jones (pedobear@pennstatefootball.com) on Fri Jan 4th, 2008 at 12:31:13 AM EST
[ Parent ]
I don't think he'll choose any of those three. Richardson maybe, or Dodd. But Biden has too much baggage and Edwards was a loser VEEP candidate in 04.
by Upstate NY on Thu Jan 3rd, 2008 at 10:03:50 PM EST
[ Parent ]
That's a good idea, yes.  We need to keep Edwards in the game, because he's too good to let go without at least having another chance at the national office down the line.

Be nice to America. Or we'll bring democracy to your country.
by Drew J Jones (pedobear@pennstatefootball.com) on Thu Jan 3rd, 2008 at 09:34:47 PM EST
[ Parent ]
I don't think so.

At this point, I thinkt that the Democrats have probably lost 2008, because Obama's win was based on the votes of independents and Republicans.  If Bloomberg enters the race as an independent, as is likely on Saturday, these voters will likely desert Obama for Bloomberg and the gang.  And the end result will be that Mike Huckabee will be president.  And you know what?  If Edwards drops out, I will probably vote for Huckabee, because I think it's the best way to move the dialogue on economic issues left at this point.  Only Nixon could go to China, and it might just be that only Huckabee can stick out his neck for labor unions.

And I'll give my consent to any government that does not deny a man a living wage-Billy Bragg

by ManfromMiddletown (manfrommiddletown at lycos dot com) on Thu Jan 3rd, 2008 at 10:08:33 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Man, this comment could get you killed over at the orange place.

We have met the enemy, and he is us — Pogo
by Migeru (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Thu Jan 3rd, 2008 at 10:11:15 PM EST
[ Parent ]
it's almost worth putting up to see what happens.

Any idiot can face a crisis - it's day to day living that wears you out.
by ceebs (ceebs (at) eurotrib (dot) com) on Thu Jan 3rd, 2008 at 10:13:49 PM EST
[ Parent ]
I'm planning a diary, but not THAT diary.

And I'll give my consent to any government that does not deny a man a living wage-Billy Bragg
by ManfromMiddletown (manfrommiddletown at lycos dot com) on Thu Jan 3rd, 2008 at 10:24:15 PM EST
[ Parent ]
I honestly don't care.

I won't be voting for Barack Obama.  If I'm going to vote for someone who's going to screw me and mine, I much rather do it for someone who had the decency not to lie to me about it.

And I'll give my consent to any government that does not deny a man a living wage-Billy Bragg

by ManfromMiddletown (manfrommiddletown at lycos dot com) on Thu Jan 3rd, 2008 at 10:23:13 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Edwards is not out of the race until Super Tuesday, anyway.

We have met the enemy, and he is us — Pogo
by Migeru (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Thu Jan 3rd, 2008 at 10:24:54 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Edwards is in this to win it, and only in it to win it, as I don't think he's going to run for VP a second time. If he can get a close third place in NH, he has every reason to stay in.
by nanne (zwaerdenmaecker@gmail.com) on Thu Jan 3rd, 2008 at 10:32:03 PM EST
[ Parent ]
So Obama/Richardson for a ticket if Edwards doesn't make it?

We have met the enemy, and he is us — Pogo
by Migeru (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Thu Jan 3rd, 2008 at 10:36:25 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Possible. Or Richardson becomes Sec. State. There will likely be some payoff for sending his supporters Obama's way. I can see Obama picking someone outside the field (but I would have no clue who).
by nanne (zwaerdenmaecker@gmail.com) on Thu Jan 3rd, 2008 at 10:47:28 PM EST
[ Parent ]
I'd hope for Edwards, but betting on Biden.

I'm not as sure as TBG about Clinton being done, though.

Be nice to America. Or we'll bring democracy to your country.

by Drew J Jones (pedobear@pennstatefootball.com) on Thu Jan 3rd, 2008 at 10:52:42 PM EST
[ Parent ]
What if Huck-be's win means quite a big deal that GOP voters are fed up with libertarian delusions, and quite seriously considering some "common sense" social turn of economic policies? At the very least, the anti-libertarian stand is not a turn-off for the "economic-freedom-crazy" conservatives.

GOP can beat Dems from the left, how about that?! Even if corporate "persons" would not like that.

Maybe (merely possibly) this is not intentional, but GOP looks smarter with its diverse crop of candidates. In a difficult PR position, without a clear idea of what to offer, GOP just gives a choice of what still could turn on its voters, and what "core-conservative" facets could be expendable this election season. The Dems, on the other hand, just let themselves race in all-to-familiar patterns of electability.

It's great that Obama's hope (rather than Clinton's political adaptability) sells well now. But this year could turn out harsh enough economically to increase "demand" for certain kinds of reality.

by das monde on Fri Jan 4th, 2008 at 04:16:49 AM EST
[ Parent ]
I wasn't expecting Edwards to do this well - even if he loses, it's going to be very close.

It's really not looking good for Hillary. She's probably going to go through the motions on principle, but I can't see her winning the main event now.

by ThatBritGuy (thatbritguy (at) googlemail.com) on Thu Jan 3rd, 2008 at 09:19:17 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Senator Barack Obama : 34.52%
Senator John Edwards : 31.61%
Senator Hillary Clinton : 31.13%
Governor Bill Richardson : 1.69%
Senator Joe Biden : 0.98%
Senator Chris Dodd : 0.04%
Uncommitted : 0.03%
Precincts Reporting: 1000 of 1781

Any idiot can face a crisis - it's day to day living that wears you out.
by ceebs (ceebs (at) eurotrib (dot) com) on Thu Jan 3rd, 2008 at 09:15:02 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Looks like he'll have a decent margin. Keeps pulling away, Clinton is not catching up, still behind Edwards at... 1030/1781
by nanne (zwaerdenmaecker@gmail.com) on Thu Jan 3rd, 2008 at 09:15:56 PM EST
[ Parent ]
I 'fess up:  I was wrong.  Young people did turn out for Obama and that's putting him over.

AP reporting 1/2 of the caucus goers are under 25, first timers, and they went for O.

She believed in nothing; only her skepticism kept her from being an atheist. -- Jean-Paul Sartre

by ATinNM on Thu Jan 3rd, 2008 at 09:20:33 PM EST
[ Parent ]
So his student machine was a very smart tactical move. Edwards must be kicking himself now.

There's something typically Obama about this though. We'll see how the same age groups feels about him four years from now.

by ThatBritGuy (thatbritguy (at) googlemail.com) on Thu Jan 3rd, 2008 at 09:24:25 PM EST
[ Parent ]
They didn't show for Dean, but they did show for Obama.  I don't get it.  It's great, but it would've been nice for the little bastards to show up four years ago.

Be nice to America. Or we'll bring democracy to your country.
by Drew J Jones (pedobear@pennstatefootball.com) on Thu Jan 3rd, 2008 at 09:31:50 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Well as long as they turn up at the actual presidentoal elections.

Any idiot can face a crisis - it's day to day living that wears you out.
by ceebs (ceebs (at) eurotrib (dot) com) on Thu Jan 3rd, 2008 at 09:34:31 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Des Moines (which ATinNM told to watch as test for Clinton): 6/19 reporting, Obama 19 Clinton 16 Edwards 14 delegates.

*Lunatic*, n.
One whose delusions are out of fashion.
by DoDo on Thu Jan 3rd, 2008 at 09:07:41 PM EST
Des Moines (the presumable cause of  Clinton predictedly pulling ahead of Edwards) still lagging. Now 7/19, with Obama 23, Clinton 20, Edwards 18.

enator Barack Obama : 34.52%
Senator John Edwards : 31.61%
Senator Hillary Clinton : 31.13%
Governor Bill Richardson : 1.69%
Senator Joe Biden : 0.98%
Senator Chris Dodd : 0.04%
Uncommitted : 0.03%
Precincts Reporting: 1000 of 1781

*Lunatic*, n.
One whose delusions are out of fashion.

by DoDo on Thu Jan 3rd, 2008 at 09:14:41 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Hillary just got her ass kicked. She can't seriously expect to recover from this.
by ThatBritGuy (thatbritguy (at) googlemail.com) on Thu Jan 3rd, 2008 at 09:26:34 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Obama beats both Edwards and Hillary below 31%

Senator Barack Obama : 35.26%
Senator John Edwards : 30.99%
Senator Hillary Clinton : 30.78%
Governor Bill Richardson : 1.82%
Senator Joe Biden : 1.02%
Uncommitted : 0.11%
Senator Chris Dodd : 0.03%
Precincts Reporting: 1316 of 1781
(Percentages are State Delegate Equivalents.)

We have met the enemy, and he is us — Pogo

by Migeru (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Thu Jan 3rd, 2008 at 09:29:07 PM EST
[ Parent ]
She can, but it's going to be tough.  She got beat by both "change candidates," and one of them is likely to drop out soon.  The party has made its opinion pretty clear.

She has to hope for big wins in the big states (NY, Cali, and FL, as Obama takes Illinois).

Be nice to America. Or we'll bring democracy to your country.

by Drew J Jones (pedobear@pennstatefootball.com) on Thu Jan 3rd, 2008 at 09:29:31 PM EST
[ Parent ]
If older women vote Clinton, Florida is hers.

*Lunatic*, n.
One whose delusions are out of fashion.
by DoDo on Thu Jan 3rd, 2008 at 09:32:42 PM EST
[ Parent ]
I don't think so, because she was playing from a supposed position of strength as the default insider heir-apparent.

Now she's just another contender. And it's obvious the Bill Effect means squat to voters. So all the default momentum has vanished. The relative percentages don't matter - what counts is that she didn't beat Edwards convincingly.

Obama meanwhile has a solid win and a solid PR narrative, which makes him the easy front runner.

Personally that makes me feel rather sick, but that's how it is.

by ThatBritGuy (thatbritguy (at) googlemail.com) on Thu Jan 3rd, 2008 at 09:36:29 PM EST
[ Parent ]
All good points.

Be nice to America. Or we'll bring democracy to your country.
by Drew J Jones (pedobear@pennstatefootball.com) on Thu Jan 3rd, 2008 at 10:00:32 PM EST
[ Parent ]
35 vs 31, that's not much.

Now my question to the Americans is,

  1. what side is Edwards likely to support and when;
  2. the same about Edwards voters? (for the latter non-voting option included)


*Lunatic*, n.
One whose delusions are out of fashion.
by DoDo on Thu Jan 3rd, 2008 at 09:30:31 PM EST
[ Parent ]
I get the impression it is about placement, not percentage. Part of the winner takes all political culture perhaps.

Sweden's finest (and perhaps only) collaborative, leftist e-newspaper Synapze.se
by A swedish kind of death on Thu Jan 3rd, 2008 at 09:34:40 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Now 36 vs. 30. Looks like Hillary is going to go below 30, Obama toward 38, if this keeps up.
by nanne (zwaerdenmaecker@gmail.com) on Thu Jan 3rd, 2008 at 09:35:00 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Edwards isn't out of it, despite what people here are saying.

A second place finish makes him viable in New Hampshire.

I'm from the New England area. Those people do not like to be told who is still a viable candidate, and New Hampshire is tiny.

Edwards has to do one thing in the next few days. He has to hold big rallies in New Hampshire. If he can't energize the crowd there, he's done.

Perception is key now because Hillary is no longer considered automatic. This may toss the race into chaos.

by Upstate NY on Thu Jan 3rd, 2008 at 10:00:42 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Edwards is not well funded, has previously lost New Hampshire, and has to face 4 days of a (free) media blast about the Obama win in Iowa.

I don't see him winning NH.

She believed in nothing; only her skepticism kept her from being an atheist. -- Jean-Paul Sartre

by ATinNM on Fri Jan 4th, 2008 at 12:05:29 AM EST
[ Parent ]
I don't either.  I think we're likely to see a fairly weak "last stand" in South Carolina or Florida for Edwards, neither of which will come through for him.  Now that he's delivered a big victory in a very, very white state, Obama is going to crush everyone in South Carolina, because black voters who clearly support him will now have the confidence to vote for him without fear of throwing their votes away.

Edwards's coverage has been moderately positive, surprisingly, but Clinton is getting destroyed by the crosstabs on these exit polls and what they say about the race.  As it turns out, she lost the female vote to Obama.  Again, the young people showed up.  And the election didn't involve independents and soft Republicans to nearly the extent the press expected (although he won with them as well).  In other words, Obama beat her among Democrats and women, and then pulled out the bigger margin with young people.

TBG may be right.  Obama and Edwards may have done permanent damage to her tonight.  An Obama win was bad enough, but coming in behind Edwards made this the worst-case scenario for the Clintons.  To say nothing of the fact that Obama and Edwards people still looked fired up and their candidates on message.  Clinton looked tired and stressed, and her audience was clearly hurting.

Be nice to America. Or we'll bring democracy to your country.

by Drew J Jones (pedobear@pennstatefootball.com) on Fri Jan 4th, 2008 at 12:15:59 AM EST
[ Parent ]
It's all about the momentum. Obama has it now, which makes him the heir apparent.

Edwards would have needed to win by a solid margin in at least three early states to reach the same unstoppability.

Clinton is burnt toast and chicken feathers. No one under the age of 120 seems to like her. She's got the old vote, but Obama seems to have captivated the gullible enthusiastic Yoof vote with his Blair-ish smile, and that means a chunk of Clinton's natural constituency has gone. So she has no real foundation now.

I also think an Obama presidency will turn into a disaster for the Democrats, and people who vote for him are going to be massively disappointed and angry by how little he does for them. He's going to be carrying the blame for a huge drop in living standards and foreign policy reverses, and I don't see that he has either the character or the vision to handle them confidently or effectively. I wouldn't be surprised to see the Right engineering a humiliation of the sort they arranged for Carter - it depends how far he's willing to sell out for 'hope'.

So the chances of an R comeback for 2012 - Jeb Bush is the inevitable front runner - are that much higher now.

by ThatBritGuy (thatbritguy (at) googlemail.com) on Fri Jan 4th, 2008 at 04:15:28 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Here's what I don't get. His message is unity, but his plank is not nearly broad enough. He's not very ambitious. So what does he want to unite us for?

In my mind, he's mixed up about politics. He thinks political unity is what we want. He doesn't seem to understand that true unity means that sentiment should be felt among the people, not the politicians.

Unity could be much better couched in, for instance, a plan for universal health care where all Americans are united in the same system. Now that's unity.

Where does Obama's unity get us? I mean, these last two years, Americans have been unified in gridlock.

by Upstate NY on Fri Jan 4th, 2008 at 09:34:14 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Clinton is burnt toast and chicken feathers. No one under the age of 120 seems to like her.

So she's essentially campaigning for the McCain vote.  (Not the McCain supporters' vote.  Just the McCain vote.)

Be nice to America. Or we'll bring democracy to your country.

by Drew J Jones (pedobear@pennstatefootball.com) on Fri Jan 4th, 2008 at 12:44:26 PM EST
[ Parent ]
I know I'm the resident Obama apologist on EuroTrib, but I do think many, especially in the Edwards camp but others as well, are too hard on him when there really isn't a whole hell of a lot of difference between Obama and Edwards.

And I say again:  One of them has a tendency to get decisions -- big decisions, more importantly -- right the first time (like Gore and Dean), while the other has spent quite a long time apologizing for his votes.  The fact that so many buy into Edwards 2.0 without any skepticism is a little weird to me having lived through the first installment (the one that helped take down Howard Dean, the only candidate who could've possibly defeated Bush), since it does seem a bit Romney-ish at times.  I got behind Edwards partly because he put people I really like, and who are competent, around him.  And I have to confess that I do love his story, because, while we're not hyper-rich like they are, the Edwards family story is a lot like the Jones family story.  But I'm not working with the assumption that Edwards, who's gone from hawk to dove and moderate to populist as these positions have become politically convenient, is incredibly real.  (I was born at night, but it wasn't last night, John.)

And I love Elizabeth Edwards, who would probably make a better president than anybody in the field, but everyone loves her.

The only difference I really see is in their rhetoric/style (basically Jack vs Bobby Kennedy), and I don't think that will prove to be a big deal.  Obama's more politically savvy than many give him credit for, and one potential advantage I see in him is his ability to sell more progressive policies in post-partisan language.

I know Edwards is the populist in the race, but I think it's a bit unfair to see Obama as some sort of elitist with no grassroots/"real people" ties given his background in civil rights law and community organizing.  Of the two, I think Obama clearly wins on that count, although Edwards's law background is solid, too.

I think there are two real groups in opposition to Obama in the Dem base:  The We-Paid-Our-Dues crowd behind Hillary, and the Obamanites-Are-Silly-and-Naive/Don't-Buy-the-Hype crowd behind Edwards.  The former doesn't convince me at all, since paying one's dues and getting the nomination is a (laughably conformist) Republican thing.  The latter may be right.  It's certainly possible, but I also think it's entirely possible the charge is as valid when said of Edwards.


Be nice to America. Or we'll bring democracy to your country.

by Drew J Jones (pedobear@pennstatefootball.com) on Fri Jan 4th, 2008 at 01:08:53 PM EST
[ Parent ]
He was not well known in New Hampshire last time around, and he was running against a man from a neighboring state who was VERY well known in NH. I would not be surprised to see Edwards finish ahead of Obama in NH.
by Upstate NY on Fri Jan 4th, 2008 at 09:35:24 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Actually, I think she can. I see no future for Edwards, though (except for playing kingmaker as VP mabye).

"If you know your enemies and know yourself, you will not be imperiled in a hundred battles." Sun Tzu
by Turambar (sersguenda at hotmail com) on Thu Jan 3rd, 2008 at 09:32:59 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Clinton's fate is out of her hands.

Edwards is done.  He had to win Iowa to continue as a viable candidate.  If he throws his support to Obama then Obama becomes the Dem nominee.  

If Edwards just bows-out then it's more of a toss-up but I think the Not-Clinton factor of Edward's justification would lead a majority of his supporters to move to Obama.

Query:  Would Edwards be willing to accept the VP position?  I don't think so.

But as this diary proves: I Can Be Wrong.  ;-)

(Tho' I did nail the GOP side.)

She believed in nothing; only her skepticism kept her from being an atheist. -- Jean-Paul Sartre

by ATinNM on Thu Jan 3rd, 2008 at 09:43:03 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Obama is in the lead but when the votes are this close in Iowa, all three candidates are still viable. New Hampshire is a tiny state. It wouldn't be that hard for Edwards to work it in the next few days.

Jerry Brown once won Connecticut when it appeared Bill Clinton was close to sewing up the nomination.

Yankees get their back up against the wall easily. They really like to contradict the conventional wisdom.

by Upstate NY on Thu Jan 3rd, 2008 at 09:57:21 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Why would Edwards not accept VP?

Granted he probably doesn't like Obama much, but if he's at all serious about his agenda he's going to have a much better chance of pushing it from inside than outside.

I can imagine press and pundits and consultants telling Obama to avoid Edwards because he's confrontational populist poison.

But outside the Beltway madness machine, it's the perfect pairing. And Edwards will know this.

by ThatBritGuy (thatbritguy (at) googlemail.com) on Thu Jan 3rd, 2008 at 09:59:21 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Look at the way Edwards and Obama have been playing together.  Kid gloves.  It's not at all out of the realm of possibility to see them pair up.  Getting the two together offers a clear "change" selling point.

Be nice to America. Or we'll bring democracy to your country.
by Drew J Jones (pedobear@pennstatefootball.com) on Thu Jan 3rd, 2008 at 10:03:58 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Why would Edwards not accept VP?

How does it feel to be running for VP again, Mr. Edwards?
by nanne (zwaerdenmaecker@gmail.com) on Thu Jan 3rd, 2008 at 10:09:52 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Why would Edwards not accept VP?

I can think of two reasons: he's been there, done that and ego.

Offsetting these is the fact if he doesn't accept VP and get elected he's done as a major national politician.  You only get so many chances at the big prize before you get elbowed aside.

She believed in nothing; only her skepticism kept her from being an atheist. -- Jean-Paul Sartre

by ATinNM on Fri Jan 4th, 2008 at 12:14:52 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Even Des Moines clear Obama territory: at 15/19, with Obama 63, Clinton, Edwards both 48.

Senator Barack Obama : 36.37%
Senator John Edwards : 30.47%
Senator Hillary Clinton : 30.15%
Governor Bill Richardson : 1.96%
Senator Joe Biden : 0.93%
Uncommitted : 0.09%
Senator Chris Dodd : 0.03%
Precincts Reporting: 1448 of 1781

*Lunatic*, n.
One whose delusions are out of fashion.

by DoDo on Thu Jan 3rd, 2008 at 09:36:09 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Now both Edwards and Clinton below 30%

Senator Barack Obama : 37.24%
Senator John Edwards : 29.97%
Senator Hillary Clinton : 29.56%
Governor Bill Richardson : 2.14%
Senator Joe Biden : 0.94%
Uncommitted : 0.12%
Senator Chris Dodd : 0.03%
Precincts Reporting: 1656 of 1781
(Percentages are State Delegate Equivalents.)

We have met the enemy, and he is us — Pogo

by Migeru (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Thu Jan 3rd, 2008 at 10:03:15 PM EST
[ Parent ]
The media is already calling it a "stunning defeat" for Romney.

She believed in nothing; only her skepticism kept her from being an atheist. -- Jean-Paul Sartre
by ATinNM on Thu Jan 3rd, 2008 at 09:09:19 PM EST
Well, you know, Huckabee's God is bigger than Romeny's God.

We have met the enemy, and he is us — Pogo
by Migeru (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Thu Jan 3rd, 2008 at 09:10:02 PM EST
[ Parent ]
AP is saying Huckabee "handily" won Iowa.  Ouch

Most recent return is 35/24 Huck/Rom

I guess $17 million doesn't buy as much as it used to.


She believed in nothing; only her skepticism kept her from being an atheist. -- Jean-Paul Sartre

by ATinNM on Thu Jan 3rd, 2008 at 09:13:59 PM EST
[ Parent ]
I really shouldn't be laughing.
by ThatBritGuy (thatbritguy (at) googlemail.com) on Thu Jan 3rd, 2008 at 09:20:44 PM EST
[ Parent ]
I caught the spending per vote for the Reps tonight.

Romney:  $238 per vote he received
Huckster:  $35

Me thinks Mitt needs to stay in the venture capital biz.  The funny bit is that he might've had a shot if he'd run as the Yankee moderate we all know he actually is.  He could've argued on electability from that position, like Rudy! has since getting in.  But he took the phony course and got his rear end kicked.

Eh, couldn't have happened to a nicer guy.

Be nice to America. Or we'll bring democracy to your country.

by Drew J Jones (pedobear@pennstatefootball.com) on Fri Jan 4th, 2008 at 08:09:21 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Yup, that had to be the deciding factor looking at the high turnout figures (for the evangelical right).

"If you know your enemies and know yourself, you will not be imperiled in a hundred battles." Sun Tzu
by Turambar (sersguenda at hotmail com) on Thu Jan 3rd, 2008 at 09:22:51 PM EST
[ Parent ]
News media are starting to call Iowa for Obama.


She believed in nothing; only her skepticism kept her from being an atheist. -- Jean-Paul Sartre
by ATinNM on Thu Jan 3rd, 2008 at 09:28:24 PM EST
With Obama above 36% they might as well.

Senator Barack Obama : 36.11%
Senator John Edwards : 30.57%
Senator Hillary Clinton : 30.34%
Governor Bill Richardson : 1.89%
Senator Joe Biden : 0.96%
Uncommitted : 0.10%
Senator Chris Dodd : 0.03%
Precincts Reporting: 1401 of 1781
(Percentages are State Delegate Equivalents.)

We have met the enemy, and he is us — Pogo

by Migeru (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Thu Jan 3rd, 2008 at 09:33:38 PM EST
[ Parent ]
This Caucus live blogging at dKos is very interesting for me. Until I read ATinNM's old diary, I thought a "caucus" is just another word for indirect primary.

On the other hand, I wouldn't want something as chaotic and tricky as described. Or without secret vote as a number of people argued in ATinNM's old diary.

*Lunatic*, n.
One whose delusions are out of fashion.

by DoDo on Thu Jan 3rd, 2008 at 09:45:08 PM EST
... a coalition of local community parties, which have members that meet together to pick their representatives to the state convention.

I've been accused of being a Marxist, yet while Harpo's my favourite, it's Groucho I'm always quoting. Odd, that.
by BruceMcF (agila61 at netscape dot net) on Fri Jan 4th, 2008 at 12:27:48 AM EST
[ Parent ]
CNN  just said that the outstanding precincts are mainly in the University areas, and among the under 25's Clinton has only been coming in fourth.

Any idiot can face a crisis - it's day to day living that wears you out.
by ceebs (ceebs (at) eurotrib (dot) com) on Thu Jan 3rd, 2008 at 10:06:01 PM EST
Is that why Richardson's percentage has been growing?

We have met the enemy, and he is us — Pogo
by Migeru (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Thu Jan 3rd, 2008 at 10:08:06 PM EST
[ Parent ]
I would think so.

turnout is up from 125,000 to 212,000 at democrat caucuses they've just said

Any idiot can face a crisis - it's day to day living that wears you out.

by ceebs (ceebs (at) eurotrib (dot) com) on Thu Jan 3rd, 2008 at 10:09:57 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Numerically that gives Obama the equivalent of a 16,000 vote majority, with Edwards around 1,000 votes ahead of Clinton.

(Or at least that's how it would work with a single ballot instead of the caucus system.)

What's the R turnout in comparison?

by ThatBritGuy (thatbritguy (at) googlemail.com) on Thu Jan 3rd, 2008 at 10:25:37 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Normally it's 85,000 to 95,000 depending on the weather.

can't find this years figures yet.

Oh and Chris Dodd has dropped out.

Any idiot can face a crisis - it's day to day living that wears you out.

by ceebs (ceebs (at) eurotrib (dot) com) on Thu Jan 3rd, 2008 at 10:37:24 PM EST
[ Parent ]
That's a shame about Dodd.  I really like him.  As far as I can tell, he's a truly decent guy.

Be nice to America. Or we'll bring democracy to your country.
by Drew J Jones (pedobear@pennstatefootball.com) on Thu Jan 3rd, 2008 at 10:39:00 PM EST
[ Parent ]
they've switched to they've heard he's going to drop out. not that he actually has.

Any idiot can face a crisis - it's day to day living that wears you out.
by ceebs (ceebs (at) eurotrib (dot) com) on Thu Jan 3rd, 2008 at 10:45:15 PM EST
[ Parent ]
He is, indeed, dropping out.  The campaign sent out a bunch of emails.  Atrios has it up.

Biden and Dodd are out.

Be nice to America. Or we'll bring democracy to your country.

by Drew J Jones (pedobear@pennstatefootball.com) on Fri Jan 4th, 2008 at 12:22:11 AM EST
[ Parent ]
with 76% in the total is about 84,000

Any idiot can face a crisis - it's day to day living that wears you out.
by ceebs (ceebs (at) eurotrib (dot) com) on Thu Jan 3rd, 2008 at 10:44:10 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Probably.  So Obama and Richardson will go up a bit.

Be nice to America. Or we'll bring democracy to your country.
by Drew J Jones (pedobear@pennstatefootball.com) on Thu Jan 3rd, 2008 at 10:10:46 PM EST
[ Parent ]
So if Obama gets the Democratic nomination in several months, does this guarantee a hispanic republican vice presidential candidate to try and split the minority vote?

Any idiot can face a crisis - it's day to day living that wears you out.
by ceebs (ceebs (at) eurotrib (dot) com) on Thu Jan 3rd, 2008 at 10:18:05 PM EST
Female, religious voters propel Huckabee to victory in Iowa - CNN.com

Rival Mitt Romney, who has heavily courted social conservatives, only drew 19 percent of those voters.

Huckabee also overwhelmingly won the female vote, picking up support from about 40 percent of women compared to only 24 percent for Romney.

Republican caucus-goers who told pollsters that a candidate's religious beliefs matter "a great deal" overwhelmingly supported Huckabee by a margin of 56 percent to 11 percent.

And Huckabee had considerable support from people who described themselves as "very conservative," with 35 percent of support from that group compared with 23 percent for Romney.

CNN polling of caucus-goers on their way in found illegal immigration was the top issue among Republicans, with 32 percent naming it their biggest concern. Romney had strongly criticized Huckabee on the issue, criticizing his support for in-state tuition benefits for illegal immigrants.



Any idiot can face a crisis - it's day to day living that wears you out.
by ceebs (ceebs (at) eurotrib (dot) com) on Thu Jan 3rd, 2008 at 11:01:59 PM EST
European Tribune - Obama and Huckabee win Iowa: (Who is really going to win the US Election? Part 2 )

IOWA.  The final polls and result (with 99% of precincts reporting)

                 Final Actual
                 Polls Result
Clinton           29    29
Obama           31    38
Edwards         26    30
Biden               5
Richardson        5      2

European Tribune - Obama and Huckabee win Iowa: (Who is really going to win the US Election? Part 2 )

IOWA
                 Final Actual (with 85% of Precincts reporting)
                 Polls Result
Huckabee       30    34
Romney          27    25
McCain           12    14
Thompson       12    13
Paul                7     10
Guilliani            6      4


Index of Frank's Diaries
by Frank Schnittger (mail Frankschnittger at hot male dotty communists) on Thu Jan 3rd, 2008 at 11:53:12 PM EST
Well, AT, I'd say we did pretty well tonight, my friend.  We each got it half-right.  Care to start the bets on New Hampshire?

Be nice to America. Or we'll bring democracy to your country.
by Drew J Jones (pedobear@pennstatefootball.com) on Fri Jan 4th, 2008 at 12:21:22 AM EST
We didn't do too bad, at that.

The surprise we expected was the Obama GOTV effort paid off.  CNN is reporting 227,000 Dems participated.  Damn.  That was unexpected.  

With that all bets are now off.  I want to see some polling from NH before making any prediction.  Independents are the key to NH and with both McCain and Obama fishing that pond.  It's who can land 'em that will do the best.

The big loser tonight was Bush and the Washington Establishment.  On the GOP side Huckabee is their worst nightmare.  For the Dems Clinton was soundly rejected.

Personally, I'm dismayed by Obama winning by that large a percentage.  Anecdotal evidence is even saying in a ballot he would have won by double digits.  Should Obama continue to trash the unions he could rip a hole in the Dem coalition, just as Huckabee threatens to do to the GOP.

On the good side, we've got ourselves a horse race.

BTW, here is the Presidential Primary Calendar.  

She believed in nothing; only her skepticism kept her from being an atheist. -- Jean-Paul Sartre

by ATinNM on Fri Jan 4th, 2008 at 01:33:32 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Independents are the key to NH and with both McCain and Obama fishing that pond.

Can you vote in both primaries in NH or only one?

Sweden's finest (and perhaps only) collaborative, leftist e-newspaper Synapze.se

by A swedish kind of death on Fri Jan 4th, 2008 at 10:01:51 AM EST
[ Parent ]
People registered in a party can only vote for the candidates of that party.  Those registered Independent can for a candidate in either party, but only once.

She believed in nothing; only her skepticism kept her from being an atheist. -- Jean-Paul Sartre
by ATinNM on Fri Jan 4th, 2008 at 11:50:38 AM EST
[ Parent ]
how do they tell?

Any idiot can face a crisis - it's day to day living that wears you out.
by ceebs (ceebs (at) eurotrib (dot) com) on Mon Jan 7th, 2008 at 11:58:01 AM EST
[ Parent ]
I don't think Obama will trash the unions.  Edwards, Obama and Clinton have positions that are pretty much identical on unions, except that Clinton's proposals don't include the ban on permanent replacement of striking workers (or maybe I'm just not seeing it on her site).

Be nice to America. Or we'll bring democracy to your country.
by Drew J Jones (pedobear@pennstatefootball.com) on Fri Jan 4th, 2008 at 01:34:55 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Also, in fairness to Clinton, those acts are going to be passed by Congress if the Dems hold on.  (We often forget that, while all candidates promise things, Congress has the ultimate power in the end.  Whether any of the three can achieve these plans depends wholly on Congress passing them.)  I, honestly, can't see any of the three vetoing those acts, and I do think the Dems will hold Congress and pass them.

And they will be good steps -- significant, but only steps -- in the right direction to strengthening our unions and rebuilding the middle and working classes.

Be nice to America. Or we'll bring democracy to your country.

by Drew J Jones (pedobear@pennstatefootball.com) on Fri Jan 4th, 2008 at 02:20:56 PM EST
[ Parent ]
I think turnout wound up being about 240-250,000.  About double what we had four years ago, which signals to me that Iowa is going to be back in our column in November.  Republican turnout was up a bit from 2000 (the last competitive caucus), but Democratic turnout absolutely exploded.

The Establishment figures were clearly rejected.  I was impressed that many in the media called that.  Chris Matthews and the MSNBC crew really nailed it.  I'm not sure what CNN saw coming, since I don't watch it.

What I think will carry Obama now is the fact that we have a clear picture of the anti-Hillary vote, and it is even stronger than I think most of us would've guessed.  About 71% did not go for Hillary, and I think the results support my suspicion that if Voter X is not already with Hillary for the primaries, Voter X will not be with Hillary.  If the second-tier people and the undecideds go to Obama, and if it winds up being Hillary vs Obama, the race is probably over.

Be nice to America. Or we'll bring democracy to your country.

by Drew J Jones (pedobear@pennstatefootball.com) on Fri Jan 4th, 2008 at 01:42:40 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Now this is very interesting:  Ron Paul won the Independents in the Republican Caucus (29%), perhaps the reason behind McCain's pitiful performance.


Be nice to America. Or we'll bring democracy to your country.
by Drew J Jones (pedobear@pennstatefootball.com) on Fri Jan 4th, 2008 at 12:40:28 AM EST
Hmm, all very interesting, and a bit surprising to me...and good work gang on these results, thanks!

So, while disappointed in Edwards being 2nd (but happy he was ahead of HC) I now wonder...uh...what is Obama actually running on? What is he saying he will do? Any ideas out there? Still don't feel right about him yet, but will vote for him if he's our candidate. Need to learn more about him. As for Edwards, he might take a VP role, but I think it might go to Richardson instead. And I think Edwards would make a terrific Attorney General...or something like that...some role where he can be active and make a difference. Lets see what happens next.

"Once in awhile we get shown the light, in the strangest of places, if we look at it right" - Hunter/Garcia

by whataboutbob on Fri Jan 4th, 2008 at 04:50:01 AM EST


Display:
Go to: [ European Tribune Homepage : Top of page : Top of comments ]

Top Diaries