Prediction: Iowa Caucus Results - KERRY WINS!!!

[BDawg]

Originally posted by: shinerburke

Originally posted by: rufruf44
Only thing I'm interested is whether if there's anyone in the running right now that can challenge dubya. So far, it doesn't look like it, especially with Dean getting smashed like that.

Trust me...the Democrats have a better chance of winning if they put anyone other than Dean up. He wouldn't have flown with the vast middle in this country. Will Kerry or Edwards? Of the two I think Edwards would have a better chance against Bush in the general election...

I agree on the Edwards comment. He's strong enough to win a southern state, which a Democrat must do.

 

[busmaster11]

A little sad that Dean didn't win, but I've always said that my number one concern was getting bush out of office... And I will support the strongest candidate to that end.

 

[UltraQuiet]

So everyone here is discounting Clark? That's intersting because I think he'll do as well or better than all the Dems in the South.

 

[Mill]

Originally posted by: Ultra Quiet
So everyone here is discounting Clark? That's intersting because I think he'll do as well or better than all the Dems in the South.

Possibly, but I still think Edwards holds the key to the South.

 

[Bowfinger]

Originally posted by: Ultra Quiet
So everyone here is discounting Clark? That's intersting because I think he'll do as well or better than all the Dems in the South.

Not at all. I'm very interested in how Clark does in New Hampshire. I'm not sure yet if he has legs or not, but he has solid national name recognition and there's no way Bush can effectively attack him issues related to patriotism and defense. Clark is vulnerable to attack on domestic issues and lack of political experience, but I think he can launch a mean counter-attack.

I would love to see Bush and Clark debate one-on-one; Clark would shred him. (But so would any of the leading Dems, Clark would just do it more aggressively.)


Edit: I agree with Mill. Edwards is also a strong contender in the south.

 

[UltraQuiet]

Originally posted by: Mill

Originally posted by: Ultra Quiet
So everyone here is discounting Clark? That's intersting because I think he'll do as well or better than all the Dems in the South.

Possibly, but I still think Edwards holds the key to the South.

Maybe, but I think Southerners are a lot more liable to trust and support a General than a lawyer/politician. Only time will tell.

 

[shiner]

Originally posted by: Ultra Quiet

Originally posted by: Mill

Originally posted by: Ultra Quiet
So everyone here is discounting Clark? That's intersting because I think he'll do as well or better than all the Dems in the South.

Possibly, but I still think Edwards holds the key to the South.

Maybe, but I think Southerners are a lot more liable to trust and support a General than a lawyer/politician. Only time will tell.

I dunno....admittedly Oklahoma is a small state, but I know several people "in the know" with the Democratic Party here that tell me they don't trust Clark at all and that he is just trying to get himself lined up for either a VP spot this year, or to make another run in 2008. Most of the Dems I know have been behind Edwards from the start.

 

[Chadder007]

Originally posted by: WinstonSmith
How about "uncommitted" as the winner?

OMG!!!! Uncommited beat Senator Palpatine!!!! Oh NOes!

 

[dmcowen674]

Dean on CNN now. Basically he is shrugging off Iowa.

 

[Dragnov]

You're 100% wrong. Yes Dean flip flopped, but so did John Kerry. In fact, John Kerry's stance on the war was ridiculously confusing. Dean still has the largest grassroots organization in history. The question will be whether the grassroots can deliver him victories. It didn't in Iowa. I don't think anyone who donated money and/or time to the Dean campaign think they wasted it. He shaped the national debate moreso than any other candidate. He revolutionized the way campaigns should be run. He also did this all before a single vote was cast.

Dean is running a 50-state campaign. I think he'll still win in the end, but of course I could be wrong.

Dean didn't revolutionize anything. He attempted a failed philosophy of energizing his own base isntead of appealing to the more moderate swing voters. His grassroots may be the largest, but grassroots alone will never be able to allow him to win. I don't see how he changed anything.. if anything he showed the cemented the failure of his campaign tactics.

Kerry won more votes among the young adults (wasn't this Dean's crowd?) Not to mention he lost in just about every other category.

 

[Chadder007]

Originally posted by: dmcowen674
Dean on CNN now. Basically he is shrugging off Iowa.

I seriously doubt that.....look like he sh@# a brick in this pic from tonight..
http://us.news1.yimg.com/us.yimg.com/p/rids/20040118/i/r3353936172.jpg

 

[chowderhead]

As a Democrat, I have to say watching Dean give his Iowa speech that that was the most painful speech that I have ever heard. He tried for energetic and positive ... he sounded ANGRY and weird reciting the names of the states. WTF is wrong with him? Please juxtapose this with the Edward's speech. Very embrassing.

 

[CADsortaGUY]

Originally posted by: Gr1mL0cK

You're 100% wrong. Yes Dean flip flopped, but so did John Kerry. In fact, John Kerry's stance on the war was ridiculously confusing. Dean still has the largest grassroots organization in history. The question will be whether the grassroots can deliver him victories. It didn't in Iowa. I don't think anyone who donated money and/or time to the Dean campaign think they wasted it. He shaped the national debate moreso than any other candidate. He revolutionized the way campaigns should be run. He also did this all before a single vote was cast.

Dean is running a 50-state campaign. I think he'll still win in the end, but of course I could be wrong.

Dean didn't revolutionize anything. He attempted a failed philosophy of energizing his own base isntead of appealing to the more moderate swing voters. His grassroots may be the largest, but grassroots alone will never be able to allow him to win. I don't see how he changed anything.. if anything he showed the cemented the failure of his campaign tactics.

Kerry won more votes among the young adults (wasn't this Dean's crowd?) Not to mention he lost in just about every other category.

Didn't I post something from the DLC a while back that people were saying was just an old 12 document? Oh yes -
yes I did.

Oh well...

CkG

 

[Mill]

Originally posted by: Ultra Quiet

Originally posted by: Mill

Originally posted by: Ultra Quiet
So everyone here is discounting Clark? That's intersting because I think he'll do as well or better than all the Dems in the South.

Possibly, but I still think Edwards holds the key to the South.

Maybe, but I think Southerners are a lot more liable to trust and support a General than a lawyer/politician. Only time will tell.

Hehe... I tend to agree, but Edwards seems very honest while Clark is pretty rigid. I don't think Southerners will care for too much of Clark's ideas.

 

[CADsortaGUY]

Originally posted by: chowderhead
As a Democrat, I have to say watching Dean give his Iowa speech that that was the most painful speech that I have ever heard. He tried for energetic and positive ... he sounded ANGRY and weird reciting the names of the states. WTF is wrong with him? Please juxtapose this with the Edward's speech. Very embrassing.

I think I woke up my kids because I was laughing so hard. I'd feel the same way you did if I was a dean supporter. Hard to spin such a defeat - good attempt though. No content but lots of "emotion".

CkG

 

[MonstaThrilla]

Originally posted by: Gr1mL0cK

You're 100% wrong. Yes Dean flip flopped, but so did John Kerry. In fact, John Kerry's stance on the war was ridiculously confusing. Dean still has the largest grassroots organization in history. The question will be whether the grassroots can deliver him victories. It didn't in Iowa. I don't think anyone who donated money and/or time to the Dean campaign think they wasted it. He shaped the national debate moreso than any other candidate. He revolutionized the way campaigns should be run. He also did this all before a single vote was cast.

Dean is running a 50-state campaign. I think he'll still win in the end, but of course I could be wrong.

Dean didn't revolutionize anything. He attempted a failed philosophy of energizing his own base isntead of appealing to the more moderate swing voters. His grassroots may be the largest, but grassroots alone will never be able to allow him to win. I don't see how he changed anything.. if anything he showed the cemented the failure of his campaign tactics.

Kerry won more votes among the young adults (wasn't this Dean's crowd?) Not to mention he lost in just about every other category.

By revolutionize I meant the whole Internet/Meetup thing. Also its a bit early to call his campaign a failure. At least wait until he actually loses.

 

[dualsmp]

John Kerry, yet another Skull & Bones secret society member just like George W. Bush-- what a surprise.

Will it be Bones vs. Bones? Probably.

 

[BaliBabyDoc]

Maybe, but I think Southerners are a lot more liable to trust and support a General than a lawyer/politician. Only time will tell.

Interesting and certainly possible but considering the only reason Bush is a failed businessman/politican instead of a lawyer/politician is because he didn't have the talent to get into law school . . . Edwards will at least get an audience. Furthermore, the self-made man from Robbins may be more in touch with Southerners than the Rhodes Scholar.

I won't go as far as to call Edwards a shifty trial lawyer but the man knows how to communicate. And on the merits . . . even some of my NC physician colleagues give the man grudging acknowledgement.

Clark has the curious Achilles of being skewered by a native son of NC (Gen. Hugh Shelton) . . . who naturally has given his support to his fellow NC State alumnus . . . John Edwards. So which general do you think Southerners should trust?

 

[Mill]

Originally posted by: MonstaThrilla

Originally posted by: Gr1mL0cK

You're 100% wrong. Yes Dean flip flopped, but so did John Kerry. In fact, John Kerry's stance on the war was ridiculously confusing. Dean still has the largest grassroots organization in history. The question will be whether the grassroots can deliver him victories. It didn't in Iowa. I don't think anyone who donated money and/or time to the Dean campaign think they wasted it. He shaped the national debate moreso than any other candidate. He revolutionized the way campaigns should be run. He also did this all before a single vote was cast.

Dean is running a 50-state campaign. I think he'll still win in the end, but of course I could be wrong.

Dean didn't revolutionize anything. He attempted a failed philosophy of energizing his own base isntead of appealing to the more moderate swing voters. His grassroots may be the largest, but grassroots alone will never be able to allow him to win. I don't see how he changed anything.. if anything he showed the cemented the failure of his campaign tactics.

Kerry won more votes among the young adults (wasn't this Dean's crowd?) Not to mention he lost in just about every other category.

By revolutionize I meant the whole Internet/Meetup thing. Also its a bit early to call his campaign a failure. At least wait until he actually loses.

Hmm... the internet aspect was very cool, and I even looked at his meetings around here. Too bad that even the liberal enclaves around here were not even touching him. I think there were two people that actually signed up for his meetings around here. I think he is just too liberal to win or swing moderates. That's his worst mistake.

 

[Dragnov]

Originally posted by: Ultra Quiet
So everyone here is discounting Clark? That's intersting because I think he'll do as well or better than all the Dems in the South.

Granted this is not set in stone or anything...

but the only candidate to win the presidency nomination while skipping the Iowa caucus was Bill Clinton... and thats because he was facing the Iowa senator...

It's strategic reaons these candidates skip the Iowa caucus, but the fact is they wouldn't have had a good showing there. Skipping > bad showing, essentially. By winning and/or having a good showing in Iowa essentially gets the candidate more money, and more media attention giving more of an advantage to them, over those who skipped it.

BUt again, not set in stone of anything but it will be mighty difficult as history has shown.

 

[UltraQuiet]

Interesting and certainly possible but considering the only reason Bush is a failed businessman/politican instead of a lawyer/politician is because he didn't have the talent to get into law school . . . Edwards will at least get an audience. Furthermore, the self-made man from Robbins may be more in touch with Southerners than the Rhodes Scholar.

Never misss a chance to get a dig in. Again my read on it is a little different than yours but onlytime will tell.

I won't go as far as to call Edwards a shifty trial lawyer but the man knows how to communicate. And on the merits . . . even some of my NC physician colleagues give the man grudging acknowledgement.

Not sure what the point is. At least you didn't tell me to eat cow sh!t.

Clark has the curious Achilles of being skewered by a native son of NC (Gen. Hugh Shelton) . . . who naturally has given his support to his fellow NC State alumnus . . . John Edwards. So which general do you think Southerners should trust?

It is curious in the extreme. The guys that reach that level are normally a very tight bunch, at least publicly. It's amazing that Gen. Shelton would even hint at some impropriety let alone expand on it just short of being specific. I really would like to know the specifics or if Gen. Shelton is just a really good friend of Edward's. Unless Shelton starts actively campaigning or decides to be specific this probably won't be an issue.

 

[Mill]

Sure the South bases a lot of their vote on if a General is running, but people fail to realize that Clark is too liberal to win the vote down here.

 

[Ferocious]

Edwards is cool.

Kerry is okay.

All other Dems should drop out immediately....if they want the Dems to have a chance this fall.

Clark and Dean have ZERO chance of beating Bush.