Which candidates drop out after New Hampshire?
- Thread starter ProfJohn
- Start date
should: all of the above.
will: probably none of the above.
edwards should have never been in this to begin with.
will: probably none of the above.
edwards should have never been in this to begin with.
2Xtreme21
Diamond Member
- Jun 13, 2004
- 7,044
- 0
- 0
Thompson didn't do anything in N.H. and he said he'd rather face the voters where he "has more of a stand." (Pretty freakin bad move basically telling a whole state they didn't matter).
Edwards won't. They're going to push him for VP again, which is dumb.
Richardson, yes.
Paul? No, and he shouldn't. He should start spending a lot more to get his name out there further in the upcoming states. Not sure why he's hoarding all of the cash he got.
Edwards won't. They're going to push him for VP again, which is dumb.
Richardson, yes.
Paul? No, and he shouldn't. He should start spending a lot more to get his name out there further in the upcoming states. Not sure why he's hoarding all of the cash he got.
- Jul 28, 2006
- 18,161
- 7
- 0
^ because Paul knows he can't win and he also knows that he can do whatever he wants with that money, besides spend it on himself.
He could take that $20 million and spend it to support similar candidates etc.
He could also run issue ads in the fall election.
He could take that $20 million and spend it to support similar candidates etc.
He could also run issue ads in the fall election.
idk why edwards is sticking in the race when he's obviously got no shot at winning and no one is going to give him a second chance to screw things up as a VP candidate.
palehorse
Lifer
- Dec 21, 2005
- 11,521
- 0
- 76
what a total waste of 20million bucks! damnit... Does he know how many kids went without bubble gum last week!? does he realize just how many kids gave up a few new Xbox games for his butt?!
He better stay in, or there are going to be some really pissed off kids at prom this year!
Lemon law
Lifer
- Nov 6, 2005
- 20,984
- 3
- 0
I don't see too many people dropping out this early. For the dems, the top three took 94% of the vote, down from the 97% in Iowa. But Hill went from first to third, Edwards from second to distant third, and Obama from first to second. And of the leftover crumbs, Richardson 5%, and consistent Kucinich at 1%. And Edwards next goes to home turf where he may reassert
being more solidly in the top three.
On the Republican side, the top three finishers took 80% of the vote up from the 72% in Iowa. But its almost a totally different top three from Iowa. McCain goes from 13% in Iowa to a win in NH, Mitts again in second, and Huck goes way down from first to a 12 % showing
to grab third. Of the 20% crumbs, it looks like Giuliani got 9 and Paul 8, leaving the last 2 splitting almost nothing.
But bottom line, read de numbers, in the first two contests, no one has topped 40% on either side. And more importantly, no one is showing a consistent appeal.
And consider the ONE BIG WINNING FACT. It takes 50% of the vote to win the nomination of
the both the Democrats and Republicans. And with no one close to 50% which basically takes
a two person race, why should anyone drop now?
Because if it comes to a split convention with no one arriving with 50% of the delegates lined up, even a few percent of the delegates become huge political capital for a minor also ran.
being more solidly in the top three.
On the Republican side, the top three finishers took 80% of the vote up from the 72% in Iowa. But its almost a totally different top three from Iowa. McCain goes from 13% in Iowa to a win in NH, Mitts again in second, and Huck goes way down from first to a 12 % showing
to grab third. Of the 20% crumbs, it looks like Giuliani got 9 and Paul 8, leaving the last 2 splitting almost nothing.
But bottom line, read de numbers, in the first two contests, no one has topped 40% on either side. And more importantly, no one is showing a consistent appeal.
And consider the ONE BIG WINNING FACT. It takes 50% of the vote to win the nomination of
the both the Democrats and Republicans. And with no one close to 50% which basically takes
a two person race, why should anyone drop now?
Because if it comes to a split convention with no one arriving with 50% of the delegates lined up, even a few percent of the delegates become huge political capital for a minor also ran.
Edwards will probably stay in. There are only three 'major' candidates for the Dems and he is one of them, whereas the Republicans have at least four who will probably stay in a bit longer (Giuliani, Huckabee, Romney, McCain). Ron Paul will probably stay in as an 'issue' candidate to try to get his message out there, much like Kucinich.
Unfortunately, Edwards probably takes more votes away from Obama than Hillary and might end up handing her the nomination.
Unfortunately, Edwards probably takes more votes away from Obama than Hillary and might end up handing her the nomination.
lozina
Lifer
- Sep 10, 2001
- 11,711
- 8
- 81
There are no similar candidates to him. The Republican field is basically 4 of the same plus Ron Paul. I dont see any of the other Republicans doing anything other than resume the fiscally irresponsible, jingoistic ideals set by the current administration. Well Huckabee might be the only one that *may* want to attempt to stray from that downward spiral
- Jul 28, 2006
- 18,161
- 7
- 0
Is there any polling showing how Paul?s support breaks down across party lines?
i.e. 50% Republican 50% Democrat? If it is close to a split then he may not hurt either side, but if it breaks too far to one side or the other then it would be a major issue.
BTW Paul got 18,276 votes out a total of 525,671 total votes for both sides.
So Paul got 3.4% of the total votes. There are only a few states that such a small number of votes would make a difference. Of course those few states, Ohio and Fl, could turn the entire election. However, you would have to look at how his vote broke down between parties to see how much of a real difference he would make. I would guess that somewhere between 66 and 75% of his votes would have to come from one party for him to make a difference on the outcome.
i.e. 50% Republican 50% Democrat? If it is close to a split then he may not hurt either side, but if it breaks too far to one side or the other then it would be a major issue.
BTW Paul got 18,276 votes out a total of 525,671 total votes for both sides.
So Paul got 3.4% of the total votes. There are only a few states that such a small number of votes would make a difference. Of course those few states, Ohio and Fl, could turn the entire election. However, you would have to look at how his vote broke down between parties to see how much of a real difference he would make. I would guess that somewhere between 66 and 75% of his votes would have to come from one party for him to make a difference on the outcome.
Arkaign
Lifer
- Oct 27, 2006
- 20,736
- 1,379
- 126
Originally posted by: lozina
Originally posted by: sirjonk
Indeed, it'll be the Nader effect for the Right siphoning off enough votes to guarantee any Dem a victory. GO RP!!
Maybe, maybe not. Pure speculation.
Well, to be fair, I'm sure the RP philosophies on personal freedom and foreign policy connect with many of the voters who voted (D) simply because the (R)'s have shown such consistent boneheaded decisions in those areas for so long. Of course, this is somewhat disingenuous because the (D)'s have gone along for many horribly stupid decisions (probably the result of finger to the wind polling and special interest string pulling rather than anything more intellectually substantive). You can blame BOTH parties for the Iraq debacle, the Patriot Acts, and the Amerikkka of the past 7 years.
Of course he does. He's splitting the anti-Hillary vote. If Edwards folds, Obama gets the nomination with ease. So expect him to stay put...
bamacre
Lifer
- Jul 1, 2004
- 21,029
- 2
- 61
Well, those numbers are also spread out over all the other candidates. Those numbers would be very different if there were only 3 candidates, 1 R, 1 D, and one RP. And if this is where we end up, he would get some more media attention. And that's really the big problem, people don't know who RP is.
I think it might be time soon for the Ron Paul supporters to realize that their candidate does not really enjoy very much support. It's not from a lack of media coverage, (he's certainly gotten far more then other candidates that poll similarly) its just that he appeals strongly to a highly vocal and motivated minority.
If the election were conducted on internet message boards, Ron Paul would be cruising to victory as we speak. That's what I think is confusing to some people, they look around at where they hang out on the internet and see legions of Ron Paul supporters... and yet he loses badly in real contests. It reminds me of when I was a kid and grew up in the ultra republican suburbs of Philadelphia. All I ever saw were Republican supporters and I always wondered how it was possible that a Democrat ever won anything at all.
If the election were conducted on internet message boards, Ron Paul would be cruising to victory as we speak. That's what I think is confusing to some people, they look around at where they hang out on the internet and see legions of Ron Paul supporters... and yet he loses badly in real contests. It reminds me of when I was a kid and grew up in the ultra republican suburbs of Philadelphia. All I ever saw were Republican supporters and I always wondered how it was possible that a Democrat ever won anything at all.
It's called Reality Distortion Field. Your analogy is a good one. If you never left that suburb, you might never realize there's something else out there. And lots of this country is similarly unaware, either through naivety or fate.
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 24K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 19K
-
-
-
Facebook
Twitter