On to Denver?
Open Thread!What does Hillary's win in Ohio and close race in Texas mean for the Democratic nomination and the general election?
Nothing follows.
posted by wretchardthecat at 3/04/2008 08:36:00 PM
The Belmont Club
The Belmont Club will be moving on Monday, June 23 to this new site.
Tuesday, March 04, 2008
Mail Wretchard
Previous Posts
- Air Force Tankers, Barack Obama's superdelegates
- Dostoevsky at the movies
- Rescues in Afghanistan, sitting out elections and ...
- Garrison
- Consolidating the Surge
- NATO's Secretary General warns Wilders about Islam...
- A book fair in Paris
- The CNAS survey of the state of the armed forces
- Groundhog day in Gaza
- Roundup. The Patton of Iraq; Doubt as a weapon of war
Blogroll
Linkroll
Visitors since 12/26/2003
Contributors
28 Comments:
If you believe Intrade prediction markets it has raised her chances 5% from 12-13% to 17-18%. I just started participating in the Intrade markets for fun. I am buying Republicans to win, not because I believe they will win but because I believe the race will tighten. Currently Intrade predict has Republicna win at 36-37%.
It means a cage match in Denver, at the convention, hopefully. McCain, for better or worse (I tend to think it's for the better, marginally), in 2008. There's a reason we don't elect many Senators in this country and you're looking at three of them. For all hi faults though, McCain is far and away better than the other possibilities.
There's a reason we don't elect many senators to the presidency.
Sorry.
Chris nice punditry. All of the remaining candidates are Senators.
Looks like its going to be fun. Hillary may yet snatch the prize from He Who Must Not Be Middle Named.
Of course, if she takes it despite his having more popularly chosen delegates and more popular votes, his supporters will be p-oed and dispirited.
OTOH, if HWMNBNM is the nominee, he will have to be out in public making speeches and defending himself. He will look less like the messiah and more like an inexperienced hack politician from Chicago.
Each day Obama and Clinton campaign against each other makes it easier for McCain. To win then need to fight for every Democratic vote. To do that they need to go on the record on all the issues. The more they do that the harder it will be to tack back to the political center next Summer, leaving McCain comfortably in the center of the American electorate.
You can expect lots of "But back in March you said ..."
But it's not all roses for McCain. He has to worry about the Right not showing up next Fall. Even if McCain is dead center politically, that hurts him if only the Left 75% of the country shows up at the Polls next Fall. Campaigning on "Better me than them" doesn't get people to the polls. Expect him to start making concession to the Right, since he knows the hard Left will never be his and he needs 50% to win.
The best case scenario is for Hillary to beat Obama by a hair after an ugly Democratic convention. Childish disappointment then keeps the moonbats at home on November thus leaving only rational Democrats to vote for Hillary. Then maybe just maybe McCain can win even after the economy rolls over and dies.
It's ridiculous that Obama the Moonbat Messiah may have lost because of that stupid Saturday Night Live show. The feckless MSM had to be shamed into doing their job.
What does this mean?
Get him out of uniform.
With victories in Rhode Island, Ohio, and Texas, and a large point spread in Ohio, Hillary Clinton now has the momentum. This contest will go all the way to Denver.
I think Barack Obama will probably win the nomination because he has deeper pockets to buy the votes of uncommitted delegates. The Democratic National Convention looks like it will be best one money can buy. It will be an interesting auction.
The Democratic voters saw their shadow and it's six more weeks of primary season.
Hope stupid does the California legislature (and that is not very hard) look now. Moving the primary up to February was only of a string of boneheaded, short-sighted acts of the CA legislature. Instead of being bunched up with 22 other states, our still scheduled June 2 primary election (for all the rest of the elected offices)would now be looming as the kingmaker. Hillary and Obama would to knee and kiss CA's ring. Now CA is long forgotten and ignored. Swift move.
I think we'll see a fight that will make 1968 in Chicago look like a Girl Scout picnic.
Code Pinkers, the Nation of Islam, ANSWER, the Aztlan folks, the transgendered, all will be there to offer their swing votes to the most hard left, fanatic, lunatic candidate and it will be leavened with a soupcon of street fights, convention fights, fights over delegates in MI and FL, and so on. All on TV.
The best reality show on TV!
Helps McCain of course, because it cements the Dems as looney-left lunatics. So far they've done well in keeping Code Pink, ANSWER, Farrakhan off the TV. That is probably impossible now.
In the meantime, expect lots of fun stuff about Barack Hussein Obama, Rezko, Auici, and so on to drop, and on Barack Hussein Obama's side, nasty info on Hillary.
The Press will smell blood, and yes SNL has influenced the election by calling them on their BS Messiah worship by people who matter to them. And Obama lacking skills and experience in tough, partisan elections will show up like the rookie with no experience he is. Pandering reflexively to the hardest hard left. While IMHO the Superdelegates will swing it to Hillary out of fear Obama could bring the Party to McGovern level defeats or worse.
But the biggest news is that the internal contradictions of the Dems: half ANSWER/Nation of Islam/Code Pink, half moderate James Webb, have not ended and will be on display, ultimately as the radical lunatic half (since that draws ratings/viewers).
It means war I tell you, war. All out un-civil war in the Democrat party. Take the gloves off, swing for the fences, knock over every cliché in sight. Going to get bloody.
Now lets see, if the Republicans had a candidate ... but after the drive bys run over that old guy, they won't. Nice babe though.
I agree with the assessment, there is a reason Senators don't get elected President. I think we are going to review the many lessons why.
I think McCain should make a California Bus tour defending NAFTA. Hill and O'Bama (he's more Irish than John Kerry) still have PA to go. That means more trade bashing. Johnny, head for the Pacific coast and repeat everything they say. It won't cost much and you will force them to spend a bunch of money to counteract you.
If Hill gets the Nomination, I don't see African Americans turning out. Unless Obama is on the ticket or campaigns for her big time.
But the person who fails may want to run again in 2012 and so may not mind the other person falling a tad short in November.
You're all right, good fight and good show and it will weaken the Dems...Popcorn time
However I, for one, would rather have seen the end of the frigging Clintons.
I really really don't want to go through election season (and night) thinking Hillary and overbearing Bill have even a shot at being in charge, and in my face, for the next 4/8 years.
Damn you Rush Limbaugh if you gave Texas to the BEAST!
If there was one lesson to be learned from 2004, it's "never underestimate the Democrats' will or ability to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory." We're seeing that on full display again in 2008.
2164th said...
What does this mean?
////////////
Means he's not getting laid.
When the MSM runs it--that means that their point has moved from American soldiers are not successful at war to American soldiers are not successful at love -so therefor they shouldn't be emulated
Tarnsman: Moving the Cali election up to Feb had NOTHING to do with the POTUS race. It was all about Proposition 93. Had that passed it would have reset term limits and allowed the 2 Democrat Leaders in the House and Senate to run for re-election in the June Primary. Since it failed they both are now termed out.
That was the ONLY reason for moving the POTUS election date up.
The right turned out big-time for McCain in Texas and Ohio. Do you know what it took for them to hold their noses and go out and vote for Hillary? That took guts, dedication and a willingness to do the dirty work.
JoseyWales said:
"I really really don't want to go through election season (and night) thinking Hillary and overbearing Bill have even a shot at being in charge, and in my face, for the next 4/8 years."
Hillary is bad. There is no argument about this basic truth.
Unfortunately, the alternative to Hillary is Barack Hussein, the Moonbat Messiah. He is much, much worse than Hillary.
For the general election it is better for McCain to face Hillary rather than Barack Hussein, here's why:
Hillary's supporters (for the most part) are rational. In the end, when given a choice between voting for a Republican versus a Democrat, Hillary's supporters will vote Democrat on November. However Barack Hussein's supporters are mostly moonbats which by definition means they're idiots. If Barack Hussein loses the primary, the moonbats will stay at home on November despite that being a de facto vote for McCain (moonbats are too stupid to see this). Consequently there will be fewer Democrats voting if Hillary wins the primary.
The momentum is back with Hillary, however the math is on Obama's side. Hillary will have to win every primary with a least 60% of the vote in order to catch up to Obama's delegate count.
That means, the Clinton camp will look to Florida and Michigan for those delegates (rightly so I think, as I thought it was irony of all ironies for the DNC to disenfranchise their constituency in a fit of pique) and Obama's camp will try to buy super-delegates to offset Michigan and Florida.
I agree that this will go all the way to Denver and be a Chicago 68 redux.
In the meantime, the press will continue to try and knock Obama off at the knees, particularly the Resko affair. Who knows they may start looking into his "church".
It's looking pretty good for McCain right now. Presidential endorsement today, has some time to pick a good VP (I'm going to go out on a limb and say he chooses Liebermann), he has some breathing space to raise money and begin a general election campaign.
As an aside, I too would prefer a candidate responsible for a budget larger than a Senate staff, but there you have it.
Chavo, Math is irrelevent to the Moonbats. Look at Florida 2000. After a year the press finally admitted (back on page D26) that no matter how they counted chads, Bush had won the State (hence, the election). To this day the moonbats still use the "selected, not elected' moniker regardless of math or facts.
The irony is that with the way this election is shaping up, it will be the Supers that decide who the nominee will be.
The Democratic Nominee will truly be selected, not elected.
McCain will not choose Lieberman. He has some SERIOUS mending to do for his base and he knows it. Not only does he need the political bolstering they'll bring - the November turnout, but also just trying to raise funds for the battle ahead. Look for someone who motivates them - Gov Sanford, Kay Bailey Hutchison, Fred Thompson, Jack Kemp, Sam Brownback, Condolesa Rice, or...
...Go Mac Go!
McCain will not choose Lieberman. He has some serious mending to do for his base and he knows it. Not only does he need the political bolstering they'll bring - the November turnout, but also just trying to raise funds for the battle ahead. Look for somone who motivates them - Gov Sanford, Kay Bailey Hutchison, Fred Thompson, Jack Kemp, Sam Brownback, or Condolesa Rice...
To mend fences with the conservative base McCain should choose a fairly young conservative who would be seen as a good Presidential candidate once McCain leaves office. I would have liked Thompson as the Presidential candidate but he would be like Cheney as VP in that he would not be someone to be the next President.
To me Michael Steele would be a good pick, conservative, has executive experience, and would show the average voters that the GOP has serious politicians who happen to be black.
I agree with Joannis that McCain will not choose Lieberman even though I would like to see Lieberman rewarded for his patriotism.
Geoffb said:
"To mend fences with the conservative base McCain should choose a fairly young conservative who would be seen as a good Presidential candidate once McCain leaves office."
The big problem with McCain is he's a very old white guy who is not too healthy. Being President is very physically hard on a person (most Presidents age very rapidly due to stress). If elected, McCain would almost certainly die in office. Therefore, his Vice Presidential choice is actually a Presidential selection.
McCain already has broad appeal to independent voters and alienated Democrats. However as Geoffb correctly said, McCain needs to mend fences with conservatives. I think the best VP would have the following qualities:
1) Look good on television (be youthful).
2) Have extensive executive experience (a state governor or major corporate CEO).
3) Be conservative but not offensive to independent voters (NOT a religious fanatic).
4) Be a person of color (hispanic or black).
Condolesa Rice would do the trick but she won't run (Convince her?). Is there another Condolesa Rice or a youthful Colin Powell out there?
OK, I am a former "in-the-tank" Fred Thompson supporter and a conservative. Believe it or not, I am warming up to McCain, particularly given the alternatives.
I think McCain, being a Navy man, would be particularly useful at the helm in the event of a conflict over Taiwan during the next 8 years.
I would like to take geoffb's comment about needing to choose a "young conservative". I think he just has to choose a credible conservative. I don't think Cheney's problems have been related to his age, or that age is a problem at all. Why does the VP slot always have to be seen as a grooming area for future Presidents?
In the old days I thought it was ticket balancing, and Fred could likely help lock down the conservative base and ensure that the South is solid for McCain, which is necessary for a Republican.
I think George H.W. Bush would have been better served by picking a less youthful veep than Quayle. I think Edwards added nothing to Kerry's chances in '04. I think Kemp was a reasonably seasoned choice for Dole in 1996 and that Dole failed for other reasons. Ferrarro added nothing to Mondale, but I think the ancient Bentsen "you're no Jack Kennedy" helped Dukakis.
Fred Thompson has the advantage of being experienced in Foreign Policy and on exactly the same page as McCain on Pakistan, Iran and other War-on-Terror issues. He is trustworthy and has a lawyer's experience so that McCain could dispatch him to foreign capitals knowing that he would not go off the reservation.
I acknowledge that most people (including McCain?) probably agree with geoffb's view on Fred Thompson being too old, so I don't think he will get the nod.
Re eggplant's later comments, I don't buy that veep has to be female or person of color, I didn't get hung up on the "executive experience" mantra coming from pundits/McCain/Giuliani during the primaries, and Thompson is clearly not a "religious fanatic".
Post a Comment
<< Home