A blog about Kern County and Politics.
Real Name: Tom Webster Gender: male Member Since: August 14, 2006 Last Signed In: October 13, 2008 Profile Views: 11703 Blog Views: 13597 Obama Family Rally in Beach Park Today from noon to 5! One Last Time for the Fans - Drinking Liberally Tonight Bloggers and Lagers: This Saturday from Noon to Three at Pizzaville Bloggers' Beer and Pizza at PizzaVille on Saturday Drinking Liberally - The bar is now open! Drinking Liberally Thursday Night Not Yet Drinking Liberally Drinking Liberally? Bush Announces The End of the Surge McCain Breaks His Own Laws August 06 September 06 October 06 November 06 December 06 January 07 February 07 March 07 April 07 May 07 June 07 July 07 August 07 September 07 October 07 November 07 December 07 January 08 February 08 March 08 April 08 May 08 June 08 July 08 August 08 September 08 October 08 
RSS 2.0    Share!
|
|
|
Our Next President 12/11/07
Three weeks out from Iowa and there's a lot of action in the polls. Obama pulled out the big guns this weekend and got 40,000 people to a rally in Iowa by holding an event with Oprah. He's gaining in all the polls where he's not already ahead and Clinton and Edwards can't break through in the national media. As of now, Obama looks to be leading in Iowa and South Carolina and is back by 3 in New Hampshire. An Iowa win may cinch every early state for him.
On the Republican side, Mike Huckabee is running away with it and some polls have him up by over 20 points. Of course, with the attention comes more scrutiny and we'll see if the news about his past and record takes him down or if he stays up. He'll probably still lose New Hampshire to Romney but he's already up in South Carolina. What's ineresting is that Giuliani is nowhere to be found and is running 3rd to 5th in most states. In the general, I'm still betting Obama vs. Romney despite the Huckabee surge. I'm also ready to move Huckabee to the top spot next week and I'm only holding off because his negatives are just coming out. Where are you this week and what do you see coming? 31 comments from 14 users
1
posted by
Fidokrab
on Jan 3, 2008 at 11:25 AM
Of the 15 or so people running for president, exactly one is for less government. Ron Paul the one I am voting for. Everyone else can claim to be conservative all they want, but I’m not buying it.
posted by
sagefever
on Dec 11, 2007 at 06:33 PM
It is all about the caucus,will winter break hurt Obama? will people go if the ice storms continue? will the holidays prevent folks from participating? ..like I said this one should be fun to watch play out.
posted by
TomW
on Dec 11, 2007 at 05:36 PM
We'll see how Edwards does in the caucus. According to TIME, his supporters are more likely to go to caucuses which will help him make up the point differences. http://www.time.com/time/po...
posted by
randomfactor
on Dec 11, 2007 at 04:14 PM
Same opinion here. The FEC is trying to stick it to him regarding online contributions, too. Edwards' got my vote in the primary.
posted by
adampayne
on Dec 11, 2007 at 04:10 PM
I'm sipping on some ice coffee, and wondering why Oprah matters. I can never put much stock in someone's endorsement who helped make Dr. Phil the ubiquitous psycho-babble-man of our age. I see that John Edwards is the one candidate that every poll shows beats every Republican candidate. John Edwards was the one major candidate who decided to go the public finance route to avoid the conflict and hypocrisy of large special interest donations and funding. His message is about hope, heath care and better opportunities for all. He has seen the most vicious personal attacks from the extreme right-wing media and has always stayed focused and composed. The only thing John Edwards does not seem to get is much national media attention, but I believe his vision for all working class Americans is the most honest and offers the best chance for positive change. posted by
AudreyB
on Dec 11, 2007 at 02:21 PM
Tom They wouldn't need to campaign at all if they are were given equal debate time. Do you really need to see the candidates in person to make a choice? Space in Time, Newsweek, the debates, CNN, CSPAN, even Fox should be enough coverage for anyone to make a decision. posted by
TomW
on Dec 11, 2007 at 02:17 PM
SFinB, the only problem with a single Super Tuesday is that the candidates couldn't afford to campaign in 50 states so you'd have each campaign picking only certain states to campaign in to win a plurality of delegates.
posted by
sfinboston52
on Dec 11, 2007 at 01:10 PM
Audrey, I agree I am not in favor of one state choosing whom the rest of us vote for. I am for a super Tuesday where all 50 states vote for for the Democrat/GOP person. And the runner up would be the Vice President candidate posted by
TomW
on Dec 11, 2007 at 01:07 PM
Romney's ad on Huckabee: http://www.youtube.com/watc...
posted by
AudreyB
on Dec 11, 2007 at 12:40 PM
It's Clinton for me. I think she has the ability and power to correct the mistakes of the last eight years. I don't like the fact that the rest of the country has to vote for candidates that are chosen by people in Iowa, New Hampshire, et al. California should have the first primary not a dinky state that's only famous every four years. posted by
sfinboston52
on Dec 11, 2007 at 12:31 PM
I am a liberal and currently plan on voting for Obama, but should he not win the nomination and. Senator Clinton wins I will vote for her holding my nose.
posted by
mattloch
on Dec 11, 2007 at 12:29 PM
The Republican candidates all seem to be beating each other to the bottom with their "dueling scandals". They're trading voters amongst themselves, but not bringing any new voters to the table (if anything, they're driving them away in droves). The only candidate that brings Republican voters to the polls is Hillary. It is a good thing the "libural" media is showing her best moments (screeching, etc.), or else she would be doing even better in national polls......
posted by
sagefever
on Dec 11, 2007 at 12:29 PM
Richardson was my first choice,but his canidacy~for whatever reason just is not "afire". Shame really because he is qualified.
posted by
montfred
on Dec 11, 2007 at 12:23 PM
I'm not going to give up the hope that we will still have a choice in California to vote for a candidate with some foreign policy experience, if ever our country needed someone at the helm, who had some idea about how to correct this nation's course, it's now. I will continue to send my monthly contribution and words of encouragement to the Richardson campaign, until he bows out, at which time, I start looking seriously at Unity 08.The content below is from http://usforeignpolicy.abou...: All candidates foreign experience at:http://usforeignpolicy.abou... Who Is He?: Bill Richardson was born November 15, 1947 in Pasadena, California. He graduated from Tufts University and Fletcher School of Law and Diplomacy. He spent 14 years as a member of Congress from New Mexico. Thompson served in the Clinton Administration as the U.S. ambassador to the United Nations and secretary of energy. In 2002, he was elected governor of New Mexico. International Experience: Richardson spent part of his childhood living in Mexico. His first professional job was working on congressional relations at the U.S. State Department. He later was a staffer for the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. As a member of Congress he traveled extensively around the world, and played a key role shaping U.S. foreign policy as the U.N. ambassador. In 1995, Richardson successfully negotiated with Saddam Hussein for the release of two American workers being held in Iraq. Similarly in 2006, he negotiated the release of an American journalist held in Sudan by President Omar Al-Bashir. Foreign Policy Positions: Governor Richardson has called for direct U.S. talks with both Iran and North Korea (within the framework of the six-party talks). He favors a full and fast U.S. withdrawal from Iraq. He supports most free trade efforts. Richardson has spoken in favor of energy independence efforts. He also favors the Kyoto Treaty on climate change. Richardson has advocated strong reforms at the United Nations, as well as full payment of U.S. dues to the world body.posted by
randomfactor
on Dec 11, 2007 at 10:26 AM
You don't think Huckabee going to bat personally for a rapist/murderer who then raped and killed again will be such a "skeleton"?
posted by
sagefever
on Dec 11, 2007 at 10:20 AM
TomW, I think no one wants to say it but I will. Romneys faith is going to hurt him in National elections. It is still a year away ~ and we have all seen those last days before an election blow up in our collective faces with a last minute "scandal",real or imaginary.I think the countries ready for a change,and that will mean a Democrat,unless it's Hillary then I predict a Republican victory.Some of the reasons Huckabee will be attacked for are some of the reasons I could vote for him..this is going to be very interesting race. I have voted Democrat for all my voting life~ this is the first time I have ever seriously considered "jumping ship",over Ms. Clinton. I know I am not alone~listen up party!
posted by
blognroll
on Dec 11, 2007 at 10:11 AM
I think Huckabee has some great momentum going right now. I think they would have to dig out an extremely minatory skeleton in his closet to slow down the surge he is enjoying. He may be the big sleeper that social conservatives were waiting for. Mitt and Rudy have plenty to fear right now coming from Huckabee.
posted by
TomW
on Dec 11, 2007 at 10:10 AM
Sage, personally I'm hoping for Huckabee. He loses to every Democrat they've polled for nationally. He also is going to be attacked for raising taxes, driver's licenses and scholarships for Illegal immigrants and expanding public health care. He doesn't have the corporatists behind him and Mitt is going negative on him today, so we'll see.
posted by
TSM
on Dec 11, 2007 at 10:10 AM
posted by
Neverleft
on Dec 11, 2007 at 10:04 AM
With a year to go it's still anyone's race. Hopefully, anyone but Hilliary.
posted by
witterpitters
on Dec 11, 2007 at 10:04 AM
I think a woman could run this country also - not at this time and sure as he** not hilliary. It would have to be someone who could be quietly assertive. Getting the point across with a firm, unemotional tone or even the "mommy look"! I do have that down to a fine art!! I just look at my grandkids with the "mommy look" and they behave!
posted by
randomfactor
on Dec 11, 2007 at 10:01 AM
Tom, I've had quite enough of weird for a while. . I think Huckabee's peaked and is on a downhill slide from here. Just like all the others. posted by
sagefever
on Dec 11, 2007 at 09:52 AM
I am talking cold showers over Obama~ I so want to believe. He is looking good.I will not vote for Hilliary,not because she "screeches",or "kills" people but because she is just more of the same. I think a woman could run this country~just not her. On the Republican side I am thinking it is going to be Huckabee,even with his liabilities,because the rest are uninspiring. posted by
TomW
on Dec 11, 2007 at 09:51 AM
RF, I can't guarantee Paul would make things worse. Just very weird.
posted by
TomW
on Dec 11, 2007 at 09:49 AM
If Obama takes Iowa, New Hampshire and South Carolina, I don't think Hillary's leg up in New York is going to matter. Her big plus is her "inevitability".The Huckabee surge is coming from Brownback and Thompson supporters who are looking for a new candidate which tells me his support is still squishy. posted by
witterpitters
on Dec 11, 2007 at 09:12 AM
*YADDA-YADDA-YADDA* Same sh** different year. It is too bad over the last several years it has come down to the lesser of whatever evils are running be they D or R or Mickey Mouse. I am, personally, sick to death of all the mud slinging as that is what it has all come down to. Nobody can talk about the issues (what a concept) without slaming the other guy/gal. Women are going to hate me, however, I do not think a woman should run this country - too damned emotional! Look at Hilary! Screaming out stuff! Good Lord! I have to turn off the TV or change the channel as I simply cannot stand the sound of her screechie, whiney voice! AND she is very condecending, in my opinion! Yes, there have been women leaders in other countries. They didn't screech! We saw very little if any 'female' emotion from them. They were able to state what they wanted without all the hormones rampaging! posted by
randomfactor
on Dec 11, 2007 at 08:56 AM
I'll vote for anyone on the D side, all the way down the list to Gravel. There's not a Republican out there who won't make things worse.
posted by
robbwillis
on Dec 11, 2007 at 08:53 AM
Good news to see anyone ahead of Hillary, but I could see myself voting for Obama. The only Republican that has a chance with me, that has a chance, is Giulani(sorry Random). I'll vote third party if the Rs and Ds end up with the usual evil lessers. Spam code: XYDUH posted by
randomfactor
on Dec 11, 2007 at 08:48 AM
I'm seeing Clinton vs. JulieAnnie, still. Gee, I wish I could vote for a Democrat instead.
posted by
adampayne
on Dec 11, 2007 at 08:44 AM
I think this means some of the "later" primaries, like California are now really important. I don't see the nominees being selected until the end of February. Wow, whatever happened to June primaries that mattered? How did we allow money to dictate everything in our lives?
posted by
TomW
on Dec 11, 2007 at 08:42 AM
Just heard a fun poll that has Obama beating Clinton in likability and Clinton up in the "who can beat the Republicans".On the other side, Huckabee is winning the likability contest but Giuliani is winning the "who can beat the Democrats" poll.
1
Our readers recommend: |