Support NeoGAF

[ToxicAdam]

I really can't pretend I have any idea how it will shake out. Like all things, I just want to be entertained.

 

[Shalashaska]

Obama and Romney.

 

[kittens]

Alright, you want my prediction? here's my prediction:

Tomorrow, a minority of people from the fine state of Iowa, itself a small, unrepresentative state, will go and vote. After having forced the candidates to spend a ridiculous amount of time campaigning in their state (instead of, you know, governing, legislating, etc) and pretending that their parochial interests are far more import than they actually are, these people will exercise a hugely disproportionate influence on the process. It’s not really clear why this is the case, but one has to assume it’s because people from Iowa are really fucking awesome. Or something.

The Democrat will either win because we recognize her last name (how’d that turn out last time, America?) or because he makes really pretty speeches about unity.

The Republican will either win because he has a lot of money, because he was mayor of a city that got attacked by terrorists, or because he’s an unknown governor from a small state with previously unknown public profile.

Whoever it is, we’ll be blessed with a ton of stories about how they positioned themselves, about how their personal background helped them win, and about how they’re set up for the rest of the horse race. We might get a couple about what positions they’ve taken, but almost none of these will be a reasonable, intelligent analysis (that is, more horse race implications!)

Cokie Roberts will probably lead the charge, and some DC schmuck who takes the Metro in to work at 10:00 because he has a sweet government contract and doesn’t need to work very hard might even listen and, if he’s dumb enough, find it interesting.

Regardless, whoever wins will have an enormous advantage. Maybe the subsequent states will decide to think for themselves, more likely they’ll just play along, but either way politicians will be running around, kissing ass, and spending ridiculous amounts of money to look and act like a robot in order to convince people that they’re a leader.

Then people drop out, then somebody wins, and that’s when the fun starts.

That’s when we get the months of the gotchas, the Wolf Blitzer special on historical debate faux pas, countless stories on he said this, no I didn’t, well I didn’t mean it that was in 1893 anyways, fuck you. While we’re running this very important, very interesting news segment, nobody will take the motherfucking time to look through the countless academic studies that might have been published on a subject, or to make a note of facts tending to tip the scales in one direction or another. After all, we don’t want to alienate people, and it’s so much easier to say “well, on the one hand” followed by “but on the other!” and then shrug and go back to checking your hair and your perfect news man voice.

So anyways, we put up with this shit for months, and some people get really passionate about it and even yell at each other. Nobody talks about social security because they don’t want to piss off the old people who nothing to do with their free time but vote. Nobody talks about cutting the military budget because they don’t want to look like a pussy. Yet they still insist that we can all get puppies and rainbows. And then somebody wins, and if we’re really lucky, it’s because a majority of Americans wanted them to.

So the new guy takes the office, and his supporters are really optimistic about everything he can accomplish. This lasts for approximately one day. Soon enough, the rabid parochial nature of the congress will turn the plan for comprehensive energy reform (if it even existed) into the “Free money for people who grow corn” bill. The education and health care bills probably barely get off the ground. But that’s not such a bad deal, because let’s be honest – if somebody had education and health care reform plans and actually won, they were probably pretty stupid plans anyways.

So maybe we leave Iraq, maybe we don’t. Either way, we sure as fuck aren’t investing in development in Africa. And by virtue of not running any stories about the federal budget, people tend to think we already spend 60% of federal revenues feeding starving children or some other hippie ass shit.

So maybe terrorists find a new base. Or Pakistan blows up. Or robots conquer the earth. Or glaciers melt the fuck out all over everything. Either way, all that exciting ("exciting") domestic reform has to get put to the side for a while, everything goes to hell, lather, rinse, repeat.

So, I guess what I am saying is, I disagree. This is not politics at its best.

…

Yeah, sorry about that. I think everything that I’ve bottled up since I was old enough to vote just broke out.

wow. a truly great post.

 

[thefro]

Here's how Intrade has it. They're a predictor market sort of like the Sim Exchange and picked up on Kerry's surge in Iowa in 2004 before the polls did. These are share values (out of 100, winner-take-all, so if Obama wins Iowa, his shares are worth 100, if he gets 2nd they're worth 0)

Obama 60 (huge spike since New Year's Day, +6 on the day)
Clinton 24 (-7)
Edwards 16 (no change)

Huckabee 53.2 (+2)
Romney 35.1 (-2)
McCain 0.7
Thompson 0.2

 

[siamesedreamer]

Didn't know where else to put this:

Obama's campaign proudly announced today the endorsement of former South Carolina Gov. Jim Hodges who will join his campaign as a national co-chair.

But the endorsement of Hodges may raise eyebrows among those who support Obama because he strongly decries lobbyists on the stump, frequently saying that he will not let them work in his White House or set the agenda in Washington.

Hodges is the founder of Hodges Consulting Group, a state-based lobbying firm he started in 2003. The firm is a subsidiary of Kennedy Covington Lobdell & Hickman, L.L.P, a law firm that represents clients in North Carolina and South Carolina.

<snip>

Though Obama has also said that he won't take federal PAC and lobbyist money on his campaign, he does take money from state based lobbyists as previously reported by First Read.

Obama's co-chair in New Hampshire, Jim Demers, is a state based lobbyist for the pharmaceutical and financial services industries amongst others. Michael Bauer, a member of Obama's LGBT steering committee, is a state based lobbyist in Chicago. And in Nevada, Obama's campaign also has three state based lobbyists who play senior advising roles in August last year.

MSNBC

LOLz at people who think he's any different than anybody else running.

 

[Triumph]

Predictions:

Iowa

Dems:
Obama 29%
Clinton 26%
Edwards 24%
Everyone else will get less than 15%. I see Obama winning after the second vote thing goes in, because I don't think anyone other than Richardson will send their 2nd chance votes her way. Biden, Dodd, Kucinich voters will probably all go to Obama.

GOP:
Romney 28%
Huckabee 26%
McCain 14%
Paul 9%
Rudy 9%
Thompson 7%
Everyone else will be fringe... of course, Paul is too but he'll come back to earth after NH even if his Rondroids never will.


Bonus New Hampshire Round

Dems:
Clinton 34%
Obama 27%
Edwards 16%
Everyone else won't matter. Clinton starts winning here and probably doesn't stop, sadly.

GOP:
Romney 26%
McCain 23%
Huckabee 17%
Rudy 12%
Paul 11%
And after this primary, it will be plainly obvious it will be Hillary vs. Romney, and I'll promptly stop caring. Sigh.

 

[eznark]

Predictions?

Dems: Obama
GOPs: Huckaboom

Two big government, anti-liberty candidates run against each other to see who can grab as much taxpayer dollars as possible. One eventually wins, no one can tell the difference?

Romney v. Hillary to see who can further ruin America with socialized medicine.

 

[tnw]

Two big government, anti-liberty candidates run against each other to see who can grab as much taxpayer dollars as possible. One eventually wins, no one can tell the difference?

don't start this. this is what they did with gore/bush in 2000, and I'd like to think in retrospect there clearly was a very big difference.

 

[Triumph]

Holy shit at Gruco's post of extreme awesomeness. I salute you, sir. And not just because you're a Braves fan.

 

[Souldriver]

Could someone tell me when the voting starts, the first exit polls appear and the final results are announced?


(preferably in NY time or California time, cause these are my references )

 

[Cheebs]

Could someone tell me when the voting starts, the first exit polls appear and the final results are announced?


(preferably in NY time or California time, cause these are my references )

EST Time: Voting begins at 7:00. Voters will begin leaving their caucus's with results/exit polling coming in around 8-8:30.

Entrance polling will start around 6:30 and entrance polling in 2004 was damn spot on with final results.

 

[eznark]

don't start this. this is what they did with gore/bush in 2000, and I'd like to think in retrospect there clearly was a very big difference.

And I saw the clear difference in 2000. There was even a clear difference in 2004, but with the GOP candidates moving left, the difference is nominal. The clearest differences are with foreign policy but none of the candidates have the will or force to shape those events and like President Bush will be shaped by them instead.

Domestic policies all appear to be one shade or another of socialism, on both "sides" of the aisle.

Sorry though, didn't meant to jack this thing.

Romney and Hillary will win the cauci (?)

 

[Cheebs]

If Romney wins tonight the nomination is his, end of story. He has been expected to lose to Huckabee for weeks now. Winning would boost his slight lead/tie in NH and then he'll win MI and it'll be over.

But if Huckabee wins and McCain finishs a decent third McCain will win NH and win the nomination.

For dems: If Edwards wins and Hillary and Obama are close then expect a close fight in NH with whoever wins that winning it all. If Hillary wins tonight the nomination is over. If Obama wins tonight it will boost him in NH and he'll win the nomination.

 

[Squirrel Killer]

So back in December, I posted this post. (Short version for those who hate clicking, I was asked to be a temporary precinct chair, accepted, then was asked who I supported, I said Ron Paul.)

Turns out, the person I talked to (who claimed to lean Huckabee, but is really a named supporter for Giuliani) forgot to relay my acceptance of the temporary precinct chairmanship to the county central committee. Funny that. I called around yesterday since I hadn't gotten anything like a list of rules or an agenda and found that the central committee had found someone else to serve as the temporary precinct chair. It was suggested that since I was willing to serve, I could offer to be the recorder or some other position.

Do I think anything nefarious took place? Not really, I know the person who contacted me and don't think s/he'd do that. Then again... Do I think anything nefarious took place? Well... I do know the person that contacted me and it's not beyond comprehension. Does it really matter? Not really, since I could just nominate myself when they call for nominations for "permanent" chair.

What should I do GAF? Fight the power or meekly surrender?

 

[Souldriver]

EST Time: Voting begins at 7:00. Voters will begin leaving their caucus's with results/exit polling coming in around 8-8:30.

Entrance polling will start around 6:30 and entrance polling in 2004 was damn spot on with final results.

Thanks man!

 

[Cheebs]

So back in December, I posted this post. (Short version for those who hate clicking, I was asked to be a temporary precinct chair, accepted, then was asked who I supported, I said Ron Paul.)

Turns out, the person I talked to (who claimed to lean Huckabee, but is really a named supporter for Giuliani) forgot to relay my acceptance of the temporary precinct chairmanship to the county central committee. Funny that. I called around yesterday since I hadn't gotten anything like a list of rules or an agenda and found that the central committee had found someone else to serve as the temporary precinct chair. It was suggested that since I was willing to serve, I could offer to be the recorder or some other position.

Do I think anything nefarious took place? Not really, I know the person who contacted me and don't think s/he'd do that. Then again... Do I think anything nefarious took place? Well... I do know the person that contacted me and it's not beyond comprehension. Does it really matter? Not really, since I could just nominate myself when they call for nominations for "permanent" chair.

What should I do GAF? Fight the power or meekly surrender?

It's too late to fight it probably. If you realized this a week ago maybe you could do something. But the day of the election? You'll probably just have to suck it up and dry again next time.

 

[RubxQub]

Pardon my ignorance, but what is so important about these two states and what they think?

Will two states really decide the primaries?

 

[Souldriver]

Pardon my ignorance, but what is so important about these two states and what they think?

Will two states really decide the primaries?

From what I've understood, it kind of sets a precedent. The person who wins the elections here, will have a larger chance of winning overall. These 2 states are not important, they just want to be the first states to hold the elections.

 

[Cheebs]

Will two states really decide the primaries?

In 2004 Kerry was doing horrible till he won Iowa and then spet the nation. So, yes it can.

If either Hillary or Obama win tonight on the Dem side then its a safe bet they will sweep most of the nation.

 

[eznark]

Latest Zogby has Clinton falling to 3rd, which is interesting. Obama certainly needs this more than her.

If McCain wins then there really is no choice for voters.

 

[scorcho]

this whole tiered caucus/primary shit needs to be destroyed. now.

 

[eznark]

this whole tiered caucus/primary shit needs to be destroyed. now.

new proposal?

 

[Cheebs]

Latest Zogby has Clinton falling to 3rd, which is interesting. Obama certainly needs this more than her.

Zogby is not the most realiable polling outlet. But he does have a good shot if turn out is strong.

 

[scorcho]

national primary. every state, every precinct, all at the same time.

except Georgia, i want to disenfranchise SD, even if i have to take out an entire state to do so.

 

[Souldriver]

You know what my main concern is. Which one of the two (Obama or Hillary) has the best chance of winning against whoever get the republican nomination? I think my views aline best with Obama's, but I kind of support Hillary cause I have the idea she'll do better in the presidential election.

Anybody got an idea about this?

 

[eznark]

national primary. every state, every precinct, all at the same time.

except Georgia, i want to disenfranchise SD, even if i have to take out an entire state to do so.

Sorry, I missed "tiered" which is pretty much the most important part of your complaint.

 

[eznark]

You know what my main concern is. Which one of the two (Obama or Hillary) has the best chance of winning against whoever get the republican nomination? I think my views aline best with Obama's, but I kind of support Hillary cause I have the idea she'll do better in the presidential election.

Anybody got an idea about this?

In the primaries vote with your heart, in the general vote with your head.

 

[Justin Bailey]

You know what my main concern is. Which one of the two (Obama or Hillary) has the best chance of winning against whoever get the republican nomination? I think my views aline best with Obama's, but I kind of support Hillary cause I have the idea she'll do better in the presidential election.

Anybody got an idea about this?

The best thing you can do is support candidates, not parties. Don't fall into that trap.

 

[Cheebs]

You know what my main concern is. Which one of the two (Obama or Hillary) has the best chance of winning against whoever get the republican nomination? I think my views aline best with Obama's, but I kind of support Hillary cause I have the idea she'll do better in the presidential election.

Anybody got an idea about this?

My gut says Hillary would do better in a general but personally I'd LIKE Obama more. Hillary doesn't seem at all to be the type who would be like Gore and Kerry and let republicans do tons of negative trashing and let stuff like the swiftboaters who helped tear down Kerry happen. Her campaign is full of people who won two presidential elections which is helpful.

 

[scorcho]

Gruco: Cokie Roberts? that's Cold War stuff, man. it's all about the Situation Room now.

Situation Room
Situation Room
Situation Room

 

[eznark]

My gut says Hillary would do better in a general but personally I'd LIKE Obama more. Hillary doesn't seem at all to be the type who would be like Gore and Kerry and let republicans do tons of negative trashing and let stuff like the swiftboaters who helped tear down Kerry happen. Her campaign is full of people who won two presidential elections which is helpful.

People will be too afraid to run negative ads against Clinton. The minute she takes office Retribution would be swift and severe.

 

[Souldriver]

The best thing you can do is support candidates, not parties. Don't fall into that trap.

It's just that in my book every democrat has better views than any republican at this point. So even if the "worst" democrat (whoever that is) wins the election, it would be better than any of the republicans in the race.

(I'm talking about the biggest candidates (Clinton, Obama, Edwards, Romney, Guilliani, Huckabee, McCain), don't know a lot about the smaller ones)

But maybe you're right. History has shown that it's largely the person, and not the party, who can change things around when America is in a bad shape, wether it be a democrat or republican. There have been quite some cases where a new elected president totally changes it's course once in office.

 

[Cheebs]

People will be too afraid to run negative ads against Clinton. The minute she takes office Retribution would be swift and severe.

:lol Exactly!

A few months ago she said that if someone attacks you then you must deck them with all your might in return.

 

[Mandark]

national primary. every state, every precinct, all at the same time.

except Georgia, i want to disenfranchise SD, even if i have to take out an entire state to do so.

Sounds good. As long as we're wishing, let's throw in a preferential voting system too.

 

[Cheebs]

Since everyone is wishing it should be here like it is in Australia (for gen elections not primaries) where you are charged a small fine if you do not vote.

 

[Clevinger]

Didn't know where else to put this:

Obama's campaign proudly announced today the endorsement of former South Carolina Gov. Jim Hodges who will join his campaign as a national co-chair.

But the endorsement of Hodges may raise eyebrows among those who support Obama because he strongly decries lobbyists on the stump, frequently saying that he will not let them work in his White House or set the agenda in Washington.

Hodges is the founder of Hodges Consulting Group, a state-based lobbying firm he started in 2003. The firm is a subsidiary of Kennedy Covington Lobdell & Hickman, L.L.P, a law firm that represents clients in North Carolina and South Carolina.

<snip>

Though Obama has also said that he won't take federal PAC and lobbyist money on his campaign, he does take money from state based lobbyists as previously reported by First Read.

Obama's co-chair in New Hampshire, Jim Demers, is a state based lobbyist for the pharmaceutical and financial services industries amongst others. Michael Bauer, a member of Obama's LGBT steering committee, is a state based lobbyist in Chicago. And in Nevada, Obama's campaign also has three state based lobbyists who play senior advising roles in August last year.

MSNBC

LOLz at people who think he's any different than anybody else running.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/22409176/page/5/

SEN. OBAMA: I haven't changed. Look, the terminology may have changed, the, the basic concept remains the same. I am going to break the revolving door that has become so commonplace in this administration and in some previous administrations. If you want to work in my White House, you will not be able to regulate former employers. And if you leave my White House, you will not be able to lobby agencies that you used to work for on behalf of folks that were regulated. That is the revolving door that has to be broken to give the American people confidence in, in their government.

MR. RUSSERT: So if a lobbyist agreed to those terms, they could work in the White House?

SEN. OBAMA: Look, there are people who may have lobbied 10 years ago, 15 years ago. They may be able to render excellent service to the American people as long as they're clear that we want people of integrity and we want this link between you cashing in and you serving in government broken.

 

[Triumph]

this whole tiered caucus/primary shit needs to be destroyed. now.

YES. One primary day. Makes them campaign on issues. Fuck this regional self-importance horse shit. We are no longer a loose confederation of states, time to start living in the present so we can move towards the future.

 

[Triumph]

You know what my main concern is. Which one of the two (Obama or Hillary) has the best chance of winning against whoever get the republican nomination? I think my views aline best with Obama's, but I kind of support Hillary cause I have the idea she'll do better in the presidential election.

Anybody got an idea about this?

Yeah, my idea is that this thinking got us the most "electable" candidate in John Kerry last time. For fuck's sakes, vote for who you think will do the best job, not who the media tells you is "electable".

 

[eznark]

Since everyone is wishing it should be here like it is in Australia (for gen elections not primaries) where you are charged a small fine if you do not vote.

Um, no. I appreciate the freedom to "vote" by abstaining from said vote if I were to choose to do so without State coercion.

 

[Justin Bailey]

Since everyone is wishing it should be here like it is in Australia (for gen elections not primaries) where you are charged a small fine if you do not vote.

Ugh, compulsory voting in any form is a bad idea. If you're too lazy to research candidates and get off your ass and vote then you don't deserve to have a say in this government.

 

[JayDubya]

Since everyone is wishing it should be here like it is in Australia (for gen elections not primaries) where you are charged a small fine if you do not vote.

Um. Those too ignorant or apathetic on the issues or just too lazy to go to the polls should not be voting.

YES. One primary day. Makes them campaign on issues.

Yeah I agree.

Fuck this regional self-importance horse shit. We are no longer a loose confederation of states, time to start living in the present so we can move towards the future.

Wait a minute. No, fuck off.

 

[joeposh]

My gut says Hillary would do better in a general but personally I'd LIKE Obama more. Hillary doesn't seem at all to be the type who would be like Gore and Kerry and let republicans do tons of negative trashing and let stuff like the swiftboaters who helped tear down Kerry happen. Her campaign is full of people who won two presidential elections which is helpful.

That kind of "safe choice" logic is exactly what got us Kerry in '04. I just don't see how people can position Clinton as the safe general election choice when her negatives are so high and even fellow Dem's struggle with the idea of voting for her.

We can't have a polarizing figure at the top of the ticket because that can only serve to motivate a currently discouraged and disenchanted Republican base. If you think they're not going to hit her and hit her hard, you're wrong. They've had nearly a decade to plan for a Clinton presidential run, and I have no doubt that they will do everything they can to paint her in negative light. If she struggled with handling very mild attacks in the primaries, how do you think she'll magically repel the slime machine it in the general?

 

[Souldriver]

Yeah, my idea is that this thinking got us the most "electable" candidate in John Kerry last time. For fuck's sakes, vote for who you think will do the best job, not who the media tells you is "electable".

I can't vote. I'm not from the USA. If I had the opportunity to vote, I'd surely go for the one that I think will do the best job (and I would be better informed anyway), but right now I just want America to change course.

 

[eznark]

YES. One primary day. Makes them campaign on issues. Fuck this regional self-importance horse shit. We are no longer a loose confederation of states, time to start living in the present so we can move towards the future.

I refuse to acknowledge minnesota, so if they get left in the past I am all aboard.

 

[eznark]

That kind of "safe choice" logic is exactly what got us Kerry in '04. I just don't see how people can position Clinton as the safe general election choice when her negatives are so high and even fellow Dem's struggle with the idea of voting for her.

We can't have a polarizing figure at the top of the ticket because that can only serve to motivate a currently discouraged and disenchanted Republican base. If you think they're not going to hit her and hit her hard, you're wrong. They've had nearly a decade to plan for a Clinton presidential run, and I have no doubt that they will do everything they can to paint her in negative light. If she struggled with handling very mild attacks in the primaries, how do you think she'll magically repel the slime machine it in the general?

It really won't take a decade of effort to "slime" Hillary Clinton. The truth will do just fine.

 

[Triumph]

I refuse to acknowledge minnesota, so if they get left in the past I am all aboard.

Give them a chance, they're about to elect the funniest Senator in the country.

 

[eznark]

Give them a chance, they're about to elect the funniest Senator in the country.

For a comedian he will sure cause a ton of despair as a Senator.

 

[Triumph]

For a comedian he will sure cause a ton of despair as a Senator.

I fail to see how he could be any worse than the idiots that are currently in the Senate... unless you're a Libertopian. You are, aren't you? Fuck, they keep coming out of the woodworks...

 

[eznark]

I fail to see how he could be any worse than the idiots that are currently in the Senate... unless you're a Libertopian. You are, aren't you? Fuck, they keep coming out of the woodworks...

I don't know what a libertopian is? I'm a free market individualist with pragmatic views on international issues who has often voted GOP in the past.

 

[eznark]

Triumph, how is his race going actually? Since I left Wisconsin I haven't followed politics in the midwest as much as I used to.