Blue Mass Group

Reality-based commentary on politics.

Who will win the Presidential Election?

By

Click through to vote for the winner of the brass ring. List your votes in the comments and win some prestigious BMG swag a year from now, if you hit the trifecta and get the two nominees and the eventual winner right. Good luck!

UPDATE:  Giuliani and Obama are off to an early lead. The votes are popping as BMG readers hit their lunch break.

Please share widely!
fb-share-icon
Tweet
0

Comments

    • No one has yet selected Giuliani on your poll.  I see that Peter has weighed in for Willard.  No surprise there.  I clicked “Clinton”.  I don’t support her above the other dems, but I think she’s a kick ass candidate in a nut ‘n bolts way that the others don’t even come close to (although a few are clearly learning)

  4. …and I NEVER slice.

    <

    p>Gimme Clinton over Rudy in the trifecta.

    <

    p>I’ll put in a Superfecta play, too. Gimme Clinton-Richardson over Rudy-Huckabee.

  5. I don’t think it’s the most likely thing to happen, but I think it might be the most likely thing to happen that nobody else bets on, thereby not requiring me to share the swag.

    <

    p>Of course, now some joik is going to predict the same thing just to undermine my strategy.

      • in a strictly platonic, hetero way of course.  đŸ˜‰

        <

        p>[that was a joke wink, not a flirt wink]

          • …it has been reported that the Hollywood writers’ strike has had secondary repercussions, particularly among the behind-the-scences people such as costume designers, make-up artists, hair dressers (US$400 is not a lot of money for hair dressing for celebs) and so forth.  

            <

            p>It’s not going to be a happy scene when the strike ends.  Hollywood needs to figure out a new business model to accommodate itself to the new technologies.  In the meantime, thank goodness for Blockbuster (or Netflix).  Hollywood failed to do that with video tape–initially.  They also failed to do that with recorded music–initially.  

            <

            p>As Seven-of-Nine might say, they must adapt.  Someone is putting up all of the HBO Bill Maher programs on YouTube, and many of the pithy comments from Olberman are also up on YouTube.  Comedy Central has put up its popular program on its own site, with minimal commercial interruptions.  Why the broadcast networks appear to be having problems adapting is a mystery.

            <

            p>We’ve stopped watching network TV and are in the process of cancelling Comcast, primarily because of their incessant commercials.  Actually, if you go to, for example abc.com, you can get video streaming with minimal commercial interruptions (3, 30 second commercials, long enough to go to the bathroom) of many of their popular evening soap operas.

            • and I don’t miss it.

              <

              p>Netflix… and before that, the occasional trip to the video store and borrowing/swapping DVDs with friends and neighbors.

              • …Unfortuntately Boston Legal is not available over abc.com, but it is available over DVD–a year later, but who cares?

                <

                p>Last night, we tried to watch BL on ABC and with the incessant commercial interruptions it was positively impossible to watch.  Between the 24 hr “home shopping infomercials” and the incessant commercial interruptions, we have hearned the benefits of “rabbit ears.”  The odd thing is, that our cable in Germany is 1/3 the cost of Comcast, and virtually commercial free.  We have to pay a modest tax (and it really is modest) for the privilege of receiving virtually commercial-free TV and radio in our modest hovels, but we are not bombarded with the incessant commercials that we get in the USofA.

                • …for a reason that I will not expound on, all of the popular US shows are available in Germany.  Dubbed in German, of course.  As my spouse says, it’s as though you never left the US.  

                  <

                  p>Ironically, most of them are probably filmed in Canada.  Or in the Czech Republic.  Or in Cinecita (Rome)

  6. the Random Republican I think will be Huckabee, who doesn’t scare me nearly as much as he did a week or two ago (otherwise, I would have said Huck over Hill).

    <

    p>All that said, I really, really, really don’t want Hillary to win, but Obama has the big ‘mo and is STILL 10 points down. Her lead isn’t going to evaporate and, in the end, I don’t think this race is even going to be close. Sadly, Hillary is actually a very good campaigner – as Laurel made the point earlier upthread. She could have been beaten by a real progressive, someone who stood up for the Democratic Wing of the Democratic Party, but Edwards and Obama kept with the insane strategy of doing the same thing over and over again, with the same results: playing as if they had the primary in the bag and were in general-election mode, as Hillary has been all campaign. (Thus, they didn’t cast themselves as different, so why vote against Hillary if they believe all the same things?).  

    • of Hillary v. Huckabee in the general. Yes, when it comes to policy and ideology, he has a lot of baggage that we hope will inform peoples’ votes.

      <

      p>BUT, the part of the campaign that will get the most attention are the affable/chilly, plainspoken/shrill, folksy/elitist, Christian/Liberal comparisons. (Not saying they’re accurate, just that they’ll be made.)

      <

      p>Huckabee mobilizes the Conservative Christian base like no other R candidate, and Hillary mobilizes the rest of the Republicans. I think Hillary stands up against Giuliani, McCain, and Romney pretty well because none of them will excite the Fundamentalists to the same extent, and they won’t turn out as well.

      <

      p>If Huck is the R nominee, I’d feel more comfortable with Obama, because the non-Fundamentalist conservatives who are wary of the Religious Right will be less antagonized and will either vote for him or not at all. Unfortunately, we don’t get to choose our candidate after they choose theirs.

      <

      p>Ultimately, I think Hillary wins in any case, but it becomes a completely different campaign against Huckabee.

      • Believe me, I would not take a Hillary vs. Huckabee campaign lightly… and would much prefer Obama or Edwards stacking up against him (especially Edwards). However, I do think we now have plenty of ammunition to use against Huckabee that will stick if he is the GOP nominee. Quite frankly, if we can’t beat a guy like Huckabee with basically anyone when Huck has that much baggage, then we really don’t deserve to win anyway.

        <

        p>And I wouldn’t predict that Obama wouldn’t stir the Republican base as much as Hillary would. He has Hussein in his name! (And those asshats actually care about stuff like that.)

        • My thoughts on which Dem is least distasteful to Republicans comes from conversations I’ve had with Republican family members who “can’t stand” Hillary but “don’t mind” Obama that much. Of course, that could very well be because she’s been the target thus far. Once the nominee is chosen, whoever he/she is will get plenty thrown at them.

        • Quite frankly, if we can’t beat a guy like Huckabee with basically anyone when Huck has that much baggage, then we really don’t deserve to win anyway.

          <

          p>I don’t know that Huck has nearly as much baggage as the current resident at 1600 Pennsylvania.

          <

          p>Silver spoon? Check
          Alcoholic? Check
          Drug rumors? Check
          Draft dodger? Check
          Clumsy speaker? Check
          Repeatedly failed businessman? Check
          Beholden to religious right? Check
          Governor with no foreign policy smarts? Check

          <

          p>It’d be really easy to “deserve to lose.” Baggage only indicates potential.

          • Let a murderer on the loose? Not that I’m aware of.

            <

            p>Half this country wants people fried alive, not scott free to rape and kill again. Now that’s something we can stick on Huckabee.

            <

            p>The reason why a lot of the Bush stuff didn’t stick is because he was an effective enough dancer to get around it – and because he had Karl Rove in the background. Let’s take the draft dodger thing – it’s probably true that he didn’t actually do all of his service, but it’s also true that Dan Rather did a report on it that wasn’t 100% good journalism. Thus, the Rove types were able to question the entire friggin thing because one tiny smidgen of it may or may not have been accurate. Thus, a big chunk of this country thought we were just trying to smear the guy.

            <

            p>Furthermore, a big difference between Huckabee and Bush is that Bush was credited to being an alcoholic when he was “young.” He had grown up, etc. Now, I’m not saying whether or not that’s true, but the country was more sympathetic to him than critical in that regard. And, in a way (if it were all true), why shouldn’t they be? It is indeed impressive to be a sober alcoholic: it’s not easy to keep oneself clean when you have that kind of addiction. Success rates aren’t exactly good. So, again, it didn’t stick.

            <

            p>Now, on the other hand, a lot of this dirt on Huckabee has come from when Huckabee was either in office or running for office. He can’t dance around it nearly as effectively. It’s all out on the open, so Republicans won’t be able to do to it what they did to Dan Rather and turn the entire information useless.

            <

            p>I’m not saying that the Democrats could absolutely, positively use all of this stuff… instead of screwing up. It’s certainly true that Dem presidential candidates are prone to screwing up, big. However, we have a lot going here and, best of all, almost none of it has made its way into the media narrative. That means there’s plenty of opportunity to bring it up as something new on the campaign trail. All I’m trying to say is that Huckabee no longer scares me far more than Rudy, Mitt or McCain. Huckabee is still a threat, but now not much more so than his competition – and we’ll have to take them all very seriously.

        • … play offense for a change, there’s plenty of ammo to trash Huckabee.  I was just hoping he’d gain some momentum before the prison things came up.  I’d much rather take him down as the nominee.

    • The Dem who wins, likely wins the whole thing. Especially against Rudy Mitt McHuckabee. It’s part wishful thinking that Clinton will go down to the antiClinton vote. IF one or the other (Edwards/Obama) drops out quick enough after the early states…if they go down fast enough…it’s assured Clinton loses, but if all three stay in, it’s really close…but again that wishful thinking, I couldn’t pick Clinton. Certainly in a  two-man race, Clinton gets her ass kicked.

      <

      p>Though I’m leaning (but undecided) to Edwards personally, Obama has a better chance of beating Clinton in Iowa, etc.

  7. This race is still wide-open and anything can happen.

    <

    p>”Other,” for example could include Gore or Bloomberg, or some unknown, after all who knows what could happen if the convention on either side was deadlocked!

  10. Obamfrey’s rise has been really nice and all, but beat Clinton?  Actually beat her?  What he’s doing to Hillary is what the Ravens did to the Patriots — nice impressive contest, but you think she won’t re-adjust.

    <

    p>As for the Republicans, each candidate has a fatal flaw, so pick ’em.  We know Mitt is willing to do whatever it takes to win, which is usually a good thing in GOP contests.

    <

    p>And as for the general, I usually think of it this way.  Imagine being the only person — the sole human being on Earth — that stands between Hillary Clinton and the presidency.  Do you want to be that person?  What would happen to you? That is why I think Clinton-Webb will win in ’08.

  11. Truth is, neither has anything like a lock. The Democratic nomination is particularly wide open. But if I don’t play I can’t win, right?

    <

    p>On the R side, it’s going to come down to McCain versus Huckabee. With a Mitt chaser for veep, probably. I can’t really justify my pick of Huckabee versus McCain (who would be more likely to cause problems for Clinton).

  12. Hillary vs. Rudi, the first presidential campaign to be run on a completely first name basis.  And Hillary will win with Bill Richardson as her running mate.  It will be called the Hill/Bill ticket.      

    • But I no longer think Richardson is her 2nd. Not sure who as of now, but I’d guess it’ll likely be someone not currently running. Less baggage, no prior attack history, less animosity from the primary.  

  13. They’re the candidate on each side who is currently surging most in the polls — not ahead yet, but actually climbing instead of staying relatively static like Clinton, Obama, Giuliani and da Mittster. If they can manage to place second in their respective IA or NH primaries, I think the “upset” factor will draw more attention to them, and they can carry the day.

    <

    p>Huckabee wins because it seems like modern America will take the guy whom they want to have a beer with over the guy who’s actually qualified, any day of the week.

    • Richardson peaked in September, and his lousy debate performances have dragged him down since then. I previously would’ve loved him as Obama’s running mate, and my wife was a strong supporter for a long time, but lately has said she’s become completely undecided. Dodd’s unfortunately peaked too without it translating over to polls. Obama and Biden seem to be gaining right now, so are McCain and Paul, but none can compare to Huckabee’s exponential rise.

  14. Can we legally get a betting pool started on this, perhaps with the bulk of proceeds going to a needy organization like the Boston Food Bank or Massachusetts Republican Party?  Cuz I’ll put money on this bet.

  15. Obama wins Iowa, NH, South Carolina and goes on to win the nomination.  Huckabee holds off Mitt’s comeback in Iowa, loses to Mitt in NH, wins South Carolina and goes on to win the nomination.

    <

    p>Thin-skinned, untested Huckabee wears poorly on America, and Obama defeats Huckabee pretty easily for the nomination.

Archives