Page 1 of 1
And the South Carolina winners are...
Posted: January 19th, 2008, 11:44 pm
by El Scorcho
From the GOP...
McCain - 33%
Huckabee - 30%
Thompson - 16%
Democrats...vote on the 26th, stay tuned
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21229231
Posted: January 20th, 2008, 12:16 am
by Ed Dantes
Interesting figures... especially with Thompson coming in third, you wonder if that's good enough to keep him in the race?
Wow... With McCain's victory, he's a legit candidate. Same with Romney. Huck's strong showing means he is, too... and Giuliani has been campaigning HARD in Florida, which is coming up on Jan. 29... I know that this is like choosing the lamb to be slaughtered by the hillary/obama machine, but the GOP race is pretty interesting.
My prediction: Thompson drops out, supporters disperse to McCain, Romney and Huckabee. Giuliani winds up losing Florida, to it doesn't matter who, but probably McCain.
McCain & Huck split Super Tuesday, with Mitt & Rudy winning a few. Rudy drops out, supporters flock to McCain and a little bit of Romney.
Huck takes a few of the states afterwards, with McCain grabbing some others and Mitt fading. He'll concede eventually, and it's my guess that McCain will have the momentum heading into the convention, and he'll pick Huck as his running mate.
And then they'll get the snot beat out of them by Hillary/Obama, who will promptly run the country into the ground.
Posted: January 20th, 2008, 12:29 am
by Baldspot
I tend to agree with your analysis. McCain would be the oldest elected Pres which isn't good when new ideas and change seems to be major themes with the electorate. His hope may lie in Hillary's high negatives, his war record if that's an issue next fall and his ability to attract the moderate votes which doesn't enthuse me much with him in the first place.
I haven't locked in on any one candidate but I'm contemplating how a Mitt, Condi team would do against the dems.
Posted: January 20th, 2008, 9:50 am
by Ed Dantes
Condi Rice, with all due respect, would be a disaster. I think she's a terrible Secretary of State, and you only need to look as far as her record concerning Israel for my opinion on that matter (as in -- she is really pushing the two-state solution). Plus, I think that the Republicans will try to distance themselves from Bush as much as possible. That's why Jeb Bush decided against running.
Posted: January 20th, 2008, 2:14 pm
by Baldspot
Your probably right. I just like the triangulation idea of every time the dems say the Republicans are not for minorities or women we point to the VP candidate, then after the election we send her on public relations appearances with no real policy making duties.
Posted: January 20th, 2008, 2:37 pm
by Ed Dantes
Baldspot wrote:Your probably right. I just like the triangulation idea of every time the dems say the Republicans are not for minorities or women we point to the VP candidate, then after the election we send her on public relations appearances with no real policy making duties.
Dems will always say that. The problem is that anytime we put a qualified minority in a position of power, Dems will blast it by saying that the person is just an "Uncle Tom" (case in point: Clarence Thomas). President Bush had the first African-American secretary of state (Powell), and it just goes on like that. All the hubbub about the Democrats having a woman and a black guy running for President is great, but I don't recall seeing these same stories when Lizzy Dole and Alan Keyes were running for the Presidency back in 2000.
Posted: January 20th, 2008, 3:30 pm
by Cider Jim
Ed, thanks for the Harriet Beecher Stowe reference!

Posted: January 20th, 2008, 5:06 pm
by Ed Dantes
I'm so jaded for not even getting a nomination in any of the "Member of the Year" awards... Not gonna happen again in '08.