Page 6 of 55 FirstFirst ... 4567816 ... LastLast
Results 101 to 120 of 1098
  1. #101
    Quote Originally Posted by A-Tex Devil View Post
    Right, but the nominees since then have been:

    Ford (incumbent)
    Reagan
    Reagan (incumbent)
    Bush
    Bush (incumbent)
    Dole
    W. Bush
    W. Bush (incumbent)
    McCain

    Maybe it's upthread, but 4 of those 6 are incumbents, so that stat is a little skewed. A sample size of 2 of 4 for the non-incumbents is a little small. Although, I'd agree that this is a really unusual year thus far.

    Frankly, I'd love a federal statute that forced primaries to all be within 14 days of each other, with the convention coming within 30 days of that -- think of it like post lock-out NFL and NBA free agent periods. What fun!! I realize that's trampling on all sorts of Federalist principles, which then leads to PPB. I get that. But the primary process, while fun from a tracking standpoint, seems like a pretty inefficient and meandering process that doesn't really keep the eye on the ball. Probably preaching to choir, though.
    good point.

  2. #102
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Undisclosed
    You gotta start somewhere. Iowa is as good or bad a place as any. And it is small enough (apparently) to allow a less-financed/establishment candidate to compete and then launch from there. At least, that's the theory.

    If either party started in California, Texas or New York (for example), the money candidate would have an even bigger advantage than currently exists. Romney's PACS have started dumping money into Iowa, we'll see if it helps him get over the 25% ceiling he keeps hitting.
    "What, me worry?" -- Roy Williams

  3. #103
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Lynchburg, VA
    Quote Originally Posted by Jarhead View Post
    Seems to me that "rather irrelevant" is an understatement.
    It depends on how you look at it. While Iowa might not be predictive for the winner, it has been consequential for the overall nomination. Although no one knew it at the time, Huck's win in the 2008 caucuses sealed Romney's fate. It contributed to McCain's narrow win in New Hampshire and denied Romney the position of conservative alternative to McCain in South Carolina. It also kept Huck around long enough to steal just enough of the conservative vote to help McCain land the knock out blow in Florida. The bottom line is McCain's people were ecstatic with the 2008 Iowa results.

    If Romney wins Iowa, the nomination is o...v...e...r, over. If Paul wins Iowa and Romney finished second, it's almost as good for Romney--a lot like 2008 for McCain. But, if Paul wins and one of the three 10 percenters (Perry, Bachmann, Santorum) manages to finish an unexpectedly strong third, maybe they emerge as a challenger to Romney in South Carolina. If I had to put money on one of the three, it would be Santorum. He's about the only candidate left who hasn't enjoyed the anybody-but-Romney bounce and he's a darling of social conservatives, who play a disproportionate role in the caucuses.

    In any case, I think Iowa is usually fairly consequential to the overall outcome.

  4. #104
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    New Bern, NC unless it's a home football game then I'm grilling on Devil's Alley
    Quote Originally Posted by A-Tex Devil View Post
    Frankly, I'd love a federal statute that forced primaries to all be within 14 days of each other, with the convention coming within 30 days of that -- think of it like post lock-out NFL and NBA free agent periods. What fun!! I realize that's trampling on all sorts of Federalist principles, which then leads to PPB. I get that. But the primary process, while fun from a tracking standpoint, seems like a pretty inefficient and meandering process that doesn't really keep the eye on the ball. Probably preaching to choir, though.
    While the primaries can seem to last forever leading up to the conventions, think about it as the most exhaustive interview process ever. It doesn't seem like a bad idea considering whoever comes out on top will be the leader of the free world. A bunch of people still won't like the results in the end, but at least whomever gets elected does so with no hidden surprises and the general belief that they are able to handle the job.
    Mmmm, BBQ!

  5. #105
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Cambridge, MA
    Quote Originally Posted by CameronBornAndBred View Post
    but at least whomever gets elected does so with no hidden surprises
    I don't know. The John Edwards stuff came out after his run in 2008 was over, right?

  6. #106
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Cambridge, MA
    Quote Originally Posted by JasonEvans View Post
    PPP says that if turnout is bad, they expect Romney to win but a strong turnout will almost certainly mean a victory for Paul.
    Wait, don't you mean the opposite? Huckabee predicted that if it happens to rain on January 3rd in Iowa, Paul wins, and if it's sunny, Romney wins. That seems to be the conventional wisdom - Paul's supporters are enthusiastic, so they're going to turn out no matter what, and therefore a low overall turnout means a higher percentage of those who make it to the polls are Paul supporters.

  7. #107
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    New Bern, NC unless it's a home football game then I'm grilling on Devil's Alley
    Quote Originally Posted by Wander View Post
    I don't know. The John Edwards stuff came out after his run in 2008 was over, right?
    Well he also didn't make it very far as a candidate. My guess is that IF he had been more of a major player, we would have known the facts long ago.
    Mmmm, BBQ!

  8. #108
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Roxboro, NC
    Quote Originally Posted by CameronBornAndBred View Post
    Well he also didn't make it very far as a candidate. My guess is that IF he had been more of a major player, we would have known the facts long ago.
    Well he was the Vice President candidate on Kerry's ticket that wasn't all that far from winning the election. That's pretty far I think.

    I do agree with your general premise though, that the drawn out process allows us to get to know everyone. Edwards is just not a good example.

  9. #109
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Hot'Lanta... home of sports teams that disappoint in the playoffs
    I think we all agree that if we have early nominating contests in big states, it makes money perhaps the biggest factor in determining the winner. Starting with smaller states, where the voters really get to know the candidates, probably makes sense. I think the problem though is with Iowa and New Hampshire always getting to go first.

    Now, some must be eliminated because, despite a small size, they represent an expensive media market. Iowa and Connecticut are about the same size, but Connecticut is an extremely expensive media market because it piggy-backs onto New York. Same with Delaware and its connection to Philly.

    But, states like Rhode Island, New Mexico, Nevada, Kansas, Arkansas, Maine, and Mississippi deserve a shot at being early in the nominating process at some point. I don't see how this would be a bad idea. They are all smaller than Iowa. Heck, if we allowed states even a little bit larger than Iowa then we could get into places like Oregon, Oklahoma, and Kentucky.

    The one thing I will say in favor of the status quo is that Iowa and NH are old pros at doing this. The citizens and the media in those states know what retail campaigning is about and they do a great job at cutting through the BS and really getting to know the candidates. I think the citizens of those states take their role in the electoral process very seriously and are studious about the candidates. I am fairly sure you would not get the same thing if we had a dozen or more states rotating through the early voting role.

    -Jason "even with smaller states first, money is a HUGE factor. It has greatly curtailed Newt's ability to run a successful campaign" Evans
    Don't ask me why, but my mother is making me Tweet. Says it will be good for my career. So, follow my ramblings, mostly on the film industry, @TVFilmTalk

  10. #110
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Columbus, Ohio
    Jason,

    To piggyback off your point regarding Newt's money-induced limitations, may we attempt discussing the implications of Citizens United and its aftershocks in this campaign cycle, or should we leave that be?

  11. #111
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Dillon, Colorado
    Quote Originally Posted by JasonEvans View Post
    The one thing I will say in favor of the status quo is that Iowa and NH are old pros at doing this. The citizens and the media in those states know what retail campaigning is about and they do a great job at cutting through the BS and really getting to know the candidates.
    NH just works really well for retail politics. The state is small geographically, easy to get around in and politically balanced. People are generally very involved in politix at the local and state levels -- the state house has something like 500 seats and representatives get paid only for expenses, so no one does it for money or glory. The population isn't dominated by one large city or media market, and is spread out enough that most candidates still spend a day up in Coos County (and bonus points if you can correctly pronounce Coos without using wikipedia). It has its own teevee stations, but you can't just dump money in the state.

    Nevada tried to frontrun NH this time around. One of the people behind this was a girl named... wait for it... Amy Tarkanian. Don't ask; you already know the answer.

  12. #112
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Undisclosed
    Quote Originally Posted by hurleyfor3 View Post
    Don't ask; you already know the answer.
    What -- whether she chews towels or not?
    "What, me worry?" -- Roy Williams

  13. #113
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Dillon, Colorado
    Quote Originally Posted by OldPhiKap View Post
    What -- whether she chews towels or not?
    Well, she's not bald. Yet. Unless she was wearing a wig when I saw her MSNBCNNBCBS (a subsidiary of Fox) a couple months back.

  14. #114
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Hot'Lanta... home of sports teams that disappoint in the playoffs
    Quote Originally Posted by Mike Corey View Post
    Jason,

    To piggyback off your point regarding Newt's money-induced limitations, may we attempt discussing the implications of Citizens United and its aftershocks in this campaign cycle, or should we leave that be?
    I think it is tough, but if you want to take a stab at it in a non-partisan fashion, go ahead. Personally, I think most folks in this forum -- liberals or conservatives -- would agree that the proliferation of money in politics is not a good thing.

    -Jason "my guidance, as always, put yourself in the shoes of someone who disagrees with your side and see if your post would anger them" Evans
    Don't ask me why, but my mother is making me Tweet. Says it will be good for my career. So, follow my ramblings, mostly on the film industry, @TVFilmTalk

  15. #115
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Undisclosed
    Quote Originally Posted by JasonEvans View Post
    I think it is tough, but if you want to take a stab at it in a non-partisan fashion, go ahead. Personally, I think most folks in this forum -- liberals or conservatives -- would agree that the proliferation of money in politics is not a good thing.

    -Jason "my guidance, as always, put yourself in the shoes of someone who disagrees with your side and see if your post would anger them" Evans
    "Money doesn't talk. It swears."

    -- Bob Dylan
    "What, me worry?" -- Roy Williams

  16. #116
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Lynchburg, VA

    Here comes Santorum?

    Maybe all that time in Iowa is finally paying off...

    CNN has him at 16%.

    If he surges, there's not enough time left for his opponents to do much about it.

  17. #117
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Undisclosed
    Quote Originally Posted by mph View Post
    Maybe all that time in Iowa is finally paying off...

    CNN has him at 16%.

    If he surges, there's not enough time left for his opponents to do much about it.
    Nate Silver's article today ( http://fivethirtyeight.blogs.nytimes...nute-momentum/ ) lays out the Iowa situation much better than I can. It's a must-read, but long/short -- if one of the social conservative candidates (Santorum, Perry, Bachman) can get some momentum for that base to coalesce around, they can spring up pretty quickly here at the end.
    "What, me worry?" -- Roy Williams

  18. #118
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Hot'Lanta... home of sports teams that disappoint in the playoffs
    As a former CNNer, it pains me to say this but the CNN poll is a piece of junk. They only polled registered republicans even though the Iowa caucus allows people to quickly and easily change party or register for a party on Caucus night. Lots of Ron Paul supporters, many of whom are independents, may not be registered GOP today but you can bet they will show up and vote for him on election night. As a result, the poll probably understates Paul's support by 4-6 points.

    At least that is what PPP and Nate Silver are saying on Twitter.

    -Jason "if Nate says it is so... I trust him" Evans
    Don't ask me why, but my mother is making me Tweet. Says it will be good for my career. So, follow my ramblings, mostly on the film industry, @TVFilmTalk

  19. #119
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Austin, TX
    Quote Originally Posted by OldPhiKap View Post
    Nate Silver's article today ( http://fivethirtyeight.blogs.nytimes...nute-momentum/ ) lays out the Iowa situation much better than I can. It's a must-read, but long/short -- if one of the social conservative candidates (Santorum, Perry, Bachman) can get some momentum for that base to coalesce around, they can spring up pretty quickly here at the end.
    I wouldn't discount Perry. The guy has never lost an election, and the debate gaffes will be either forgotten or spun favorably for him if he is able to stick around through March.

    While his debating skills are in doubt, he and his team are masters at campaigns and timing of attacks. The absolute obliteration of Kay Bailey Hutchison in what many thought would be a competitive primary in 2010 was pretty impressive, regardless of where you stand.

    That said, democratic supporters with cash have been funneling money into his campaign because they seriously doubt he could win a general election.

  20. #120
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    New Bern, NC unless it's a home football game then I'm grilling on Devil's Alley

    Gary Johnson picks up his ball and goes home. Or at least leaves the Republicans

    Claiming more disrespect than Rodney Dangerfield got from his wife, Gary Johnson leaves the Republican party to run as a Libertarian. I honestly had no idea he was even running, so good luck, buddy.
    "Frankly, I have been disappointed by the treatment I received in the Republican nomination process. I had hoped to lay out a real libertarian message on all the issues in the Republican contest. The process was not fair and open."


    http://politics.blogs.foxnews.com/20...ertarian-party
    Mmmm, BBQ!

Similar Threads

  1. Politics of Preschool
    By JasonEvans in forum Off Topic
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 05-05-2008, 02:16 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •