American Presidential Elections: 2008

[DemonArchangel]

So, who do you think will run for America's highest executive office in 2008? Who do you think will win? What kind of leader do you want elected to office? Currently, there are so many different possibilities, and so many different potential candidates to choose from.

In my opinion, if the Democrats pick a strong candidate with broad appeal, they could easily put a Democratic president into office. Even Republicans are by and large dissatisfied with 8 years of Dubya and his cronies, so if a Democrat could keep the Democratic vote together and still reach some Republicans, he/she would win.

However, a strong Republican candidate could easily capitalize on a large conservative base, especially since America has swung to the right ever since 9/11 (****ing Al-Qaida bastards.....), and if the Democratic candidate is weak on certain issues like security, the economy and (*sigh*) moral issues, a smart Republican could easily go in for the kill.

(And yes, I'm biased, if you can't tell)

Anyway, the outcome of the 2008 election is really in the air. I know Hillary isn't going to win, because she would cause too many divisions, even in the Democratic party (THANK GOD!)*

*That was from an atheist by the way*

Anyway, my picks for 2008:

Democratic President: John Edwards (unless somebody better comes up)

Republican President: John McCain

Most Likely To Be 1st Female President: Condoleeza Rice

[Al Khalifah]

Hopefully the democrats might field someone with a bit of character this time rather than the two useless pieces of wood they've fielded the last two times. Then perhaps there might at least be some kind of competition.

I doubt Rice will be the first female president. She won't appeal to the far right, which comprises a large section of the Republican support.

[GeneralHankerchief]

Hmm.

While it's still early to tell, the most vocal members of the parties will select both candidates for president.

With the Dems, Mark Warner takes on Hillary (who's been swinging noticeably to the right). The bloggers, whom Warner has been appealing to, turn out in full force and give him the slight victory.

In the GOP, moderate John McCain battles religous conservative Sam Brownback. It sums up the massive fracture in the Republican Party and is a nasty race. Eventually the smearing done by Brownback ala South Carolina in 2000 gives him the nod.

In the general election, the McCain conservatives flock in large numbers to Warner's side, mainly due to his more moderate stance and presence of a personality. Warner manages to squeak by with several swing states, including Florida, PA, Ohio, and his home state of Virginia.

[DemonArchangel]

Hopefully the democrats might field someone with a bit of character this time rather than the two useless pieces of wood they've fielded the last two times. Then perhaps there might at least be some kind of competition.

I doubt Rice will be the first female president. She won't appeal to the far right, which comprises a large section of the Republican support.

Point #1: True, true, the Democratic party has yet to field a decent candidate. Sadly, I don't think they currently have enough.

Point #2: What beef does the far right have with Condi? (Besides the fact that they're wife beating sexists)

[GeneralHankerchief]

Point #2: What beef does the far right have with Condi? (Besides the fact that they're wife beating sexists)

Probably because she hasn't stated out loud that abortion is murder, gay's shouldn't marry, the court is being taking over by judicial activists, etc. Even though she's been National Security Advisor and Secretary of State so her opinions on that stuff really don't matter.

[Divinus Arma]

oooh fun!


Before we consider a candidate, let's consider the winning issues. Candidates don't win, acuity to the issues does.

National Security: Complex issue. Consider the war on terrorism and its campaigns. Democrats will get burned because the campaign in Iraq is a component of the war on terror. Yes, yes, we all know that there are no WMD now. But the vast majority do not think it was anything more than a flawed evaluation of intelligence. "Bush Lied" is screamed only by the far left and international opponents of American foriegn policy. If the majority of Americans actually thought that "Bush Lied", then they would be screaming to their congressman to impeach him. And that would be all over the news, and build upon itself towards an actual impeachment. If you think that "Bush Lied" rather than "Bush screwed up", than take a look in the mirror and see an American Extremist Liberal. No offense. And Don't worry, I'll take a swipe at the GOP base too here in a minute. There are just far too many damning statements by bigtime Democrats and the GOP will be able to market these statements as "Democrats are weak on terror", whether it is true of the Democratic Presidential candidate or not.
Advantage: Republicans. Unless America decided to go back to sleep and pretend that terrorism isn't a threat, the Dems will be getting bruised by a very refined Republican spin machine. The Dem spin machine will be unable to keep up, because so many weak anti-troop statements have been made in the last couple of years.

The Economy: This is essentially divided into two components: National performance and the federal deficit. No more how you slice it, the economy is humming right along despite 9/11, a tech crash, and two military major campaigns. Granted, much of this progress has been encourgaed by two extremely important factors: A historically low Fed Rate and reduction in taxes. The GOP can make claim to one of those. The other is being reversed by Chairman Bernake right now, and amazingly we are still seeing the economy grow despite increased costs to consumers and businesses- that's a sign of a very healthy economy indeed. As for the national debt, the GOP will get slammed in the butt for pork barrel spending. Republicans are pissed about this spending, but realize that the Democrats will be much worse.
Advantage: Republicans, but barely. Increasing taxes is not something that can be sold easily to the public, especially when a growing economy begins to pay off the Federal Debt.

Illegal Immigration: Topic De Jour; the wild card. This will not matter much for a Dem, but this will absolutley cripple a GOP candidate. A candidate who is soft on illegal immigration will get burned badly. They GOP absolutely cannot field another individual who supports illegal immigration. Take a look at Bush's poll ratings. That isn't the Left causing the drop- it's the Right. People like me; hard line conservatives who do not support the importation of poverty (The merits etc of illegal immigration have been discussed ad nauseum back here, so I won't waste a perfectly good thread on the subject).
Advantage: Democrats. They have historically promised benefits to the impoverished, and the unions have begun to see Illegal immigrants with amnesty as potential new union members- and voters. Republicans are split between a hard and a hard place; the party voters vs. the business money.

And as a non-issue factor, Political Tactics: Each side has been pretty fierce in its attacks of the other. Whoever lightens up on the rhetoric and sticks to their party message will be percieved as the good guy. Attacks will be bad news for anyone this time around. The Dems may choose to attack the Republicans as "tax-breaks for the rich" and "chicken-hawks", or "cowboys". The biggest mistake the Democrats can make is to run against Bush when Bush isn't running. It will be difficult, however, for the Dems to run without attacking the Right. This is because they don't have much to run on aside from the deficit and the campaign in Iraq. And these are issues they are weak on.
For Republicans, "Liberal" has been made a dirty word with much success, and it has been that way since the 90's. However, they would be very wise to keep the word liberal to a very mild usage. The reason for this is clear: moderates will view the Republican candidate as a Partisan Hack. The use of the word liberal only works on the base who hold a set opinion on the differences between liberals and conservatives. Moderates on the left get pissed when every Democrat is called a liberal. Similarly, moderate Republicans roll their eyes when they hear the word liberal. A Republican who refrains from calling his oponent a liberal will be rewarded with a public perception that he is a reasonable non-partisan candidate.
Advantage: To be determined based on campaign behavior.

Other Factors:
Health Care. People are demanding a change, but most Americans are not yet sold on the idea of a public health care system. The failure of government to succeed in Schools, in the DMV and other administrative minutia, and in the Social Security Administration does not inspire confidence that an enormous social health program will be efficiently managed. We fear out-of-control costs, enormous tax burden, and a poorly managed system that wastes our money at best and endangers our health at worse. Despite this, Americans need change. The Dems plan to run on the government health care plan. If the Republicans offered a very limited alternative, like a government insurance program rather than government facilities, they could claim this issue as their own. The Dems could also propose a limited a limited program, but many analysts seem to think Health Care is going to be a big ticket agenda item for the Democrats; it is an opportuity to create an imaginative vision for something better with huge novelty appeal, whether that vision is realistic or not.
Advantage: Republicans. I don't think the Democrats can successfully market this. Too much concern on the part of the middle class.


Now, let's take alook at what's at stake here.

The Supreme Court of The United States. This is the big one. Nothing is more important than this right now. Republicans are absolutley salivating at the prospect of Ginsburg or Stevens retiring. Democrats are well aware of this and are terrified of losing the judicial branch. Granted, Republicans are in the majority there now, but Souter and Kennedy are not conservative by any stretch of the imagination.

Everything else at stake realtes directly to the issues.


Well, that's my analysis.

[DemonArchangel]

Wow, that is such a badass analysis. Hats off to you man.

The thing is, I think we're probably going to end up seeing more Democrats in Congress, even if the Democrats fail to put one of their own into the White House. Something tells me that dissatisfaction with the Republican political machine is at an all time high.

And about your position on the issues vs. the candidates. I think the candidate does indeed matter. Charisma, charm, good looks, etc. all count towards people voting for a candidate (yes, we're that shallow), also, individual candidates might each have their own positions regarding each of the major issues below. Candidate selection has to be done carefully here, otherwise, a bad candidate is bad, no matter how appealing the issues are.

[Al Khalifah]

Point #2: What beef does the far right have with Condi? (Besides the fact that they're wife beating sexists)

The fact that she's black and a woman. While I'm not implying anything about the vast (and I mean VAST) majority of Republicans, I suspect that there would still be significant factor that would not support a black presidential candidate. Could cause vote splitting to a third party.

[Lemur]

Dear lord, do we really have to start worrying about this now? Two years out?

Lemur for prez.

Finally, someone making sense. My first act as President will be a public horsewhipping of all registered lobbyists. After that, we'll have a big party. I want Borat to hold my bible when I'm sworn in.