A Weblog of Centrist Voices in American Politics
|
|
|
A Weblog of Centrist Voices in American Politics | |
|
December 12, 2006Pollster on Dem's 2008 ProspectsHere's an interesting post on the dems 2008 prospects from pollster.com. What's interesting about them is the evidence of very high negatives for Hillary, and the suggestion that people don't seem to have any specific ideas that come to mind on Obama. But they like him. A lot! The other interesting thing is that the polls suggest that Gore and Kerry are non-starters who ought not waste their time. Or ours. Especially Kerry. Who else isn't surprised that Lurch is going to be the last one to see the clue lamp flashing? Posted by Kranky Kritter at December 12, 2006 12:37 PMComments
Note to Al Gore: It's not just that you have poor overall results; after all, it's still early. But if you have higher negatives than Hilary at this point, it's time to take up another line of work than candidate. Posted by: wj at December 12, 2006 03:15 PMAh, but they have prepared their entire lives to one day be President. They have dreamed of realizing that goal since they were children, and they'll be damned if they're going to let high negatives and opinion polls prevent them from achieving their lifelong dream. They'll run, if only because they see their window closing and don't want to give up on their dream. Yes, they really are that ambitious. Posted by: Bobby at December 13, 2006 12:28 PMHillary will not get the nomination. the war and her stand on free trade shows she is republican lite. "Republican lite?" What an awfully silly thing to say. She's a member of the Democratic Party. Everyone gets to choose which party they belong to. Only rank partisans play the "not a real democrat" and "not a real republican" game. Lots of folks within the democratic party share her views on a variety of issues, especially those from the DLC. And quite a few of the new democratic members of congress are known as "Blue Dogs" because they are democrats who have some conservative views on things like the budget and on social issues. But these folks are in fact full-fledged members of the democratic party, whether more liberal folks like it or not. Liberals don't OWN the democratic party any more than socons, neocons, or fincons own the GOP. Don't forget that Howard Dean ultimately flamed out in 2004 because mainstream democrats feared that he has too liberal to be electable. And please acknowledge that much of the recent democratic growth in Congress is due to the election of moderate and conservative democrats, not liberal democrats. There ought to be room for conservatives within the democratic party. The democrats cannot muster a majority of votes without them. That's just the way it is. Posted by: bk at December 14, 2006 10:39 AM |
Archives
February 2008
January 2008 December 2007 November 2007 October 2007 September 2007 August 2007 July 2007 June 2007 May 2007 April 2007 March 2007 February 2007 January 2007 December 2006 November 2006 October 2006 September 2006 August 2006 July 2006 June 2006 May 2006 April 2006 March 2006 February 2006 January 2006 December 2005 November 2005 October 2005 September 2005 August 2005 July 2005 June 2005 May 2005 April 2005 March 2005 February 2005 January 2005 February 2004 January 2004 December 2003 November 2003 October 2003 September 2003 August 2003 July 2003 June 2003 May 2003 April 2003
Recent Entries
Three Quotes
The Choice, Based on Iraq Policy Even More Of A Surprise Castro Bows Out Kosovo Declares Independence Will Obama Take McCain's Funding Dare? Global Poverty Act Preservation Friday Band Taking on Obama Electoral Results Came Out As Expected?!?
|
