November scenarios

flaja · 06-05-2008, 08:27 PM

I think that the winner of the election in November will depend mostly on whom McCain chooses as his running mate.

If McCain doesn’t have an evangelical running mate, he won’t have anything to counter the black vote in the South. This means that Obama will win regardless of whom his running mate is.

I think a McCain/Huckabee ticket would beat any Obama ticket that didn’t include Clinton. Evangelicals would outvote blacks in the South and Democrats in Pennsylvania, Ohio, Michigan and West Virginia would resent not having Clinton on the ticket, so McCain would have a better than even chance of winning these states.

A McCain/Huckabee ticket would have a better than even chance of losing to an Obama/Clinton ticket because Obama would have a good chance of winning Pennsylvania, Ohio, Michigan and West Virginia.

Urbane Guerrilla · 06-06-2008, 04:16 AM

Welcome, Flaja.

Heck, it would beat any ticket that did include Clinton. Clinton's negatives are not merely political, they are personal, and they make working with her as your second banana something close to impossible. There's a whole nation out here that would greatly enjoy voting against Hillary -- as many times as she makes it necessary. They don't want a Saul Alinsky-trained, tax-and-spend-more-than-you've-got socialist, the Government is your mother and your father girl anywhere near the Oval Office, especially after the experience of having had one there during the Clinton years.

Or else you've got an electorate lobotomized by bread and circuses -- and need to replace it with a better electorate. Essentially, an electorate that prefers adult thinking.

Ibby · 06-06-2008, 05:14 AM

www.fivethirtyeight.com

TheMercenary · 06-06-2008, 11:21 AM

I think it is less important who McCain chooses than who Obama chooses. A strong crossover VP for Obama will give him a good chance of winning if McCain does not choose Huckabee.

glatt · 06-06-2008, 11:41 AM

I think Obama should not choose Clinton as a running mate because she is very polarizing.

If he does not choose her, either she will back him or she won't. If she backs him, then he can count on the votes of most of her supporters. If she doesn't back him, then some of her supporters will stay home out of spite, but many will vote for Obama because he is closer to their ideal than McCain is. The feminists who supported Clinton are not going to want another conservative president appointing judges to the Supreme Court. They will vote for the lesser evil.

Obama should instead choose a candidate that is less polarizing, and is closer to the middle. I'm thinking Webb. Webb is strong on military and guns and used to be a Republican. He's the closest thing to a moderate that the Democrats have.

The thing about going to the middle, is that there are more voters in the middle than on the edges. Obama needs to go to the middle with the VP.

TheMercenary · 06-06-2008, 11:44 AM

I agree. I really don't have any good ideas for him but I think he needs to choose someone with some experience in government. Maybe a state gov or someone like that.

glatt · 06-06-2008, 11:47 AM

Good point, Webb has no experience.

TheMercenary · 06-06-2008, 12:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by glatt

Good point, Webb has no experience.

If you say so.

TheMercenary · 06-06-2008, 12:40 PM

Ha! maybe he is a good choice!

"This is why, were I Obama, I would look at the left-liberal case against Webb - on the grounds that he's too anti-feminist, too pro-military, too skeptical about affirmative action and immigration, too hostile to Hollywood and academia - as an advertisement for the pick."

http://rossdouthat.theatlantic.com/a...ainst_webb.php

tw · 06-06-2008, 07:19 PM

Last time a VP choice made a difference:
Kennedy selected Johnson.

TheMercenary · 06-06-2008, 08:18 PM

Nixon chose Ford.

Clodfobble · 06-06-2008, 09:13 PM

Reagan chose Bush Sr. Don't forget the VP is usually the presumptive nominee 8 years hence.

deadbeater · 06-06-2008, 09:33 PM

Cheyney chose Bush to be president. Hee, hee.

I'm thinking that it could be Ed Rendell, the governor of Pennsylvania. A Clinton supporter, popular in Appalachia. Could help force McCain to spend resources in states thought to be lock for the Republicans..

Griff · 06-07-2008, 06:18 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by deadbeater

I'm thinking that it could be Ed Rendell, the governor of Pennsylvania. A Clinton supporter, popular in Appalachia. Could help force McCain to spend resources in states thought to be lock for the Republicans..

Actually Ed is more popular in urban PA, the hillbillies didn't vote for him in any great numbers. You could maybe scrape out a win that way, but Rendell looks, sounds, and acts like the kind of pol Obama is running against.

I'd like to learn more about Webb. He seems like a no bullshit guy.

xoxoxoBruce · 06-07-2008, 11:15 AM

Griff for Vice President.
He'll foil the goats on the fence.

06-05-2008, 08:27 PM	#1
flaja High Propagandist Join Date: Jun 2008 Posts: 112	November scenarios I think that the winner of the election in November will depend mostly on whom McCain chooses as his running mate. If McCain doesn’t have an evangelical running mate, he won’t have anything to counter the black vote in the South. This means that Obama will win regardless of whom his running mate is. I think a McCain/Huckabee ticket would beat any Obama ticket that didn’t include Clinton. Evangelicals would outvote blacks in the South and Democrats in Pennsylvania, Ohio, Michigan and West Virginia would resent not having Clinton on the ticket, so McCain would have a better than even chance of winning these states. A McCain/Huckabee ticket would have a better than even chance of losing to an Obama/Clinton ticket because Obama would have a good chance of winning Pennsylvania, Ohio, Michigan and West Virginia.

06-06-2008, 04:16 AM	#2
Urbane Guerrilla Person who doesn't update the user title Join Date: Jul 2002 Location: Southern California Posts: 6,674	Welcome, Flaja. Heck, it would beat any ticket that did include Clinton. Clinton's negatives are not merely political, they are personal, and they make working with her as your second banana something close to impossible. There's a whole nation out here that would greatly enjoy voting against Hillary -- as many times as she makes it necessary. They don't want a Saul Alinsky-trained, tax-and-spend-more-than-you've-got socialist, the Government is your mother and your father girl anywhere near the Oval Office, especially after the experience of having had one there during the Clinton years. Or else you've got an electorate lobotomized by bread and circuses -- and need to replace it with a better electorate. Essentially, an electorate that prefers adult thinking. __________________ Wanna stop school shootings? End Gun-Free Zones, of course.

06-06-2008, 05:14 AM	#3
Ibby erika Join Date: Apr 2006 Location: "the high up north" Posts: 6,127	www.fivethirtyeight.com __________________ not really back, you didn't see me, i was never here shhhhhh

06-06-2008, 11:21 AM	#4
TheMercenary “Hypocrisy: prejudice with a halo” Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: Savannah, Georgia Posts: 21,393	I think it is less important who McCain chooses than who Obama chooses. A strong crossover VP for Obama will give him a good chance of winning if McCain does not choose Huckabee. __________________ Anyone but the this most fuked up President in History in 2012!

06-06-2008, 11:44 AM	#6
TheMercenary “Hypocrisy: prejudice with a halo” Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: Savannah, Georgia Posts: 21,393	I agree. I really don't have any good ideas for him but I think he needs to choose someone with some experience in government. Maybe a state gov or someone like that. __________________ Anyone but the this most fuked up President in History in 2012!

06-06-2008, 11:41 AM	#5
glatt ™ Join Date: Jul 2003 Location: Arlington, VA Posts: 27,717	I think Obama should not choose Clinton as a running mate because she is very polarizing. If he does not choose her, either she will back him or she won't. If she backs him, then he can count on the votes of most of her supporters. If she doesn't back him, then some of her supporters will stay home out of spite, but many will vote for Obama because he is closer to their ideal than McCain is. The feminists who supported Clinton are not going to want another conservative president appointing judges to the Supreme Court. They will vote for the lesser evil. Obama should instead choose a candidate that is less polarizing, and is closer to the middle. I'm thinking Webb. Webb is strong on military and guns and used to be a Republican. He's the closest thing to a moderate that the Democrats have. The thing about going to the middle, is that there are more voters in the middle than on the edges. Obama needs to go to the middle with the VP.

06-06-2008, 11:47 AM	#7
glatt ™ Join Date: Jul 2003 Location: Arlington, VA Posts: 27,717	Good point, Webb has no experience.

06-06-2008, 12:40 PM	#9
TheMercenary “Hypocrisy: prejudice with a halo” Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: Savannah, Georgia Posts: 21,393	Ha! maybe he is a good choice! "This is why, were I Obama, I would look at the left-liberal case against Webb - on the grounds that he's too anti-feminist, too pro-military, too skeptical about affirmative action and immigration, too hostile to Hollywood and academia - as an advertisement for the pick." http://rossdouthat.theatlantic.com/a...ainst_webb.php __________________ Anyone but the this most fuked up President in History in 2012!

06-06-2008, 07:19 PM	#10
tw Read? I only know how to write. Join Date: Jan 2001 Posts: 11,933	Last time a VP choice made a difference: Kennedy selected Johnson.

06-06-2008, 08:18 PM	#11
TheMercenary “Hypocrisy: prejudice with a halo” Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: Savannah, Georgia Posts: 21,393	Nixon chose Ford. __________________ Anyone but the this most fuked up President in History in 2012!

06-06-2008, 09:13 PM	#12
Clodfobble UNDER CONDITIONAL MITIGATION Join Date: Mar 2004 Location: Austin, TX Posts: 20,012	Reagan chose Bush Sr. Don't forget the VP is usually the presumptive nominee 8 years hence.

06-06-2008, 09:33 PM	#13
deadbeater Sir Post-A-Lot Join Date: Dec 2006 Posts: 439	Cheyney chose Bush to be president. Hee, hee. I'm thinking that it could be Ed Rendell, the governor of Pennsylvania. A Clinton supporter, popular in Appalachia. Could help force McCain to spend resources in states thought to be lock for the Republicans..

06-07-2008, 11:15 AM	#15
xoxoxoBruce The future is unwritten Join Date: Oct 2002 Posts: 71,105	Griff for Vice President. He'll foil the goats on the fence. __________________ The descent of man ~ Nixon, Friedman, Reagan, Trump.

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)