Member of the reality-based community of progressive (not anonymous) Massachusetts blogs
As I had mentioned in a post last week, the Presidential primaries have not yet created much excitement or interest in Lowell.
But yesterday, New Year’s Day, I received a canvas call from the Hilary Clinton campaign offices in New Hampshire. I agree with Lynne’s comments. I also “don’t mind live callers or door knockers, after all that should be the heart of democracy (volunteers hitting the ground and/or phones to talk to people about their candidate).” Since I canvas for candidates, I think the polite thing to do is to listen. So I gladly spoke to the caller who was asking me to support Clinton’s candidacy.
Since I really am undecided, I could not tell who I will get my vote on February 5th. However, I think I should have told her who will NOT get my vote. The caller was reading from a script and pleasant enough; but I was not in the mood to get into a discussion about Clinton.
I was surprised to receive that call prior to the New Hampshire primaries; I would think that the campaign for now would be concentrating on the Granite State. But upon further reflection, either the Clinton campaign is looking for volunteers; that is why they are calling super voters who live near the New Hampshire border or they are so confident about New Hampshire that they have moved on to Massachusetts. My instincts tell me it is the former.
According to an AP story on the Globe’s website, “New polls show both races [in Iowa] competitive, the outcomes extraordinarily unpredictable.” In spite of the confusing and “undemocratic” aspects of the Iowa Caucus sytem (read Christopher Hitchens and Jeff Greenfield in today’s Slate), I hope this this unpredictable competitiveness will carry on to New Hampshire, then to Super Duper Tuesday and then on to the National Conventions.
[powered by WordPress.]
43 queries. 0.746 seconds
January 3rd, 2008 at 10:51 am
Republican Predictions:
1. Mitt Romney
2. Mike Huckabee
3. Fred Thompson
Democratic Predictions:
1. Hillary Clinton
2. John Edwards
3. Barack Obama
This one is too close to be really sire, however. But I do believe that Barack will NOT win Iowa, his support, although enthusiatic, are mostly members of the younger generation that hostorically don’t show up at voting time. Im hoping that Mitt is able to pull it off. I think the biggest suprise is that Thompson makes third place for the Republicans and pretty much shuts McCain up for about a day or two.
Although he doesn’t need a victory tonight, if Mitt wins, it will be a tremendous boost for his campaign and will essentially end Huckabee’s. (And that is a good thing!)
January 3rd, 2008 at 12:03 pm
Is this predictions for just Iowa?
Then it’s probable, in my opinion, that Clinton will come in second or even third. I don’t know how you get that she’d be first? Obama and Edwards have some amazing ground games. Clinton has the best one that money can buy, but it’s not deep. Plus undecideds are VERY unlikely to break FOR her, she’s a known quantity and people know whether or not they like her already. That could really benefit Edwards.
There’s a small chance that Edwards is going to surprise everyone.
On the Repub side, it’s between Huckabee and Romney. I suspect Huckabee will squeak it out, as he’s the more legitimate “Evangelical” conservative. Romney’s just a pretender who flipflops, they hate him. Romney’s also lost the “establishment” - they’ve figured out he’s abhorrent to the religious South conservative, and that he’s also a very shoddy candidate to boot (my god, how many implosions can one have in one month??).
I want Huckabee to win and get the nomination. He’s a guy who as far as I can tell will NOT moderate his stance in the general election. Therefore he’s unelectable, and it will be great fun to see him run his party into the ground.
January 3rd, 2008 at 12:38 pm
“run his party into the ground.”
Somebody beat him to it…
January 3rd, 2008 at 12:46 pm
“…it will be great fun to see him (Huckabee) run his party into the ground.”
If it is not already underground, we have the Democratic establishment to blame. This is an election which is the Democrats to lose, and if they do, it is time for a 3rd party that will represent real change.
January 3rd, 2008 at 1:20 pm
I’m tired of hearing that the Iowa caucus rules are arcane and complicated. If I understand them right, it’s basically a simplified instant runoff. You vote your conscience (let’s say it’s Kucinich), and if your candidate doesn’t get 15%, you switch your vote to your second choice (probably not Clinton).
Cambridge uses this for city elections (on the ballot you rank the candidates) and it works pretty well.
I’m hoping Edwards picks up a lot of those #2 votes. He knows we’re in a dogfight to save the middle class and that to compromise with HMO means they approve your liver transplant only after you’re dead.
January 3rd, 2008 at 4:45 pm
Yes, Lynne, those are predictions for Iowa. Like you say, its a very close race, and I wouldn’t be suprised at all if Edwards won, or Barack for that matter. Im still betting on Hillary simply vecause she’s a Clinton, and the Clintons have always been sneaky. It should be a close one.
January 3rd, 2008 at 6:26 pm
UPDATE: Ive been hearing reports on the news lately that Chriss Dodd, Joe Biden, Dennis Kucinich, and Bill Richardson have all told thier supporters to support Obama should they have to switch votes. Anyone that understands how the caucus works knows that this is could be extremely important. If true, and if the supporters actually do that, which nobody really knows, its disasterous news for Clinton.
January 3rd, 2008 at 7:19 pm
I think Huckabee’s baggage is fatal in a general, which is why I was hoping it wouldn’t come out quite so early. It feels like McCain has become the establisment heir apparent only because the other choices didn’t pan out so well. Rudy is loony and will be easily framed as such in a general campaign. Although his GOP opponents are probably not willing to frame him in that way in the primary because most of the things that Rudy is loony about are things the GOP has been promoting or apologizing for for years now. Even so, the establishment in the GOP probably recognized this just in time to give McCain his recent ’surge’. Willard has his own problems, but you probably could make a reasonable argument that although his chameleon skin and record are more of a liability (even among the base) than McCain’s not as obvious sell-out history over the last eight years, his youth and demeanor may be more desirable to the GOP than McCain’s age and pallor of being ‘yesterday’s news’.
January 3rd, 2008 at 8:30 pm
Robby: that’s been debunked. Dodd specifically came out and said he doesn’t endorse any secondary candidate - his supporters are his supporters. Richardson has denied publicly several times today that it’s just a rumor. Kucinich so far as I know is the ONLY candidate to encourage supporters to pick Obama if they can’t caucus for him.