Replies

I do not believe that voters will reject Bush. Most independents will say,"Do I vote for someone that I know what they are going to do (Bush) or someone that is unpredictable (Dean)? Let me also say that Dean if elected will have a real rough time getting anything past Congress.

Something odd happened to me tonight. I live in Iowa, the first major battleground in the primary season. I'm a registered Republican. So tonight I got a phone call from an automated system, from some company I never heard of. It starts out, "Hello, Registered Republican. We would like to ask you a few questions." They then asked questions about abortion, gun control and school vouchers -- was I for or against each, and how important were my views on each issue in deciding how to vote.

My question is, who is the client for this poll? There is absolutely no reason for Dubya to be polling Iowa a year before the general election. Could it be someone thinking about challenging him from the right? Seems unlikely, despite the occasional frothing. So I'm left with the conclusion that one of the Dems is considering trying to entice Republicans to attend the Democratic caucus and support him. But which one?

Well, Lieberman, Clark and Kerry have all pulled out of Iowa, iirc. There is no way Moseley-Braun, Kucinich or Sharpton would be crazy enough to think that they could ever attract significant GOP support. Same for Dean. Edwards campaign is on life support. That leaves Dick Gephardt.

Does any of this make sense to anyone? Could Gephardt be considering trying to reinvent himself by moving a little to the right on social issues in hopes of attracting Republicans who don't have any pressing need to attend their own caucuses? Or is there something else I'm not thinking of?

It will be a brokered convention. The Democrats changed their nomination rules this year to get rid of winner-take-all primaries. All pledged delegates will be apportioned by congressional district - any contender receiving at least 15% of the vote in a given CD will secure an accordant proportion of the delegates.

In light of the 'superdelegates', the frontrunner will need to take at least 61% of the pledged delegates in order to win the nomination outright. I doubt it'll happen with this nine person field so evenly dividing the party along regional & demographic lines. So, for all we know, the D nominee next year will be Hillary Clinton or Al Gore because I think there's an excellent chance for a brokered convention.

I actually believe that Howard DEAN is the Democrats' best hope for beating Bush (with the possible exception of Hillary!, who isn't running [this is unquestionable truth, subject to the "it depends upon the definition of is" standard of truth, and is erased from history should it prove embarrassing to Clinton]).

Dean was a governor, as was every president to win the office by defeating an incumbent president. The sole exception, Benjamin Harrison, grandson of ex-president William Henry Harrison, lost the popular vote in 1888 but won the electoral college. Dean also hasn't proven inept at exciting people, even if it's just his left-wing base. And unlike Davis, his record as governor isn't particularly bad. His foreign policy experience resembles Bush's before his inarguration. He even embraces pre-emptive unilateralism--at least in the politics of personal destruction.

Having said that, I don't think Dean will win. But he's MUCH stronger than most conservatives will admit. He'll perform far better than McGovern-Mondale. He may run a campaign as solid as Gore-Lieberman. I'd give him an shot at victory.

Meanwhile, it isn't yet certain who will be the Republican nominee. He faces a tough primary contest that may be too divisive for him to survive the general election. This is now a FOURTEEN-way race. Here are the challengers, most of whom have ideologies dramatically different from the President's:

Albertha Moultrie Brinson (R-New York)
Edie Bukewihge (R-California)
F. Dean Christensen (R-Arizona)
Carten Cordell (R-Alabama)
Thomas S. Fabish (R-California)
Lowell "Jack" Fellure (R-West Virginia)
Hoover Mark Gee (R-California)
Michael Idrogo (R-Texas)
Mildred "Millie" Howard (R-Ohio)
Derrick C. Johnson (R-Oregon)
Louis J. Rapuano Jr. (R-Connecitcut)
Keith Slinker (R-Pennsylvania)
William "Bill" Wyatt (R-California)

I have just joined freerepublic, and I hope that here is a good place to post this query: are all members here supporters of Bush? It seems to me that from all perspectives, from darkest liberal to lightest conservative,
he is a terrible president. He has fought two wars without
achieving his desired objective in either one. And he lies
constantly! He is for "the front line", but has cut funds
for firemen and police. He "supports our troops" but has
cut stuff for veterans. He "defends the environment", but
he lets us drink arsenic and breath mercury. The list goes
on and on.

If you like him, tell us why!

Best wishes,

Alan17b

The best description I heard of these candidates was by Senator Zell Miller (D - GA)...

"Nine birds on a wire...when one takes off one way, the others all follow"

Sure republican win: Carol Mosely Braun

Dem's strongest candidate: Wesley Clark