Hillary is going to be the nominee unless she is incapacitated in some way.

[calteacherguy]

Obama has spoiled his chances, and Edwards isn't going to catch fire if he hasn't by now.

She's at 41% nationally, and leading in Iowa.

I wish Clark would jump in, but it looks like he won't so it's going to be Hillary.

Clinton/Clark perhaps?

[sandnsea]

1. It's all tied up in Iowa

Which means that nationally, she will drop too when people realize there's an actual choice and pay attention to what everybody is saying.

[Buzz Clik]

2. Incapacitated -- perhaps being deemed "unelectable"?

[calteacherguy]

3. Apparently, most Democrats don't see her as unelectable.

Which is most unfortunate for our Party, in my view.

[Buzz Clik]

5. Yikes. Now we're both going to get in trouble.

[still_one]

6. The ONLY reason that is the case is because the republicans are even more pathetic /nt

[still_one]

4. unfortunately, that is the way it looks now. Gore isn't going to run

and as you said it doesn't look like Clark will jump in

[saltpoint]

7. Sometimes the leader the summer before ain't the leader the winter afterward.

Frontrunners after the '72 Nixon landslide would do well to review the campaign position of Senator Muskie, who, we were told early on, would almost certainly be President Muskie.

Didn't happen.

Don Segretti knows something about why it didn't happen. So do a few others.

But the polls seemed so certain...

[calteacherguy]

15. Times have changed, and Hillary is an unprecedented case.

There is no historical precedent. Hillary will be the nominee unless she falls gravely ill.

[saltpoint]

17. Politics hasn't changed much in several thousand years.

Senator Clinton is not the first woman to lead a nation. She isn't the first candidate to run in the border of an established office-holding husband. She's not even the first woman to seek the presidency in this nation.

New candidate, very old game.

http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,905715,00.html

[The_Casual_Observer]

8. An incapacitation!

[TeamJordan23]

9. How has he ruined his chances? He is leading in SC, Iowa; tied in NH according to recent polls? nm

[ProudDad]

10. You mean like actually stating

some concrete positions or ideas???

[liberalmuse]

11. Clinton/Clark I could live with.

I've kind of resigned myself that Clinton will be the nominee. What really sucks is that the alternative is even worse, so I may have to cast a vote for her. Mitt Romney will likely be the 'pub candidate which will have me running to the polls to vote for Hillary.

[Sarah Ibarruri]

12. If Clinton becomes the Dem candidate, we WILL have another GOP president. nt

[ronnykmarshall]

22. and another award for you too

[tomreedtoon]

32. Absolutely agreed. Even if she wins, she'll be a Republican.

She's taking money from the same megacorporations as the Republicans have for the last few years. She's the favored candidate of the DLC, meaning she's a DINO.

[Sarah Ibarruri]

48. I don't know that she'll be a Republican about things....

I know she was a Republican in her college years, right? However, I think she changed. Nonetheless, her husband was never very lib. He was as conservative as a human being could get and still be called a Democrat. However, I think if elected, she would try to do right by some people.

BUT my problem is not with Sen. Clinton as a person or a woman. My problem is with this country, and let me explain once again:

THIS COUNTRY IS TOO SEXIST TO ELECT A WOMAN AS HEAD OF IT.

If women are still struggling in corporations to be respected, if Sen. Clinton is still being scrutinized for her breasts, her skin, and being insulted, you know she's being treated like a woman is in this country. This country views women being a prostitute (look at the fashions), a dumbass (look at the Bible banging wifeys that ask their husband for permission to do anything), and unworthy (look how even in the corporate world women are still being paid MUCH LESS than men for the same job, all qualifications being equal).

THIS COUNTRY IS TOO SEXIST TO ELECT A WOMAN AS ITS PRESIDENT.

I sure hope I made that clear.

The same applies to Obama. This country is too frikkin RACIST to elect a black president.

In the future? Maybe.

Right now? Well, anyone who thinks so is out of their frikkin' mind or living under the influence of drugs and not in touch with what surrounds them.

[laugle]

56. With all due respect to you, I too thought Hillary

being a woman would make it hard for her to win......then came the 2006 election, and I realized that people had finally had enough of the rethugs. Even will all their cheating/schemeing they lost big time!

Hell, rethugs can't even raise money because the people know that they are going to lose big again!

2008 will finally be the year of the "woman," and I say it's about time!!

Dems will kick-ass in 2008 and you can bet one thing-the Clinton's know how to win elections!!

AND FINALLY AMERICA IS AWAKE!

[sellitman]

13. Only 8 % of Americans have decided who they are going to vote for.

How do you figure? At this early stage I wouldn't be so sure.

[LaPera]

14. Not a chance - It'll be Edwards/Clark! Maybe against Jeb/Arnold?

The Bush crime family would love to hold their fascist power with Jeb & Arnold.

So much time left to go, many things will happen, especially with the republican stiffs now running.

[MonkeyFunk]

46. Jeb/Arnold?

that'd be great.

The Bush name is anathema now, and Arnold is constitutionally ineligible to be VP.

[saltpoint]

47. Arnold is Constitutionally prohibited from holding the presidency and

Jeb can't do 08 owing to his older brother's historic failures.

I think the Republicans are stuck with the fools in their current pack.

[mzteris]

16. um - not being snarky but

that sounds a bit threatening.

Reminds me of the stuff I heard when Geroge Wallace decided to run for President.

[MannyGoldstein]

18. President Dean Might Disagree

President Dean was almost 30% ahead of Kerry a month before Iowa.

He held on to his lead to trounce Kerry in the primaries, and crush Bush in the general election. (Not.)

Seriously: stop listening to that "resistance is futile" HillShill crap. It only works if you believe it.

[Poiuyt]

24. Wasn't Joe Lieberman ahead in the polls at this point in 2003?

[MannyGoldstein]

25. At This Point, I Believe He Was n/t

[MalloyLiberal]

43. Bad analogy

Joe Lieberman was relatively unkown compared to Hillary. Everboydy knows her and either loves her or hates her, even people who live under a rock.

[Poiuyt]

54. Not a bad analogy

Lieberman was hardly an unknown. He was Gore's running mate just a few years before so he was well known by the people who pay attention to politics a year before the election. Yes, Hillary is something of a celebrity, but my point was that only political junkies are really paying attention right now.

[MalloyLiberal]

63. A lot of people two years ago

Didn't know who our Vice President was.

LOTS of people are clueless.

[dubeskin]

19. I just can't see that happening

Like others have said, it's almost too early. Give it a while longer, and you'll start to see a leader emerge. Hilary's chances ARE looking good, but it's just too early to really call.

[illinoisprogressive]

20. I beg to differ and here is why

ever since the youtube debates the discussions have been about Obama. Hillary went after him but, he turned it all on to discussing him. With his speech, the msm picked up on only one line and twisted it but, the conversation and news has been all about Obama. He has effectively turned the attention away from Hillary.
All the talking is about Obama and his positions and policies.
They aren't discussing Hillary's, but, she doesn't have any to discuss.
With the attention and the talk of policy, and issues (which Obama has effectively done as well this week) he will rise in people's eyes and they will look at him closer and not just at Hillary.

[sampsonblk]

34. Not at all, and here's why

Obama is an inspirational candidate. To all but a few of us, this actual policy stuff is boring. If Obama is going to argue this campaign based on policy details, I don't think the voters will pick him over Hillary Clinton. She's been around seemingly forever, and she knows many of these world leaders personally.

Early indication, as I predicted last week, is showing the many people agree with Obama, and they think he won the debate. But when asked which Dem they support, Clinton's numbers went up.


Incidentally, is there a prize for that hole-in-one prediction?

[laugle]

57. What a load......

Dream on........................that kind of publicity, Hillary doesn't need!

[ronnykmarshall]

21. Again ...... I award one of these

[jillan]

23. That's pretty good :)

[smalll]

26. And whoever's the nominee will win - the Repubs have got nothing this time-

Romney? Who never had the evangelicals, and who has recently lost the animal people? (The dog on the roof.) Giuliani? Too New Yorky, too Italian, too bald, Judith Nathan, Bernie Kerik, etc. etc. McCain? Tragic really, the maverick who has devolved into the grumpy old man (with unattractive skin cancer scars on his face). They got no one.

[aquart]

27. Gosh, then we needn't bother to vote.

But thank you for your concern.

[smalll]

28. The former First Lady of the United States of America;

the "junior" Senator from New York; Madame Inevitable and Inexorable; Our Destiny, Our Fate - O Fortuna, IMPERIATRIX MUNDI (the Empress of the World) --
Hillary. Rodham. Clinton.

(Booyah!)

[saltpoint]

29. You were gungho for Obama a week and a half ago on these very boards.

You're a darn fickle rascal, that's apparent.

Who's it going to be next week? Kucinich? Dodd? Gravel?

[calteacherguy]

30. No, none of those three I assure you.

I thought Obama had a chance, but he ruined it this week. We can't afford to nominate a candidate that looks as if he doesn't understand or is confused about fundamental national security issues. Obama provided plenty of ammunition to the Republicans to use against him this week...too much.

He's off the table, and that's very, very sad.

[saltpoint]

31. Senator Obama's numbers in Iowa, SC and NH all suggest that he is very much

on the table.

I think you need to pick up a newspaper once in awhile.

Obama is popular, effective, flush with cash, and surrounded by sharp minds.

I absolutely don't know what you're talking about and suspect you don't either.

[ripple]

41. Obama is still going strong

He might be 'off the table' for you, but I predict he'll be on many, many ballots.

His statements regarding Pakistan were reasonable, given the situation. I doubt that you will find a single viable candidate that will say they won't go after bin laden if they have actionable intelligence to kill or capture him- no matter where he's hiding. I recognize that Pakistan's government is vulnerable to collapse, but I also think Bush has coddled Musharraf for far too long. Obama is right to make the substantial amounts of money we give Pakistan contingent upon their cooperation in looking out for American interests.

Obama is not a hawk by any stretch of the imagination, but he does recognize that we can't simply stand back and allow Pakistan to provide refuge to the same people we are fighting in Afghanistan. He's not talking about toppling the Pakistan government and occupying the country- instead, I think it's safe to assume that he's talking about targeted Special Operations maneuvers designed to take out specific enemies, with the least amount of impact on the civilian population in Pakistan.

Obama correctly stated in the CNN debate that one of the biggest reasons that anti-American sentiment is so high in Pakistan right now is our occupation of Iraq. It's going to take decades to win the favor of the Pakistani people. Meanwhile, we keep giving Pakistan enormous sums of money, while Musharraf's government looks the other way as the Taliban and al Qaeda continue to grow stronger and more organized in his country by recruiting, training, organizing, and then crossing back over into Afghanistan, putting our troops in the middle of a never-ending game of whack-a-mole. Allowing that to continue is simply unacceptable.

[Hippo_Tron]

45. The only problem with Obama's statements this week is that he can't control the media

And he probably needs to hire some better consultants to help him do that. Obama wants to speak his mind, but he's learning that when you speak your mind instead of in newspeak, the media doesn't convey your message in the way that you want them to.

[calteacherguy]

55. Yes, that is the same problem Clark had early on when he ran as well.

Still, I'm concerned that should he hypothetically become the nominee, these statements may be used by the Republicans to destroy our chances.

Convince me I'm wrong.

[Hippo_Tron]

66. This is 2008, not 2004

The GOP has lost a lot of credibility on national security and a lot of popularity in general. It is true that any Democrat will have to prove that they have the ability to be commander-in-chief. But one week of misconstrued statements isn't going to do the damage that it would have done four years ago.

[laugle]

58. Hi OC! No it seems that many people here

are re-thinking BO in light of his recent comments on Pakistan, some will disagree, but I think it was a big scary blunder!

I can't even think, in recent memory of a presidential candidate talking of military action on one of our so-called allies.

But I don't want to re-hash the whole thing again, suffice to say, I am noticing a change here at DU!

Time will tell............

[saltpoint]

64. Hi, laugle. The polls are in wild fluctuation right now.

Richardson is rising. Biden is doing much better. Romney is well-positioned in Iowa. Thompson polls well but seems to be delayed or unsure. McCain's cooked.

And so forth.

After Labor Day, it gets more serious. I'm going to tune in to see how things are then. It seems likely that Tommy Thompson will be out of the race soon. Which is fine with me. He's a complete moron.

Good to see you on DU.

[laugle]

68. I agree, McCain is cooked! I'm now convinced he has been

invaded by the "POD PEOPLE!!" Remember the movie "The Invasion of the Body Snatchers," either that or dimentia is setting in......LOL

[saltpoint]

33. If anyone is interested, here are the percentage breakdowns for

results in the New Hampshire primaries for the last several decades:

http://www.primarynewhampshire.com/new-hampshire-primary-past-results.php

[draft_mario_cuomo]

35. Thanks for sharing. That was interesting--especially this one for a Republican primary

1960 - Richard M. Nixon* (89.3%) Nelson Rockefeller (3.8%) Paul C. Fisher (3.3%) John F. Kennedy (3.0%)

:wtf:

[saltpoint]

36. Yeah, that Kennedy fellow... he's out of it for sure. He's a loser!

[Lindsey]

39. Well, I guess this as a good a place as any to keep the Republican

talking points comin'. The plan is for Hillary to win the primaries so people who wouldn't otherwise vote will then register and vote - against her. There are many people whose strong hatred for her will mobilze them enmasse. We could be slaughtered. And we have the media telling us constantly that she's the "front-runner." And then we have people here saying it. And then people say things like they want to send their money to who has the best shot and since Hillary's the top runner....


And to the poster who said basically The Dems. will definitely win....where ya been for 6 1/2 years? black is now white, left if right, up is down, and in is out. There is nothing Karl Rove won't do...NOTHING. His #1 priority right now is to see that a Republican gets in. He's so cruel and cunning that he'll think of things that normal people don't think of....that's why he's so hard to figure out. He's truly a psychopath and few people can think that way so how can one figure out what he's going to do.

[saltpoint]

40. The percentages from New Hampshire across several elections can

serve as indicators and gauges of the uncertainty of U.S. politics. Hart upended Mondale. Gore turned back Bradley's challenge. McCain trounced Bush. Pat Buchanan slipped by Bob Dole.

There's surprises all over the place.

And much delight.

[fujiyama]

37. I think you're correct

She's a smart politician and she's run a good campaign...

But a lot of people outside the part absolutely despise her. She's one of the few politicians, along with Bush actually, that people just casually rip on.

[AtomicKitten]

38. ah, okay

[laugle]

59. OHHH....AK

I'm sure glad you took down the "bros & Hoes," but don't you know this one is a badddddd omen, the spirits come through that, that's a no/no. Remember the Exorcist!

While your at it, can you find an exorcist to exorcise the demon in the WH! LOL

[AtomicKitten]

60. they will have to throw holy water on the grounds of the White House

and use about 100,000 gallons of bleach to exorcise the funk on 1/20/09.

[laugle]

61. You are having fun today, aren't you?

You mischeivious little devil!!!

[AtomicKitten]

62. I'm chomping at the bit to get on with the ass-kicking the GOP has coming.

[snowbear]

42. CalTeacher, did you just move to the U.S. in the past 5 years?

Because evidently you know diddly-squat.

[Hippo_Tron]

44. I agree, lets call it 6 months in advance and just save people the trouble of voting

Edwards has plenty of time to catch fire and we haven't really waited long enough to see the effects of Obama's recent decision to try and break away from Hillary on foreign policy. Just because the mainstream media punditry think she's inevitably doesn't mean that she is.

[elizm]

49. You are becoming suspect...

I'm not buying that you didn't know Obama was now on top in the latest Iowa poll. So what is with this flame bait?

[tammywammy]

50. It's a long time between now and when the primaries start

Anything can happen. I don't think Obama's "spoiled his chances." But just the same I don't think Hillary has it in the bag. If Obama and Hillary keep going at each other like they have, we may get Edwards at the nominee. Or who knows someone else may decide to jump in and win it.

It's too early to be saying who's going to be the nominee (though I know most all of us on DU have our favorites).

[Larkspur]

51. If she's the nominee, guess I won't be voting Dem for Prez for the first time in my life

[laugle]

69. Yeah that's great, then we can get another RW Judge on the Supreme Court,

and ruin this country for decades!!

You may want to re-think that!!

[cd3dem]

70. that will teach em

start memorizing your "Ten Commandments"

[gulliver]

52. Obama still has time to recover. The "Iowegians" and netroots...

... are different sets of people. Obama's behavior shortly after the YouTube debate only reflects negatively on him if you know about it. The netroots were mortified a bit (What happened to St. Barack?), but I doubt it made the airwaves in IA. It's like Bush calling Clymer an a**hole on the open mike or giggling when he talks about someone dying--disconcerting, but too subtle to register with most people.

Obama is making some lightweight moves, but he can recover. It seems like he doesn't have good advice or he makes things up on the fly. That's really amateur-hour IMO. Bill Clinton can improvise. Most other mortals have to do their homework.

Hillary will beat Obama if he doesn't get serious, and maybe she should. Hillary is reliable and predictable. If she needs advice, she gets it from Bill. If we want to know what her administration would be like, we just look at Bill's.

If Obama leads going into Iowa, we will see them do what they did with Dean and Kerry: leave the fling in the lurch and walk down the aisle with the "safe" choice. This time it might actually be the right choice.

I still hope Clark gets in.

[Grandrose]

53. Yeah...like President Dean!

Oophs, there it is...don't count your chickens until they hatch! You get the picture? It ain't over...until it's over!

Okay, okay enough with silly cliches, I just could not resist!:rofl:

[Nutmegger]

65. That's some crystal ball you have there. [n\t]

[ima_sinnic]

67. oh, gee, yeah, the primaries are OVER!

well, if your prediction is accurate, the Dems have lost at least this voter.
I support Kucinich as a way to support his platform, but if Shillary is the candidate, I will be writing in Al Gore.

[woo me with science]

71. Oh my! And which candidate do you see doing the incapacitating?