Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
The winner in Iowa has historically not been a predictor of the nominee from either party,
As for the winners and losers. The huge turnout of young voters helped Obama and hurt Clinton. Mr. Obama however has thus far proven to be very thin on substance, and high on rhetoric and style. He will need much more then this in the coming primaries. His rather mediocre record in the US Senate, and very uninspiring record in the Illinois legislature are likely now to come under scrutiny. He has no real solutions for anything, including health care.
Mrs Clinton has to overcome the desire for change, her somewhat arrogant air of 'inevitability' and needs to engage Obama and Edwards in a more aggressive way without become harsh or shrill.
Mr. Edwards will have a tougher time in New Hampshire, with has less money then Clinton or Obama. His populist message is to me the most vigorous of all the candidates.
I have nothing against Mr. Huckabee- but on many issues he seems uninformed- and many of his views seem rather eccentric.
I am not here to be critical of his religious views- but the scientific evidence of evolution is overwhelming- his refusal to accept ideas from the late 19th century is troubling.
Mr. Romney has shown that money and arrogance do not mean votes- at least in Iowa.
John Mc Cain may do much better in New Hampshire. Rudy is holding out to the 'big states'
The winner in Iowa has historically not been a predictor of the nominee from either party,
As for the winners and losers. The huge turnout of young voters helped Obama and hurt Clinton. Mr. Obama however has thus far proven to be very thin on substance, and high on rhetoric and style. He will need much more then this in the coming primaries. His rather mediocre record in the US Senate, and very uninspiring record in the Illinois legislature are likely now to come under scrutiny. He has no real solutions for anything, including health care.
Mrs Clinton has to overcome the desire for change, her somewhat arrogant air of 'inevitability' and needs to engage Obama and Edwards in a more aggressive way without become harsh or shrill.
Mr. Edwards will have a tougher time in New Hampshire, with has less money then Clinton or Obama. His populist message is to me the most vigorous of all the candidates.
I have nothing against Mr. Huckabee- but on many issues he seems uninformed- and many of his views seem rather eccentric.
I am not here to be critical of his religious views- but the scientific evidence of evolution is overwhelming- his refusal to accept ideas from the late 19th century is troubling.
Mr. Romney has shown that money and arrogance do not mean votes- at least in Iowa.
John Mc Cain may do much better in New Hampshire. Rudy is holding out to the 'big states'
All in all an interesting beauty contest for all-
I don't think Obama will get the Bible reading christian vote.
As much as I like Obama personally, Al Gore will have to enter the race to save the Democrats if Hillary cant regain a commanding delegate lead after the results of February 5th. Unfortunately, Obama has no chance to win the general election, there are still too many racists, rednecks, and yahoos in this country. Out of " half-north, half-south states" like Missouri, Illinois, Ohio, Virginia, etc. Obama would have to win at least a couple of them. Do you reallly feel he could do that?
As much as I like Obama personally, Al Gore will have to enter the race to save the Democrats if Hillary cant regain a commanding delegate lead after the results of February 5th. Unfortunately, Obama has no chance to win the general election, there are still too many racists, rednecks, and yahoos in this country. Out of " half-north, half-south states" like Missouri, Illinois, Ohio, Virginia, etc. Obama would have to win at least a couple of them. Do you reallly feel he could do that?
In one word. Yes.
Colin Powell had a damn good chance of capturing the majority White vote (and a few Black voters as well) back in 2004 had he run instead of the man sitting in the White House presently.
Let me put it this way: I have Redneck leanings and I would have voted for Colin in a heartbeat.
The under 30 crowd showed up in droves and he got all their votes. He got most independent votes as well. I think he will do well with minorities. If those trends continue there is no reason that could not trump the "redneck" factor.
Especially if the Republicans offer up Huckabee as the alternative.
The under 30 crowd showed up in droves and he got all their votes. He got most independent votes as well. I think he will do well with minorities. If those trends continue there is no reason that could not trump the "redneck" factor.
Especially if the Republicans offer up Huckabee as the alternative.
I believe I know what email you speak of. Trinity United Church of Christ (http://www.tucc.org/black_value_system.html - broken link) is the link. I'd say it would ruin his chances in the Carolinas for sure. But then again his skin color probably already ruined it for him anyways. I'd argue in more progressive states, it may actually improve his chances.
I didn't read the whole thing, but that website seems to be about color. The e-mail I received had nothing to do with color.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.