Jump to content

Edwards entering the no-hope zone?


Rune

Recommended Posts

Despite his recent string of magazine covers John Edwards campaign is now the new slipping and slipping somewhat fast campaign. it doesn't suprise me one bit their's only so much people can hear for four years of how poor you were. Obama continues to stay stagnant in New Hampshire while Clinton dominates and Richardson continues his slow move upward. An interesting note is the fact that the same number of people find Obama unacceptable as do Clinton. Considering his big card entering this campaign was that he was acceptable to such a large group of people compared to Clinton.

 

On the Republican side Romney is really beginning to dominate as Rudy and Mccain continue their fall backwards while Thompson remains the same. Thompson's lack of movement in New Hampshire doesn't really mean much. He's pretty close in Iowa and if he can pull of a win there he'll have enough momentum to make up any shortcomings if their is any by the time the primary rolls around.

 

WASHINGTON (CNN) ? The Democratic and Republican presidential front-runners held their spots in a new CNN/WMUR poll of New Hampshire voters, but further back in the pack, the field has shifted on each side.

 

Among Democratic contenders, Sen. Hillary Clinton wields a solid lead over Sen. Barack Obama, with the former first lady claiming the support of 36 percent of Granite State voters. Obama trailed with 27 percent. (Full poll results [PDF])

 

But former Sen. John Edwards, the party?s vice presidential nominee in 2004, slipped to a statistical tie with New Mexico Gov. Bill Richardson in the latest poll, which was conducted between July 9 and Tuesday. Edwards had drawn 14 percent support in the previous poll, conducted in June, but came in at 9 percent in the new survey, while Richardson came in at 11 percent in both surveys. (See June?s Democatic poll)

 

And on the Republican side, Sen. John McCain slipped 8 percentage points since June (See June?s GOP poll) in the state where he upset now-President Bush during the 2000 presidential campaign. At 12 percent, McCain trails former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney, who leads the pack with 34 percent; former New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani, with 20 percent; and former Sen. Fred Thompson, who has not yet officially entered the race, with 13 percent. Thompson ran fourth in the June poll.

 

Romney gained five percentage points in the most recent poll; Giuliani dropped 2, and Thompson gained 1.

 

New Hampshire holds the nation?s first presidential primary, scheduled for Jan. 22, 2008. The poll, conducted by the University of New Hampshire, had a sampling error of 5.5 percentage points.

 

 

Only 7 percent of the 307 Republican primary voters and 10 percent of Democrats said they had settled on a candidate. And 38 percent of the Republicans polled said they could never support the Arizona senator, compared to 30 percent for Thompson, 22 percent for Giuliani and 17 percent for Romney.

 

On the Democratic side, 16 percent of the 333 voters surveyed said they would not consider voting for Clinton under any circumstances; 15 percent said the same about Obama, and 24 percent viewed Edwards as unacceptable.

 

Eight Democrats and 10 Republicans are currently in the wide-open race for the White House.

 

Among the second-tier Democratic candidates, Sen. Joseph Biden of Delaware drew 4 percent support; Rep. Dennis Kucinich of Ohio, 3 percent; and the remaining two, Connecticut Sen. Christopher Dodd and former Sen. Mike Gravel of Alaska drew less than 1 percent.

 

Among second-tier Republicans, former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee and Rep. Ron Paul of Texas were tied at 2 percent; Rep. Tom Tancredo of Colorado and former Wisconsin Gov. Tommy Thompson each had 1 percent; and Sen. Sam Brownback of Kansas and Rep. Duncan Hunter of California had less than 1 percent support

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It'll be interesting to see if Romney's early spending in New Hampshire, Iowa, South Carolina, etc. pays off.

 

I'm pretty sure he is the only one running television ads in those states so far.

 

I imagine the Thompson camp is incredibly pleased how he is gaining points despite doing little to earn those. He's probably going to hold off on his announcement until after the Des Moines debate (as there is no real upside to him being in it at this point). People will brush this off because I support him, but I think Thompson's 'wait and see' approach is going to prove brilliant.

 

Romney just started going on the offensive against Thompson too. I love it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Rune that unacceptable % of Obama vs Clinton is suprising, I agree. Good to see Richardson gaining ground, he needs some momentum. I'm not all that high on Edwards.

 

Romney I think has for the moment replaced McCain as the sort of establishment candidate for the GOP. He's not perfect, but he fills most of their needs. Giuliani will probably continue to fade.

 

Just my prediction, but I think this is about as high as Thompson will get. Once he announces & gets into debates and speeches and people see more & more of him, I don't envision him gaining much ground.

 

Hillary is really polling high, I thought it would be closer than this. Despite the $ Obama is raising, that Clinton machine is tough to beat. I still don't get why there isn't more support for some of the 2nd tier people other than the fact that the media loves a two or three-man race. Richardson and Dodd and even Biden are accomplished, capable Senators.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Rune that unacceptable % of Obama vs Clinton is suprising, I agree. Good to see Richardson gaining ground, he needs some momentum. I'm not all that high on Edwards.

 

Romney I think has for the moment replaced McCain as the sort of establishment candidate for the GOP. He's not perfect, but he fills most of their needs. Giuliani will probably continue to fade.

 

Just my prediction, but I think this is about as high as Thompson will get. Once he announces & gets into debates and speeches and people see more & more of him, I don't envision him gaining much ground.

 

Hillary is really polling high, I thought it would be closer than this. Despite the $ Obama is raising, that Clinton machine is tough to beat. I still don't get why there isn't more support for some of the 2nd tier people other than the fact that the media loves a two or three-man race. Richardson and Dodd and even Biden are accomplished, capable Senators.

So by that logic, Romney will win the nomination?

 

I don't know how one could come to the conclusion that Thompson has peaked, I think it is quite the opposite. He is more of a name then a face at this point, and is polling third (and 2nd someplaces) despite not even formally annoucning he is running (and the fundraising and exposure will easily pick up).

 

If there is a candidate who will do better when he is in a debate and giving speeches, its easily Thompson. Thompson will fare very well in a debate. Great public speaker. I don't understand how one who is polling so high despite not even being a formal candidate stands to lose ground when he is exposed more.

 

You obviously have the right to your opinion, but you are going against probably all conventional thinking in this race with those ideas.

 

Giuliani and (now) Romney wouldn't be concentrating on Thompson so much if they felt he was just a flash in the pan.

 

Anyways, I think a lot of people are getting way too far ahead of themselves in July.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I really think that repeat candidates are hurt by their past performances these days. It's one reason why John Kerry decided not to run, even though he won the 04 nomination. He was smart enough to realize that it's almost impossible to come back a second time, win the nomination, and THEN somehow win the Presidency.

 

Edwards should just focus on his charities and get out of politics.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I really think that repeat candidates are hurt by their past performances these days. It's one reason why John Kerry decided not to run, even though he won the 04 nomination. He was smart enough to realize that it's almost impossible to come back a second time, win the nomination, and THEN somehow win the Presidency.

 

Edwards should just focus on his charities and get out of politics.

And he should ask that Hugo Chavez ass kissing Danny Glover not to help in his campaign

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Night Phantom

I really think that repeat candidates are hurt by their past performances these days. It's one reason why John Kerry decided not to run, even though he won the 04 nomination. He was smart enough to realize that it's almost impossible to come back a second time, win the nomination, and THEN somehow win the Presidency.

Ronald Reagan?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I really think that repeat candidates are hurt by their past performances these days. It's one reason why John Kerry decided not to run, even though he won the 04 nomination. He was smart enough to realize that it's almost impossible to come back a second time, win the nomination, and THEN somehow win the Presidency.

Ronald Reagan?

Richard Nixon?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Richard Nixon (failed in 1960, succeeded in 1968), Grover Cleveland (succeeded in 1884, failed in 1888, succeeded in 1892), Andrew Jackson (failed in 1824, succeeded in 1828), Thomas Jefferson (failed in 1796, succeeded in 1800), and John Adams (obviously failed in 1788 and 1792, then succeeded in 1796) (but the last two were under different electoral rules). Reagan didn't win the Republican nomination in 1976, but rather Ford retained it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So by that logic, Romney will win the nomination?

I didn't say that, I only said for the moment he seems to me to be the guy with momentum.

 

I don't know how one could come to the conclusion that Thompson has peaked, I think it is quite the opposite. He is more of a name then a face at this point, and is polling third (and 2nd someplaces) despite not even formally annoucning he is running (and the fundraising and exposure will easily pick up).

 

If there is a candidate who will do better when he is in a debate and giving speeches, its easily Thompson. Thompson will fare very well in a debate. Great public speaker. I don't understand how one who is polling so high despite not even being a formal candidate stands to lose ground when he is exposed more.

 

You obviously have the right to your opinion, but you are going against probably all conventional thinking in this race with those ideas.

 

Yeah it's just my opinion, he could win the GOP nomination for all I know, and if he gets the machine behind him it's certainly a possibility.

 

But first of all I disagree that he's a "great" public speaker. Just because he doesn't fall all over himself and can recite the usual checklist of conservative talking points doesn't make him a great speaker. He's slow and he's dispassionate. I'm sure he'll speak in glittering generalities and good 'old boy lingo which will sound good for a while. Being a little older, I watched the guy when he was a senator. He's not Ronald Reagan. Any comparisons with Reagan are only going to hurt him. Reagan left hollywood for politics. He had a vision, he had ideas, he had a passion for transforming government. Thompson has gone the opposite way. He had one term as a senator and an unremarkable one at that. Since then he went on to hollywood and lobbying.

 

I don't think the exposure will help him, simple as that. I think he's polling as well as he is because of the dissatisfaction with the current choices. Although with the choices as weak as they are, maybe he'll gain ground. Who knows. Conservative Republicans reelected Bush to a second term, so I shouldn't pretend to understand them.

 

Again, just my .02, I'm no expert analyst. Could be Dennis Kucinich vs Ron Paul in the general election for all I know.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'll agree to disagree. I think he is a very good public speaker and very well suited for a public debate.

 

Not as if the GOP hopefuls are full of FDRs or something. Giuliani is only accepted in that regard because his voice is so known and people are comfortable with him. Romney is a good speaker and I've always maintained the more people see him the more it will help him, but when we get deeper in to the campaign he has a big flip flop thing he is going to have to change people's opinions on.

 

I don't know why I spend much time debating the legitimacy of GOP candidates with democrats though. :lol

 

In the last few days I've learned that all of them will slowly be going down in polls and will be looking at running their campaigns from a defecit. ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Heck I'm not even a strong Democrat. I was registered Independent for a while.

 

Had McCain won the Republican nomination over Bush in 2000 I was set to vote for him. I also would've voted for Bush Sr but wasn't quite old enough. I voted for our Republican governor.

 

At this particular time though I can't support a party that has put George W Bush in the White House twice. Just can't do it. Time to give the other side a shot.

 

Actually, the fact that my being socially liberal puts me at odds with just about every republican candidate still in 2008 is disappointing to me.

 

It's also why I'm open to hearing what Bloomberg has to say, if he's serious about running.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm with you on social issues, I hate that the GOP has become more focused on those issues then the economy, national defense, and education.

 

I wasn't taking a shot at you more or less the general views of a lot of dems on here when it comes to the GOP nominees, and to sum up all their 'views', its amazing that any even run. :lol

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Heck I'm not even a strong Democrat. I was registered Independent for a while.

 

Had McCain won the Republican nomination over Bush in 2000 I was set to vote for him. I also would've voted for Bush Sr but wasn't quite old enough. I voted for our Republican governor.

 

At this particular time though I can't support a party that has put George W Bush in the White House twice. Just can't do it. Time to give the other side a shot.

 

Actually, the fact that my being socially liberal puts me at odds with just about every republican candidate still in 2008 is disappointing to me.

 

It's also why I'm open to hearing what Bloomberg has to say, if he's serious about running.

Why does that matter? Charlie Crist is a good guy and the democratic candidate for this wonderful state of ours is a total sleezebag.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Heck I'm not even a strong Democrat. I was registered Independent for a while.

 

Had McCain won the Republican nomination over Bush in 2000 I was set to vote for him. I also would've voted for Bush Sr but wasn't quite old enough. I voted for our Republican governor.

 

At this particular time though I can't support a party that has put George W Bush in the White House twice. Just can't do it. Time to give the other side a shot.

 

Actually, the fact that my being socially liberal puts me at odds with just about every republican candidate still in 2008 is disappointing to me.

 

It's also why I'm open to hearing what Bloomberg has to say, if he's serious about running.

Why does that matter? Charlie Crist is a good guy and the democratic candidate for this wonderful state of ours is a total sleezebag.

Yeah, that statement offended all my moral fibers too..

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Heck I'm not even a strong Democrat. I was registered Independent for a while.

 

Had McCain won the Republican nomination over Bush in 2000 I was set to vote for him. I also would've voted for Bush Sr but wasn't quite old enough. I voted for our Republican governor.

Why does that matter? Charlie Crist is a good guy and the democratic candidate for this wonderful state of ours is a total sleezebag.

 

I agree. So what's your question? I was simply explaining that despite my left leanings I've voted Republican before & wouldn't be completely opposed to in the future if it were the right candidate.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Edwards leads in Iowa.

 

Forget the national polls.

 

Romney is still below McCain in the national polls but leads huge in Iowa AND NH.

 

Hillary and giuliani fall off, and Edwards or Richardson take on Romney.

 

You can't count out the guys leading in the biggest states, just because the rest of the country doesnt see it that way yet. The early states have the biggest influence. It was all Dean at this time on 03, remember?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Heck I'm not even a strong Democrat. I was registered Independent for a while.

 

Had McCain won the Republican nomination over Bush in 2000 I was set to vote for him. I also would've voted for Bush Sr but wasn't quite old enough. I voted for our Republican governor.

Why does that matter? Charlie Crist is a good guy and the democratic candidate for this wonderful state of ours is a total sleezebag.

 

I agree. So what's your question? I was simply explaining that despite my left leanings I've voted Republican before & wouldn't be completely opposed to in the future if it were the right candidate.

 

Republicans aren't exclusively right wing and democrats aren't exclusively left wing. That just bothers me a little when its bandied about like that. Why can't it just be as simple as "I voted for Crist because he is flat out the better guy and not a sleezebag."

 

:confused

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks, I think I know that all Republicans aren't right-wing & Dems aren't left-wing. The majority of them are however.

 

I wasn't saying it like "hey look how great I am, I can even vote for a Republican!" I was just following up with Fox that my thoughts on the candidates weren't based on general hate for the party or something.

 

Whatever, not worth haggling over. That was my whole point, in most cases I would rather vote the person.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

He had appeared to be slipping in Iowa but this poll proves wrong. Romney's still in a solid lead while the great Ron Paul is trailing powerhouses like Tommy Thompson, and Tom Tancredo. Also Bill Richardson continues to show his upward momentum as he's now getting close to Obama in Iowa

 

WASHINGTON (CNN) ? Democratic presidential candidate John Edwards and Republican candidate Mitt Romney both increased their leads in a new Iowa poll released Thursday evening.

 

Among Democratic contenders, former Sen. John Edwards now holds a 5-point lead, climbing up to 27 percent. Sens. Hillary Clinton, D-New York, and Barack Obama, D-Illinois, both fell 6 points. They now sit at 22 and 16 percent, respectively.

 

Edwards wasn?t the only Democrat gaining, however. New Mexico Gov. Bill Richardson gained 4 points and now sits at 11 percent.

 

Sen. Joe Biden, D-Delaware, bumped his numbers a bit to 3 percent. Rep. Dennis Kucinich and Sen. Chris Dodd are both holding steady at 2 percent. Another non-mover was Sen. Mike Gravel, who is staying put at 1 percent.

 

Sixteen percent of the Democratic respondents were undecided this time around, compared to 10 percent two months ago.

 

On the Republican side, former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney bumped his numbers up to 25 percent, and unofficial GOP candidate Fred Thompson rose to 14. Former Mayor Rudy Giuliani slips a bit, falling to 13, and Sen. John McCain, who had been the leader of the pack in May, is now seeing 10 percent.

 

Another unofficial candidate, former House speaker Newt Gingrich, holds steady at 6 percent. Former governors Mike Huckabee and Tommy Thompson both sit with 2 percent, as do Rep. Tom Tancredo and Sen. Sam Brownback. Reps. Duncan Hunter and Ron Paul both sit still at 1.

 

Twenty-two percent of Republican respondents were undecided, which is exactly the same number that said they were undecided in May.

 

The poll, conducted by KCCI-TV out of Des Moines, surveyed 600 likely voters who vote regularly in state elections. It carries a margin of error of plus or minus 4 percentage points.

 

KCCI: Candidate standings shuffle

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'll agree to disagree. I think he is a very good public speaker and very well suited for a public debate.

 

Not as if the GOP hopefuls are full of FDRs or something. Giuliani is only accepted in that regard because his voice is so known and people are comfortable with him. Romney is a good speaker and I've always maintained the more people see him the more it will help him, but when we get deeper in to the campaign he has a big flip flop thing he is going to have to change people's opinions on.

 

I don't know why I spend much time debating the legitimacy of GOP candidates with democrats though. :lol

 

In the last few days I've learned that all of them will slowly be going down in polls and will be looking at running their campaigns from a defecit. ;)

 

To the extent that democrats on the board talk about republican candidates, I think it is the political junkies in us as opposed to the democrats commenting on the other side. I agree with your point somewhat though. I used to get annoyed when republicans said democrats were fools for not nominating Lieberman in 04. It ignores core values in favor of their own subjective viewpoints.

 

But commenting on how a candidate on the other side might be percieved by those on the other side has some validitity. Guliani getting flack for his social views is a no brainer.

 

The reality is, nobody really understands what makes certain guys succeed and others fail, regardless of what party you are in.

 

The voter in us and the political observers in us have to be seperated. I am voting for Obama because I like him much more than Hillary or the others, and I think he has the shot to win it. But if Hillary runs an effective campaign, I won't deny it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.



×
×
  • Create New...