|
|
Post by Benji Duncan on Jan 4, 2008 0:38:04 GMT -5
Huckabee, Obama have huge night in Iowa
# Barack Obama wins, with Edwards 2nd and Clinton 3rd in Democratic race, CNN projects
# CNN projects Republican Mike Huckabee wins too, beating Mitt Romney into second place
# Entrance polls indicated young Dems went for Obama; Huckabee favored by religious voters
# Joe Biden and Chris Dodd withdraw from Democratic race after caucuses
|
|
|
|
Post by Gene on Jan 4, 2008 9:04:00 GMT -5
Interesting.
This is making a good run-up for what's going to happen with Michigan, which has been changed to go much earlier in this process from now on. I'm glad a "rust belt" state like Michigan has been placed to go earlier, since it gets the issues that matter to states like this talked about a little earlier in the full campaign (Ohio or Pennsylvania would have been good, too, though). What's charictaristic about Michigan, though, is that it is pretty conservative country, and it sort of falls on the line of the farm belt and the rust belt. Labor is typically a Dem chip while conservatism and farming have become more Rep domains, which can make for some interesting klunges... Tourism in Michigan's north means a lot of small businesses, and they traditionally gravitate to Rep. And lately, Michigan's demographic is getting old (it was one of the only two states last year that LOST population, which usually means less young people), so I think added all up, Michigan tips more to the Reps.
The results of Iowa, being a mid-west state, are the most influential on how Michigan is going to go, out of all the caucuses that go before it. It begs for a predition, it seems (and I can't resist!...).
If you recall in 2000, McCain won the Rep nomination in Michigan. Does that love have staying power for him in 2008? And let's not forget that Mitt Romney, the son of former Michigan governer George Romney, is in this race, which surely has an influence. Iowa right now likes Huckabee, which, as I say, will have an influence on what Michiagn likes. The Rep nomination in Michigan is going to be good!... But, forced in a corner, I'll put my chips on Romney.
For the Dems, it's less relevant in Michigan, but maybe frustrated laborers are going to get going to the polls more this year and voice how they feel. If that's so, I bet Edwards is going to gain steam, maybe even edging out Obama. But, it's possible many blacks in Detroit will end up at the polls that may have never seen the point of it before, voting for Obama, so it's no shoe-in. I don't see Clinton's message really "playing" in Michigan, or folks here perceiving that she understands Michigan people or its problems, so I'll be surprised if she lands on top here.
I'm normally not a big political watcher (and I'm not really a partisan zealot either way), but I definitely get interested in presidential elections. I think the time of transition is an opportunity and an invitation for America to change, forcing a statement as to how we're feeling and who we are, and THAT to me is interesting. The answers to the questions of "Who are we?, "Where are we now?", "Where are we going?" and such unfold quickly. It's another new chapter of the story of the grand experiment of the greatest country in the world. Hard to beat that!...
|
|
|
|
Post by Marvin the Misfit on Jan 4, 2008 12:07:26 GMT -5
Michigan is a blue state Gene. I am pretty sure that michigan will not support Hillary though. There will be a big association with granholm that I am sure she is not expecting.
The locals I talk to seem to support Huckabee big time.
It's going to be another situation like is always the situation in a michigan election where rural michigan votes one way and urban michigan votes another way.
Urban michigan is going to vote for Romney, McCain and Paul, in that order. Rural Michigan is going to vote for Huckabee, Romney and Paul, in that order. The end result for the dems will be Romney, with Paul making a big surprise second place. Paul has a lot of support here.
on the dem side, urban michigan is going to vote for Obama, Edwards, Clinton, in that order. Rural michigan is going to vote Edwards, Kucinich, Clinton. The end result will be Edwards, with Clinton pulling second.
I really expect Kucinich do to better now that Biden and Dodd are out of the race and he isn't stuck in the crowd. I think he will overtake Edwards soon as the third place runner.
This is turning into a final four betting pool, like they do in offices with college basketball.
|
|
Jenn
New Member
Posts: 23
|
Post by Jenn on Jan 7, 2008 21:55:06 GMT -5
I am so disheartened by the whole thing. Why are candidates being excluded? Doesn't it make you feel like the whole thing is rigged? Interesting video where Van Sustren even admits "at the risk of getting in trouble". Who are they going to get in trouble by? Scary when you think about it. When will America be ready for some new ideas or at least open to discussion outside the box? Almost forgot the link: www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qi_XBgzHxQs |
|
|
|
Post by Benji Duncan on Jan 8, 2008 0:45:10 GMT -5
The issue is that most americans, especially the older one's, are accustomed to living in a world in which everyone agrees with them. When you are used to everyone agreeing with you after awhile you think people have no right to disagree. We've gotten used to living in a world of conservatives and liberals somewhat (though not in northern michigan) we are not open to living in a world of belief systems beyond those two small variances.
We've been seeing this a lot lately. Pundits and opinion people getting fired for saying quoteendquote "extreme comments." Actors losing their careers for the like. If people only want to hear what they already think why don't they just talk to a mirror? It seems the only function public opinions have anymore is to reaffirm what people already believe so they will feel like they have a good grip on things. The amount of opinionated people in public keeps growing but it seems the search for diverse opinions keeps shrinking. This need to always be agreed with is just something people seem addicted to like a drug.
|
|
|
|
Post by Marvin the Misfit on Jan 10, 2008 19:31:25 GMT -5
The issue is that most americans, especially the older one's, are accustomed to living in a world in which everyone agrees with them. When you are used to everyone agreeing with you after awhile you think people have no right to disagree. We've gotten used to living in a world of conservatives and liberals somewhat (though not in northern michigan) we are not open to living in a world of belief systems beyond those two small variances. Small variances? You sound like the Darth siddius giving that speech to Anikin Skywalker in episode 3. Conservatives think only about themselves. Liberals are selfless, they only think about others. Yeah, and it's the reason people go to church.  |
|
