New Hampshire thread

In a probably vain effort to maintain order around here, I will henceforth be running separate threads for discussion of the US presidential campaign. Here’s the first.

Author: William Bowe

William Bowe is a Perth-based election analyst and occasional teacher of political science. His blog, The Poll Bludger, has existed in one form or another since 2004, and is one of the most heavily trafficked websites on Australian politics.

928 comments on “New Hampshire thread”

Comments Page 19 of 19
1 18 19
  1. 899
    Chris Curtis – honestly i cannot see John Edwards having anything more than a couple hundred delegates, he’s not going to be a king maker IMHO.
    Hillary has the benefit of the super-delegates compared to Obama but we’ll know who’s got the best shot after Feb 5 and after Feb 5 i think we should all take a punt.

    IMHO if Giuliani does not win Florida he’ll be hard pressed to get the nomination against McCain but if he wins and with the ‘Mo’ he’ll get into Super Tuesday he should end up with the nomination in the end. So IMHO alot rests on Florida and then Super Tuesday. It will either be Giuliani or McCain as i dont see Romney as a viable candidate.

  2. I think Edwards will flame out, basically he will not be around beyonf 5th February. It seems from RealClearPolitics that January polls favor Hilary strongly in big states like NJ and Florida. Also the Dem nominee needs about 2000 delegates to win, whilst states have delegates there are some 500 super delegates (who are basically party big wigs , representatives and senators), the purpose of this group is to prevent a brokered convention, ie they will give a winning majority to whoever is strongest – hence Edwards counts for zip.

  3. scotty youre spot on. how many americans (and aussies) have bought the crap about freedom etc used by bush, howard and others to justify their wars. How about the media start challenging this stuff???

  4. Glen Giuliani has too much negative baggage I don’t think he is electable it would be fantastic if the republican’s put him up but I don’t think they are that stupid.
    He used up years ago any 9/11 boost as did any of the pathetic bunch that tried to exploit the 9/11 misery for political gain.

    It will be interesting to see how the Obama / Clinton abuse goes with players and whether or not Edwards does well with it. I’d be happy to speculate that most Hillary haters already hate her, and those smart enough to see through the vile wont be turned off by the current stupid spats.

    My feeling is Obama will start to fall short and will end up Hillary’s VP running mate. Race and sex rolled into a ticket. Chris could be right, he is about most things, but I would be surprised to see a Clinton / Edwards ticket, but it is a possibility.

  5. I’m going to agree with Glen and ESJ and that’s gotta be a first. I think Hillary will get the Dem nomination (although I hope Obama will). I think it will come down to Florida for the Repugs and McCain will win unless Giuliani wins Florida enough to get the momentum.
    I think a Clinton v McCain battle would go down to the wire with McCain winning.

  6. 904
    Jasmine – you too have been sucked in by the left wing rhetoric on Giuliani, the man was the Mayor of New York City which suffered the brunt of the September 11 attacks and he held the City together and what that experience counts for nothing and that challenging time should never be used to show the quality and character of a politician? Cmon by your logic Churchill couldnt have used his leadership skills during the Blitz to show people of his fortitude because he’d be using a tragedy get serious.

    Giuliani is the only Republican with a credible tax plan that actually will cut taxes, McCain voted against tax cuts time and time again which severely damages his credibility as a fiscal conservative. McCain is also not campaigning in Florida as he’s in Michigan and South Carolina which leaves Rudy with the best shot for taking the States delegates on the 29th. I believe he will win there considering the money and effort he’s put into the State, and if he does win he’ll be hard to stop especially considering Giuliani leads by a fair margin the polls in California, New York, New Jersey ect if he sweeps 5Feb the nomination will be a formality in Rudy’s favour but if he doesnt win Florida it will be tough for him IMHO.

    McCain would be odds on favourite for the Presidency had he be 10 years younger but 71 is far too old to become and executive head of state. Also he has limited executive experience being a Senator which is why those candidates with executive experience generally do well in Presidential elections like Governors Bush, Clinton, Reagan, Carter ect.

    Florida will be the key to the Republican nomination a Rudy win brings him back in play, a loss and he’d be on the verge on pulling out after Feb5. I believe if Rudy wins Florida he’ll be favourite for the nomination over McCain.

    Obama would be very lucky to win the nomination, ive always thought it would be a Clinton/Giuliani election or possibly a Clinton/McCain election.
    Also i doubt Obama would want to be VP to Clinton who would with Bill around!

    But in Australian politics i dont think the two Queensland Tory parties should merge unless its done federally and IMHO the sooner the Nats and the Libs merge Federally the better Opposition we’ll be. There is quite frankly no need for 2 conservative political parties, Britain, New Zealand, Japan, Canada, France, America all have 1 major conservative party. The sooner they form a new Conservative Party the better IMHO i hope Nelson and Truss have the balls to do it.

  7. I think Glen it is you that is sucked in by right wing nutjobs. Giuliani didn’t hold the City together he was at baseball games while firefighters and other real workers held the City together. Same firefighters that will campaign against him.

    A credible tax plan to CUT TAXES … oh that will be good for the economy …

    I don’t know the VP has lots of free time to prepare for campaign’s future, it might be a very smart place to hide. But maybe he wouldn’t want that as you suggest.

  8. Diogenes @ 898 – I’ve read several reports that McCain is not well regarded by the American POW organizations or many Vietnam veterans.

    The one thing I’ve learnt the hard way is that those who should empathise most with your situation are often the ones most willing to knife you in the back. Witness how ready some of John Kerry’s fellow swift boaters were to trash his record in 2004 to support a guy who took the easy way out.

  9. Just a quick point on the reasons for the Iraq war – one thing that has always troubled me is the one-word ipso facto reasoning put up by the left, e.g. ‘oil’ or ‘Halliburton’. It’s not that these factors are unimportant, but I think that concentrating on them to the exclusion of the bigger picture misses the point somewhat.

    In that context, I highly recommend The Shock Doctrine by Naomi Klein. Not only is it a great book in itself, it nailed the doubts I had always held about the justification of the invasion by clarifying the wider context – that of the bigger neoconservative project, which (Klein asserts, and I agree) is actually centered on the basic premise of transferring as much public money, as covertly as possible, into a select few private hands.

    On Lockerbie:

    “Giuliani has too much negative baggage I don’t think he is electable it would be fantastic if the republican’s put him up but I don’t think they are that stupid.”

    I do, but more to the point, they might be that desperate…

  10. 892

    great article, thanks for the link. This should be etched on everyone’s consciousness:

    Saddam Hussein did not “kill and terrorize the Iraqi people in an effort to foment sectarian division” as Bush claimed. He killed and terrorized people to maintain a homogeneous secular regime in spite of ethnic and religious differences. The Baath Party began as an opposition socialist party, and initially attracted large numbers of Shiite supporters. Once the Baathists came to power in 1963, Shiites filled posts at all levels of government roughly in proportion with their numbers in the population. For 27 years between 1963 and 1990, there was always a majority of Shiites on the Revolutionary Command Council, the executive cabinet of the Baathist regime.

    The “Shiite rebellion” in the south that followed the Gulf War led to purges of Shiites from government ministries and the military. The surviving leaders of the rebellion now believe that their biggest mistake was their failure to include Sunnis and other parts of the country in their revolt, which they always viewed as a popular uprising against a repressive government, not as a sectarian conflict.

    Islamist Shiites were not the first choice of U.S. policymakers to lead a U.S.-appointed Iraqi government. In 1998, 40 Americans who shaped what later became U.S. policy signed a letter to President Clinton asking the U.S. government to “recognize a provisional government of Iraq based on the principles and leaders of the Iraqi National Congress,” the exile group led by Ahmad Chalabi. The signatories included Rumsfeld, Wolfowitz, Carlucci, Perle, Armitage, Feith, Abrams, Bolton and Khalilzad.

    By June 2004, Chalabi had become an embarrassment to his American supporters, so Iyad Allawi, the leader of another exile group called the Iraqi National Accord, was installed as interim prime minister over the objections of U.N. representative Lakhdar Brahimi who was supposed to be in charge of the selection process. As Brahimi put it, “Bremer is the dictator of Iraq. He has the money. He has the signature. . . . I will not say who was my first choice, and who was not my first choice . . . I will remind you that the Americans are governing this country.” The U.S. viewed Allawi as a strongman who could impose order and Iraqis soon knew him as “Saddam without the mustache.”

  11. whilst states have delegates there are some 500 super delegates (who are basically party big wigs , representatives and senators), the purpose of this group is to prevent a brokered convention, ie they will give a winning majority to whoever is strongest – hence Edwards counts for zip.

    Actually it’s closer to 800 (including unpledged addons)!

    Or in other words, if the PLEOs act strongly in this fashion, Edwards needs to get something like 800 plus the difference between Clinton and Obama to be a player.

    However the closer it is between Clinton and Obama, the more likely it is that PLEOs will remain divided between these two, which reduces Edwards’ target.

    But yes, by far the most likely scenario is a runaway lead established on 5th, or slightly after.

  12. Obama seems to inexperienced to be the President

    Pathological Logic looks for acomplex reason for the iraq invasion.
    The US are not that subtle !

    What Bush said he meant .
    the US believed Iraq had WMD’s despite UN inspectors saying he didn’t

    What has NEVER been explained is the source of the false intel and that 3 Countries benefited from the invasion (Kuwait , Israel & Saidi Arabia)

  13. Megan, what’s coming more and more into focus for me is the way the US has steadfastly denied its intentions, muddied the waters, and then when it all looked like they’d lose control, swapped camels before the finish line.

    Let me explain: overthrowing Saddam was always a high risk strategy, just ask Brent Scowcroft, who advised Bush Snr not to ‘go to Baghdad’ or else he’d eventually have to hold an election, and hey, they’d probably not like the outcome.

    Sound advice. The majority Shia were odds on going to align with Iran, despite the near ten year war in the 80’s, just to stick it up the Ba’athists, and regain their religious identity against the infidel invaders.

    So far, all very predictable, and that’s exactly what happened.

    But not to be snookered by Iran, what did the Yanks do next?

    Ah, that’s the beauty of it, the simple, inexorable logic of the enemy of my enemy: they courted, bribed and promised the Sunni tribes anything short of exterminating the Shia government, lots of support to get rid of their fresh irritant, namely the ragtag ruffians who claimed to be noble Muslim, devotees of bin Laden.

    Once the Sunni figured out they’d get trashed by the Shia if the US left, and that they could not win the insurgency with fundamentalist nutters extorting them to be ‘holier than thou’, they simply took the US offer of cash and arms, and bingo!!! The surge is a pure success!

    Praise GW Bush, the mastemind of Mesopotamia.

    And to think, adults, literate people, actually believe this ‘surge’ has solved the problem stuff?

    Just today, in the NY Times no less, that cretinous and intellectually dishonest neocon, Bill Kristol, is waving the ‘surge’ around like it’s pure unadulterated victory, and taunting Democrats with it.

    Nothing makes me puke like Bill Kristol hiding behind the lamentable failure of Iraq as if his entire intellectual existance depended on it (and it does, by the way), painting lipstick on this pig, and kissing it for all he’s worth.

    Dis-gus-ting! He knows no shame, and deserves no excuses.

  14. 914

    Megan! The Fillipino Monkey!

    OMG, spare me…it hurts when I laugh!

    How friggin’ desperate were they to put that tripe together?

    Monty Python could not, repeat, could not, write a more incredible script!

  15. And not to make too fine apoint of it, Hillary supported the invasion of Iraq.
    Full stop. End of sentence.
    That is why I hope Obama wins, experienced or not, because she is complicit in this disgraceful episode of modern history, and does not deserve to become the POTUS.
    I want to see someone with integrity for a change.

  16. 914 Megan.
    Does anyone remember when Reagan was “goofin’ around” and didn’t realise the mike was on when he ordered a nuclear attack?
    How many F@#$ing idiots can get elected as US President?
    Intelligence clearly isn’t a prerequisite.

  17. 913

    That Palast article is chilling, the sheer cynicism and arrogance of the neocon madness that created this nightmare just takes my breath away.

    WMD? Democracy?

    Only fools, dribbling cretins, the terminally dysfunctional, or the most deviously vicious could ever profess these ‘noble’ reasons for what was unleashed in Iraq.

  18. jen, the funny thing, and it’s really hysterical, is that the devout Republicans actually believe that Ronny actually defeated the USSR!

    Yep, like Joshua, you know, it’s biblical, ‘tear down this wall’, and presto, the wall came down!

    Nobody dares remind the poor deluded nutters that sane economists from the 60’s said it was unsustainable, and that the USSR would eventually implode.

    But hey, why not spend a few trillions of dollars defeating a country where they lined up to buy the only pair of shoes in the store?

    Their gullibility knows no bounds, just look at the current POTUS! But it seems they do eventually ‘get it’, judging from his popularity.

  19. #913 Megan

    The entire Iraq privatization subject is a IMO very plausible and rationale strategy in this day and age if your aims are to establish systemic long-term economic infiltration. However – a successful process would require the maintenance of political instability over a long period (but not too unstable as to trigger rebellion and potential loss of assets). Clearly the current internal conflicts within Iraq are providing the appropriate level of festering instability – but sufficient stability for the interim government to pass legislation enabling the sell-off of oil assets e.g. Hunt Oil and what seems to be a close alignment members of the current US administration (refer Spoils of War detailing concerns of a the Democrat Dennis_Kucinich.

Comments are closed.

Comments Page 19 of 19
1 18 19