Calling Iowa
Iowa's a tough one to predict, as it is a measure of enthusiasm--commitment to spending several hours for your candidate--not just breezing by a voter booth and hanging a chad.
The more people see/hear of HELLary, the less they seem to like her. Obams still troubles me because he is so much style but I'm not so sure on substance. It's difficult to gauge the "enthusiasm" factor on him. I rarely watch Oprah, she's a nice enough person but I'd have a hard time throwing myself into a campaign just on her say-so.
Which leaves us with Edwards. I'm *very* disappointed that Kucinich told his supporters that if Kucinich didn't get the magic 15% in Iowa then they should go with Obama rather than Edwards. In my informal unscientific survey, none of the Kucinich supporters could articulate *why* (recalling that Kucinich's second choice in 2004 was Edwards). So...Edwards supporters are pretty enthusiastic. Ditto Kucinich supporters. I'm not seeing the Kucinich supporters playing follow the leader--I think they'll mainly go for Edwards. If I had to call it, then: Edwards.
Republican side: Ron Paul. His supporters are fanatical, and oblivious to the drawbacks of a Paul Presidency (e.g. Who protects us from giant corporations if the government is disemboweled? What happens to the "revolution" if something happens to Paul? How come Paul isn't standing up for free speech on AETA or the "thought crimes" bill? How come Paul hasn't come out for impeachment?). The corporate media has pretty well killed Kucinich's candidacy by ignoring/ridiculing him, but that's not the case with Paul--Paul's supporters tend to see a reflection of themselves in Paul. If I had to call it, then: Paul; second choice McCain. The rest are too darned nutty. (BTW, the only truly sane Republican, Sam Brownback, never had a chance because he was genuine and honest. More on that another time).
TLC.
The more people see/hear of HELLary, the less they seem to like her. Obams still troubles me because he is so much style but I'm not so sure on substance. It's difficult to gauge the "enthusiasm" factor on him. I rarely watch Oprah, she's a nice enough person but I'd have a hard time throwing myself into a campaign just on her say-so.
Which leaves us with Edwards. I'm *very* disappointed that Kucinich told his supporters that if Kucinich didn't get the magic 15% in Iowa then they should go with Obama rather than Edwards. In my informal unscientific survey, none of the Kucinich supporters could articulate *why* (recalling that Kucinich's second choice in 2004 was Edwards). So...Edwards supporters are pretty enthusiastic. Ditto Kucinich supporters. I'm not seeing the Kucinich supporters playing follow the leader--I think they'll mainly go for Edwards. If I had to call it, then: Edwards.
Republican side: Ron Paul. His supporters are fanatical, and oblivious to the drawbacks of a Paul Presidency (e.g. Who protects us from giant corporations if the government is disemboweled? What happens to the "revolution" if something happens to Paul? How come Paul isn't standing up for free speech on AETA or the "thought crimes" bill? How come Paul hasn't come out for impeachment?). The corporate media has pretty well killed Kucinich's candidacy by ignoring/ridiculing him, but that's not the case with Paul--Paul's supporters tend to see a reflection of themselves in Paul. If I had to call it, then: Paul; second choice McCain. The rest are too darned nutty. (BTW, the only truly sane Republican, Sam Brownback, never had a chance because he was genuine and honest. More on that another time).
TLC.
posted by TLC's Place at 6:22 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home