Andrew Mason is half right.
I’m finally coming around on Obama - the guy looks like he has finally inspired enough voters to overcome Hillary’s fiduciary advantage. He’s played tough and is definitely more likable, which is hardly fair to Hillary (who is crazy smart), but this is politics and style counts more than substance.
But for the Republicans, I’ll predict Mitt Romney gets the nomination. He’s one part compromise candidate and one part moderate. While McCain’s numbers have been improving, most of the supporters of the loser candidates (Thompson, Paul, etc) will turn to Romney and not McCain (who has been more inconsistent than alleged flip-flopper Romney) or Huckabee (whose campaign is based on appealing to the religious right, but has not been met with the unanimous approval given to Bush eight years ago).
So I’ll take Obama and Romney, and in the general election I think the more sound bite-able Romney will do a better job holding the electorate’s 10-second attention span than Obama, whose well-thought-out positions don’t fit in a newspaper headline.
Mark it down: Before the smoke clears in the first primary, I am taking Romney and Obama as the nominees, and Romney as POTUS 44.
They have an “edit” feature on these blog posts, right?
January 11th, 2008 at 3:00 am
first!
just kidding, no one posts on here and definitely no one posts replies.
seriously? romney? president? this guy rubs everyone the wrong way way more than hilary rubs republicans the wrong way. mccain only did well in NH on his historical support in NH, his victory there is as quaint as the republicans nomination of anyone short of re-animated reagan. $50 side bet, scott green, that mccain will not win another state, romney will not win the general election, and that the hilary-obama fight will not be settled until denver, when the delgates meet. whether its hilary or obama, no bets. my romantic side says obama, my cynical side says the assholes representing us will be fearful enough to present hilary. $50 on the aforementioned terms? hm? hey? e-shake on it, scott green?
January 11th, 2008 at 6:43 pm
There are so many things wrong with this analysis, I’m not sure Scott Green even follows politics.
Romney getting the nomination isn’t too far out there, but part compromise candidate and part moderate? You do realize he’s by and far the most conservative (even if it is fake conservatism) candidate in the GOP, right?
And Ron Paul supporters turning to Romney? Are you nuts? Ron Paul supporters are mostly libertarians, similar to independents. Bottom line - no chance they will support Romney (find me one who would).
John McCain more of a flip flopper than Romney? Again, you have to be kidding. Can you name some examples (other than the fact that McCain has said he’ll “secure the border first”), which is hardly a flip-flop?
Huckabee may appeal to the religious right, but he’s probably the most moderate candidate overall (other than maybe McCain) for the GOP.
Oh, and Obama’s “well thought-out positions” could definitely be a headline in a newspaper. It will read “CHANGE”, and nothing else.
January 17th, 2008 at 4:13 pm
Rudy is by far the most moderate, but strong republican candidate. So far, 4 candidates have won 4 minor states, BUT Rudy still leads in all the major states for the upcoming super tuesday
Romney has no chance and Obama will lose to the Hillary machine
Mark my words
January 17th, 2008 at 4:13 pm
sorry 3 candidates won 4 states (mistyped that) — but 4 will win 5 if Thompson takes SC