For the last seven Presidential elections, the Republican party hs already known who its candidate would be by the time of the nominating convention. I beleive the Democrats have a similar situation on their side.

However, between the brewing Hillary-Obama battle on the Democratic side and the long list of candidates on the Republican side, could we see the need for multiple rounds of voting when it comes time for the conventions? Which candidates would pick up which sections of the country? Who would be the first to drop out if there was a "race" for votes at the Convention?

I have my opinions, but I want to see what other people think.

The Republican list is appealing thus far... coming from me, a liberal.
My worry with the
Pub primary is that there are too many decent moderate candidates with mass appeal. The result could be that their votes are widely distributed, giving the hardcore conservatives a shot at backing one strong ultracon to victory.
As for the Crats... I'm hoping like hell Obama and Hillary are not the limit... In fact now I'm hoping neither runs since they have already taken a lead in polls over primacy. Neither can actually win. Hillary is demonized far beyond what she truly deserves. She's a career politician with no soul, but she's not really as bad as she's made out to be by the Right. But people not living in New York think she's the antichrist. As for Obama, I like him... but he has no experience and not enough of a name. Regardless of whether this actually means anything, it will keep him from getting elected. Not to mention that the simple folk think that he's evil because his name sounds like "one of them dang terrorists".
The Crats need someone electable... which they don't have yet. My opinion is that they need an old-fashioned kind of Democrat from the West (not California) with a pro-life or at least not-too-friendly-with-pro-choice stance and moderate views on fiscal matters. Maybe I should run... Except I'm not old enough and I have less experience than Obama and I don't want the job anyway.

__________________
"Man lives in the sunlit world of that which he believes to be reality. But unseen by most is an underworld, a place that is just as real... but not as brightly lit... A DARK SIDE!"
-opening from Tales From the Darkside

Well, there are appealing candidates for both sides of the Republican party. I am pro-life, so Giuliani is absolutely out of the question. I can tolerate McCain, although he supports embryonic stem cell research (I don't). I think the really underestimated candidate is Brownback, I think he has a good chance to become the nominee. However personal opinions aside, I was looking for guesses as to who would pick up which states and if we would need multiple voting rounds at the conventions.

Here is what I think:

The candidates: Brownback, McCain, Giuliani, Romney, and one other (unknown)

Giuliani is liberal on abortion, immigration, and homosexual marriage. He will have to do well in the liberal states (NY,NJ,MI,WI,MN,CA,OR,WA) if he has any hope. He has lost favor with many Republicans, including myself, who don't feel he would promote a culture of life. If he can't win the Great Lakes states (MI,MN,WI), he is done.

McCain is also somewhat liberal, although he opposes abortion and homosexual marriage. He is acceptable to most Christians, but may not do well in the southeast and midwest if Brownback, Romney, and a third Conservative run. He will have to rely on Hispanic Republicans who like his stance on immigration (little punishment for illegals already here) if he wants to win the nomination, in my opinion. He will have to rely on votes in the southwest and Florida if he wants to have a clear lead. This means doing well in CA,NV,AZ,TX, and NM. This would mean that California may prevent both Giuliani and McCain from reaching the convention.

Brownback is the most Conservative out there, although he has made appeals to Moderates and Democrats. He is likely to do well in the midwest and southeast. He will need to have a substantial showing in one of those areas to have a good chance. He should have a good shot too, so long as he continues to increase his name recognition and does not pull an Allen and shoot himself in the foot.

Romney, as a Mormon and Conservative would probably have the best chance in states like Utah, Nevada, and Colorado, all where he could come in first. He would not be likely to win many states outside of the Rocky Mountains and Northeast. However, he could pull several second or third place showings in the Southeast and Midwest, where he could win over votes with his conservative views. If he does that, he can survive until the convention and pull votes from the others in second/later voting rounds.

anyone have other opinions or predictions?

Well I guess i'll break it down:

Democrats:

Hillary will be the only candidate running. Maybe Vilsack sticks around through Super Tuesday, but that's it.

You're nuts if you think the whole Obama orgasm isn't a complete work on the part of the Clinton team. Just stinks of a Clinton move.. Obama's presence and blossoming popularity is scaring candidates out left and right. The longer he hangs around and feigns running, the less time these other candidates have to get in the race to have a chance.

What's the other thing his presence is doing? Raising the profile of Hillary, who i'm sure is going nuts over the fact that Nancy Pelosi and fellow NY Senator Chuck Schumer are dominating her in the headlines. Obama's presence is good for her because people want to ask her what she thinks. Her response is simple: praise the hell out of him.

Obama runs and gainst enough popularity without having to lend any substance to the debate. He becomes an opinion maker. He stalls forever, waits until the last minute and endorses Hillary. With three quarters of the field cleared, Obama's stock up a million and one percent and Hillary endorsed, it'd take a miracle for her NOT to win the nomination.

Quid Pro quo here too. Obama will be Hillary's running mate. They'll amp up the black and female stuff through the roof. Obama, for all his work on the campaign trail, get the possible pedigree of Vice President and in four to eight years, would find himself an easy nominee for the Democratic ticket, this time having experience, a campaign network and all the cash in the world. Hillary gets her Presidency... or so she hopes.

So I don't think the Democratic Primary will be compedetive at all. I think Hillary will run away and Vilsack will be the only one self centered enough to stick around. Oh yeah, Dennis Kucinich will DEFINATELY run and waste everyone's time.


Republicans

Rudy Giulliani-- Way too far to the left to win the nomination. Once the mud starts flying he'll be packing it in.. in a hurry. Expect McCain to be the one swinging the hardest. They're fighting over the same sect of voters. Difference is, McCain's got a nice clean past. Giulliani doesn't. Expect him to be out after the NH primaries IF he runs, which any consultant would tell him is career suicide.

John McCain-- If he can smash Giulliani out of the running early, he's probobly the front runner. He'll be whipping out all those polls that show him as the candidate that can win. He'll waffle on all the important conservative issues and talk about his electibility. It might work for him too. Without a real strong soundly conservative candidate in the field, I like his chances... SO LONG as he is able to dispatch of Giulliani early. If a strong conservative candidate comes along, it's a different race.

Mitt Romney-- Of anyone in the race he has the most money and the best organization. He's the only remotely electable conservative candidate in the running right now to boot which puts him in the driver's seat, IMO, as of now. There are A LOT of questions about him though regarding some of his true positions on several issues. His record of party building is disgraceful. His 'people' are ruthless social climbers and eager to take any scraps off the table. If I managed his campaign my strategy would be simple. I'd be blasting away at McCain from the beginning, trying myself to drag out the war between him and Giulliani as long as possible. I blame most of my issue stances on "liberal Massachusetts" (doesn't hold water but no one will care) and try to keep as much focus as possible on McCain's lack of credibility on the issues. Romney looks to me like a strong candidate right now, but like McCain, the tables will really be turned is a strong conservative candidate throws his hat in the ring.

Sam Brownback-- This guy brings nothing to the table for me, and he'll be painted by his opponents as the same old D.C. Republican. I think Brownback's got as much of a shot at winning these primaries as I do.




So i'll say this I guess.....

Hillary will have incredibly smooth sailing on her quest to the nomination.

The Republicans will fight it out a little more. Romney and McCain, IMO are the two candidates to beat, and the entire race depends on McCain's ability to push Giulliani out quickly. If he doesn't, Romney wins the nomination fairly easily. If he does, I think McCain is the guy to beat.

I think McCain would stampede Hillary in a general election while I think Romney-Hillary would be razor thin close...

Frankly this is the kind of thing that pisses me off about the Democrats. They are theoretically "my party" as I am a liberal, but the leadership, much like the Republican leadership, is more into playing games than anything... and they're more obvious about it than the Republicans. I'm hoping that at some point there is a revolution within the party, tossing all the DNC elites out on their rears. These people are killing the party, choking it with their egos.
I personally think Hillary hasn't got a shot against either Romney or McCain.
If there is a Democrat who dares to face down Hillary, I'll vote in the Crat primary, but if not I'll vote in the Pub primary... I'm alright with McCain and Romney as they seem decent enough to override party BS for what they think the people want.

__________________
"Man lives in the sunlit world of that which he believes to be reality. But unseen by most is an underworld, a place that is just as real... but not as brightly lit... A DARK SIDE!"
-opening from Tales From the Darkside

I'd agree with your statement on McCain... but probobly not so much Romney... Romney's people have towed plenty of party BS in Massachusetts, to the point where they've practically killed it. McCain is the guy who'd I consider more of the 'reformer'...

Games are part of the bigger game here so it doesn't bother me TOO much. I just think elites have taken over BOTH parties these days. Very one track kind of strategy and have replaced theory and idealogy with actually thinking through issues. They're the people I attribute the lack of common sense and the deep divides between the parties to.

Your "analysis" is incorrect. Republicans "anoint" a candidate long before the convention and then use most of their campaign funds killing their Democratic opponent in the general election. Democrats, on the other hand, use most of their money killing each other in the primaries and then have little left for the general election.

__________________
Theodore Lamar Heiks
BA, History/Political Science, Western State College of Colorado, 1984
MBA, Entrepreneurship/Marketing, City University of Seattle, 1993

One of the big questions is how the independents will register. I am a Republican at heart, but the only person I had hope for was McCain. But the longer he keeps talking the "Bush talk" on Iraq, the more I am starting to believe he really would support keeping troops in Iraq. I don't think Giuliani or Romney have the horse power to keep the nomination away from McCain.

That throws me into the category where I may register Democrat. I hate Hillary, and I think the feeling is mutual with lots of Democrats. That brings up the dark horse: Obama. The more I read, the I think the guy has his screwed on right. I am sort of so-so on his social programs, but they would cost nothing compared to continuing the Iraq War. Plus, probably time to raise minimum wage. The debt is far to large to ever get something major like national health care through the Congress.

My mind is still open. Let's see who flips and who flops as the Primaries draw near. All I really know is Hillary is definitely out. If the Dems look like they are heading in her direction, then its time to re-think the Republican list.

__________________
Hobo
Charter member of 'Republicans Who Hate Bush" Club

Well, we obviously have very different opinions, as I cannot support a Candidate who is not committed to outright, total victory in Iraq.

However, I agree that the moderates are going to have a say, the question is, in which party?

I also am rethinking my above post, I think Romney can beat McCain, and very possibly take the nomination. I think Romney has an advantage in his personal life, he's been married only once, for a long time, and has a large and family, something that will appeal to Christian Conservatives. Romney's once roadblock is his Mormon faith, but this can be overcome by simply educcating the voters that Mormons are followers of God and Christ just like other Christians.

The way for Republicans to win is to go for a Conservative, a pro-life, pro-family, pro-military Conservative. That means someone like Romney or Brownback, even Gingrich. Out of those three, Romney has the best shot, easily. McCain and Giuliani may just kill each other off in the Primaries, fighting over a limited number of liberal to moderate Conservatives who are willing to overlook large gaps in each of their respective positions. That could leave Romney or another Conservative to be carried to victory by the Reagan Conservatives, those who support life, morals, family, strong national defense, an agressive war on terror, and a fiscally conservative stance.

By the way, if I could have the Republican members of this forum (and independents) vote in the following poll:

http://www.ilovepolls.com/showpoll.php?id=604&type=link

It's a primary I'm running for my blog, viewable here:

www.act-blog.co.nr

Thanks!