Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : THE WHITE HOUSE -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: MJ who wrote (9587)	10/9/2007 11:33:39 PM
From: pompsander	Respond to of 25737

"Seems to me there is a huge disparity between Ron Paul and Hillary so would think that would be difficult for his supporters to do." __________ Yes, if real libertarians look at some of Mrs. Clinton's "big government saves all" proposals, it would be pretty hard to swallow. Let's assume that there are 40% of the likely voters who are going to vote for the Democratic nominee, be it Hillary, Obama or Biden. Likewise, there are 40% of the likely voters, nationwide, that will vote for the Republican nominee, be it Mitt, Rudy or Fred. National elections over the years has shown this to be the case, even in landslide years - the loser gets 45% of the total vote and its considered a crushing loss. If we are trying to figure out where that 20% "in play" is going to land, there are many factors. Something like 44% say they would not vote for Hillary under any circumstances. So that means she has lost 4% of our "swing 20%". But she could still get to 50.1% by being either the proactive or default choice of 10%. The same holds true for the Republicans. Fred Thompson's negatives are on the rise. Rudy seems anathema to many in the party. McCain likewise. Romney can't seem to get an enthusiasm going. How do any of these candidates stretch the party's solid 40% up to 50%? Some of it could be a vote against Hillary, but I think that only gets them 4%. My fear is that there will be vote of people wanting change after eight years of Mr. Bush. That "change vote" could be five or six percent of the swing twenty. Even with all Hillary's negatives she (and any Democrat) could pick up this vote. Split the rest of the 20% and you can get to 50%. If the republicans have to deal with a third party, it gets easier for the Democrats. I don't think the Democrats will have to deal with a third party because the Greens and Nadar are still being reminded about their supposed impact on the 2000 election and no lefty is going to get another republican elected by voting for a left candidate instead of any democrat. I don't think that is true on the republican side, where a percentage of the base could swing away, despite the looming presence of Mrs. Clinton. I would rather have a Republican president if we are going to have a Democratic congress (and that is a given). I just can't yet see how the Republicans are going to pull it off. Right now none of the major candidates are offering much change from Mr. Bush...and that won't sell next year. But its a long time until November.....2008.