Iowa Predictions

The friendliest place on the web for anyone that follows U2.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
joyfulgirl said:
I'd love to see Edwards come in at #1.

So would I. Lately I have been considering voting for him, even though he won't win. That doesn't matter to me though, I'll vote my choice regardless.

Poll: Obama grabs Iowa lead from Edwards
Huckabee leads Romney, according to latest Reuters/C-SPAN/Zogby poll
Reuters
updated 9:27 a.m. ET, Thurs., Jan. 3, 2008

DES MOINES, Iowa - Democrat Barack Obama surged to a four-point lead over John Edwards in Iowa, with Hillary Clinton fading to third just hours before the first presidential nominating contest, according to a Reuters/C-SPAN/Zogby poll released on Thursday.

Obama and Edwards gained ground overnight in the tracking poll, and Clinton fell four points to third place — a finish that, if it held, would deal a dramatic setback to the one-time Democratic front-runner.

Obama was at 31 percent among likely Democratic caucus-goers, Edwards at 27 percent and Clinton 24 percent. No other Democrat was in double digits.

In the Republican race, Mike Huckabee expanded his lead to six points, 31 to 25 percent, over former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney, the one-time leader in Iowa who has attacked Huckabee for his record as Arkansas governor.

Former Tennessee Sen. Fred Thompson is in third place in the Republican race at 11 percent and Arizona Sen. John McCain slipped two points to 10 percent. Texas Rep. Ron Paul also registered 10 percent.

Zogby: Clinton fade
"There is a clear Clinton fade," pollster John Zogby said. "None of it has been dramatic, but it has been steady."

He said Clinton, a New York senator, was losing ground to Obama, an Illinois senator, among Democrats — as opposed to independents — and self-described liberals.

"Under any circumstance, a 31-27-24 spread is still very close," he said of the margins for the top three Democratic contenders. "Edwards is right in the mix and he has made gains too."

About 6 percent of Republicans and 5 percent of Democrats remain undecided, leaving room for late swings.

The rolling poll of 905 likely Democratic caucus-goers and 914 likely Republican caucus-goers was taken Sunday through Wednesday and has a margin of error of 3.3 percentage points for each party.

New Mexico Gov. Bill Richardson was fourth with 7 percent and Delaware Sen. Joseph Biden was at 5 percent. Connecticut Sen. Chris Dodd was at 1 percent and Ohio Rep. Dennis Kucinich was under 1 percent.

Dems in three-way battle
Iowa opens the process of choosing the next U.S. president on Thursday night, kicking off a state-by-state battle to choose Republican and Democratic candidates for the November election to replace President George W. Bush.

Obama, Clinton and Edwards have battled for the lead in Iowa for months. Clinton, who would be the first woman president, holds a slight lead among women and is still strong among older voters. Obama leads among men and younger voters.

Edwards, a former North Carolina senator, remained the top second choice of Democrats. A candidate must have 15 percent support in each precinct to be viable or their supporters can switch to another candidate.

In the Republican race, Huckabee gained three points on Romney. The gains followed Monday's news conference where he said he would not air an ad attacking Romney because he wanted to keep the race positive -- and then showed it to reporters.

The move was heavily criticized in the media -- but his numbers have climbed since, Zogby said.

"Everyone outside of Iowa laughed at what appeared to be a Huckabee gambit, but Iowa Republicans seem to think it was genuine," he said.

"Huckabee is not pulling away, but it's now a six-point lead and he has moved above 30 percent."

Former New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani, who has largely bypassed Iowa to focus on later voting states, is at 6 percent. California Rep. Duncan Hunter is at 1 percent.

The rolling tracking poll concludes with these results. In a rolling poll, the most recent day's results are added while the oldest day's results are dropped in order to track changing momentum.
 
Last edited:
MrsSpringsteen said:


So would I. Lately I have been considering voting for him, even though he won't win. That doesn't matter to me though, I'll vote my choice regardless.

He's the only reason I'm re-registering as a Democrat to vote in the Primaries (I registered a long time ago as an Independent). I think Obama talks the talk but I have no confidence in his ability to walk the talk. I'm very uncomfortable with both him and Hillary, much as I'd like to get behind one of them. I will only vote for Hillary if she wins the nomination and the race looks tight, otherwise I cannot vote for her. If it turns out to be Obama or Hillary and it looks like the Democrats will easily win, I won't vote at all. Kucinich is backing Obama which I find incredibly weird and disappointing.
 
Edwards strikes me as the only front runner for the Dems with any real principles. Sadly, I've always felt it won't translate into anything concrete.

He's managed to do quite well with little money.
 
i don't know why, but i find Edwards full of it.

i can see why he was such a great trial lawyer, and that's about all i can see.

but that's just me.

:shrug:

i like his wife better.
 
They all seem full of it to me, in one way or another. I want to believe that he genuinely cares about all that "two Americas" stuff, maybe he doesn't give a crap and it's all a sham. I do really like Senator Obama and the fresh perspective he brings and am still considering voting for him. I like some things about Hillary too but will probably end up choosing Edwards or Obama.
 
Irvine511 said:
i don't know why, but i find Edwards full of it.

i can see why he was such a great trial lawyer, and that's about all i can see.

but that's just me.

I've actually heard this a lot as well and most people have told me they find that Southern charm to be extremely suspect.
 
As an ex-Southerner myself, I can say I absolutely despise so-called Southern charm. I didn't like Edwards when he ran for VP. But he seems different to me now, bolder, speaking more from conviction than charm. I don't think there's any way in hell Obama can even make a dent in cleaning up Bush's mess. It's great to have a fresh voice and all but I don't think there's a lot of substance there. Edwards is tougher and smarter, imo. The Clintons would get the job done, too, I just don't like them.
 
Ralph Nader supports Edwards, so that's a good endorsement for me.

In an appearance on "Hardball," in mid-December, he said Edwards "now has the most progressive message across a broad spectrum of corporate power damaging the interests of workers, consumers, taxpayers, of any candidate I have--leading candidate I have seen in years." He went on to explain that "the key phrase is when he [Edwards] says he doesn't want to replace a corporate Republican with a corporate Democrat." Nader told Politico, " it's the only time I've heard a Democrat talk that way in a long time." For Ralph Nader--and take my word for it, please--that is rare praise for a leading Democratic politician.

I think he'll do well.
 
I bet U2Democrat has a picture of him wearing a wife beater :wink:

The few times I have experienced it I have liked Southern charm, probably just because I'm a life long Northerner used to a steady diet of noncharm. I think it could get tiring and at times offensive if not done correctly. I don't like it when it's condescending and sexist. But there's something to be said for genuine Southern charm and manners and all that.
 
joyfulgirl said:
Edwards is tougher and smarter, imo. The Clintons would get the job done, too, I just don't like them.

As much as Hillary wouldn't be my first choice, I do think that she has no qualms about playing dirty and her team as well. There is no way the Clintons would get swiftboated, and given how the Republicans go about discrediting people, maybe the only language they understand is that of equal ruthlessness.
 
anitram said:


As much as Hillary wouldn't be my first choice, I do think that she has no qualms about playing dirty and her team as well. There is no way the Clintons would get swiftboated, and given how the Republicans go about discrediting people, maybe the only language they understand is that of equal ruthlessness.

I agree. The Republicans would chew Obama up and spit him out. I just don't think he would be able to get anything done, regardless of good intentions. The worse things look by fall in the US, economically and otherwise, the more attractive Hillary will become to voters, I think. In the end, she has the experience and savvy to navigate the political waters here and globally. But man, it will kill me to vote for her. I don't think Edwards has a chance but I'm happy to see someone with progressive views doing so well this far.
 
joyfulgirl said:


In the end, she has the experience and savvy to navigate the political waters here and globally.

:scratch:

I'm sorry, I just don't see it. Especially comparing her with McCain (hopefully), she doesn't come close to his experience and accomplishments.
 
Last edited:
I think it's hilarious how the Republicans are suddenly all hanging on to McCain like he's their own personal Jesus, after having written him off for pretty much all of last year (except STING here, I have to hand it to him, he's devoted). Everyone else was crowing about RUUUUUUUUUDY and Fred and diamond had a lot of man love for Mitt, and so on.

But suddenly, when faced with the prospect of a hillbilly being beaten by every Democrat on the ticket, everyone is changing their tune.
 
anitram said:
I think it's hilarious how the Republicans are suddenly all hanging on to McCain like he's their own personal Jesus, after having written him off for pretty much all of last year (except STING here, I have to hand it to him, he's devoted). Everyone else was crowing about RUUUUUUUUUDY and Fred and diamond had a lot of man love for Mitt, and so on.

But suddenly, when faced with the prospect of a hillbilly being beaten by every Democrat on the ticket, everyone is changing their tune.

This post is wrong in so many ways.

First off, that personal Jesus remark was dumb. Second, speaking for myself, I wrote off McCain because his numbers were awful and his campaign seemed dead. It never had anything to do with me not liking him and his positions. He has always been my second choice after Rudy, until recently when he became my first choice. Third, McCain is not the only Republican who can beat Hillary. He certainly has the best shot, but Rudy and Mitt could do it too. Finally, the reason I'm not supporting Huckabee (who I'm assuming that hillbilly remark was aimed at) isn't because he'll lose as much as it is because I don't think many of his stances are real conservative.

I assumed you knew enough about politics to know that candidates have surges, and McCain is in one right now. Same goes for Obama and Edwards. I thought you knew that people are allowed to like different candidates, and even switch their minds, without coming off as desperate and compromising.
 
2861U2 said:

Finally, the reason I'm not supporting Huckabee (who I'm assuming that hillbilly remark was aimed at) isn't because he'll lose as much as it is because I don't think many of his stances are real conservative.

Could you elaborate on those stances?
 
anitram said:


Could you elaborate on those stances?

Well his record showed him as a big spender and big taxer. His proposal about the Fair Tax and abolishing the IRS sounds intriguing, but I don't think it's realistic. His illegal immigration policy doesn't seem tough enough- of course, McCain's wasn't either, but he acknowledged it was bad. His abortion stance has shifted in recent years, too. Not like Romney, though. I believe Romney when he says he truly had a change of heart and is now firmly pro-life. Huckabee doesn't seem to know exactly where he stands. He seems pro-life, but has stated last year that the states should decide, so it's hard to tell.

Also, he supports the Ten Commandments being displayed in every school. Now, as much as I think the Ten Commandments are important and rules everyone should live by regardless of your faith, even I wouldn't take it that far.
 
Okay, but how are any of his views not conservative, as you stated?

Ten Commandments? Seems like this is a stance staunchly supported by the conservative base. It surely isn't a liberal stance, hah.

Abolishing income tax? Again, how is this not a conservative stance?

Immigration policy? Whether you think it's tough enough, it's absolutely in line with conservative views.

Pro-life? Same thing.

Maybe he's a flip-flopper (I actually don't think so) but to say his stance isn't conservative kind of puzzles me to be honest. How would you exactly then classify his views?
 
Well he isn't the most conservative in the race, at the very least. He's pardoned rapists and murderers, supported scholarships for illegals and raised taxes greatly. Taxes and immigration are huge issues among conservatives, and I hope they look past his charm, smooth talk and evangelism and really investigate him.
 
2861U2 said:
charm, smooth talk and evangelism and really investigate him.

I think that if you slightly change around the adjectives, you could pretty much make that statement about any candidate. The bottom line is that there will be many candidates who will get votes for stupid reasons (or in the case of Hilary Clinton, will be voted against for stupid reasons).
 
phillyfan26 said:


I think that if you slightly change around the adjectives, you could pretty much make that statement about any candidate. The bottom line is that there will be many candidates who will get votes for stupid reasons (or in the case of Hilary Clinton, will be voted against for stupid reasons).

That's absolutely true.

I don't think the last statement applies solely to Hillary, though. I'm sure some people won't vote for Obama because he's black, or McCain because he's old, Romney's a Mormon, etc.
 
2861U2 said:


:scratch:

I'm sorry, I just don't see it. Especially comparing her with McCain (hopefully), she doesn't come close to his experience and accomplishments.

Experience isn't everything. Let's remember McCain let the least experienced Bush beat him in 2000, partly by questioning his loyalty to the military. That's weak.

Also having financial problems within your own campaign makes me wonder if he can run a country if he can't run his own campaign.
 
2861U2 said:


Also, he supports the Ten Commandments being displayed in every school. Now, as much as I think the Ten Commandments are important and rules everyone should live by regardless of your faith, even I wouldn't take it that far.

This made me smile! :) :wink:
 
Back
Top Bottom