Check out my rundown of the 2010 Senate races here

Sunday, December 30, 2007

Bloomberg '08?

There has been much speculation on whether Mike Bloomberg, the mayor of New York City, would run for president as an third-party independent in 2008.

He's a billionaire that could potentially fund his own national campaign (as he did when he ran for mayor), and has been traveling widely giving speaking out about national and domestic problems that face the nation.

When I first heard that he might run, I quickly dismissed it and thought it was just the brainchild of the media (and wouldn't they love it).

But now, I think that it's a real possibility.

Yesterday, Bloomberg and twelve other leading centrist Democrats and Republicans scheduled a meeting at the University of Oklahoma for January 7.

Their goal is to discuss the possibility of selecting a candidate that will unify America and end the damaging partisanship in Washington. They will only do this if they do not believe that the Democratic and Republican nominees seek to accomplish this.

Essentially, its a bi-partisan coalition to end partisanship. Go figure.

Now the question on political pundits's minds is "Which side will this hurt--the Democrats or the Republicans?"

I think that his candidacy would hurt the Democrats much more than the Republicans.

Even though he has changed his party alliances, he is essentially a northeastern liberal figure. I am still a little fuzzy on his positions on the big issues, but I do know that he's been speaking widely about issues like stopping global warming and achieving universal health care for all Americans.

That sounds like a liberal to me. The Republicans would definitely benefit if he runs.

Republican Senator Chuck Hagel of Nebraska has said that he would consider going on the Bloomberg ticket should he decide to run.

A third party candidate has never carried a state in the general election let alone come close to winning. Bloomberg, should he decide to run, just might be a contender with the help of independents across the nation. He could make more than a splash come November.

Obama Alone Can Stop Clinton

As the Democratic race in Iowa draws nearer an nearer, the polls show the three frontrunners' numbers getting closer and closer.

Only a few months ago, Hillary Clinton had significant leads in Iowa and New Hampshire and was seen as the "inevitable" candidate on the Democratic side.

But now, she is dead even with Obama and Edwards, and the results of Iowa will have a profound impact on the rest of the race.

Clinton is the only candidate among the top three who can sustain a loss in Iowa because of her campaigns great organization and money beyond the Hawkeye State.

Edwards does not pose much of a threat in New Hampshire, so it really comes down to Clinton and Obama there. Right now they're pretty even there, but the results of Iowa will greatly affect its results five days later.

Obama is the only candidate who has the financial strength to rival Clinton in the longrun. Edwards is financially challenged at this point in the race and could not keep up with the wealthy Clinton juggernaut.

Also, Obama is the only candidate who can rival Clinton in the big establishment states like California that vote on Super Tuesday. Edwards's populist message would not resonate with folks outside of the midwest and south.

The results of the Iowa caucuses will reveal who will take on Clinton in the rest of the primaries.

Edwards does not stand a chance.

Obama does.

Saturday, December 29, 2007

What If Edwards Wins Iowa?

Over the past few months, political pundits have been predicting the scenarios of a Clinton or Obama victory in Iowa. But they failed to address the ever-looming threat of John Edwards.

Each day, polls consistently show him getting closer to these two. And now, it's officially a tossup.

The leads among these three are well within the margin of error in these polls, making the outcome a matter of turnout and second choice candidates.

But what happens if Edwards comes up big and wins Iowa?

First, the media will label him as "The Comeback Kid," and they'll obsess over his gradual rise to the top despite a lack of funds. To the victor goes the media.

That positive spin will not necessarily boost him to a victory in New Hampshire, as he polls poorly there.

I personally don't think Edwards can win in New Hampshire under any circumstances, just because his populist message won't really resonate with New Hampshire independents.

A southern populist Baptist doesn't have much in common with a secular a free-thinking New Englander.

But if Edwards pulls it out in Iowa, this race will get a lot more interesting.

Let's go through a couple of scenarios.

Let's say that Edwards comes in first, Clinton in second, and Obama in third, and the final tally is pretty close.

I personally think that in Iowa, who loses is more important than who wins. In this case, Obama would lose big, and would probably lose New Hampshire to Clinton because of the spin the media and the Clintons would put on the outcome.

But if Obama places second and Clinton places third in Iowa, the media will talk about the "epic demise" of Hillary Clinton, and about the myth of her inevitability.

Her campaign would try to shrug it off, saying that Iowa is no big deal, even though it has spent millions of dollars and quite a bit of time there.

They would say, "Oh it's no big deal. They weren't her kind of people anyway." But ideologically, it would be a huge loss for her. Democrats around the country will think that if she can't win (or come close to winning) there, then she can't win anywhere.

A third place finish for her would hurt her more than one for Obama.

Edwards would have to duke it out with the winner of New Hampshire in states like Nevada and South Carolina. That is much too far away to predict. So much can and will happen from now until then.

Wednesday, December 26, 2007

Obamania

Barack Obama has certainly made it an exciting race in Iowa. Most polls show that he is virtually tied with Hillary Clinton and John Edwards in the Hawkeye State.

His campaign has been focusing on the great change he would bring to Washington as an untainted outsider. He has also been emphasizing change through hope and about working across the aisle to achieve his goals.

He claims that this is a major drawback of Mrs. Clinton, in that she is a polarizing figure and would further divide the nation.

Obama’s appeal is largest among young and highly educated voters. They like his willingness and ability to work across party lines, and are captivated by his magnificent oratory skills.

The only problem is that they are not the most reliable voting block. However, if they show up in big numbers in Iowa on January 3rd, it is likely that he will win the state.

Meanwhile, the Clinton campaign, especially Bill, relentlessly attack him as having too little experience to run the country.

They also say that hope is not enough to achieve the change that almost all Democrats want. They believe that hard work is the only way achieve change, while the Edwards campaign believes that demanding change will solve America's problems.

Obama has recently pulled even with Clinton in New Hampshire and South Carolina, making the January 3rd Iowa caucuses that much more important.

If he wins the caucuses decisively, it could give him the momentum to win New Hampshire, South Carolina and many of the other early states.

If he finishes behind Hillary, it is likely that he will have a difficult time in the states that follow, because of the massive bounce that Iowa winners usually get.

However, if the Obama campaign can get out the youth vote, he has a good chance to win, provided he makes no major gaffes on the way.

Monday, December 24, 2007

Edwards: The New Kerry?

John Edwards has been largely ignored in the race for the White House, what with the Oprahs and the Magic Johnsons taking up the media spotlight for Clinton and Obama.

But despite a shortage of funds, he is hanging in there in Iowa. Some pundits say that he is right where he wants to be with 10 days before the caucuses.

Most polls show him in a strong third place there, trailing Clinton and Obama by only a few percentage points. Some say he is just lurking in the shadows just waiting to make his move.

Preaching a largely populist message about taking on "Corporate America" and helping out the middle-class, Edwards has gained much support among many Iowans.

In a sense, Edwards and Obama are fighting over the anti-Hillary voters in Iowa, and thus far have divided up the vote almost equally.

But how can Edwards overcome the powerful campaigns of Clinton and Obama?

Easy--the same way Kerry overcame Howard Dean and Dick Gephardt, the two Iowa front-runners, in the 2004 caucuses.

Dean and Gephardt both waged highly negative campaigns against each other even up to election day while enjoying a somewhat comfortable lead over the rest of the competition.

Iowa voters obviously did not care for this negative style of campaigning, and it largely hurt the two front-runners on election day.

Kerry snuck up on them and won the state handily. Kerry then used his momentum to catapult him easily to winning the nomination.

There are many similarities between Edwards now and Kerry then. They both led relatively positive campaigns and were financially challenged compared to the front-runners coming into Iowa.

While Clinton and Obama duke it out and exchange insults in Iowa, much like Dean and Gephardt's did, Edwards might just sneak up on them and pull out a come-from-behind victory, much like Kerry did.

Sunday, December 23, 2007

The Huckaboom

Mike Huckabee's rise to stardom in the GOP is something of a fairy tale.

A few months ago, he was doomed to single digits in most states across the country, stuck as an also-ran candidate.

Now, he is the new front-runner in the quest for the GOP nomination.

"How did this happen?" you might ask. Well, that's a damn good question.

Seemingly overnight, Iowa voters seemed to recognize Mike Huckabee as "one of their own." Many were dissatisfied with the current field of Republican candidates, and evangelicals loved the fact that he was a minister and had a consistent position on abortion, unlike Mitt Romney and Rudy Giuliani. And he was likable and funny.

So, the media started to cover his candidacy more, and word-of-mouth spread across Iowa about this guy. Iowans thought that they could relate to him, and whaddaya know: he's the new front-runner.

He is now essentially tied for the national lead alongside Romney and Giuliani, and has a strong lead in Iowa.

Huckabee has yet to really address any specific plans on foreign policy, and has almost no experience with anything across the US borders. Romney and Giuliani have also pointed out that he has had "soft" positions on immigration and education as governor of Arkansas.

But still, hanging on to his bread-and-butter social issues, he has maintained his lead over Romney in Iowa.

Adding insult to injury, Romney, his biggest opponent in the Hawkeye State, has outspent him by roughly 20-1.

Even if Huckabee wins Iowa, he will have serious cash problems when the next 49 states roll along. Momentum alone can't carry him to the nomination.

It is too difficult to tell what kind of effect an Iowa victory will have on the rest of the early-voting states. He will probably fare better in the southern states such as South Carolina and Florida.

It is too early to tell what kind of an effect any of those victories will have on Super Tuesday.

If you ask me, this Huckabee thing is a fad. I don't think he appeals to many voters in New Hampshire, and in most other states north of the Mason-Dixon line.

He is largely a one-issue candidate, with that one issue being abortion. Abortion alone is not enough to carry anyone to the nomination, let alone the presidency.

I think his lack of money and universal appeal will hurt him on Super Tuesday, and that Republicans will wake up and look beyond his stances on social issues and give the nomination to McCain or Romney.

Saturday, December 22, 2007

Romney Is Fading

Mitt Romney, the once front-runner in Iowa and New Hampshire, seems to be slipping in recent polls in said states.

Despite having run the most expensive campaign among Republicans, he trails Mike Huckabee in Iowa and his lead is slowly dissolving to John McCain in New Hampshire.

Does this mean that money can't necessarily buy Romney victory?

Yes.

Romney has hardly left the first two states to cast their votes in the nominating process, and has been badly wounded by the surge of Mike Huckabee in Iowa. Huckabee has spent a small fraction of the money Romney has spent on advertisements and such in the state.

Romney's strategy from the start of the campaign was to focus all of his attention on the early contests of Iowa and New Hampshire. And for a while, it worked.

But as the date of the Iowa caucuses draws nearer, Romney finds himself as the underdog in Iowa. Many political pundits attribute this to his Mormon faith, which unsettles many evangelical voters in the Hawkeye State.

Romney has been scrambling to regain the lead in Iowa, and which has led him to neglect New Hampshire. This has allowed a window for John McCain to re-emerge in the Granite State and take a strong second-place position there below Romney.

A win for Huckabee in Iowa is a win for McCain. If Romney is defeated in Iowa and McCain places a strong third, Romney's firewall in New Hampshire might disappear.

McCain has earned the major endorsements of the New Hampshire Union Leader, the Boston Globe, and more recently, the Boston Herald--the three major newspapers in Romney's backyard. These endorsements might cause Romney supporters to reconsider McCain.

If Romney fails to win Iowa and New Hampshire, you can consider his candidacy as good as dead.

I'll continue to keep a close eye on his campaign, especially after the Iowa results come in.

Thursday, December 20, 2007

Mac Is Back

Where was John McCain a month ago? Nowhere, that's where. Out of money, support, money, hope, and money, the McCain campaign almost rolled over and died on the side of the road in late summer.

But with the recent endorsements from the Des Moines Register, the Boston Globe, the Manchester Union Register, and the traitor Joe Lieberman, he has received plenty of attention from the media.

This could not have happened at a better time.

These endorsements and this media attention have left Republicans saying, "Oh yeah, that guy."

Recently, his Iowa poll numbers have risen, and his New Hampshire numbers took a swift upturn, putting him in a comfortable second place position behind Mitt Romney.

McCain has found his voice this past month, and has boarded the Straight Talk Express with new found confidence.

Many Republicans see him as the best candidate to win the war in Iraq and to give the surge a chance to succeed. His military experience should win him major credibility points if he becomes a serious contender for the nomination and in the general election, especially on the issues of Iraq and torture.

With a strong finish in Iowa, he could give Romney a run for his money in his own backyard: New Hampshire. A recent Rasmussen poll puts him only 4 percentage points below Romney in the Granite State.

McCain now has the full attention of New Hampshire independents, who he hopes will help him win NH as they did in 2000.

He has a good window to muster support now because Romney is busy competing with Huckabee in Iowa, and Giuliani has retreated to Florida.

But even with a strong finish in the early states, McCain is very very short on cash. He has nowhere near as much bread as he needs to be a major competitor on Super Tuesday.

McCain has a long road ahead of him, and needs a victory in New Hampshire to keep his campaign alive for another primary.

From there, anything could happen.

Wednesday, December 19, 2007

Giuliani: A Long Shot?

Republicans are frustrated. No candidate has really emerged as a favorite, or one that could unite the party and defeat the Democrats in November. They all have major drawbacks which have been highlighted again and again by each other (and the media).

Over the next few days, I'm going to evaluate each candidate's chances in the early states and nationally, and why they haven't emerged as the favorite among Republicans.

Rudy Giuliani has been the national front-runner among Republicans since the pilgrims landed on Plymouth Rock. For a long time, people focused on his leadership during 9/11 and thought he could do a good job with terrorism and keeping America safe.

However, recent polls have shown that voters are more concerned about domestic issues like immigration, and Giuliani has lost the spotlight.

His national poll numbers have been slipping, and Huckabee has caught up with him nationally. His liberal views on bread-and-butter social issues--namely gay rights and abortion-- do not sit well with many Republicans, which has hurt his numbers.

And the whole Bernard Kerik scandal hasn't helped him too much either.

After running a weak campaign in Iowa, New Hampshire, and South Carolina, Rudy's campaign is focusing on winning Florida.

They believe that a victory there will boost his numbers in states like California, New York and many other of the other 20 states that will be casting their votes on Super Tuesday.

Florida is the last state to vote before Super Tuesday, which takes place a week later.

Even though he is beginning to shift his focus to Florida, he has only a small lead over Mike Huckabee there, according to recent polls. And Huckabee has hardly campaigned or spent much money there.

I agree with the many political pundits that Giuliani's strategy is doomed to fail for a few reasons:

1.) His national lead is slipping quickly.

2.) He has almost no chance to win in any state voting before January 29th.

3.) His opponents will get significant bounces from their victories in states like Iowa and New Hampshire. I believe that their momentum will leave him in the dust come Super Tuesday--the day of reckoning for his campaign.

4.) No Republican has ever been nominated without a victory in Iowa or New Hampshire. I don't think that will change now.

Rudy needs foreign policy to take the spotlight again to have a chance of getting the nomination.

Unfortunately, he needs another 9/11.

Tuesday, December 18, 2007

Barack's Momentum

The media has had a lot of fun giving names to the contest between Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton. Let's break down what has already happened, what is happening, and what probably will happen.

Hillary has been slipping in the polls recently, especially in the Big 3: Iowa, New Hampshire, and South Carolina. Her nomination seemed inevitable until about a month ago, when she straddled a few issues and her campaign made a few big blunders.

That is where Obama stole the spotlight. He has always been a gifted orator, and really made his case to voters in the Big 3. He appeared authentic, youthful (in a good way), and able to lead the country.

Of course, he did not close the Hillary gap alone. As I'm sure you've already heard, Oprah campaigned with Obama in the Big 3. I don't want to talk about that. Every newspaper and 24-hour news channel already obsessed over that story. Then they obsessed about it some more.

I don't personally think that her presence on the campaign will make a huge impact in the end. At best, it might swing a few undecided voters to Obama's side on election day.

However annoying the media was with the coverage of this story, they did help his campaign by giving him plenty of attention, which he has handled well. Recent polls show that he has capitalized on all of this attention, which shows that he's running a strong and confident campaign--at least right now.

This success was also paired with a few gaffes on the Clinton side which included attacking Obama's kindergarten and teenage record. These accusations backfired in the end, resulting in the brief humiliation in the Clinton campaign, and a drop in polls numbers.

No matter what poll you look at, Obama is gaining on Hillary in the Big 3. Hillary's leads in these states are mostly within the margin of error, if they have not already tipped to Obama's favor.

But will this momentum lead Obama to victory in Iowa and the rest of the primaries?

In the month before the Iowa caucuses in 2004, John Kerry rose in the polls quickly and had plenty of momentum--like Obama--and overtook the Howard Dean's vast lead in the polls--just like Hillary's--in the last few weeks before the caucuses. Kerry went on to win in Iowa, New Hampshire, and 44 other states, and easily won the nomination.

Does this mean that Obama can do the same?

I think if he does not make any major blunders before January 3rd, he has a good shot to win in Iowa. His charisma, oratory, and fund raising ability is uncanny, which Iowa Democrats seem to eat up.

But do not discount Hillary. She has a strong system of support in Iowa, and she is a familiar face to Iowans. Many voters end up going with familiarity in the end.

There is not much time left for campaigning, especially with Christmas and bad weather on the way. Candidates have toned down the negativity, because the polls tell them that it repulses voters, especially around Christmas.

Look for a close race on January 3rd. Anything can happen at the caucuses. Hillary lost the vast lead she had there in a matter of weeks. There is still not a clear-cut front-runner in Iowa, or any of the Big 3. Look for it to have a huge influence on the other states.

The Iowa bounce turned Howard Dean's campaign from inevitable to a long shot overnight. If Hillary loses handily there, I think she's cooked.

Monday, December 17, 2007

Intro & Key Endorsements

Hello America. Welcome to the brand new political blog "Electile Dysfunction." My name is Adam, and I am from central New Jersey. On this blog, I will post election news, blurbs, opinions, and predictions about the upcoming election. I will try to try to offer some insight to make this whole election process more sane and digestible.

Let's get to it, shall we?

On the Democratic side, Senators Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama split some very key endorsements this weekend in the early primary states of Iowa and New Hampshire.

The Des Moines Register announced its endorsement for Clinton, but said nothing but good things about Obama. They highlighted his inexperience, having only a few years under his belt in the Senate, which they based their decision on.

This endorsement was exactly what the Clinton campaign was looking for to slow the bleeding of their campaign.

Hillary's popularity has been slipping in recent months in the polls, and is now neck-and-neck with Obama in the early states of Iowa, New Hampshire, and South Carolina.

Senator Edwards only seems to be a threat in Iowa at this time.

However, the Des Moines Register has a history of choosing 2nd place candidates in recent years. In 2000 they supported Bill Bradley, and in 2004 it was John Edwards. However, Edwards did finish in a strong second that year despite his low poll numbers leading up to election day.

Needless to say, this endorsement can't hurt Hillary--especially in such a tight race.

Obama received a key endorsement from the Boston Globe this weekend, which should help his rising numbers in New Hampshire. They did not mind his inexperience, and said that he could bring fresh ideas to Washington.

Southern New Hampshire is the most populous part of the state, and many people there commute to Boston and read the Globe.

We'll see how much impact both of these endorsements have after the Iowa bounce.

Meanwhile, Senator John McCain swept the endorsements on the Republican side, reviving a lackluster campaign. He got the nod from the Register, Globe, and the Union Leader--New Hampshire's largest newspaper.

Senator Joe Lieberman, a supposedly left-leaning independent from Connecticut, also endorsed McCain, displaying McCain's ability to reach across the aisle. He considers this to be important to many voters, especially in New Hampshire, where he is making his stand.

The big question is: will these endorsements really help his campaign?

Only time will tell.

If you ask me, it won't do much for him in Iowa, and it may move him into a more comfortable 2nd place position in New Hampshire. Who knows, he may even give Romney a run for his money in the Granite State.