Whose up and whose down? Who said the wrong word? Who has the right strategy. I can’t keep up!
Obama has Oprah, which makes the campaign the Story of Os.
Hillary (and Bill) can’t take cheap shots at Obama, which sounds sexist to me.
Edwards is the only Democrat talking like a Democrat, and can’t get the rest of Iowa to understand that we haven’t elected a sitting Senator (Obama and Hillary) since 1960.
Romney doesn’t think his Mormon faith should matter so that is all the man can talk about.
Giuliani probably can’t believe he is not currently the chosen one, considering his heroism on 5-28.
McCain gets the endorsement of The Des Moines Register and the Boston Globe, but is still apparently so desparate that he asks that Democrat/Independent, bi-polar, sorry excuse for a candidate in ‘00 Joe Lieberman to support him. I had rather be waterboarded. Actually, maybe this is waterboarding.
Huckabee has the faith of a preacher, but is betting on Ed Rollins to save his political soul.
And today, I find out that Ron Paul has raised another record $6 million in one day on the internet. That is like saying that someone other than Halliburton got a contract in Iraq. So what? However, I have to say go Ron Paul. By George, if nothing else, you may prove the power of the internet and people in time for ‘12.
It just seems to me that none of this makes sense. I am having a hard time keeping it straight. What I really think is this: The polls are wrong! I am betting the Iowa Caucus is having as much difficulty as I am. It’s an open race all the way to January 3, 2008. I think Edwards and McCain are the sleepers. I think Iowans are not telling the pollsters the truth. But hey, what do I know?
In this interview Bob Newman of Newman Communications, gives us his take on what is going on.
Bob thinks even though Obama is enjoying a lead in the polls, Clinton is going to edge out a victory in Iowa and New Hampshire. On the Republican side, Huckabee will win Iowa, not New Hampshire and South Carolina doesn’t matter because no preacher is going to be elected president.
The unfortunate candidates are McCain and Edwards, both of whom epitomize the core beliefs of their respective parties, but neither seem to be able to capitalize on the issues. McCain may be paying for his support of Bush and the War. Edwards should be the most electable but doesn’t seem to be captivating the electorate. But don’t count him out.
Georgia seemed to be Fred Thompson’s back yard a few months ago. Now, it appears that Fred is either lazy or old or both, but in any event he is out of it for all practical purposes.
Bob would like to see Obama get the nomination. It would make for an exciting election. His problem is trying to acheive broad appeal to whites and blacks. He is not talking about the typical black issues, so as to avoid being perceived as a Jesse Jackson. Clinton, on the other hand, has inherited Bill’s broad base of support among African Americans, which explains why Obama brought out the Oprah. For this reason, Bob wonders if Obama’s lead in the polls is legitimate and raises the possibilities that the Iowa electorate doesn’t want to say on the record that they aren’t voting for Obama.
All things said, the bottom line is who is the most electable? Bob says: Obama for the Democrats and Gulliani for the Republicans.
And the most important question: Is there any chance a Democrat won’t win in ‘08? Bob answers this question by saying that he thinks there is a chance that Giuliani could win.
If the Democrats can’t win in ‘08, I will just……
Comments