NH?

Guesses?

Tom Dewey...

Elitist scumbags, and dumb Amerikunz everywhere will think they have voting rights..

I see a virtual three way tie for first palce with the Democratis with Senator Clinton in first place,Senator Obama in second place and Senator Edwards in third place.

Amongst the Republicans I see a virual tie for first place with Huckabee in front and Romney behind by a couple of points,and a virualy tie for second place with Mc Cain in front and Thompson behind by a couple of points.

In other words: No front runner in either party.

If you are right TT just look at how each of the candidates 'spins' their win/loss

Huckabee has made some very strange political strategy maneuvers lately
(his no- ad ad and his Leno appearance)


Clinton is losing ground everywhere:nice:

So I'll go with Romney or McCain

and

Obama or Edwards

New Hampshire is a whole different ballgame

Primary votes are just as rigged as any other voting; Florida has no monopoly on rigging elections.

The DNC establishment candidate will win Iowa, and that will be Hillary, and the RNC establishment candidate will win the New Hampshire primary, and that will be Huckabee.

Write in Camejo/Fonda in 2008.

Well, I heard Huckabee's plan to get rid of the IRS on The Tonight Show. It may sound as unrealistic as H.R. 676, but it sounds good to me.

He's a 'Fair Tax' advocate. That plan merely changes the name of the IRS to something else; Wall Street, the stock market, and big business can't make big profits without a huge yearly influx of Federal money, so they just came up with new scams to push the tax burden off on wage earners.

Jordin Sparks!

Ooops, sorry, wrong game show...

He's a 'Fair Tax' advocate. That plan merely changes the name of the IRS to something else; Wall Street, the stock market, and big business can't make big profits without a huge yearly influx of Federal money, so they just came up with new scams to push the tax burden off on wage earners.

Are you just repeating what the voices in your head tell you?


To answer the question: Huckabee and Obama will win Iowa. Romney and Clinton will win New Hampshire. Ron Paul will do better than anyone in the Mainstream Media expected him to, but no one will acknowledge it.

Are you just repeating what the voices in your head tell you?

I read the 'Fair tax' bill in it's entirety. Obviously you haven't, or you wouldn't be in favor of it. Nobody with any sense is, except for those who will make immense amounts of money off of it, and that tiny little group doesn't include over 85% of Americans, who will be paying a lot more in taxes than they do now, and saddled with an even more medieval bureaucratic Federal agency.

Are you just repeating what the voices in your head tell you?

I think he's trying to make a fair point.

"Read my lips, no new taxes"

We hear tax promises every election, but the reality is that, with the economy structured the way it is, there just isn't much room for maneuver, so after every election, aside from a few name changes, and a little creative accounting, not a lot changes.

Do you think for a minute the IRS would be abolished, without an almost identical replacement, in other words do you see the remote possibility of anything much more happening than a simple creative name change?

The IRS deals with over $2.2 trillion, it's not the sort of thing congress is going to vote to forget about.

People complain that nothing ever changes, and at the same time everyone is afraid of any anti-establishment ideas, such as the FairTax. Get real! You can't have your cake and eat it too. Stop complaining about a system that you're helping to keep in place.

There's plenty of room for maneuver, but first you have to start thinking outside the box.

People complain that nothing ever changes

And that things change to much.

Often the same people complain about both, sometimes even when talking about the same subject.

People like complaining.

and at the same time everyone is afraid of any anti-establishment ideas, such as the FairTax.

What's anti-establishment about it?

Isn't it a member of the establishment proposing it?

You can't have your cake and eat it too. Stop complaining about a system that you're helping to keep in place.

How do I keep this system in place, or is that just a bit of throw away fiction?

There's plenty of room for maneuver, but first you have to start thinking outside the box.

I prefer to think within reality, but impress me, show me where you pull an alternative $2.2 trillion from, show me this outside the box thinking.

How do I keep this system in place, or is that just a bit of throw away fiction?


You're keeping the IRS in place by posting messages about how much you doubt that the economy can function without it. Here's a direct quote from two posts ago:


but the reality is that, with the economy structured the way it is, there just isn't much room for maneuver,


If that's not pro-establishment, I don't know what is. It's called FUD, which stands for Fear, Uncertainty, and Doubt. It's a common tactic employed by every major establishment in the world to keep people in line. Every time something new and better comes along, all you have to do to get rid of it is plant a little seed of doubt in people's minds.

As Machiavelli said,
"It ought to be remembered that there is nothing more difficult to take in hand, more perilous to conduct, or more uncertain in its success, than to take the lead in the introduction of a new order of things. Because the innovator has for enemies all those who have done well under the old conditions, and lukewarm defenders in those who may do well under the new. This coolness arises partly from fear of the opponents, who have the laws on their side, and partly from the incredulity of men, who do not readily believe in new things until they have had a long experience of them."

And that's why we still have the IRS.


I prefer to think within reality, but impress me, show me where you pull an alternative $2.2 trillion from, show me this outside the box thinking.

We could stop keeping our troops in 130 countries. We could shut down 700 permanent military bases on other countries' soil. We could get rid of the Departments of Education and Energy. We could give young people today a way out of the Social Security \ Medicare Ponzi scheme.

With our federal government's deficit spending, it's only a matter of time before the whole thing collapses. You can make major changes now and avoid a catastrophe, or you can watch your country fall apart in a couple decades.

If you want the government to take care of you from the cradle to the grave, then I agree you can't get rid of the IRS. The only way you can is if you change your view about the proper role of government.

People complain that nothing ever changes, and at the same time everyone is afraid of any anti-establishment ideas, such as the FairTax. Get real! You can't have your cake and eat it too. Stop complaining about a system that you're helping to keep in place.

There's plenty of room for maneuver, but first you have to start thinking outside the box.

God you're sexy when you talk politics.

You're keeping the IRS in place by posting messages about how much you doubt that the economy can function without it.

For a start I don't say anything of the sort, but even if I did do you really propose to tell me that my two posts influence the entire economy of America?

Nope, as I suspected, throw away fiction.


If that's not pro-establishment, I don't know what is.

Well then you obviously don't know what is.

It's called FUD, which stands for Fear, Uncertainty, and Doubt.

Nope, but that's called buzzwords and fiction.

All I was stating was simple economic facts, that the current structure leaves little maneuver with the current tax system, I'm not afraid of anything, uncertain about anything, or in doubt of anything.

I'm sorry, that was just more fiction.

We could stop keeping our troops in 130 countries. We could shut down 700 permanent military bases on other countries' soil.

Economics is obviously not your strong point, is it?

Let us assume that these things were instantly achievable, with no ramifications, you've just accounted for less than 1% of the $2.2 trillion we are talking about.

In other words, even if it was a realistic instant objective you're talking about a drop in the ocean, when it comes to the greater economic picture, after all, it's not even equivalent to the drop of 2.3% in the average Americans income, between 2001 and 2004, in fact it's not even equivalent to half of that.

Like I said, I prefer to think within reality.

This seems appropriate for today:
http://www.toothpastefordinner.com/010308/scared-of-government.gif

For a start I don't say anything of the sort, but even if I did do you really propose to tell me that my two posts influence the entire economy of America?

Nope, as I suspected, throw away fiction.


You said exactly what I quoted you as saying! The reason we have the IRS is because everyone thinks they can't live without it. You said explicitly that you think we can't live without it. I'm not making this up; it's on the same web page you're reading right now.

No single raindrop thinks that it's responsible for the flood.

And now you're trying to act like you didn't even say it. You're officially on my "not worth talking to" list.

You said exactly what I quoted you as saying!

You claimed I said "You're keeping the IRS in place by posting messages about how much you doubt that the economy can function without it."

I've never said anything of the sort.

I said, and I quote "but the reality is that, with the economy structured the way it is, there just isn't much room for maneuver"

Which is something quite different.

You're officially on my "not worth talking to" list.

And your on my officially "Throws his toys out the pram when he loses an argument" list

If you are right TT just look at how each of the candidates 'spins' their win/loss


Of course they'll all spin it,they're politicans after all.


Huckabee has made some very strange political strategy maneuvers lately
(his no- ad ad and his Leno appearance)


I don't think he'll be around long.


Clinton is losing ground everywhere


I don't see that,in fact she'll very likely be the next President [and a damn better one than the boob we have now].









Ron Paul will do better than anyone in the Mainstream Media expected him to, but no one will acknowledge it.



I'm not sure Ron Paul will ever do better than fourth.

I heard Ron Paul on Hannity the other day,except for his oppostiton to Iraq and the war on drugs,Ron Paul is just the same old shill for Corperate America that the other Republicans are,any non-conservative who supports him is a fool.

I heard Ron Paul on Hannity the other day,except for his oppostiton to Iraq and the war on drugs,Ron Paul is just the same old shill for Corperate America that the other Republicans are,any non-conservative who supports him is a fool.

That "other day" was most likely yesterday afternoon when Hannity interviewed him. :p As far as your ridiculous comments regarding Dr. Paul, you are either insane [and] or a very, very ignorant fool [possibly retarded]. It is troubling that individuals as clueless as you vote in America.

That "other day" was most likely yesterday afternoon when Hannity interviewed him. :p As far as your ridiculous comments regarding Dr. Paul, you are either insane [and] or a very, very ignorant fool [possibly retarded]. It is troubling that individuals as clueless as you vote in America.

Snouter, I take it you'll be proudly joining Truth Teller in enthusiastically caucusing for Hillary as soon as that wonderous opportunity arrives in your historic and quaint state of Connecticut?

I don't see that,in fact she'll very likely be the next President






Dream on. She brings no magic bullet and anyone should be able to see that .

Ron Paul is just the same old shill for Corperate America that the other Republicans are

This is probably the most strikingly uninformed and patently ignorant statements Truth Teller has made since -- well, since his previous post at DA. It's particularly ironic given that Truth Teller is apparently a supporter of Hillary Clinton, who is as slavish a doormat to corporate interests as exists in Congress.

I don't see that,in fact she'll very likely be the next President [and a damn better one than the boob we have now].

You don't see it? You're not looking... I heard on the radio on the way home that Zogby had her 9 points behind Obama. That's what they call, "losing ground".

I heard Ron Paul on Hannity the other day,except for his oppostiton to Iraq and the war on drugs,Ron Paul is just the same old shill for Corperate America that the other Republicans are,any non-conservative who supports him is a fool.

Wow... and you like Mrs. Clinton?

Actually,I haven't decided who to support yet,it will either be Clinton,Edwards or Obama.

But I can see the writing on the wall,the election is Hillary's to lose and to say so isn't an endorsement [and she will be better than the boob who is currently in office,simply because no one can do worse than Bush has] just a fact.

I am not an extremist,I am a moderate leftist,so I expect immature extremists to give me their childish insults.

You don't see it? You're not looking... I heard on the radio on the way home that Zogby had her 9 points behind Obama. That's what they call, "losing ground".


Those polls mean nothing this early in the race and especially not in a Caucus state where turnout is the key.


Wow... and you like Mrs. Clinton?



She's more moderate than Ron Paul.

Slightly OT I guess, but kinda related: The latest letter from Mr. Moore (click here) (http://www.michaelmoore.com/words/message/index.php)

Slightly OT I guess, but kinda related: The latest letter from Mr. Moore (click here) (http://www.michaelmoore.com/words/message/index.php)

I think it was a pretty reasonable assessment by Mr Moore. Thanks for posting it.

To answer the question: Huckabee and Obama will win Iowa. Romney and Clinton will win New Hampshire. Ron Paul will do better than anyone in the Mainstream Media expected him to, but no one will acknowledge it.
Well you're shooting par so far

Ron Paul got 10%

Ron Paul got 10%

That's pretty much where he was expected to be, in Iowa. I predicted around 8-10% for him in Iowa, and a 4th or 5th placing, possibly his best bet is up next (New Hampshire), I think there he will do better than some expected (but again, as with Iowa, broadly in line with political predictions) but by then his supporters will be starting to see his real standing (as opposed to his online standing) and there after his poll results will start to fade.

I think for him to have stepped up from the position of "happy quirky candidate, that amuses until the real election starts" to "genuine candidate, with genuine support" he needed to get at the very least 14% and a 3rd in Iowa, and a top two position in New Hampshire.

Without those his campaign will probably rapidly fade.

It's the same every four years, there is always the quirky outsider that the media hypes up, and who appears to have strong support, until the primaries start (in some cases they've even managed to maintain some legs once the primaries have started, we've seen one or two second tier candidates get the odd first or second in early primaries before, albeit fading soon after).

Huckabee and Obama will win Iowa.

I was right.

Ron Paul will do better than anyone in the Mainstream Media expected him to, but no one will acknowledge it.

I was also right there. Ron Paul got 10%, which is higher than any of the polls gave him.

I was right.



I was also right there. Ron Paul got 10%, which is higher than any of the polls gave him.

Excellent prognosticating, Feenix.

I predict that Huck and Obama will win their respective party's caucuses in Iowa.

This is probably the most strikingly uninformed and patently ignorant statements Truth Teller has made since -- well, since his previous post at DA. It's particularly ironic given that Truth Teller is apparently a supporter of Hillary Clinton, who is as slavish a doormat to corporate interests as exists in Congress.

Hillary came in 3rd. LOL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Excellent prognosticating, Feenix.

Thanx :nice:

We'll see if my Clinton / Romney prediction for NH comes true. I'm hoping it won't, but I'm afraid it will... :hmm:

I was right.



I was also right there. Ron Paul got 10%, which is higher than any of the polls gave him.

Indeed. Nobody can argue that you don't have an intimate, empathic feel for which way the idiot vote will go, that's for sure.

I predict that Huck and Obama will win their respective party's caucuses in Iowa.


Religion played a huge role in Mike Huckabee's triumph in the Iowa Republican caucuses, though there are some mixed signals for him on the road ahead. On the Democratic side, it was fresh blood — and an outcry for change — that helped propel Barack Obama to his victory in the state.


http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5hWo9LoUnPeka7_l2cOeaLRisAJ5gD8TV5IJ80

I was right.

So was I, about Edwards showing well.

I was also right there. Ron Paul got 10%, which is higher than any of the polls gave him.

Actually it's exactly what Zogby International gave him in the poll they carried out between December 30, 2007 - January 2, 2008

http://zogby.com/news/ReadNews.dbm?ID=1411

He came exactly where he was expected to come in Iowa, between 8-10% in most recent major polls.

The Dems were virtually a 30/30/30 tie,the extra 8% Obama got came from the remaining canidates delegates who went for him during the second round of voting [ the Democrat's caucus allows that ,the Republican's don't].

I was however very surprised that Obama got the majority of the women's vote [albeit a slight majority].

As for Huckabee ,he has the greatest scandal of all the canidates [namely the serial rapist he pardoned who went out to commit multiple murders and rapes in another state,even Willie Horton didn't do that].

I guess Iowa Evangelicals think serial rape should be legal as long as one of the victims is related to Bill Clinton.:shrug:

Romney is toast,I think most Americans will vote for a woman or a racial minority,but they won't vote for a Mormon,let alone a Mormon who in reality is a much bigger flip-flopper than John Kerry was falsely accused of being.

I was however very surprised that Obama got the majority of the women's vote [albeit a slight majority].

You're not the only one. The political comentators are having a field day right now parading around with these results... The fact that Obama surprised everyone by motivating first time voters really says something too.

My prediction for NH -

Romney
McCain
Paul
Huckabee
Giuliani
Thompson
Hunter

I think they're overplaying McCain's support in Iowa, and Romney will win with a slight lead over McCain. Paul will come in third causing massive media coverage, calling it "shocking". (hopefully) Which will cause some momentum to build for his campaign, and hopefully a 2nd place (or better) finish in Neveda, or Michigan. Hopefully, this isn't me being an optimist. *sigh* We will see on Tuesday.

http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5hWo9LoUnPeka7_l2cOeaLRisAJ5gD8TV5IJ80

Hey Thanks. I was looking for an article like that...

The Dems were virtually a 30/30/30 tie,the extra 8% Obama got came from the remaining canidates delegates who went for him during the second round of voting [ the Democrat's caucus allows that ,the Republican's don't].

I was however very surprised that Obama got the majority of the women's vote [albeit a slight majority].

That's interesting. Do you think that Hillary would get more women votes if she takes off the pants and puts on a skirt?

That's interesting. Do you think that Hillary would get more women votes if she takes off the pants and puts on a skirt?

:rofl:





No.

My prediction for NH -

Romney
McCain
Paul
Huckabee
Giuliani
Thompson
Hunter


I notice you're leaving the Dems out.

Anyway,I think Mc Cain will win NH ,Romney will be a distant second and Paul will be a distant third [or worse].

As for the good people: Close between Obama and Clinton,I'd give the slight nod to Obama.

Edwards a somewhat distant third,the rest aren't even worth mentioning.




I think they're overplaying McCain's support in Iowa,


I think McCain has done exceptionally well,especailly with the lack of resources he's had.



and Romney will win with a slight lead over McCain.


Romney is an empty suit.

Did you see Saturday night's debate?

Romney was the only person that night [ in both parties ,mind you] who I thought did an awful job of debating.

He's a flip/flopper who has no values.

He'll say anything to get elected [even lie about his dad "marching" with Martin Luther King]and he looks like a middle-aged Ken doll[with much less intellect then the Ken doll].


Paul will come in third causing massive media coverage, calling it "shocking". (hopefully) Which will cause some momentum to build for his campaign, and hopefully a 2nd place (or better) finish in Neveda, or Michigan. Hopefully, this isn't me being an optimist. *sigh* We will see on Tuesday.


Keep dreaming,I think NH will be the best Paul will ever do.

That's interesting. Do you think that Hillary would get more women votes if she takes off the pants and puts on a skirt?


LOL.

No I don't.

Polls show that the majority of men and women alike who support Hillary are in my age group [over 50],the majority of Obama supporters are very young ,and it's young women who got Obama slightly ahead in the women's vote.

Plus,Iowa and New Hampshire are states where independents can vote in the caucus and primary,the big states aren't like that,so Hillary [or almost anyone else] isn't in or out yet.

What Obama is doing is drawing young people and independents and he's not only geting the youth vote in a major way that no canidate since Mc Govern has,he's also taking a lot of independent votes away from Ron Paul [thank you for that Barack].

As for myself,I think all the Democrats are all great and I'll support whomever gets the Democratic nomination.

I lke Obama's vision,I like Edwards' stands on most issues,I like the fact that Clinton has been tested and can withstand everything [plus I like her experience and yes, I think she has the best chance of winning the election of all the Democrats].

I think any Democrat elected president will get us out of this war quciker than any Republican elected except maybe Ron Paul [but I'm not a one issue voter and I think Ron Paul is wrong on most issues].


As a Democrat, I think Hillary has the best chance of winning the election,I think Mike Huckabee is the Republican who would be the easiest for her to defeat,and I think John McCain would be the Republican that would be the hardest for her to defeat.

I just don't want a Republican to win (unless it's Paul), this country can't stand 4 or 8 more years of wars, corporate cronyism, loss of liberty, increased poverty, etc. The only Democrat that's good is Kucinich, and again, he has no chance in this ****ed up country. Out of the top democrats Edwards seems to be the best, Hillary is bad news, I've heard bad things about Obama, but where does he really stand on important issue's? Is he just another corporate lobbyist masquerading as a representative of the people? Is he all talk?

For TT -

Obama 39
Hillary 33
Edwards 19
Richardson 6
Kucinich 2
Gravel 1

I didn't put it up because I thought it would be obvious, so I will put percentages up.

Romney is an empty suit.


I agree with that. I can't believe the crap that comes out of that man's mouth. It's amazing to me that anyone would be dumb enough to think he's being sincere.

I agree with that. I can't believe the crap that comes out of that man's mouth. It's amazing to me that anyone would be dumb enough to think he's being sincere.

Agreed. He's one of the most transparent candidates out there.

To answer the question: Huckabee and Obama will win Iowa. Romney and Clinton will win New Hampshire. Ron Paul will do better than anyone in the Mainstream Media expected him to, but no one will acknowledge it.

I was right about Clinton and wrong about Romney. Ron Paul only got 8% of the vote in NH, so I guess I was wrong about that, too.

Still, three out of five ain't that bad. 60% of the time, I'm right all the time! :nice:

It was the people over 50 came out and won it for Hillary and I must admit I'm about to join my G-G-Generation and declare my support for Hillary.

I was leaning for Obama [who I think would make a great VEEP ,though I think Sam Nunn and Wesley Clark would also be great VEEP choices]but the debate Saturday night won me over to Hillary and I think the debate won most of yesterday's voters over to her as well.

Her Senate record has not been perfect,she has made mistakes,but [like John Kennedy]she has learned from her mistakes fast and has not repeated them.

I think a Hillary presidency and a Democratic Congress is the best bet we have in cleaning up this major mess that Bush has made.

I think Ron Paul should drop out and run as a Indie canidate [though I think he's going to wait until he addresses the Republicans at the convention before doing that].

Romney is all but finished.

It was the people over 50 came out and won it for Hillary and I must admit I'm about to join my G-G-Generation and declare my support for Hillary.

I was leaning for Obama [who I think would make a great VEEP ,though I think Sam Nunn and Wesley Clark would also be great VEEP choices]but the debate Saturday night won me over to Hillary and I think the debate won most of yesterday's voters over to her as well.

Her Senate record has not been perfect,she has made mistakes,but [like John Kennedy]she has learned from her mistakes fast and has not repeated them.

I think a Hillary presidency and a Democratic Congress is the best bet we have in cleaning up this major mess that Bush has made.

I think Ron Paul should drop out and run as a Indie canidate [though I think he's going to wait until he addresses the Republicans at the convention before doing that].

Romney is all but finished.

So when's your state's primary? Super Tuesday? You don't need to decide just yet. Obama may surprise, it's still relatively early in the process. Fight the pigeonholing of the pundits! And seriously, what "experience" did Bill have when he assumed the Presidential mantle, after all? Experience is only one factor.
Just my :2c:
:)

So when's your state's primary? Super Tuesday? You don't need to decide just yet. Obama may surprise, it's still relatively early in the process. Fight the pigeonholing of the pundits! And seriously, what "experience" did Bill have when he assumed the Presidential mantle, after all? Experience is only one factor.
Just my :2c:
:)


I don't think Obama is too young [or McCain too old] to become president.

And I will support whomever gets the Democratic nomination and I think whomever wins the Democratic nomination will make a good president.



I think my primary is March ,and remember only 1% of the country has voted so far,but I think Hillary has the best chance of winning the election [and the nomination,especially the big states],she's been scrutinized and tested[unfairly in my view] and come out on the winning side.


I admire Obama's idealism,I aslo admire Clinton's pragmatism and I'll vote pragmatism over idealism any time.