2008: Edwards v. Allen - Who Wins?

[liberalpragmatist]

My guess is Edwards wins that contest although whether he'd be able to carry North Carolina is an open question. Still, I think against Allen he could carry all of Kerry's states and a few others - Ohio, Iowa, Arkansas, Florida, Missouri, Arizona, New Mexico, Colorado, Nevada - any of those really.

[Punkingal]

1. Edwards, I would hope...

Did you know Allen fancies himself the second coming of Ronnie Raygun? :puke:

[Wetzelbill]

4. a younger dumber Raygun

that's all we need.

[longship]

2. First 2006, then 2008.

nt

[Erika]

3. Edwards would win

Allen is an impressive and knowledgeable guy, but he doesn't have the charisma Edwards has. Perhaps an Edwards/Allen ticket?

[liberalpragmatist]

7. I think we're thinking about different Allens

Who are you talking about? I was talking about the Republican Senator from Virginia, George Allen, who's utterly dumb, fancies himself a cowboy, and is billed by the conservatives as the second coming of Reagan and Dubya wrapped into one (even dumber package).

[AmericanDream]

11. Impressive and Knowledgeable guy? What are you talking about?

George Allen is one of the dumbest political figures around... however, that said, he is exactly the kind that will appeal to the conservative base and some other "heartland Americans"...

Recent years have shown that you either have to be a simple guy (like Reagan, Bush II) or a charismatic candidate (like Clinton) to get to the white house... Allen belongs to the former category and Edwards to the second... so it will be close...

[Mass]

17. You are probably thinking to a different Allen

George Allen is the very Republican Senator from VA. There is no sense to an Edwards/Allen ticket.

[tritsofme]

5. Rerun of 2000/2004

I doubt Edwards could carry NC.

FL, PA, OH as the big swing states.

I think Allen's game would play in IA.

Take AR and MO off the table also.

It'd be anyone's game, naturally favoring whoever the Dem nominee is because of 8 years of Republican rule.

People that dismiss George Allen as a candidate obviously haven't been paying attention to American politics for the last 25 years.

[Erika]

6. I think Edwards is stronger than you realize

He is energetic, hopeful, and charismatic. The movement to support him is growing daily.

[enough already]

15. How strong could he be if he coudn't win his home state easily? n/t

[AmericanDream]

16. How foolish is it to expect to carry a state w/o campaigning there?

Get a grip and a dose of reality... people don't vote for VP. As a presidential candidate, he might have some chance of doing that... not as a VP. But the bottom line... you are not gonna carry a state if you don't campaign there.. kerry team planned only 3 edwards event in that area, two of which were just courtesy rallies for his home state. They were not even contesting this state to begin with... so it says nothing about Edwards' strength.

[Awsi Dooger]

8. It would be extremely close

I agree with tritsofme, similar dynamics to 2000 and 2004. Allen is a very logical and formidable GOP nominee because he essentially takes pivotal Virginia off the table. That sticks us on the short end of the margin for error equation again, requiring Florida or Ohio or the very unlikely straight flush of smaller states. I don't know what happens in Virginia if you've got dueling Virginians in Warner against Allen, for president and not senate. I would assume the state would default to its red tendency and vote Allen.

Edwards can't win North Carolina. That state is maybe 12-13 points base Republican in a presidential election. Edwards atop the ticket could slice off maybe half that margin but no more. If he won North Carolina it would be irrelevant because it means he's sweeping the country by a Clinton-like popular vote margin.

Among those other states, Arizona and Missouri are the biggest longshots for Edwards. Probably Arkansas as well. They can't be won in a 50/50 race.

2008 figures to be a coin flip regardless of the nominees. I don't know where this notion arises up that we're a substantial favorite. The GOP will have been in power only two terms. That is historically an armageddon power struggle with among the closest elections in American history. Just look at 1960, 1968, 1976 and 2000. Granted, every year switched to the out party, and that's good news in evaluating 2008, but those were virtual dead heats. The only other two-term example post WW II is 1988 and that was a relatively simple hold of serve for the party in power.

The year we look great is 2012. If we win in 2008, then we'll have an incumbent with the party in charge only one term. That is a massive advantageous position, 11 of 12 re-elections since 1900. If the GOP wins in 2008, then they will have been in charge three straight terms and the restlessness grows in exponential proportion. It would take a likable and popular incumbent to survive re-election in that scenario. That's why I admire Clinton so much as a great handicapper. He ran in the perfect year, '92, when the GOP had been in power since January '81.

[liberalpragmatist]

9. Good analysis

I figure that it's likely to be a close race regardless of the nominees but that because of the time-for-change factor we'll have a slight advantage. Given Bush's current unpopularity and the unpopularity of much of the GOP agenda right now, if that holds (and 3 years is a big *IF*), say, if Bush is thoroughly discredited, we'll have a bigger advantage.

That said, if Bush IS thoroughly discredited it'll probably still be a competitive race. Since nobody is running as Bush's VP, all the Republicans can credibly claim to be "running as their own man." I also think that if we sweep '06 (again, a big *IF*) we might actually make it easier for the Republican candidate. A big '06 loss would turn Bush into a lame-duck and the GOP contenders wouldn't even have to pay lip-service anymore.

The one big exception to all this, I fear, is McCain. If he is the GOP nominee - and it's a possibility that I now think is much more likely than I did even a few months back - than he has a VERY good chance of winning comfortably.

[AmericanDream]

10. Edwards will carry all states from 04 plus Ohio, and most likely Florida

[...of J.Temperance]

12. Senator Edwards would win because he stands for HOPE

Senator Edwards stands for hope and he stands for social justice and that things CAN be better and that the American people DESERVE BETTER.
He stands for UNITING the country, and for there being ONE country.

Howdy Doody Allen is ANOTHER fake Southerner, ANOTHER Carpetbagger and ANOTHER fuckhead who's dumber than a box of rocks. He stands for MORE OF THE SAME, more war, more RECKLESS taxcuts for billionaires, more cutting social programs that help the needy, more racism and bigotry, more National Debt and trillion dollar yearly deficits...in short Howdy Doody Allen stands for MORE MISERY AND SUFFERING.

So, given the two platforms, Senator Edwards would beat Howdy Doody Allen like a red-headed stepchild.

Edwards/Warner 2008...or Edwards/Clark 2008.

Let's go and get the Repuke bastards.

[Clark2008]

26. Hope?

:rofl:

I'm glad I never put my hope in his abilities.

In fact, I nearly didn't vote for Kerry for putting that kind of inexperience on the ticket. Inexperience in the world, not in politics, I should clarify.

[...of J.Temperance]

31. Oh heck

You big bully you!

:cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry:

[win_in_06]

13. It would be a classic match up.

A true populist democrat vs a bona fide right-winger.

I think it would probably come down to fundraising and voter turnout.

We could definitely win this one.

I think the selection of a midwesterner as VP would be key. One state could make the difference.

Gephardt = MO
Bayh = IN

[abluelady]

14. Allen is another dummy like Bush

Probably all the dummies who liked Bush will vote for Allen. We just have to hope that the voters are disenfranchised enough with Bush to vote against his party. Man for man the repugs have shown they don't vote for the better man. They vote for their guns, their god and against the gays. We must change the framing.

[win_in_06]

19. I think the fundies/dummies will be even more energized for Allen.

He is more conservative than Bush.

[abluelady]

21. And More Important

His daddy was a football coach.:sarcasm:

[Mass]

18. I would hope Edwards, but dont underestimate Allen

1/ He has been the governor of VA before being senator. He has executive experience, which is something Edwards misses.

2/ He is kind of a blank slate, just as Bush was and is from the South. So the advantage of Edwards being a Southerner disappears.

3/ He is impressive when he does a speech. He is definitively lousy when he speaks without script, but given a script, he is doing great.

4/ He is the one who will benefit from the low expectations game, while expectations will be high on Edwards.

[Zynx]

20. It would be very close and I'm not sure who would win.

Allen is a much more formidable candidate than many on the DU give him credit for. Sure, the guy is as dumb as a brick, but Americans love dumb candidates.

[ClassWarrior]

22. Edwards, of course.

Geez, didn't you ever have a basketball coach?? Visualize Victory!!!

B-)

NGU.

[phylla]

23. Allen would cruise to the Whitehouse. I despise him, but he would win.

smooth talking but
says nothing but talking points
smarmy, obsequious, smiling,
tobacco chewing,
boot wearing,
noose decorating,
bigot...
who happens to be the son of a professional football coach and
was a quarterback at UVa..
that is enough to elect him right there....

This man is a threat. Do not underestimate him.

[PurityOfEssence]

24. Edwards. Just imagine the debate.

Allen is a slobbering idiot. Edwards is not only brilliant, but a very polished performer.

[Clark2008]

25. Allen, sorry to say.

Edwards couldn't flip his own state and he was only marginally popular in Arizona and New Mexico (came in fifth, in one of those states, but I can't remember which).

Besides, he has no foreign policy experience. I don't think Allen does either, but the meme is that Republicans are always stronger on this issue (notice I said "meme," not that I think that they are).

[methinks2]

27. Edwards, no doubt about it,

:woohoo:

[LostinVA]

28. Allen is too RW nutty -- even * "toned it down" in 2004

And Edwards has the blue collar roots thing going....

[Pithy Cherub]

29. The third party candidate. n/t

[mikelewis]

30. Whoever counts the votes...

How they are cast is obviously irrelevant.

[Oceansaway]

32. Edwards/Obama ??

[nickshepDEM]

33. Depends... Allen is an electoral bad ass.

He's been the underdog in the past, and always come out on top. However, he's a Bush stamp, and could probably be defeated due to Republican fatigue.