Kerry wins the South. The race is over.

Master of Ossus · Post by **Master of Ossus** » 2004-02-10 11:42pm

Kerry won Virginia and Tennessee.

The race is over.

Alex Moon · Post by **Alex Moon** » 2004-02-10 11:45pm

Hehe, Dean lost to that Whackjob Clark.

Seggybop · Post by **Seggybop** » 2004-02-11 12:01am

Apparently Clark is quitting now. o.0

Post by **Vympel** » 2004-02-11 12:02am

Maybe Kerry will offer Clark will have a position in his administration if he wins.

Pu-239 · Post by **Pu-239** » 2004-02-11 12:18am

Fuck. I hate Kerry.

Joe · Post by **Joe** » 2004-02-11 12:21am

Vympel wrote:Maybe Kerry will offer Clark will have a position in his administration if he wins.

I don't see it happening. Edwards has a good shot at Vice President, though.

Spanky The Dolphin · Post by **Spanky The Dolphin** » 2004-02-11 12:29am

Good. If Bush loses the election, I rather it be to Kerry than Dean.

The Duchess of Zeon · Post by **The Duchess of Zeon** » 2004-02-11 12:36am

Master of Ossus wrote: The race is over.

The nomination is over. This actually says absolutely nothing about the race itself: Mondale won the primaries/caucases of Texas, Arkansas, Tennessee, Alabama, Georgia, and North Carolina, just to go on and get so totally stomped by Reagan. The party nominations in the South, you see, are very tightly constrained as a legacy of the post-reconstruction era, and so the voting block represented here is very strictly the democratic base.

Joe · Post by **Joe** » 2004-02-11 12:44am

Kerry is a much stronger candidate than Mondale and there are a lot of very angry people He may not win, but he won't be spanked the way NE liberals have previously been.

Worlds Spanner · Post by **Worlds Spanner** » 2004-02-11 12:51am

The primary is probably the race in question.

The real campaign doesn't "traditionally" kick off until the conventions, although we all know that isn't true any more.

The Duchess of Zeon · Post by **The Duchess of Zeon** » 2004-02-11 12:58am

Joe wrote:He may not win, but he won't be spanked the way NE liberals have previously been.

He has a difficult road to climb. Thanks to the reapportioning of Electoral College Electors due to the 2000 census, Bush can lose several states he won in 2000, and still win the election.

Worlds Spanner · Post by **Worlds Spanner** » 2004-02-11 01:01am

The Duchess of Zeon wrote:
Joe wrote:He may not win, but he won't be spanked the way NE liberals have previously been.
He has a difficult road to climb. Thanks to the reapportioning of Electoral College Electors due to the 2000 census, Bush can lose several states he won in 2000, and still win the election.

Depends on which states though.

Joe · Post by **Joe** » 2004-02-11 01:14am

The Duchess of Zeon wrote:
Joe wrote:He may not win, but he won't be spanked the way NE liberals have previously been.
He has a difficult road to climb. Thanks to the reapportioning of Electoral College Electors due to the 2000 census, Bush can lose several states he won in 2000, and still win the election.

True. I would say Kerry will sink or swim based on how well he can shift the focus of the election from foreign to domestic policy. I honestly think the best strategy would have been to laud Bush's success (perceived or otherwise) on the war on terror and the need to wrap it up and move on to whatever it is the Democrats consider important these days. It wouldn't have appealed to the base, but it would have been more electable. But Kerry's long past that point, so it doesn't really matter.

0.1 · Post by **0.1** » 2004-02-11 05:26am

I don't know why people hate Kerry so damn much because he did a better job and beat out Dean.

Heck, I'd vote for him. But of course, that's due to the fact that I come from a state that will swing Democrat even if Hitler was on the ticket just as long as it isn't the Republicans in the White House.

The Duchess of Zeon · Post by **The Duchess of Zeon** » 2004-02-11 05:27am

0.1 wrote:
Heck, I'd vote for him. But of course, that's due to the fact that I come from a state that will swing Democrat even if Hitler was on the ticket just as long as it isn't the Republicans in the White House.

RI?

0.1 · Post by **0.1** » 2004-02-11 05:27am

The Duchess of Zeon · Post by **The Duchess of Zeon** » 2004-02-11 05:30am

0.1 wrote:CA

Eh, not so much of a lock as the reputation might suggest.

Worlds Spanner · Post by **Worlds Spanner** » 2004-02-11 11:44am

Think Reagan.

Master of Ossus · Post by **Master of Ossus** » 2004-02-11 12:36pm

The Duchess of Zeon wrote: The nomination is over. This actually says absolutely nothing about the race itself: Mondale won the primaries/caucases of Texas, Arkansas, Tennessee, Alabama, Georgia, and North Carolina, just to go on and get so totally stomped by Reagan. The party nominations in the South, you see, are very tightly constrained as a legacy of the post-reconstruction era, and so the voting block represented here is very strictly the democratic base.

Well, I meant the primary race. Since Edwards was basically running on a southern solidarity ticket, of course he needed to win the southern states, and Kerry's victories there took Edwards out of it even if nothing else did.

I agree that the fact that Kerry carried the South means nothing in terms of the actual election.

Post by **LadyTevar** » 2004-02-11 02:45pm

I still say if the Media wouldn't hype who won where, Dean and Clark would still have a fighting chance.

People are sheep. Tell them that SoandSo is the front runner, and they'll vote for him just because hes' the Labelled Front Runner.

Gunshy · Post by **Gunshy** » 2004-02-11 03:38pm

LadyTevar wrote:I still say if the Media wouldn't hype who won where, Dean and Clark would still have a fighting chance.

People are sheep. Tell them that SoandSo is the front runner, and they'll vote for him just because hes' the Labelled Front Runner.

Not always. I mean, look at how Dean simply blew it in Iowa, even though the media had practically annointed him the nominee.

McC · Post by **McC** » 2004-02-11 03:45pm

Generally speaking, I like Kerry's platform (I'm somewhat dubious on his immigration policy and a few other things). Overall, I like what his site says his stance is on the issues overall (speaking mainly from a social standpoint, and not so much an economic one, since my understanding of economics is tremendously small). I'll probably vote for him. I suspect I'd prefer a Republican candidate over a Democrat, but I don't like Bush at all, so I'm sorta defaulted

The Dude · Post by **The Dude** » 2004-02-11 04:10pm

Worlds Spanner wrote:Think Reagan.

Bush is no Reagan.

0.1 · Post by **0.1** » 2004-02-11 04:12pm

For CA, I am talking in modern times (last decade). Does anyone here seriously think that Bush have a shot at winning CA? If so, I'd like to sell you the Golden Gate bridge for $500, trust me, it's a bargain at that price.

After all, times have changed a lot since the 80s. CA used to be solidly Republican about three or four decades ago, just like TX used to be one of the bastion of Democrat powers in the LBJ years.

The election will come down to a few midwest and northern states. The coasts, and a good portion of the south are more or less locked up for both sides. Based on a simple look at the traditional areas, the west coast will be entirely democrat this time around, as well a good portion of the New England states.

The Republicans will get a good majority of Southern states, or states where the electoral votes number in single digits. Then it's a horse race in the critical midwestern states. If anything, as a Republican strategist, I'd seriously worry about those states like TN, FL, PA, OH, etc. You're going to win and lose the election on those. For the vote to count, it really has to be out of those swing states. The Republicans would be dreaming if they think they might win CA this time around.

StarDestroyer.Net BBS

Kerry wins the South. The race is over.

Kerry wins the South. The race is over.

Re: Kerry wins the South. The race is over.

Re: Kerry wins the South. The race is over.