|
Democratic Field Wide-Open
The "consensus" is that Dean was the star the first day of the DNC meeting, and that Edwards shined on day two. The Edward's soundbite:
Without Kerry, whose cancer operation kept him away, or Graham, whose heart operation kept him away, Dean and Edwards didn't have the chance to become giant-killers, even though their stars were the ones that shined. Here's the latest CNN/Time national numbers-- it's still all about name recognition: Lieberman 16% And it really is wide open. "Undecided" numbers twice as many as the leader, with the leader only 14% above the candidate in 9th place. As for the two leading candidates, Lieberman was viewed favorably by only 49% and Gephardt by only 41%. With +90% name recognition, the only way one of those two is going to get the nomination, is if they are the last two standing. Jerome Armstrong on Feb 22 @ 8:14 PM
| TrackBack
Comments
However, in that poll, both Lieberman and Gephardt have unusually high "Not Familiar" points among Democrats and Independent Voters (as do all the candidates): Time/CNN Poll conducted by Harris interactive, Feb 19-20, Democrats and Independents who lean Democratic nationwide: Favorable/Unfavorable/Not Familiar/Not Sure Lieberman 49 17 32 2 It's important to note the high "not familiar" responses that each candidate gets. Statistics can mean what you want them to mean, depeding upon how they are reported. (For example, I could go around posting that with +90% name recognition, Lieberman is viewed unfavorably by a mere 17% -- that would be misleading, too.) You are right, however, that it's still anyone's game. But I do not think that you can conclude yet that "The only way one of those two is going to get the nomination, is if they are the last two standing." It's far too early to make that conclusion. The poll, which you are drawing your conclusion from, doesn't seem to support it, I think. Posted by: GoVOTE on February 22, 2003 10:19 PMYou are correct, I did not draw the "+90% name recognition" from this poll. "not familiar" and "name ID" are two different animals, the former dealing mostly with positions (not enough familiar with to draw a conclusion...); whereas, the argument that Lieberman has only 66% name ID, or Gephardt has only 56% name ID, amongst Democratic primary voters, is off the wall... so I would just add, I base the conclusion that "the only way one of those two is going to get the nomination, is if they are the last two standing" on the whole of polling that I've seen. But the wider point, "that it's still anyone's game" is much stronger an argument, I agree. Posted by: JB on February 22, 2003 10:38 PMWhat are the outstanding past accomplishments of Lieberman, Gephardt, Kerry and Edwards? Do any of them have a theme or something that they wish to be identified with as they seek the Presidency? JB, Thank you for your honesty. With all due respect, don't you think the write-up on the front page should be adjusted to reflect a more accurate representation? If there's a running theme throughout these comment boards from those who have not jumped on the Dean bandwangon, it's that Dean supporters tend to exaggerate, especially at the expense of the other candidates. I'd hate for you to add fuel to the fire. Posted by: GoVOTE on February 23, 2003 12:05 PM"I'd hate for you to add fuel to the fire." Ha ha, as if I'm not responsible for a few cords here myself. Listen, I'm a Dean supporter, I have personal opinions, and it's going to show. The good thing is, that the comment boards allow back and forth to give equal time, even if the front page doesn't have equal time. I have thought about turning this into a free for all, giving supporters of the other candidates equal posting capability. A LT reader mentioned that I start another site for just that, but i's just not going to happen, one website is enough. That would be the only solution to what I see as your objection, because getting rid of personal opinion (a less biased way of saying "a more accurate representation") is something that is not going to be hidden. Posted by: JB on February 23, 2003 01:35 PMJB, Keep up the good work! Posted by: JobyTodd on February 23, 2003 02:06 PMPeople are signing up for "meetups" about their candidates all over the country. Here's the latest tally for each candidate: Edwards 316 No that is not a typo. While some candidates may have high name recognition at this point, only one seems to be getting people off their asses and going to meetings. In their defense, the other candidates don't have a link to the meetups on their websites. But only 16 for Lieberman and Gephardt is pretty telling. LOL! Posted by: HowardDean4Prez on February 23, 2003 09:55 PMAnd only Dean has the enthusiastic support of the gay and lesbian block going all out him. They are well entrenched in several media outlets and in Hollywood, the biggest area of Dean excitement. Posted by: cal-dem on February 23, 2003 10:54 PMDean and Graham have a surprisingly high unfavorable number in comparison to their favorable number. Only Al S. has a higher relative unfavorable number. Posted by: on February 23, 2003 11:00 PMYea, I noticed that too. 8% unfavorable compared to 13% favorable struck me. I think it's because the majority of people who know of Dean currently, only know of him as the pacifist ultra-liberal candidate. He hasn't received enough face time to dispel these myths. This begs the question whether he'll get the opportunity to address these falsehoods given the crowded field. I think his candor will attract a lot of reporters who will grow tired of hearing the same crap from Lie/Dick/John/Wonderboy so there is hope. Posted by: HowardDean4Prez on February 24, 2003 03:03 AMjb - I will agree that the field is wide open and Dean could come in a la Carter, if he scores some early victories. (anything less than 2nd in NH will be a disaster). Thus, its still too early to stick a fork in Lieberman - especially given his low "unfavorable" numbers. By the way, is anyone else surprised a the fav/unfav numbers for Graham? Posted by: Mike the Analyst on February 24, 2003 06:12 AMI'm not a Dean guy, but even in Dallas where I live folks are forming informal Dean meetups. Posted by: pc on February 24, 2003 08:13 AMI did a piss-poor job but I split my "analysis" (ahem) at my blog into "who I want to win" and "who I think will win" the nomination. Lieberman leads the latter and Carol Mosely-Braun leads the former. Although I am undecided as too whom I will support (I'm highly impressed with Dean so far but also want to back a truly viable candidate), I have this early feeling that Leiberman is going to win the nomination and also be the best candidate against Bush. The reason I feel this way is his manner mostly. He seems able to be likeable while at the same time criticizing someone. He also comes off as very smart, honest and reasonable not strident. This ability makes him I think better able to appeal more to independents and even some Republicans while still scoring points with his Democratic base. I think the Quinnipac (sp) poll of a few weeks ago kind of backs up what I'm saying. Bush only led Leiberman by I think 49-43. Posted by: Ced on February 24, 2003 10:05 AMBY 04, the war in Iraq will be over -- either be a big quagmire or a small quagmire -- and people will turn their attention to the economy, as always. At this point, economy will liklely be in very early stages of a very slow recovery and we will have a record $500B deficit. Who will have credibility on the economy? (Seems like a budget-balancing governor is best. I don't see how any of these senators can make the case effectively. Posted by: KansasDem on February 24, 2003 11:06 AMI see your point KansasDem. I too think very highly of Dean. Maybe if things are truly as bad as you forecast almost any of top tier can overtake Bush and win in 2004. Posted by: Ced on February 24, 2003 01:15 PMCed, Dean is a viable candidate. Unlike Kucinich, Sharpton, Moseley-Braun, he is NOT a protest candidate. He has a very real shot at earning the Democratic nomination and the White House. Posted by: JobyTodd on February 24, 2003 02:08 PMCed, You must be observing the wrong Joe Lieberman. The Joe Lieberman who's running for president is a whiny, annoying, self-righteous double-talker...this is exactly what Independents DON'T look for in presidential candidates! If you all resign yourselves into believing some corporate media myth that Lieberman has the nomination locked up, then it will turn into a self-fulfilling prophecy. PLEASE, let's not squander this opportunity, folks! Posted by: Tony on February 24, 2003 04:32 PMMcCain was the darling of the Independents in 2000, and when was HE not strident? Posted by: RParker on February 24, 2003 05:51 PMMcCain was also straight-forward and assertive. Lieberman comes off as just a wimp. Posted by: Tony on February 24, 2003 09:26 PMOut of all the Democratic candidates for the 2004 Presidential Election.. Dick Gephardt is the Strongest Candidate for President in 2004. Gephardt is a former Presidential Candidate and a former Democratic Leader in the US House of Representative. He is a Congressman from Missouri- swing state in the MIdwest. Gephardt has strong ties with Organized Labor. Other candidates. Lieberman- too conservative, Kerry and Dean are too liberal ( Bush- Cheney will run ads against Kerry and Dean as New England Liberals. Edwards- too inexperienced. Bob Graham- too unhealthy to be President. Other Candidates are unelectible. Gephardt is able to win all the states Gore carried in 2000 plus Missouri- Gephardts home state, West Virginia- Democratic Stronghold in the Border South- Dukakis carried it in 1988 and Clinton won it in 1992 and 1996 and New Hampshire a swing state in the Northeast and Nevada- a Swing State in the WestCoast- Enviromentally conscience and Strong Latino Population. If i were Gephardt, I would select Bill Richardson. Governor of New Mexico as the VP runningmate. Richardson is a former Congressman from New Mexico, Served as Ambassador to UN and Secretary of Energy during the Clinton Administration. First Hispanic candidate for VP.
How can we expect Gephardt to win the nomination (much less the White House) when for three successive election cycles, he couldn't even win back the House of Represenatives for us. Granted that elections for the House and the White House are different, House races have increasingly become "nationalized". Gephardt served us proudly as Minority Leader and potential Speaker-in-Waiting. However, he'll be lucky to survive the first few weeks of the primary process. Howard Dean is the Democrats best hope of winning back the White House. Dean-Clark 2004 How can we expect Gephardt to win the nomination (much less the White House) when for three successive election cycles, he couldn't even win back the House of Represenatives for us. Granted that elections for the House and the White House are different, House races have increasingly become "nationalized". Gephardt served us proudly as Minority Leader and potential Speaker-in-Waiting. However, he'll be lucky to survive the first few weeks of the primary process. Howard Dean is the Democrats best hope of winning back the White House. Dean-Clark 2004 Post a comment
|