I heard some business about Edwards wishing not to pledge his delegates to either front runner. Was that just fancy-dancy for "I'll tell you who I slide 'em to on Thursday like I said now git!" . . . ?
Dunno, I -suspect- that as this should be a close race past Super Tuesday (there's some stuff going on in Maine I don't quite follow first), that Edwards is really staying out of it so he can leverage himself. He'd be a vote winner on either ticket, though the I believe he's closer to Barrack than Hilary.
I forgot to mention, McCain is a real threat to either Obama or Clinton according to the polls (oddly not to Edwards apparently), and I really can see the Democrats doing a Detroit Lions against the war vet. He looks less likely to screw up, and is his own man, so has less people to please, and less of a murky or inconsistent past.
He'd be a better President than the current incumbent at least...
Conventional wisdom seems to be that the Democrats always need the South to gain the presidency (I think Kennedy was the last non-Southerner), so maybe Edwards as running-mate can deliver that. Hope he can get them to take some of his program on board as well. If there really is a recession coming up, a bit of old-fashioned big-government thinking might not go amiss.
Recent occasions when the President has been the more northern of the two candidates (in terms of political history rather than place of birth):
1992: Clinton (Arkansas) beats Bush (Texas) 1984: Regan (California) beats Carter (Georgia). Hmm, some overlap there. 1960: Kennedy (Massachusetts) beats Nixon (California)
I think anyone needs the South to win the Presidency. That and Ohio.
I seem to remember there also being some stat about the taller candidate almost always winning. So how come the taller candidate's always from the southern state? Some conspiracy, I suspect.
I think anyone needs the South to win the Presidency
Probably true to some extent of any suitably large subset of states.
I think the theory is that the South is by default Republican, but may vote for a Democrat if he's one of its own. So the Democrats can only (since Kennedy) win with a Southerner, but that's a necessary rather than a sufficient condition.
how come the taller candidate's always from the southern state?
Hmm, maybe something in the protein levels of the regional dietary pattern? Or maybe the South being more traditional tends to defer to taller men, so a short Southerner would never have achieved sufficient prominence to get near a sniff of candidacy.
Comments 7
Reply
I forgot to mention, McCain is a real threat to either Obama or Clinton according to the polls (oddly not to Edwards apparently), and I really can see the Democrats doing a Detroit Lions against the war vet. He looks less likely to screw up, and is his own man, so has less people to please, and less of a murky or inconsistent past.
He'd be a better President than the current incumbent at least...
Reply
http://www.census.gov/population/projections/SummaryTabB1.pdf
Older people will vote for him, but he should get creamed among those under age 45.
Reply
Reply
1992: Clinton (Arkansas) beats Bush (Texas)
1984: Regan (California) beats Carter (Georgia). Hmm, some overlap there.
1960: Kennedy (Massachusetts) beats Nixon (California)
I think anyone needs the South to win the Presidency. That and Ohio.
I seem to remember there also being some stat about the taller candidate almost always winning. So how come the taller candidate's always from the southern state? Some conspiracy, I suspect.
Reply
Except that it was 1980 and his name's spelt "Reagan". But you get the idea.
Reply
Probably true to some extent of any suitably large subset of states.
I think the theory is that the South is by default Republican, but may vote for a Democrat if he's one of its own. So the Democrats can only (since Kennedy) win with a Southerner, but that's a necessary rather than a sufficient condition.
how come the taller candidate's always from the southern state?
Hmm, maybe something in the protein levels of the regional dietary pattern? Or maybe the South being more traditional tends to defer to taller men, so a short Southerner would never have achieved sufficient prominence to get near a sniff of candidacy.
Reply
Leave a comment