Post-Iowa wrap-up and predictions
Jan. 4th, 2008 07:35 am![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
valarltd1)I totally called it for Huckabee.
As I see it, none of the others has a chance with middle America.
Guiliani is too ethnic. "Rudy" is an urban name. You don't get that in suburbia or the sticks. Rudy is the flashy dressing Cosby kid (or the adorable little girl) And the sheer Italian-ness of Guiliani is a killer. He's also from New York City, which makes him immediately suspect.
Mitt Romney. He's from Massachussetts. This means he's not only a crazy polygamist cultist but queer, in the thinking of the average cuttle-fish. "Massachussetts Liberal" is a cultural meme that's still around.
Ron Paul, despite the dedication of the Paulites, is an absolute whack-job. Sane people know we live in a society and everyone's choices affect everyone else. "Rugged Individualism" is for single males who have no dependents and can pretend they are Jeremiah Johnson.
Huckabee is Middle America. He has an ordinary name. He's against all the stuff the ordinary person is, for all the stuff they're for. He believes in their social issues, but he's not against government programs that improve the lives of millions of people. The fact that he's the Taliban on the other side of the Abrahamic blanket is a feature for most people, not a bug. His opposition is going to come from the money branch of the party, and this has already started. (my icon seems very appropriate)
2) The Dems are harder to handicap.
Obama has one big problem. He's black. This will hurt him more than most liberal people think.
Clinton has four big problems. Bill. She's a woman. She's Business as Usual Inside the Beltway. And the Democratic side severely underestimated exactly how much people hate her for those three.
Edwards is still associated with the disasterous Kerry campaign. And in both his and Clinton's cases, the opposition is deliberately calling them gender nonconformist, with the dog-whistle implications that they are fair targets.
As I see it, none of the others has a chance with middle America.
Guiliani is too ethnic. "Rudy" is an urban name. You don't get that in suburbia or the sticks. Rudy is the flashy dressing Cosby kid (or the adorable little girl) And the sheer Italian-ness of Guiliani is a killer. He's also from New York City, which makes him immediately suspect.
Mitt Romney. He's from Massachussetts. This means he's not only a crazy polygamist cultist but queer, in the thinking of the average cuttle-fish. "Massachussetts Liberal" is a cultural meme that's still around.
Ron Paul, despite the dedication of the Paulites, is an absolute whack-job. Sane people know we live in a society and everyone's choices affect everyone else. "Rugged Individualism" is for single males who have no dependents and can pretend they are Jeremiah Johnson.
Huckabee is Middle America. He has an ordinary name. He's against all the stuff the ordinary person is, for all the stuff they're for. He believes in their social issues, but he's not against government programs that improve the lives of millions of people. The fact that he's the Taliban on the other side of the Abrahamic blanket is a feature for most people, not a bug. His opposition is going to come from the money branch of the party, and this has already started. (my icon seems very appropriate)
2) The Dems are harder to handicap.
Obama has one big problem. He's black. This will hurt him more than most liberal people think.
Clinton has four big problems. Bill. She's a woman. She's Business as Usual Inside the Beltway. And the Democratic side severely underestimated exactly how much people hate her for those three.
Edwards is still associated with the disasterous Kerry campaign. And in both his and Clinton's cases, the opposition is deliberately calling them gender nonconformist, with the dog-whistle implications that they are fair targets.
