United States Presidential Election, 2008

2007-10-21T18:40:59Z

Chaplinsky: /* Withdrawn Republican Party Candidates */

[[Image:56eugyjnm.jpg|right|thumb|350px|The [[White House]], the official home and workplace of the [[President of the United States]] of America.]] The '''2008 United States Presidential Election''' is scheduled for Tuesday, November 4, 2008.<ref>http://www.boston.com/news/politics/2008/calendar/</ref> The primary season for both the [[Republican Party]] and the [[Democratic Party]] officially begins on January 14, 2008 with the [[Iowa Caucus]]es and (as of March 16, 2007) ends on March 4, 2008.<ref>http://www.boston.com/news/politics/2008/calendar/</ref> The 2008 election cycle has seen a major shift to the primary election calendar, frontloading many primaries into early February.<ref>http://www.miamiherald.com/515/story/43160.html</ref>

==First election without incumbents since 1928==
The President of the United States often runs for reelection. If not, the Vice-President of the United States runs after he leaves office. 2008 may mark the first time since the 1928 election in which there is neither an incumbent president nor an incumbent vice-president running for his party's presidential nomination and thus not running in the presidential election (unless former Vice President [[Al Gore]] runs.) In the [[United States presidential election of 1952]], the race was between Republican candidate Dwight D. Eisenhower and Democratic candidate Adlai Stevenson. Vice President Alben Barkley sought but failed to win the Democratic nomination. Current Vice President [[Dick Cheney]] has repeatedly stated he will not run for President. "I will say just as hard as I possibly know how to say... If nominated, I will not run; if elected, I will not serve," Cheney said on Fox News Sunday.

== Battleground States ==
The United States has become so regionally polarized that even though the 2004 presidential election was close nationwide, only nine states had outcomes having less than 4% margin between the candidates:

State, margin of victory, party that won the state in 2004

#Wisconsin, 0.38% (Dem)
#Iowa, 0.67% (Repub)
#New Mexico, 0.79% (Repub)
#New Hampshire, 1.37% (Dem)
#Ohio, 2.11% (Repub)
#Pennsylvania, 2.50% (Dem)
#Nevada, 2.59% (Repub)
#Michigan, 3.42% (Dem)
#Minnesota, 3.48% (Dem)

== Republican Strategy ==
The Republican presidential nominee must win Wisconsin or Minnesota, and hold Iowa. The outcome in New Mexico, which has only 5 electoral votes, is irrelevant. Minnesota's margin of victory for the Democrats in 2004 probably places it out of reach for Republicans in 2008.

The inescapable conclusion is that the Republican nominee must win Wisconsin and hold Iowa in order to win the general election.{{fact}}

===Declared Republican Party Candidates===
[[John H. Cox]]

Former Mayor [[Rudy Giuliani|Rudolph Giuliani]], [[New York City]]

Former Governor [[Mike Huckabee]], [[Arkansas]]

Representative [[Duncan Hunter]], [[California]] 52nd

UN Ambassador [[Alan Keyes]]

Senator [[John McCain]], [[Arizona]]

Representative [[Ron Paul]], [[Texas]] 14th

Former Governor [[Mitt Romney]], [[Massachusetts]]

[[Michael C. Smith]]

Representative [[Tom Tancredo]], [[Colorado]] 6th

Former Senator [[Fred Thompson]], [[Tennessee]]

===Withdrawn Republican Party Candidates===
Senator [[Sam Brownback]], [[Kansas]], withdrew October 19, 2007, citing a lack of funding.<ref>http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5ifK7vLWH4aU4urzB-4bSX1u4QF9QD8SC0EI00</ref> Brownback also had done poorly at key conservative milestones, such as the [[Value Voters Debate]].<ref>http://www.valuesvoterdebate.com/pollresults.cfm, Brownback lost sizably to [[Mike Huckabee]].</ref>

Former Governor [[Jim Gilmore]], [[Virginia]], withdrew July 14, 2007

Former Governor and HS Secretary [[Tommy Thompson]], withdrew August 12, 2007

== Democratic Strategy ==
As usual, the best strategy for Democrats is a hot topic for debate among members of that party and independent [[pundits]]. [[Daily Kos]] can occasionally provide arguments on the strategy that should be pursued by Democrats, although most posts there are simply rants against the Republicans or Democrats deemed insufficiently [[liberal]], which led [[Barack Obama]] to say in 2006 that he found the site "predictable." A majority of Democrats are confident that the cratering popularity of [[President]] [[George W. Bush]] and particularly [[Operation Iraqi Freedom]] puts them in a highly favorable position for 2008, to the extent it may even be their race to lose.

However, evaluating the race in [[Electoral College]] terms forces caution upon the Democrats. Between the [[United States presidential election, 2000]] and the [[United States Presidential election, 2004]], only three states budged from one party to the other: New Mexico (from Democratic to Republican), Iowa (from Democratic to Republican) and New Hampshire (from Republican to Democratic). The American people would seem to be not only strongly divided, but in the vast majority of states, faithful over a period of years to their chosen parties. Not even the [[September 11, 2001 attacks]] could persuade the people of New York to vote Republican, for example, and it is highly unlikely that the depopulation of [[New Orleans]] will be considered a good reason for the majority of voters in Louisiana to become Democrats. The phrase [[Second Coming Republicans]] (or Democrats) takes on new meaning in light of the relative lack of party-switching in response to these events.

Had all three of the above [[swing states]] voted Democratic in 2000, and everything else remained the same, [[Al Gore]] would have become President in 2001, so this is the result Democrats should especially aim for. This does not necessarily mean they can let their guard down in the states that voted their way in both of the last two elections -- particularly if the Republicans nominate [[Rudy Giuliani]], [[Mitt Romney]], or another candidate associated with one of those states.

Evaluating the race by historic analogy, the last Senator elected President and the last Northern Democrat elected President were the same person: [[John F. Kennedy]], in the [[United States presidential election, 1960]]. If this pattern continues to hold true this cycle, the candidate best positioned this year is [[Bill Richardson]], who is cast somewhat against type as a member of the [[National Rifle Association]] and also has the distinction of being from one of the three [[swing states]] cited above. In strong second place would probably be [[John Edwards]], but it needs to be said that the Democrat who can carry Edwards' home state of [[North Carolina]] in a Presidential election probably hasn't been born yet. [[Lyndon B. Johnson]] was the last person to do so, just after writing off most of the South for the Democratic Party by passing the [[1964 Civil Rights Act]]. Still, the Democrats, as pointed out above, feel for the most part that this is their race to lose and may "let it all hang out" in the belief that any of their first-tier candidates (though probably not Gravel or Kucinich) will handily defeat a [[generic]] Republican candidate.

===Declared Democratic Party Candidates===
Senator [[Joseph Biden]], [[Delaware]]

Senator [[Hillary Clinton]], [[New York]]

Senator [[Chris Dodd]], [[Connecticut]]

Former Senator [[John Edwards]], [[North Carolina]]

Former Senator [[Mike Gravel]], [[Alaska]]

Representative [[Dennis Kucinich]], [[Ohio]] 10th

Senator [[Barack Obama]], [[Illinois]]

Governor [[Bill Richardson]], [[New Mexico]]

=== Possible Democratic Party Candidates ===
VP [[Al Gore]], [[Tennessee]]

==Third parties==
New York City Mayor [[Michael Bloomberg]] has been frequently mentioned as a possible independent candidate for the 2008 presidential election and fueled that speculation when he left the Republican Party in June 2007. If he runs, he could put in over one billion dollars of his own money into the race.

Former Congresswoman [[Cynthia McKinney]], who was defeated for voting against the [[Iraq War]] and arrested on battery charges after striking a Capitol Hill police officer, is considering bid on the [[environmentalist]] [[Green Party]] ticket. [http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,62891,00.html]

==Opinion polling==
A big concern in the Hillary Clinton camp is whether or not she is electable. An Electability Poll in which the participants are asked in no certain order, a list of candidates from both parties, whether they would vote for candidate X or prefer someone else. Recent polling has revealed, of all major presidential candidates from both parties, Hillary Clinton is the only candidate to whom a majority of 52% would not vote for, or would prefer someone else. <ref>[http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/06/28/248165.aspx Poll: Is Hillary Electable?], by Mark Murray, ''NBC News'', June 28, 2007. Retrieved from MSNBC.com June 29, 2007.</ref>

The poll results show majorities would consider voting for all other major presidential candidates or possible candidates:

{| style="background:white; color:blue" border="1" class="wikitable"
|+ Electability Poll
|''Who would you vote for, the candidate or somebody else?''
|-
! Candidate
! Results
|-
| Rudy Giuliani
| 64% - 36%
|-
| Fred Thompson
| 62% - 38%
|-
| Michael Bloomberg
| 61% - 39%
|-
| Barak Obama
| 60% - 40%
|-
| John Edwards
| 59% - 41%
|-
| John McCain
| 58% - 42%
|-
| Joseph Biden
| 57% - 43%
|-
| Bill Richardson
| 57% - 43%
|-
| Mike Huckabee
| 56% - 44%
|-
| Mitt Romney
| 54% - 46%
|-
| Hillary Clinton
| 48% - 52%
|}

The poll also revealed that Hillary Clinton is the only candidate to whom more voters view her unfavorably than favorably. 39% say they recognize Clinton favorably, while a larger number of 42% say they recognize her unfavorably. By contrast, every other candidate has a net-positive favorable rating:

{| style="background:white; color:blue" border="1" class="wikitable"
|+ Favorability Poll
|''Do you view the candidate favorably or unfavorably?''
|-
! Candidate
! Results
|-
| Rudy Giuliani
| 43% - 17%
|-
| Barak Obama
| 36% - 21%
|-
| John McCain
| 33% - 28%
|-
| John Edwards
| 32% - 28%
|-
| Fred Thompson
| 25% - 12%
|-
| Mitt Romney
| 24% - 20%
|-
| Joseph Biden
| 21% - 20%
|-
| Michael Bloomberg
| 20% - 18%
|-
| Bill Richardson
| 19% - 15%
|-
| Mike Huckabee
| 16% - 12%
|-
| Hillary Clinton
| 39% - 42%
|}

The poll has a margin of error of +/- 4%.

==See Also==
[[Previous Breaking News/2008 Presidential Election|Articles about the '''2008 Presidential Election''' from previous "Breaking News"]]

== References ==
<references/>

{{2008 presidential candidates}}
[[Category: United States]]

Category:Creationism

2007-10-21T17:05:19Z

Chaplinsky:

'''Creationism''' is the "''Belief in the literal interpretation of the account of the creation of the universe and of all living things related in the Bible''."<ref>[http://www.answers.com/topic/creationism American Heritage Dictionary]</ref> More generally, creationism is the belief that the earth and everything in it was created by God or some other supreme being. Those that hold the views of ''Creationism'' are referred to as ''Creationists''.

[[Category:Origins debate]]
[[Category:pseudoscience]]

Category:Science

2007-10-21T17:04:07Z

Chaplinsky:

<center><big>'''Academic Warning'''</big></center>

'''Science''' is the use of inductive & deductive reasoning processes to come upon natural explanations for natural phenomena. Many of the articles in this category, unfortunately, do not use this definition of "science," and attempt to pervert the definition thereof to legitimize fringe religious dogma, and incorporate it into academic discourse through the "backdoor," as it were. Students are urged to look beyond this site for true definitions of science, especially with regards to evolution. A cogent description of evolution can be found [http://evolution.berkeley.edu/ here].

[[Category:Everything]]

Category:Homosexuality

2007-10-21T16:51:16Z

Chaplinsky:

<center><big>'''Tolerance Warning'''</big></center>

'''Homosexuality''' is the tendency of sexual attraction towards a member of one's own gender. Like all sexuality-related matters, homosexuality is deeply correlated with personality, and likely to be an innate quality in the individual. Criticizing or condemning someone for innate qualities is wrong. The articles presented below, save one, do ''not'' make this point clear, and instead represent homosexual lifestyles as worthy of condemnation, loathing, and disgust. Readers are urged to realize that the articles in this category are not family friendly, nor do they espouse the kind of tolerance, grace, and compassion for one's fellow man that ought to define Christianity and Christian lifestyles. While reading these articles, please remember their point of view, and in your own conduct, treat all others with respect.

[[Category:Psychology]]

Category:Homosexuality

2007-10-21T16:49:03Z

Chaplinsky:

'''Homosexuality''' is the tendency of sexual attraction towards a member of one's own gender. Like all sexuality-related matters, homosexuality is deeply correlated with personality, and likely to be an innate quality in the individual. Criticizing or condemning someone for innate qualities is wrong. The articles presented below, save one, do ''not'' make this point clear, and instead represent homosexual lifestyles as worthy of condemnation, loathing, and disgust. Readers are urged to realize that the articles in this category are not family friendly, nor do they espouse the kind of tolerance, grace, and compassion for one's fellow man that ought to define Christianity and Christian lifestyles. While reading these articles, please remember their point of view, and in your own conduct, treat all others with respect.

[[Category:Psychology]]

Conservapedia - User contributions [en]

United States Presidential Election, 2008

Category:Creationism

Category:Science

Category:Homosexuality

Category:Homosexuality