My prediction for the November: A four party clusterphuck for the Whitehouse.

[MethuenProgressive]

Us versus
GOP: McCain/Rice
Whackos: Nader/Moore
Fundis: Huckabee/Paul
-------------------------
"We must all hang together, or most assuredly we shall all hang separately."
B. Franklin

[endarkenment]

1. Wow that is some prediction.

Rice will not be the VP pick for McStain.

Moore will not associate himself with Nader and Nader will underperform his thrilling 2004 0.38% vote total.

Huckabee and Paul will not run at all.

Other than that you did just fine.

p.s. Obama will win the popular vote by a landslide.

[MethuenProgressive]

4. If it is Obama v McCain v Nader v Huckabee

If Huckabee gets in, all that pandering Obama did to the Hate Wing of his church would have been for naught. With Nader in no leftist/liberal would ever vote for closet DLCer centrist Obama. With McCain in there goes all the moderate Republicans Obama's been courting.
Face it, all BO has going for him is Hillary Hatred. With that taken out of the math his support sags.
In a four-way the roll of the dice comes up snake eyes.

[endarkenment]

5. Huckabee is not getting in.

Unless McStain is forced to withdraw Huckabee is simply organizing for 2012. Your predictions are silly.

"With Nader in no leftist/liberal would ever vote for closet DLCer centrist Obama." - that explains exactly why Nader pulled 0.38% in 2004 with centrist DLCer Kerry on the ticket. You have no facts to support your nonsense.

"Face it, all BO has going for him is Hillary Hatred. With that taken out of the math his support sags."

Your motives are now transparent. What your OP actually amounts to is a sneak GDP crap post that you have pushed into GD.

[dmallind]

2. Doubt it on the last part

Hopefully not enough fringe type Dems will be clueless enough to repeat their 2000 error this time around when Ralph goes on his GOP-funded swing-state-focused vanity tour. God knows you'd have to be a special kind of idiot not to realize there really IS a difference between "tweedledum" and "tweedledee" after the last seven years.

[EmperorHasNoClothes]

3. Moore and Nader had a falling out in '04

Moore is no fool. He sees right through Nader now. Watch how he looks at Nader in this video:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RysZy331YK0

[DemzRock]

6. Hmmm... my cynical version:

I think it would be more like:

Lessor of all the evils Party (US) versus

Hypocritical Egotistical Fool (Corporatist in Disguise) Party: Nader/?
Libertarians who are correct on Foreign Policy and Individial Freedom but NOTHING ELSE Party: Paul/?
Complete Flaming Globalist A**hole Republicans who kiss W Butt: McCain/?

[Bluenorthwest]

7. Moore/Nader?

I was at one of Moore's college tour stops during the 2004 cycle. He trashed Nader and a group of Nader supporters went way off on Mike who really responded in kind. He went after them. The group eventually had to be removed from the event, disrupting even after Moore gave them a chance to speak and get answers.
They would never in a million years run together and Moore will not even endorse a Nader run again. No way in hell.

[theredpen]

8. Paul is not a Fundamentalist. He's Catholic. (nt)

[MethuenProgressive]

10. So he belongs to ultra-strict Church that rules every moment of his everyday life?

That'll fit.

[theredpen]

12. Actually, I believe that Ron Paul attends an Episcopalian Church

The Episcopal Church ordains women and gays.

A lot of Catholics attend Episcopalian churches for various reasons. In my case, it's a protest over the Pope's continued support for the regressive stance on homosexuality. I don't know what Ron Paul's reason is.

Whatever the case, your zealous (pun intended) attempts to make Ron Paul out to be a religious wacko are also targeting a huge segment of the religious left who are on your side.

On Edit: Also, if your faith isn't with you "every moment of (your) everyday life" then what fucking good is it? We criticize the religious right who are all about peace and love on Sunday and all about being assholes Monday-Saturday, and now we also attack people who live what they believe?

[Virginia Dare]

14. My right wing fundie neighbors love him..

so actually it would be a good fit.

Personally, I want my politicians to be able to put their faith aside. What they do in the private moments of their lives is their own business, but when they're making decisions about governing me, I want faith and religion off the table thank you very much.

[theredpen]

15. That's absurd

Expecting people with religious faith to stay in the closet is as ignorant as expecting people without faith to keep their mouths shut about not believing. If find it reminiscent of the wingnuts who say, "I don't mind what the homos do in the privacy of their home, but I don't want them legislating their 'gay agenda.'" Does anyone here really think that Barney Frank wakes up every day wondering how he can impose homosexuality onto the lives of middle Americans? Why, then would we expect someone who is unabashedly religious — such as Barrack Obama or John Edwards — to be that way with their religion?

In the specific case of Barack Obama, some people have criticized his overt spirituality. This negativity has come from — as usual — middle class white liberals who are ignorant of the role that faith has played in the black experience in America. Essentially, Christian faith was the only positive thing that American blacks were allowed to have by the white establishment for hundreds of years. I find these attacks on Obama's spiritual audacity to be implicitly racist.

The bottom line is that just because someone is religious, it doesn't automatically make them a theocrat. We need to deep-six that smear because this religiophobia as it gets the Democratic party labeled as radical and out of touch with mainstream America.

Edit: Typos

Also, tell your fundie neighbors that Ron Paul is a Catholic who attends an Episcopal Church. If that doesn't sour them, they aren't fundies — you just think they are.

[Virginia Dare]

16. I don't expect them to stay in the closet at all..

and I'm not saying that a religious person can't be a good politician, I just don't want their religious faith guiding their political principles. John Kerry and Ted Kennedy for instance are able to put aside their fundamental religious beliefs when it comes to making political policy.

Oh and as to my neighbors, there is no thinking about it, they are rabid right wing religious fundamentalists and they have no problem making that fact known. They loved George Bush and they LOVE LOVE LOVE Ron Paul.

[theredpen]

17. There's just no explaining some people

Sorry if I misunderstood your point about religion in political life.

As far as your neighbors go, I don't understand people who think that George W. Bush is great, but "LOVE LOVE LOVE" Ron Paul. Oh, I used the word "think" — that's probably my mistake, isn't it? :)

[Virginia Dare]

18. It doesn't make sense to me either..

but as you say it wouldn't considering the type of people we're dealing with. It doesn't sound rational for the religious fundies to love him, but they do...:shrug:

[Virginia Dare]

9. What about Bloomberg?

He's only going to run if Hillary is the Dem nominee? That's the conventional "wisdom" as I recall.

Condi will not be the V.P. candidate, she won't be able to stand up to the vetting. It will eventually come out that she is in a long-term relationship with another woman.

I think you're correct about Paul running, but I think the Huckster is a stalking horse right now.

[MethuenProgressive]

11. I think Condi is the silver bullet. The GOP will actually think she cancels out Obama and Clinton.

She's their secret weapon. Or really, any female or person of color they can trot out.

[theredpen]

13. I think you're right that Rice would be a great choice for the ticket...

...but would she want to run with McCain? Will the Republican Party really want her? Having Condi as VP would mean the possibility of having Condi as P — she's no Dan Quayle.