<p>
</p>
<p>So, is your point that “real” liberals do not vote in primaries - they just wait for the general election. That sounds a bit 180 degree out of synch with reality. Usually the far left and the far right are the ones who do vote in the primaries.</p>
<p>FF, you and Garland are both correct: the ideological extremes dominate both parties in the primaries <em>but</em> there are many on the Left for whom the Democratic party is insufficiently “Progressive” for them to affiliate with.</p>
<p>Garland, I’ll make book right now that Hillary can win. Guess we should wait to see the actual nominees. Stakes = a donation to a non-profit charity of the winner’s choice?</p>
<p>“Garland, I’ll make book right now that Hillary can win. Guess we should wait to see the actual nominees. Stakes = a donation to a non-profit charity of the winner’s choice?”</p>
<p>Are you starting a pool here? Electoral votes? States carried?</p>
<p>FF-I’m saying that a poll of liberal Dems isn’t going to include a lot of liberals. We’ll have to see what happens in the actual primaries.</p>
<p>Thedad–nah, I’m not a bettor. I’m hoping I don’t have an opportunity to be proved right or wrong on this. I’d just as soon be wrong, but i’d just as sooner not have that scenario.</p>
<p>garland, I believe that the poll was done based on which primary in which you would most likely vote. So, unless the “true” liberals indicated that they would not vote in either primary, they would be included in this poll. I don’t think that the filtering question was: “Are you a Democrat?” but more like: “Are you more likely to vote in the Democratic primary or the Republican”.</p>
<p>ZM, once the nominations are set, I’d definitely set up an EV/states carried pool.</p>
<p>For November '06, in October I set up a listing of every House and Senate race. I was the only one who entered. Even as a field of one, I did pretty well. I’m a data junky and look at lots of below-the-line polling data.</p>
<p>Fair enough, FF. Surprising, though. Most liberal/progressive folks I know and read consider HC centrist (Iraq votes, wishy washy on healthcare, actually, wishy washy on everything, as far as I can tell.)</p>
<p>My mom calls HC “Republican lite” in tones of great dismay.</p>
<p>“My mom calls HC “Republican lite” in tones of great dismay”</p>
<p>Just wait til she’s elected.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>To which Hillary Clinton is saying (in her best southern accent), “Oh Lawdy, don’t throw me in that briar patch!”</p>
<p>The attacks on Clinton for not being liberal enough are the best thing that could ever happen for her in the general election.</p>
<p>Republican-lite? You mean like Ted Kennedy, the lion of liberalism, with whom she shared an almost identical liberal Senate voting record during her first term in the Senate? Recently jolting to the center must be fooling those poor high school educated women who desperately need her help :), but not the rest of us. Never quite thought of Teddy as Republican-lite. LOL</p>
<p>Garland I can’t wait to see which of us is right, because I don’t think there is a republican who can win.</p>
<p>I agree with that statement, but I also know that any of the Ds can loose</p>
<p>HH, my mom is not a poor, high-school educated woman. Add it to your list of errors.</p>
<p>I guess you missed my attempt at a humorous reference, which was not meant as a dig on your mom.
Your mom may be brilliant; however, she’s obviously not familiar with Mrs. C’s Senate voting record.
No disrespect to Molly Ivins, either, who, like your mom, referred to Mrs. C as “Republican-lite.”</p>
<p>HH–educate me, then. I’m truly interested–what are some HC positions that would be considered really left wing?</p>
<p>What, for instance, would separate her from Giuliani?</p>
<p>“HH–educate me, then. I’m truly interested–what are some HC positions that would be considered really left wing?”</p>
<p>Well definitely the re-distributionist aspect of her campaign. Speaking of Rudy, did you see his announcement yesterday about his 12 commitments to America? Anyone?</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I dunno. She just introduced a bill to provide free postage for troops stationed in Iraq and Afghanistan. That’s pretty far out there on the whacko leftist scale, don’t you think? I mean, what’s with all these gummint handouts?</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Pretty unimpressive stuff. I’ve seen more specificity from Barack Obama, which ain’t sayin’ much!</p>
<p>I loved how he forgot the “cut taxes” part!</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I love how promising a middle class tax cut is “re-distributionist” in Republican lingo! That pretty much says it all.</p>
<p>TheDad isn’t the only one placing bets this early. This is better than March Madness. You can get an instant spread.</p>
<p>Here’s what Clinton vs. Giuliani looks like.</p>
<p><a href=“http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2008/president/us/general_election_giuliani_vs_clinton-227.html[/url]”>http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2008/president/us/general_election_giuliani_vs_clinton-227.html</a></p>
<p>You can mix and match any candidates you want. 
</p>
<p>“I love how promising a middle class tax cut is “re-distributionist” in Republican lingo! That pretty much says it all.”</p>
<p>Will you stop. That’s not what I was referring to, as you well know. As I said yesterday, it’s her statements about “the common good.”</p>