Who Can Win in November?

It???s unfortunate you left Ron Paul out of your analysis. He is polling at 9% in the latest Des Moines Register poll (tied with Fred Thompson and ahead of Giuliani.) Paul is also doing better than Fred Thompson in the latest New Hampshire polls. On a national level, he???s the only Republican candidate who has consistently been against the Iraq War (a significant distinction considering the majority of Americans are upset with the war.) While he may be a long shot he should still be considered in your analysis as he has very strong grass roots support, a positive trend in the polls, a stronger national appeal than most republicans due to his stance on Iraq, and probably the most genuine of all the candidates. I also believe the polls are under representing some Ron Paul primary voters (newly registered, and previously apathetic voters) so I think he has more upside potential than the other candidates.

It???s unfortunate you left Ron Paul out of your analysis. He is polling at 9% in the latest Des Moines Register poll (tied with Fred Thompson and ahead of Giuliani.) Paul is also doing better than Fred Thompson in the latest New Hampshire polls. On a national level, he???s the only Republican candidate who has consistently been against the Iraq War (a significant distinction considering the majority of Americans are upset with the war.) While he may be a long shot he should still be considered in your analysis as he has very strong grass roots support, a positive trend in the polls, a stronger national appeal than most republicans due to his stance on Iraq, and probably the most genuine of all the candidates. I also believe the polls are under representing some Ron Paul primary voters (newly registered, and previously apathetic voters) so I think he has more upside potential than the other candidates.

I find Mr. Alter's analysis to be devoid of any facts whatsoever. He claims that Obama has the potential to win in a landslide, but John Edwards is somehow risky. This ignores all of the pollign date and decades of historical data that political scientists have spent thier careers collecting. Certainly a white southern democrat with a populist message is a safer bet to take the electoral college vote than a defined and villified Senator in Clinton or an African American candidate with less than 6 years in a prominent elected position. The last time the Democrats took the White House with a candidate that was not a white southernor was JFK. What about the American voting public leads Mr. Alter to believe that they will check thier prejudices at the door come election day when there is another suitable candidate on the ballot? This is the same electorate that voted for Geore W. Bush TWICE! TWICE!!!! I hope we as a public become more enlightened soon, because candidates should be judged on their merit not their democraphics. BUt I am not willing to bet the Supreme Court on a social experiment in 2008. Too much is at stake this time around given the compostion of the Court.

Your choice is going to be, Hillary or Mitt. If you believe otherwise you are wrong. Jeff

Race is always a major factor in American politics. Obama is both black and white and therefore represents

PoliticalAnalyst Good Analysis, makes sense, however Obama will be the democratic nominee and the next president. All recent polls show that Obama would defeat Guilliani fifty one percent to forty three percent. After Iowa and New Hampshire people will begin to realize how strong the movement behind OBAMA really is. people want peace not war. They know that these problems abroad have to be solved. Obama is in the best position to succeed. The outcome in Iowa will be Obama thrity six per cent , Hillary thirty two percent , Edwards twenty eight percent and the other four percent will be split among the rest of the candidates. What is your prediction political analyst. We will see who is right.

I hear no one talking about the drug problem or the cost of living in this country. WAKE UP AMERICANS
IF YOU DON'T, WE MAY BE IN DEEP TROUBLE.WE NEED TO GET RID OF EVERY ONE IN OFFICE. AND NOT RELECK MORE PROBLEMS.

I disagree with jmacken. Hilary has shown herself to be someone who can work with the other side. While Obama positions himself as a uniter and the best agent of change, you have to be very young or naive to believe the GOP slime machine won't go after his race and drug use. The real reason the GOP doesn't want to run against Hilary is that they have already spent a fortune and done everything they could to drive up her negatives. The same cannot be said of Obama. They have lots of ammunition to slime him. Trust me. I have watched them for a few years now and they always go negative, but only fools believe them without doing their own research.
The GOP has little chance in defeating Hilary, but Obama would be an easier target for them. He may actually be the only top Dem who could lose in 2008.

With all due respect Mr Alter, I think you are missing the point on electability in a national election. I don't understand how you place John Edwards, Hillary Clinton and Barak Obama above Joe Biden. When has experience been a bad thing? A man who has written legislation to protect women and their families, put more officers on the street and has stood up to both democrats and republicans to do what is right in Bosinia, Iraq and Darfur. Who is the first senator you all call to gain information about foreign catastrophies? What the media is failing to show or maybe you don't realize that experience is not what is standing in the way of Senator Biden's bid for the Democratic nomination but rather a push from special interest groups that don't trust Senator Biden because he does not always vote in their favor.

It angers me to watch the media push these inexperienced candidates to the front lines. You would have to believe that many of these media centers are helping fund some of these candidates. There is so little that we know about Senator Obama and his voting record, period. Since stepping into office as a freshman senator he has been campaigning for the presidency. Senator Clinton had to move to another state to be supported in her bid for her seat in the senate and her belief that being First Lady has set her up to be the president of our nation is completly without merit. I will concede that Edwards has supporters that are loyal since his first bid for the presidency, but many feel he is wimpy and wishy washy. In many eyes he is seen as a loser. I was so truely disgusted with his performance in the '04 VP debate that I chose not to support him in this years caucus.

If you actually asked caucus goers who they would stand behind you may find some more interesting answers. If you asked caucus goers how they feel about the large amounts of money wasted in this campaign you would more than likely hear that people are disgusted with the three campaigns.

I ask that you report on the experiences and backgrounds of these candidates without their names and let's see who comes out as the future leader of our nation

Hillary is despise by the conservative Republicans and disliked by independents and moderate Republicans. This translates to vigorous opposition, large donations, and the loss of the swing vote. If the Democrats nominate Hillary, they will be snatching defeat from the jaws of victory.

Barack Obama is very intelligent, and will do well in debates. He has great knowledge of both national and world politics that will be demonstrated in presidential debates if he is nominated. He really will be a uniter rather than a divider. He will do winders to improve the image of the US in the rest of the world. At home, he may not convert the most conservative Republicans, but moderate Republicans will find that he is reasonable. Recall the keynote speech he gave 4 years ago at the Democratic National Convention. If he is the Democrat's nominee, it will be elected in a landslide.

When Sen. Obama wins the caucuses, MSNBC and CNN, Chuck
Todd, Keith Olbermann and Mr. Alter are going to be eating a lot of crow !!!

Clinton's experience and battled-tested conditioning weigh strongly in her favor. This is not the election to take a chance on someone untested on a national stage, lacking critical foreign policy experience, and exposed to the inevitable Republican attack machine (let's face it there's much more to be made of Senator Obama's past -- or in the Republican's case they'll make it up). I admire Obama and I'm as hopeful as he is about our nation, but the person who can get across the finish line to change the direction of our country is Hillary Clinton.

Clinton's experience and battled-tested conditioning weigh strongly in her favor. This is not the election to take a chance on someone untested on a national stage, lacking critical foreign policy experience, and exposed to the inevitable Republican attack machine (let's face it there's much more to be made of Senator Obama's past -- or in the Republican's case they'll make it up). I admire Obama and I'm as hopeful as he is about our nation, but the person who can get across the finish line to change the direction of our country is Hillary Clinton.

No mention of the only trustworthy canidate who is not beholdened to special interest and lobbyist and, has the experience in all facets a U.S. president would encounter. and that man is Republican Alan Keyes.

Mr. Alter's by-the-book conventional wisdom should not apply to Obama.

Doesn't Mr. Alter know that Obama is only a newcomer who has already raised equal amount of money and become a formidable rival to Clinton, considering how much connection and influence an ex-president can transfer to his spouse and how much media attention an ex-president???s spouse can get? Doesn???t Mr. Alter know that to achieve this alone is a testimony of Obama???s strengths and potentials?

Doesn't Mr. Alter know that as a newcomer, Obama has already faced Clinton???s ruthless machine unharmed?

Doesn???t Mr. Alter know that Obama is a self-made man whatever he has achieved until now testified his inner strengths, intelligence, leadership skills and talent? Even though Obama is younger, he is more tested than many of his older rivals.

The test of life can shape and demonstrate a person???s character much more than the test of political arena. Many politicians have proved to us again and again that as long as they know how to talk, spin, plot and play media, political and fund-raising games, they can win. Should we appreciate this type of ???experience????

Obama is a self-made man who has been tested throughout his life. There is no short cuts for him growing up from a single-parent household as an African American. In this backdrop, Obama was able to graduate from Columbia University, Harvard Law School and became the first African American president of Harvard Law Review.

As an elected official, Obama has proven himself again and again that he has the cross board appeal--not only to get supports from Blacks but Whites; not only get votes from Democrats but Republicans.

Among many of Obama???s appeals is his courage and vision. Yes, he can follow the conventional wisdom and avoid a formidable political machine such as Clintons??? by choosing to wait and not to run this time. His audacity to dream and to act against the conventional wisdom demonstrates that he is a real leader.

We are in the 21st century now. The so-called experience in the 20 century may not be relevant any more. In this fast-moving Internet age, many CEOs and founders of today???s great companies are at their 30s and 40s. Nobody accuses them of lack of experience but admires their vision for the future. Likewise, in this totally different era, we need a president at his 40s, so he can have the energy, the vision, the unburdened mind from the past to lead us to a new beginning, where we want to render old political power and ideology obsolete, if they get in the way of common good and collective progress.