What would be the most favorable head-to-head matchup in 2008?

[Comicstripper]

I mean, realistically. We all know that Wes Clark would CRUSH, say, David Duke.

I really feel that Obama vs. Giuliani would be a cakewalk for us. Giuliani's strengths would be negated by Obama's shared ones, while the mayor's weaknesses would only be highlighted by Obama's fairly squeaky-clean personal and political record. But I'm curious what you all think.

[still_one]

1. First let me say I am an Obama supporter, however I do not think it would be a cakewalk

against giuliani.

1. This country is quite racist, a fact not to be overlooked by how they tried to supress many African Americans from even voting in certain parts of the country

2. roger ailes, and the wonderful crew at faux, and even cnn, have tried to associate Obama with osama jokes, hussein jokes, and Islamic schools. There will be major swiftboating, and their scorch and burn policy that the repukes used so effectively in the south.

You indicate that giuliani's faults will hurt him over Obama's clean record. Problem is, only if the people are allowed to be aware of it. When Kerry ran, there were networks who REFUSED to air ads supporting Kerry, and exposing bush's misdeads. Most people in this country do not even realize that giuliani is not particularly liked by the FDNY, or his wonderful decision to put the office of Emergencies in the WTC, in spite of advice NOT to, and how he negelected to unify communication between a emergency responders, in spite of advice that it needed to be done.

Because of our wonderful media, I think it will be a tough battle no matter who is are nominee

[karynnj]

6. I agree especially with your point two

In addition to 2004, consider 2000;

The Republicans are hypocrites, after condemning any corruption and seediness on our side, they nominated and easily voted for a man, whose own campaign admitted was a drunk until he was 40. Gore, who was was as clean as Obama, was the one questioned - on accepting a check at a Buddist temple.

In 2004, Bush was President, but it was clear that his past was shady - at minimum he was a waste as someone trained to fly for the national guard, Kerry was a highly decorated war hero - with a complete record easily available on his web site. We know how that worked.

As much as Obama, Kerry had 3 decades in public life and had been called the most honest man in politics in the wake of his BCCI investigation and his Clean Elections bill with Wellstone.

The standards are different.

[still_one]

14. whichever candidate we choose, that candidate my come out on the offensive /nt

[skipos]

8. Agree. Rudy has proven to be strong in the polls.

Americans like their faux heros, and MSM isn't going to tarnish that myth.

[polichick]

11. I agree that it won't be easy...

We Dems are idealists, always seeing people through our rose-colored glasses. We can't overlook racism, sexism, media ownership ~ and of course the willingness of Reps to rob the American electorate in any way possible. We'll have to fight to win!

[still_one]

15. In spite of the difficulties, I still think we will take all three branches of government in 2008/nt

[Forkboy]

2. Us against Them.

[Lord Helmet]

3. Jesus (D) vs. Son of Sam (R)

smack down

[sofa king]

23. Oh, so you're for Obama vs. Gingrich, then.

[cassiepriam]

4. Gore vs Jeb Bush

This time the right person becomes president.

[MaineProgressive]

5. That's an easy one

Obama vs. Brownback (or Hunter, or Thompson, or Huckabee -- take your pick).

[momster]

7. Edwards/Obama v. McCain/Thompson

You've got youth, health, exuberance, charisma and eloquence against elderly, angry, tired, dull, and pouchy/slouchy. (Not to mention that both McCain and Thompson are so pale they need transfusions to look undead.) A televised debate between any combo of these 4 men would be JFK v. Nixon all over again. Visuals are everything in 2008 for the vast majority of the electorate.

[DaveinMD]

9. Edwards v Romney

would net a Dem 60 percent of the vote and maybe even a fillibuster proof Senate.

[Auntie Bush]

10. The most favorable match-up would be our

smart guy vs their dumb guy. Any combination ought to do it.

[ripple]

12. I think a McCain vs. Obama match-up would be interesting

Talk about a contrast between candidates- age, speaking ability, judgment, appearance, level of calm, etc.

I'm reluctant to call any match-up a cake walk (because 2004 should have been one), but I definitely think Obama would have an undeniable advantage in such a match-up.

[AX10]

13. Clark. Edwards, or Clinton vs. Brownback/Hunter

[Alexander]

16. Al Gore/Wes Clark vs. Tom Tancredo/Duncan Hunter

If these are the nominees, the Democrats will win over 400 electoral votes and at least 30 states.

[rep the dems]

18. Heh, didn't see your post before I made mine.

I have the same thing except Tommy Thompson instead of Duncan Hunter.

[Alexander]

20. Thompson's more sane than Hunter, hence he'd get more votes.

After watching the Republican debate (I believe in knowing my enemy), Thompson's plan for Iraq seems sane compared to many of the other wingnuts there.

Hence I think Tommy Thompson's a bit more electable than Hunter. Not by much, though, particularly with his recent comments about Jews.

[rep the dems]

21. Really? I thought Hunter would be a little bit more appealing to the

conservative base. Thompson just seems like a joke to me, and Hunter slighly less of a joke.

[Alexander]

25. Hunter's also got some ethics questions, and he's a Congressman.

Not saying Thompson isn't ethically challenged himself, but he did get elected governor 3 times and held a Cabinet post - seems like less of a joke than Hunter to me.

Then again, both men are polling in the 1-2% range, so I can't say I'm worried about either one of them.

[rep the dems]

17. Gore-Clark vs Tancredo-Tommy Thompson

God, that would be amazing.

[Colobo]

19. Obama vs. McCain

[More Than A Feeling]

22. Edwards v. Romney

It would be something like a 20 point blow-out

[Awsi Dooger]

27. That was my first thought

Among the top tier candidates. Nothing will be 20 points but I think Edwards would defeat Romney by 3 or 4 points.

Anything involving Guiliani is the toughest.

[Kelly Rupert]

24. Giuliani wouldn't be a cakewalk in the slightest, and his strengths are not Obama's.

They are both charismatic men, but Rudy's greatest strength is Obama's greatest weakness--results. Mr. Giuliani can point to an NYC with a halved crime rate, among other civic accomplishments. He has a legit claim to being 'tough on crime,' and the country at large trusts him on terrorism. Obama, on the other hand, has less than a full term in the Senate.

Giuliani has right-wing cred on terrorism, and his leftish stances on abortion and gay rights will help towards courting the center. He's a legit candidate, and IMO has the best shot of winning. Romney and McCain, on the other hand, are absolute jokes.

[AZBlue]

26. Favorable for Dems? Anyone vs. McCain.

There's no way that relic could win. It would be a landslide.