Talk:2008 United States presidential election

Should we mention rumours about Ron Paul possibly running as an Independent Candidate?

no need. Paul did run in 1988 and got under .5% of the vote.Richard Jensen 19:30, 3 January 2008 (CST)

Also Rans

"Also rans" is standard language in American politics for 80 years. It is not disrespectful, as shown by [1] and books like Presidential Also-Rans and Running Mates, 1788 Through 1996 (1998); Also Rans: Great Men Who Missed the Presidential Goal (1928); and in ancient history: Candidates Defeated in Roman Elections: Some Ancient Roman "Also-Rans" (1991) Richard Jensen 22:37, 4 January 2008 (CST)

Candidates named

For the sake of neutrality, of course, some Republican candidates should be named in the first paragraph, if some Democratic candidates are. (I should have thought this was obvious enough not to need anyone to point it out.) --Larry Sanger 22:14, 8 January 2008 (CST)

Also, if Al Gore never announced his candidacy, then why is he included in a list of "withdrawn candidates"? --Larry Sanger 22:16, 8 January 2008 (CST)

lede

The lede should to contain the status of the main contenders. Bloomberg is making some preparations but the experts do not say he is expected to be a major contender for winning in the fall, —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Richard Jensen (talk • contribs) 03:59, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

The lede currently contains the sentence McCain is currently leading by 10 points over Huckabee.. Aside from being clumsily-written in comparison to the rest of the article, it's also unclear, and possibly inaccurate. Leading by 10 points how? In percentage of popular votes already cast? Of standing in nationwide preference polls? As of January 22, Romney is leading in the delegate-count, with 66 (+6 "superdelegates") to McCain's 38 delegates.

Should we say anything at all in the lede, before the February 5th results are in? If so, what should we say about who is leading in the Republican race, and what should that be based on? Anthony Argyriou 20:06, 22 January 2008 (CST)

good points. I will work on it tonite. Richard Jensen 20:12, 22 January 2008 (CST)

Ralph Nader may run again. Every four years, he gets the runs. Anthony Argyriou 20:44, 22 January 2008 (CST)

compliments

This page is doing quite well, I think. It exhibits a sensitivity to some of the issues we've been dialoging about in Politics, and I very much appreciate that. Keep up the good work!Pat Palmer 10:33, 20 January 2008 (CST)

thanks from all of us at election desk central. Richard Jensen 21:05, 20 January 2008 (CST)

Referee statement

For the moment I'm planting my flag here, as available to help resolve any issues that arise. I've noted a couple of general "article policy issues that probably will arise.

1) What happens to text that becomes outdated, do we just ditch it and the links with it? There will be an understandable reluctance to delete someone's hard forged prose and the research behind it, but we need to keep the article topical and fairly concise. I think that it would be a shame to lose such text, so we might consider a "News timeline" page as an archive for the links that are lost. In other words, if and when a news story is edited out by the passage of events, any links and a brief summary should perhaps be preserved in the timeline archive?

2)quotes. Topical quotes can make an article lively, at the same time they can be inflammatory and selection is a problem.

I think we should reflect that probably this article will not have a decisive effect on the outcome of the election, however good it is. We shouldn't get too obsessed with balance at the expense of readability; judging balance is not going to be a perfect art. What we can't reasonably do is, every time a lively and pithy quote emerges, wonder desperately how to balance it. But if such quotes never live on the main page for long, perhaps that will be less of a problem, as we can think that the article will be balanced over time if not at every instant. Perhaps again we should have a "gallery" of quotes, so that a quote is used for a while and then archived in the gallery. Just a thought???? Gareth Leng 12:09, 21 January 2008 (CST)

Gareth's point #1 is interesting. It depends whether the primary race ends on Feb 5 (hence closure for the battle for the nomination), or continues on for weeks and months (requiring much more text). Let's decide in a couple weeks. Richard Jensen 13:46, 21 January 2008 (CST)

Kucinich

Didn't he just drop? --Robert W King 12:39, 25 January 2008 (CST)

yes, he's out. Richard Jensen 14:29, 25 January 2008 (CST)

Who's leading?

Who's leading the races? By national polling, Clinton and McCain. By delegate counts, Obama and Romney. In 8 days, this will likely be all sorted out, but perhaps we should include delegate counts, and not just polls, when discussing the status of the horserace? Anthony Argyriou 13:19, 28 January 2008 (CST)

good point. The delegate counts will start to matter on Feb 6. Clinton has more than Obama because of superdelegates.Richard Jensen 14:02, 28 January 2008 (CST)

Article Formatting

Is there anything that can be done about the formatting of the article? I have a few suggestions (and gripes):

• The TOC is now way too long. It should be moved either to the right, or some other solution should be found.
• As the primaries continue, the article growth is going to be regular and will expand, rearing the unfortunate consequences of long articles. My recommendation is to use the templates for sidenotes, or textboxes to divide up coverages per state or by candidate, or by date or SOMETHING. One paragraph after another after another just won't cut it for an article of this magnitude.
• More photographs!

--Robert W King 10:08, 31 January 2008 (CST)

we do need photos. I'm guessing the primary season will pretty much end on Feb. 5, when half the country votes. Richard Jensen 10:31, 31 January 2008 (CST)

Well even then, the article scope goes beyond the primaries, right? --Robert W King 10:33, 31 January 2008 (CST)

Yes it's the most complicated and longest election in American history, with election day in November. But I expect rather little "enyclopedic" news between March and August.Richard Jensen 10:35, 31 January 2008 (CST)

Democratic Candidate: Obama Barack Lornem ipsum Lornem ipsum Lornem ipsum Lornem ipsum Lornem ipsum Lornem ipsum Lornem ipsum Lornem ipsum Lornem ipsum Lornem ipsum Lornem ipsum Lornem ipsum Lornem ipsum Lornem ipsum Lornem ipsum Lornem ipsum Lornem ipsum Lornem ipsum Lornem ipsum Lornem ipsum Lornem ipsum Lornem ipsum Lornem ipsum Lornem ipsum Lornem ipsum Lornem ipsum Lornem ipsum Lornem ipsum Lornem ipsum Lornem ipsum Lornem ipsum Lornem ipsum Lornem ipsum Lornem ipsum Lornem ipsum Lornem ipsum Lornem ipsum Lornem ipsum Lornem ipsum Lornem ipsum Lornem ipsum Lornem ipsum Lornem ipsum Lornem ipsum Lornem ipsum Lornem ipsum Lornem ipsum Lornem ipsum Lornem ipsum Lornem ipsum Lornem ipsum Lornem ipsum Lornem ipsum Lornem ipsum Lornem ipsum Lornem ipsum Lornem ipsum Lornem ipsum Lornem ipsum Lornem ipsum Lornem ipsum Lornem ipsum

Republican Candidate: John McCain Lornem ipsum Lornem ipsum Lornem ipsum Lornem ipsum Lornem ipsum Lornem ipsum Lornem ipsum Lornem ipsum Lornem ipsum Lornem ipsum Lornem ipsum Lornem ipsum Lornem ipsum Lornem ipsum Lornem ipsum Lornem ipsum Lornem ipsum Lornem ipsum Lornem ipsum Lornem ipsum Lornem ipsum Lornem ipsum Lornem ipsum Lornem ipsum Lornem ipsum Lornem ipsum Lornem ipsum Lornem ipsum Lornem ipsum Lornem ipsum Lornem ipsum Lornem ipsum Lornem ipsum Lornem ipsum Lornem ipsum Lornem ipsum Lornem ipsum Lornem ipsum Lornem ipsum Lornem ipsum Lornem ipsum Lornem ipsum Lornem ipsum Lornem ipsum Lornem ipsum Lornem ipsum Lornem ipsum Lornem ipsum Lornem ipsum Lornem ipsum Lornem ipsum Lornem ipsum Lornem ipsum Lornem ipsum Lornem ipsum Lornem ipsum Lornem ipsum Lornem ipsum Lornem ipsum Lornem ipsum Lornem ipsum Lornem ipsum Lornem ipsum Lornem ipsum Lornem ipsum Lornem ipsum Lornem ipsum Lornem ipsum Lornem ipsum Lornem ipsum Lornem ipsum Lornem ipsum Lornem ipsum Lornem ipsum v

Democratic Candidate: Hillary Clinton Lornem ipsum Lornem ipsum Lornem ipsum Lornem ipsum Lornem ipsum Lornem ipsum Lornem ipsum Lornem ipsum Lornem ipsum Lornem ipsum Lornem ipsum Lornem ipsum Lornem ipsum Lornem ipsum Lornem ipsum Lornem ipsum Lornem ipsum Lornem ipsum Lornem ipsum Lornem ipsum Lornem ipsum Lornem ipsum Lornem ipsum Lornem ipsum Lornem ipsum Lornem ipsum Lornem ipsum Lornem ipsum Lornem ipsum Lornem ipsum Lornem ipsum Lornem ipsum Lornem ipsum Lornem ipsum Lornem ipsum Lornem ipsum Lornem ipsum Lornem ipsum Lornem ipsum Lornem ipsum Lornem ipsum Lornem ipsum Lornem ipsum Lornem ipsum Lornem ipsum Lornem ipsum Lornem ipsum Lornem ipsum Lornem ipsum Lornem ipsum Lornem ipsum Lornem ipsum Lornem ipsum Lornem ipsum Lornem ipsum Lornem ipsum Lornem ipsum Lornem ipsum Lornem ipsum Lornem ipsum Lornem ipsum Lornem ipsum Lornem ipsum Lornem ipsum Lornem ipsum Lornem ipsum Lornem ipsum Lornem ipsum Lornem ipsum Lornem ipsum Lornem ipsum Lornem ipsum Lornem ipsum Lornem ipsum v