Why should I choose Democrat?

Three reasons the Democrats will win next year’s presidential election

Money: The most promising Democratic candidates have raised significantly more donations than the Republicans. A permanently high level of donations is not only the elixir of life for anyone who wants to lead a national election campaign, it also reflects the support of the candidate in their own party. And this in turn is the basic requirement for the later dispute with the opposing party. Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama have raised more than $ 20 million in grants each quarter of this year, according to the latest FEC release.

None of the top four Republican applicants made it. Mitt Romney, the Republicans' best fundraiser, only just barely passed the $ 20 million mark in the first quarter of the year. Accordingly, the Democrats have significantly more money available than the Republicans for the hot phase of the election campaign that is now beginning. Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama can both spend well over 30 million dollars, while Mitt Romney and Rudy Guiliani have comparatively few free funds with 9 and 12 million dollars respectively. John McCain's reserves of two million dollars are so small that he recently had to fire part of his campaign team.

Request for a change: After a president has completed two terms, there is a general desire for renewal among the electorate. This latent will to change can, but need not, lead to a change of party in the presidency.

However, this double willingness to change is particularly pronounced when the president has been elected for two terms and he and his policies are unpopular with the electorate. A change of staff in the White House is then no longer enough for the citizens; they hope that the additional change of party will give them the greatest chance of change. Both criteria recently applied to Presidents Bill Clinton and Ronald Reagan, whose policies were disapproved of by around 40 percent of voters at the end of their term in office. And they currently also apply to President George W. Bush. In current surveys, his policies are even disapproved of by around 70 percent of those surveyed.

Candidates: Republicans have a problem. You have a large field of more or less well-known candidates, none of whom, however, have the approval of the whole party. Even the Republicans Guliani, Romney, Thompson and McCain, who lead the internal polls, only address certain wing of the party. When partisan voters are asked how satisfied they are with the selection of candidates, Republicans do significantly worse than Democrats. According to a spring poll by broadcaster CBS, 6 out of 10 Democrats were satisfied with their candidates, and 6 out of 10 Republicans were dissatisfied with the selection.

A look at magazines and blogs related to the party is sufficient to understand the mood within the so-called Grand Old Party. Whether in the movement's house journal, the “American Conservative” or in the influential powerline blog - the party's malaise, unsuitable candidates and unfavorable prospects for the 2008 election are being discussed with introspection that has been unfamiliar for years. Particularly critical for the Republicans: none of the candidates is supported by the evangelicals, i.e. the conservative Christians. With around a quarter of the electorate, they not only form an important electoral bloc, but traditionally vote for the Republican candidate with an overwhelming majority.

But the members' dissatisfaction with the candidates is not only reflected in the comparatively low donations and the survey results. It could even mean that the outcome of the nomination will only remain open shortly before the party meeting in September 2008, because none of the candidates can win a majority of delegates. As a result, the Republican candidates would be preoccupied with internal party struggles instead of the Democratic challenger until shortly before the election.