To the Democrats here, who do you want as your nominee in 2008?
Here's a little analysis by me.
Ex-Senator Mike Gravel: Openly acknowledges that his goal is to bring more attention to his idea of a National Initiative idea. His tax ideas are also interesting. But he's a no-go as a nominee.
General Wesley Clark: Impressive resume, and a possible VP candidate. He was the frontrunner in 2004 until his poor political skills could be seen.
Senator Christopher Dodd: Fights for the left-of-Hillary base, but has no chance.
Senator Joseph Biden: Fights with Hillary for the more moderate spot, citing his electability and foreign policy experience. However, his past plaguerism may defeat him.
Senator Barack Obama: Has ruled out 2008 in the past, but would be a perfect VP candidate. His lack of political experience and accomplishment is why he may choose to wait to run, unless he runs simply to impress the nominee into putting him on the ticket.
Senator Evan Bayh: Got a big boost by Mark Warner's decision not to run, and Evan Bayh will fight for the right-of-Hillary spot. However, as of now, he is over-shadowed by John Edwards as the "electable" alternative.
Governor Tom Vilsack: Fights for the moderate base, but has no name recognition.
Senator John Kerry: He will fight for the left-of-Hillary spot, and hopes to reinstall hope in him by being more vicious and left-wing.
Governor Bill Richardson: Will fight for the moderate spot, but is more likely as a VP candidate.
Ex-Senator John Edwards: Will fight for the "electable" and moderate spot, and seems to be winning in that category. Strategists see a huge boost from Mark Warner choosing not to run, and benefit from changes in the primary calendar.
Ex-Senator Tom Daschle: Will try to criticize Hillary as not being left enough, but argue he is more electable. I see no chance for him, as people will question his electability after being defeated in 2004.
Governor Phil Bredesen: Some chance he will run, but not likely as anything other than a VP candidate.
Ex-VP Al Gore: A less than 50-50 chance he'll run, but if he does, he'll immediately seize the left-of-Hillary spot and give her a run for her money.
Senator Russ Feingold: Currently winning the left-of-Hillary spot, but there are big questions about his electability. I see him as the Howard Dean of 2008.
Predictions: If Al Gore does NOT run, you'll see a contest between John Edwards and Hillary Clinton, with Russ Feingold being a powerful force but not winning. If Al Gore runs, then it's between him and Hillary. Most likely winner: Hillary Clinton. Most likely VP: Barack Obama.
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
Going to be Hillary. I'm not sure Gore is a wise choice even if he does run. I think Edwards is consistant though. The rest, I'm not really sure. Your analysis is pretty good.
Why isn't Gore a wise choice? I figure he has the left-wing base down, but is electable as shown in 2000.
Please not another Clinton in the White House.
I wish Obama would run, but as you said, he's only been around a few years and that could possibly work against him. There is a lot of momentum right to get him to run, and he might loose that if he waits until 2016. So, I think that's a toss up as to if he will run or not.
I like Al Gore and I think the past few years have given him a boost. I just couldn't bring myself to like him in 2000. Luckily, I wasn't old enough to vote yet or I would still be kicking myself... I would have voted for Bush sadly enough.
I think it'll be between Kerry (or Edwards) and Clinton (if Obama decides not to run this time). I like Hilary, but a lot of people don't like her, so I'm not sure how well that will go over.
I'm waiting, rather impatiently, to see how 08 shapes up.
"We don't receive wisdom; we must discover it for ourselves after a journey that no one can take for us or spare us." -Marcel Proust
Why do you think Kerry might beat out Edwards? Don't you think that if anyone would "forgive" any past candidate, it'd be Al Gore?
I still think the best position for Obama is VP. Gives him the political experience, and guarantees him a shot at the presidency.
I think my dream ticket would be Obama/Feingold... or Feingold/Obama, either way is fine. I really like both of those guys, and they're both straight-talking progressives. We need that now.
Do you think Feingold is electable?
Absolutely.
That was my way of asking you to make your case. I don't think most Americans, although not liking Bush, advocate immediate withdrawal and impeachment.
This country needs a progressive standard-bearer right now. Russ Feingold and Barak Obama are just that. Each easily wins their senate seats in so-called "battleground states". Each speaks clearly and honestly, without mucking about in any Orwellian doublespeak -- that in itself should make the American people happy. Plus, they're both better looking and more charasmatic than any of the candidates on the other side of the aisle -- and that is a factor, believe it or not -- especially Sam "Real ID" Brownback.
Feingold might have a decent shot at winning the general, but he'll never win the Democratic nomination, for a number of reasons.
Bt I don't care a bit...he stood up against the Patriot Act and against the Iraq War, so he has my support as long as he's in it.
I don't see anyone else on this list...or any other list...that I would even consider voting for.
I guess I'm still the last person in the country who still has serious doubts that Hillary will run, now or ever.
Gore: I don't think he'll run. If he does, I think you'll see the magical reappearance of the bland Gore who ran in 2000. I think he's well off doing what he's doing now, and hope he has the good sense to realize it.
Obama: He lost me at Ohio.
Pretty Boy: He has a decent chance at it, which is sad.
Kerry: Ha ha ha ha ha...I really do hope he has the gall.
What do you mean Obama lost you at Ohio? Can you elaborate?
Obama did not stand up for democracy:
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi=/news/archive/2005/01/06/natio...
http://www.buzzflash.com/alerts/05/01/ale05006.html
_________________________
Partisanship...so 20th Century
Clark may have made a few novice mistakes in 2004, but he lost solely because he got into the race too late to compete in Iowa. Up to that point, Clark had raised more money than anyone, was second and climbing in all the NH polls, ended up coming in 3rd in New Hampshire (behind two candidates from states right next door), and ultimately was the only candidate other than Kerry to win a state not his own. Not a bad showing for his first run at elective office ever. Moreover, Clark is fast learner. He kicked butt in his 2004 Democratic convention speech, and he kills on the stump now, as he's travelling all over the country, campaigning for 2006 Congessional Democrats. If Clark decides to run in 2008, and if the media gives any kind of coverage, Clark is gonna surprise the hell out of everybody who's ever said he is a "poor" campaigner.
Thanks for your comment. It's interesting. In 2004, a lot of people saw Clinton's hand behind Wesley Clark, and that led to rumors that he'd choose Hillary as VP (or maybe vice versa now?).
A number of people encouraged Clark to run in '04: Bill Clinton, but also Jimmy Carter, Joe Biden, Tom Harkin, Charlie Rangel and a number of others. And then there was the draft (and yes, we were very real) that pledged him his first million in campaign funds. So who's to say whether he'd choose Hillary Clinton or she him in 2008? I really don't think that's a factor at this point. If Clark runs, it will be for the top of the ticket; if he wins, he'll select a VP according to the same criteria any other nominee would use. I don't see that being Hillary Clinton, but I can't read his mind. If Clark doesn't run or win, I think many of the potential nominees woud love to have someone of his qualifications on the ticket with them. But Clark doesn't approve of what he calls the "Cheney model" for an administration, so it's quite possible he would decline the offer.
I can't help but think that Clark would easily take a VP spot, to neutralize those saying he has no domestic political experience. I think he's a perfect choice for Hillary. But you're right, I don't see him choosing Hillary this time (maybe in 2004 if he had won).
...or which TV show he was interviewed on, but after the primary was essentially over, I believe Clark stated unambiguously that he was asked to run to stop Dean, and...as I recall, that it was the Clintons who asked him to stop Dean. Biden probably chimed in on the stopping Dean part. Carter and Harkin...seems unlikely.
I want H. Clinton because she graduated from my high school and she is going to come back to talk with the school!!