Early musings on 2008
Here are some quick assessments.
Democrats
- Clinton - She can raise millions and millions of dollars, she's been an effective senator, she's moved to the center . . . blah, blah, blah. It would be nice to think that the Democrats, emboldened by 2006, will resist nominating her. If they are wise they will resist, because I believe, as I always have, that she is unelectable. So, my prediction is that she won't be nominated, and will lose the general election if she is nominated.
- Obama - I don't think the buzz can be sustained as he is fleshed out and begins having to take more positions. He will not be able to leverage consistent opposition to the war as far as some people think. It's uncertain how he would have voted had he been in the Senate—other than Russ Feingold, no Democrat with any discernible presidential ambitions voted against the Iraq War Resolution. We've already seen Obama hedging his bets on controversial issues. His lack of experience could provide the perfect fig leaf for those voters (i.e., closet racists) with reservations about a black president. He's also quite a bit further to the left, or has been, than people realize. In sum: I don't see blocs of "NASCAR dad" votes materializing. Oh, and if my middle name were "Hussein", I don't think I would adopt a trademark look that is essentially the same trademark look Saddam Hussein adopted for his trial. If Obama proves to have the talent or charisma of a JFK, then all bets are off. Otherwise, he'll make someone an outstanding running mate.
- Edwards - Next to Obama, he looks experienced. Next to Clinton, he looks electable. He's been in 2008 mode since November 2004, which should pay dividends in early primary states. I believe he's laid a lot of groundwork in Iowa and might do well there too; with native son Vilsack in the race, people will be paying a little less attention to Iowa, so Edwards wouldn't need a home run there. I could see Edwards emerging as a front-runner if he does well early, especially if people begin focusing on Clinton's unelectability and if Obama settles to earth. Edwards-Obama would be an interesting ticket.
- Biden, Dodd - The distinguished gentlemen from Delaware and Connecticut will yield.
- Vilsack - By all accounts he's been a fine governor of Iowa. That's nice.
- Kucinich - Technically not eligible for election because he is only a character, like Borat or Father Guido Sarducci. (That reminds me, I watched The Godfather: Part III recently and I have to say that the casting of Don Novello as a Corleone family retainer really distracted me. His voice is just unmistakable, at least when doing anything remotely like an Italian accent. He is not, however, running for president.)
- Richardson - There is a reason, sadly forgotten, why I don't care for Richardson. I think it has to do with his poor stewardship at the Department of Energy, notably things he didn't do and statements he made during the whole Wen Ho Lee fiasco. As I say, I don't remember exactly. Be that as it may. I don't see it happening for Richardson. It doesn't seem to me that his being Latino is a big enough deal. If Democrats can't secure a substantial Latino vote with whomever they nominate, that probably means the wheels have come off in ways that Richardson would not have been able to prevent.
- Kerry - Honestly, who is going to want to vote for Kerry? I don't see it happening for Kerry in 2008. He had his shot and he might well be smart enough to realize that was it and stay out of a race he would almost surely lose. Can you imagine how insufferable he would be about Iraq this time around?
- Gore - He might not be faulted for running again because he won in 2000 in ways that don't count. He would, of course, be president today if he had managed to win his home state in 2000. Oops. I think he could be a surprisingly strong candidate, but my sense is that he isn't going to run.
- Clark - In theory, a strong candidate, supplying the national security credibility that has been a Democratic Achilles' heel. That was true in 2004 too, and it didn't get him very far. Still, he remains interesting. My guess is that if he enters the 2008 race he will once again fail to generate the necessary traction. But a Clark-Obama ticket would cover a lot of ground.
- Corzine - To my knowledge, he has not indicated any interest, and he probably isn't equipped to self-finance a presidential run. Still, he's obviously a very competent and successful Democrat. And he voted against the war. I think it would be intriguing if Corzine or someone like him got into the race.
- McCain - Until recently he seemed to enjoy some studiously-cultivated plausible deniability on the implementation of the Iraq War. Now, his support of the so-called "surge" puts that in jeopardy. He continues to have issues with the hard-core Republican "base" that is critical for gaining his party's nomination. However, assuming the Republicans want to win in 2008, that may not be an obstacle. I expect that McCain is going to be closely associated with what Edwards is already calling the "McCain Surge", and tarred by its likely failure. Putting that to one side, McCain seems like not only the strongest candidate on the Republican side, but the strongest overall. I think he would beat Clinton or Obama if the election were held today.
- Giuliani - I don't see Giuliani as a national political figure, and I don't think he will be able to leverage his years as mayor to the extent some might believe. He's only on the map because of 9/11, and because he was present in New York City on that day. I don't think Giuliani will wear well with voters, and he has quite a bit of baggage. I wouldn't be surprised if he shows weakness in his fundraising efforts as many in his natural donor base decide McCain is the better bet.
- Romney - I don't see Romney developing much traction. I do think his religion would become an issue. The average person has more or less no idea of the core beliefs of Mormonism, so some of what Romney believes will come as a surprise and might make him appear a little alien to core Republican voters. Of course, who else will all those people vote for if Romney is the nominee? Which he won't be.
- Brownback - This guy is just a nut with no chance of being nominated or elected. In the future, the polite thing for Kansas to do would be to keep people like this to themselves.
- Gingrich - No idea if he will run, but I wouldn't be shocked. His smarts and political instincts should be the envy of most everyone listed here. He has a lot of baggage. I'd love to see him debate Hillary, except that it would mean that one of them would have to lead us for four years thereafter.
Labels: 2008 presidential campaign, Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton
posted at 12:38 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home