It would be a mistake now, and for the foreseeable future, to be afraid of being seen as liberal (a word already beginning to lose the negative onus it has carried ever since the '80s). See this thread on “The demographic collapse of the Republican Party” (which might better have been titled, “The demographic collapse of the conservative movement”).
All leftists, progressives, left-populists, liberals, center-leftists, join me in song: “Tiiiiiiiime is on my side, yes it iiiis . . .”
The Democratic victory in 2006 was two-fold in nature. It was Iraq fatigue combined with putting forth moderate postions and candidates. In 2008, Iraq and Bush will not be relevant. If they continue to project an air of moderate politics, they will have a better chance.
I don’t know Obama’s history. If he is vulnerable to being painted as a flaming liberal, he could be vulnerable. If not, his charisma could help him with shallower voters. I think Edwards has a better chance. He was the candidate I feared most in 2004. (I also think Evan Bayh could have been an easy winner in 2008).
The bottom line for Democrats is that committed liberals will not fly as national candidates. That’s why they run left in the primaries and then back to the right for the national election.
I disagree. And if another catastrophic terrorist attack hits the United States, leftist politics will be doomed for a generation.
If you think Iraq will be irrelevant to the 2008 elections, you are quite mistaken. We will still be there (even optimistic predictions suggest that). how to extricate ourselves from that clusterfuck will be a focal point of every campaign.
An encouraging word! But then, Charlie Crist is a Republican the way Arnold Schwarzenegger is a Republican. 
You’re delusional.
Iraq isn’t going away and Bush’s war is going to be the central issue. You think conservatives like to throw Bill Clinton’s name around? It’ll be double that for Bush.
Bush’s first term included 9/11, the war in Afganistan, the war and susequent occupation in Iraq. All the big decisions were made with a Republican President, House, and Senate. Anyone who didn’t toe the President’s line was tossed aside and anyone who raised an opposing voice was called a traitor. Democratic voices and legislation were ignored. The CPA in Iraq that made all the bad decisions in the aftermath of the invasion was an ideologically pure Republican gang. In other words, every decision about the war came from Republicans. Iraq was a perfect petri dish of Republican ideas.
2008 is going to be all about Iraq and George Bush.
That’s because the numbers simply aren’t there to make an openly far-left presidential candidate electable. How did Kuchinich do last time with his “Department of Peace” and other similar proposals?
By summer of 2008, most American troops will be out of Iraq and out of harms way. What follows there will be filtered through the ideological prism of the speaker. If it’s chaos, Republicans will blame Democrats for undermining the effort. Democrats will blame Republicans for starting the war in the first place.
If things are going well on the ground, that will favor the Republicans.
If the democratic candidate thinks that he or she can campaign on the corpse of GWB, all the republican nominee has to say is “ummm…I’m not him.”
Ah, yes, the old “the war is protecting us, but if they attack us it is the Democrats fault”.
Tails, I win, heads, you lose…
wanna bet? First define “most”, I’d say at least 2/3s of the current deployment. By summer do you mean June? August? labor day?
I’m just stating fact as demonstrated by the reaction to 9/11 and the national security/defense baggage carried by the democrats. Only someone who is ideologically blinded to political reality would deny that a terrorist attack on american soil would not hurt the political fortunes of anyone deemed left of center.
I’ll bite. I believe that at least 2/3 of the current number of soldiers inside the border of Iraq will be outside those borders by August 1st of 2008.
The American people want security, but they also want, more and more, the things only leftist or center-leftist politics can provide: Universal health care, a better social safety net, and social-cultural liberalism. This is a result of demographic trends which will continue despite the impact of particular events.
check your private messages.
Both Giuliani and McCain are still saying that we are not leaving.
McCain is worse in his efforts to become a Bush clone, so yes, it is very optimistic to say we will be out by summer 2008 and it is silly to say the Republicans will not be affected because they are on the record that they will continue policies that will be opposed by even more people come election time.
Meet the new boss. Same as the old boss.
YEAAAARGH!
True, but irrelevant, because there isn’t going to be any far-left candidate. Oh, I’ll campaign for Saint Dennis until the Dem convention, just to help propagate his ideas through the memeshpere – and then support the nominee, who won’t be DK. And not even Obama or Edwards is “far-left” by any reasonable definition. And I don’t expect Nader to have even the slightest relevance this time around, whether he runs or not.
That happens only if W is the first to cave in his current showdown with Congress over the funding-bill-with-deadline-attached.
Will he be?
It would also hurt the political fortunes of anyone identified or associated with the Bush Admin or the neocons. I mean, we’ve been following their lead, giving them a free hand, doing everything they say, ever since 9/11, and they still let this happen again?!