Interesting. I think more Americans will be inspired to vote for the first ever black candidate than will be turned away by it. I guess I think racism isn’t as prevalent as you. Plus, I think black voter turnout would probably be significantly higher than normal, if given the chance to elect a black candidate to the nation’s highest office.
Cite? Or is this just unspecfied conservative propaganda?
An Obama candidacy would be a sure-fire way to rally the conservative base, IMO.
What makes McCain attractive to liberals and moderates despite his actual conservative positions? The fact that he is articulate, straight talking, and most of all the fact that we believe that he believes what he says. No one knows what HRC really believes. Is she a conservative wannabee war supporter or a liberal or what? She is an “as if” person, a chameleon. And her varying stands will come back to haunt her. Edwards also is someone who comes off as whatever you want him to be, but with no backbone or heart.
Feingold is too liberal for most Dems and a Jewish Leftist? Totally unelectable.
I’d like to know more about Bayh and about Richardson. Any one think that Obama could be pegged for VP.
Why not Richardson? He’s term-limited in 2010, which means if he does want to run his best chance is 2008, unless the Republicans win and then he could take a shot in 2012.
I think it will be offered to him, but I think he’ll turn it down. The VP is a good way to disappear from the political limelight for 4 to 8 years. Plus, you become the President’s biggest supporter, which makes you appear to be less of an alpha dog.
Good spin doctoring.
You mean like the way he flip-flopped over Jerry Falwell’s intolerance? Or how he chided folks for “finger-pointing” over North Korean nukes one day after blaming Bill Clinton for the same?
Oopsie. Anyway, Richardson was a busy guy during the Clinton administration. First, ambassador to the UN, then Energy Secretary. Either one of those could be a target, especially the DOE position since he was in that seat when the Wen Ho Lee stuff happened. Before that, he was the Representative for the NM-3 district (basically Santa Fe, Taos, Los Alamos, and so on in the northern half of the state.) He’s spent a fair amount of time the last few years meeting with the North Koreans and keeps flying out of the country on these various diplomatic things.
What’s happened to Joe Biden? It seemed like during the last six months or so he was making more public appearances, and getting more press, presumably for another presidential run. Has he said he won’t run, or is there something else that has dropped him off the radar?
Not sure I would vote for him, but he always seemed like a viable candidate.
It seems this thread is putting the cart before the horse. The Democratic Party is going to have to present itself as a viable alternative to the United States’s electorate and they only have 2 years to do so. If Bush could run for a third term do you really think he’d lose? His approval rating right now is hovering in the lower 40 percentile and it’d be a redux of the 2004 election as far as I can see, except the Republicans would also have immigration as a strong tool (gays, Mexicans, and terrorists – what a campaign!).
And this is Bush. He** won’t** be running. Whoever runs should be able to easily distance himself from Bush’s stink, so talking about how bad a presiden Bush is doesn’t help much. The Democrats are going to have to shake off the numerous stereotypes associated with them. Otherwise, even a very qualified candidate has little chance. I don’t see them salvaging their reputation, so I’m going to go out on a limb and predict an R in the White House come '08.
I’m fairly convinced that with a stronger vice-presidential candidate, the Democrats could have won last time. Richardson, for instance - someone with strong governmental (and gubernatorial) experience. Edwards struck me as a Quayle clone. Just a pretty face. I’d certainly never support him for President.
That said, I really don’t understand this handicapping of the 2008 race even before we’ve had the off-year election. There’s a long way to go. Both Clinton and Obama and - hell, everybody - have two years to show their stuff.
The male Clinton was referenced above. He won the nomination because he showed his stuff while the experts were considering Bush the Elder unbeatable. There’s just no way to tell at this point.
I think Clinton’s a stronger candidate than people realize. Barring Gore and Kerry, she’s the only Democratic candidate who’s already gone through the full wringer. The Republicans have already used up all their best material on her.
Sure, somebody like Warner or Feingold look good now. But they haven’t withstood the full attack of a Presidential campaign. In three years, people might be saying “with all the good candidates we had, why’d we pick that loser?”
Hoping Mario Cuomo would be scared out of running?
I wish I could give the general populace more credit than this, but I can’t; Obama is black and his name sounds like he’s on the most wanted list in Iraq. I just can’t imagine him as president at this juncture.
Regaurding Hillary, I’m already sick of the Oval Office staying in the family. I’d support a constitutional “immediate family” amendment. I guess this goes doubly for Jeb.
http://www.adaction.org/lifetimesenwisconsin.html Cite
Americans for Democratic Action, which is a liberal advocacy group has rated him at a 98 out of a possible 100 on their “Liberal Quotient.” That ranks him at either first or tied for first of all Senator currently serving in the United States Senate.
If he’s not “too far left” then I guess no one is.
Sadness. I didn’t make it much of a secret that Warner was my dream run. Unfortunately, both Obama and Richardson I don’t trust to not scandal out, Bayh is dull as hell, Hillary is Hillary, and geez, I just don’t know. Seems like the Republicans have a far more exciting slate. Sigh.
Personally, I hope nobody. She’s my top choice among the likely-to-run dems, which is pretty alarming considering I’m a small-l libertarian.
Not that it will matter; IMO Guiliani will walk in. He will win the GOP nomination fairly easily, and win the general by the biggest margin since Reagan.
Impediment yes, but not disqualifier perhaps. I’m one of those whites that would eagerly want to vote for a qualified black presidential candidate.
IMO one of the biggest problems America has is the millions of minorities who believe (justified or not) that they can not/will not ever get a fair shake in life; I think a whole host of problems flow from that perception. A black president could do enormous good for the country in changing that.
Nice to see you can easily reduce a person’s sociopolitical views to a simple number. And here I thought you were going to cite his viewpoints and public statements for examples of “far left”-iness… :rolleyes:
Despite the questions about her principles, and the obvious fact that she does not have Bill’s political talents, she is a good candidate and a good campaigner. I’ve been impressed by her to this point.
I’ll second that. Clark sounded like a good idea on paper, but performed so badly that there’s no way I’d vote for him in a primary. He blew it.
He IS going to have some problems with the religious right. Maybe people think he’ll waltz to the nomination solely on the strength of that “America’s Mayor” crap, but he’s not only pro-choice and pro-gay rights, as noted, but very publically cheated on his wife while he was in office, and when he decided to get a separation from his wife, he told the press before he told her. They’ll have to square away some moral questions.
Precisely what has Guiliani done to warrant such adoration? What specifically did he do as mayor on 9/11 that nobody else would have done? Yeah, he was mayor when the planes hit and acted concerned and in charge. But what specifically did he do that made a difference?