I really wish we could break that streak, just on general principles.
That strikes me as an asset. No past record to tear apart with misleading campaign adds.
As for who I’d nominate… I think we’re going to lose, so my pick would be Noam Chomsky. Let’s go down with style, this time.
Heh. Unfortunately, the chances of Noam Chomsky accepting the Democratic nomination are even less than the chances of his receiving it.
Of course, having your candidate be completely unwilling, and excoriating your imperialist policies at every possible turn, might fit the party’s style perfectly at this point.
Daniel
Oh hell yeah! Just imagine the debate…
Moderator: For our first question, each candidate has 30 seconds to respond. The percentage of working Americans without health insurance is at an all-time high. What will you do in your Presidency to address this?
Republican Candidate: First off, I’d like to thank you, Moderator, and the fine people of this town. It’s people like you that help make our country the great place it is. I’d also like to give thanks to Jesus Christ, without whose grace I never would have come as far as I have in life. I hope his blessings will be on these campaigns and the presidency regardless of who wins. As for healthcare, I think we should continue down the path my predecessor has been taking us: Reducing dependence on insurance by allowing hard-working Americans to set aside a portion of their income, before tax, for their own health. The program has been a stunning success–consider that the number of people using it has gone from zero to thousands, an increase of well over %130, in just 2 short years.
Moderator: Mr. Chomsky, you have 30 seconds to respond.
Noam Chomsky: First off, I’d like to express my outrage at having to participate in this Corporation-staged puppet show, Moderator. You and the people of this town should be ashamed for your contribution to the illusion that is the USA. We need to immediately end our hegemonic cultural and political influence over the rest of the world, and join all other Western nations in making amends for centuries of damaging imperialistic policies. Would somebody please unshackle me from the podium, now?
Moderator: I’m sorry, Mr. Chomsky, but according to the rules agreed upon by both parties you’re not to be unchained until 5 minutes after the credits end. On to the next question …
I, too, am thinking “Southern Governor,” most likely Warner or Richardson. My dark-horse pick? Mike Easley from NC. He easily won his last gubernatorial campaign (2004), and he’s currently one of the most popular governors in the country (although Warner is even better). Carrying NC gets you 14 electoral votes, plus a shot at the other close southern states (Virginia, Louisiana, Arkansas). I doubt that he’ll run (perhaps he’ll go for Senate when his term’s up), but it would be interesting.
A Schweitzer run would be pretty cool, too.
Y’all should go with Gore/Dean. Hillary can wait until 2012 or 2016 if need be. Let her get re-elected as New York Senator and serve a complete second term, first. Anyone who yells “carpetbagger!” after that will be a moron.
I dont see a male minority dem getting the nod. A male minority pub maybe. If the dems dont choose a rich white guy, then they had better dust Hillary off. I, personally, wouldn’t vote for her unless Bush ran for a third term.
What can he say he’s done, though? Half a term in the US Senate, seven years in the Illinois State Senate, and wrote a book? I don’t think that stacks up too well against say, McCain’s 20 years in the Senate and his military record. I think he’ll be a great candidate one day. No point in rushing things.
Not a horrible idea, but he doesn’t appear to be seriously considering it. Besides, he has zero name recognition outside of North Carolina.
He is also overshadowed in his own state by a far more likely candidate, John Edwards. I think an Edwards/Obama ticket would look good in 2008. It would look young, energetic, and genuine, and it would represent a clear break from the increasingly unpopular Bush legacy. They’ll be able to pin the whole “trial lawyer” thing on him, but if they didn’t have something to pin on him they’d just make something up anyway.
I’d love to see Kerry in the office, but he has too much baggage at the moment. Al Gore, in his new incarnation, would be a great President, but his baggage problem is worse than Kerry’s. I’d much rather it not be Hillary, but she wouldn’t be that bad.
I strongly suspect that the GOP candidate will be a move toward the center – Guiliani or maybe McCain. If the Dems were to offer up a Richardson or a Warner, those in the center would actually have a choice.
Unfortunately, I think that Bricker is right, and the dems will nominate a centrist who will pander to the far left: I’ll guess Joe Biden or Evan Bayh.
My dream candidate? Russ Feingold, senator from Wisconsin. A liberal/progressive maverick, he voted to confirm Ashcroft, saying the Prez had the right to name whom he wanted to his cabinet, and voted to confirm our new Supreme Court Chief Justice too, pissing off a lot of Democrats. But he was the sole vote against the Patriot Act, and he’s the most vocal Democrat calling for setting a deadline to pull the troops out of Iraq.
He’s the poorest man in the Senate, based on declared worth and income tax statements, and he only accepts the salary that was effective for his Senate seat at the time he was elected, giving the extra from pay raises the Senate voted itself during his term back to the gummint to pay down the deficit.
I think he’s too liberal to actually win, more’s the pity. But it’s a fun dream.
Bill Richardson from New Mexico…perhaps with Hillary as the VP candidate. Imagine a McCain/Rice vs Richardson/Clinton death match for the presidency! I don’t really like any of them, but it would be a VERY interesting race IMHO. Thats all I care about these days…
-XT
No way is anyone going to have HRC as their running mate, and no way would she accept it. It’s gotta be all or nothing for her.
And, from what I posted in the other thread: Condi vs Hillary in '08? Read all about it…
Metacom: Nice one on the Chomsky debate! 
Well, I mostly agree that she won’t have it. I didn’t say it was reality based…just that it would be fun and what I would like to see. I highly doubt Rice will either run or be nominated as a VP choice either for that matter…and I think Richardson is a dark horse at best. McCain maybe has a somewhat higher chance of making to the top spot, but he IS getting pretty old and doesn’t really resonate with the religious crowd.
-XT
Joe Biden seems interesting.
Joe Biden is all right, and all, but it’ll take the Republicans all of 2 seconds to turn “plagiarizer” into 2008’s “flip-flopper.”
I love Obama, he seems to be a very caring and passionate man. As far as public speaking, he’s in the Martin Luther King class. Perhaps the best living orator. He would make a wonderful president. I hate to be cynical, but I’m not convinced that a black man, even one as gifted as Obama, is electable.
I love John Edwards and his populism. However, he failed to deliver any southern states in 04 and may not have the gravitas to win.
My vote would go to Richardson of New Mexico, to neutralize any inroads that the Pubs have made in the Hispanic community. Another fine man who would make a great president.
It seems to me that you’re rationalizing. One could just as easily say our country taxes individual citizens (“From each according to his ability”) in order to help the disadvantaged (“To each according to his need”). I think that Democrats who do not comprehend how her announcement, worded as it was, might give people the heebie-jeebies, are not qualified to select their best candidate — meaning, one that will win.
It is easy to conceive a Rovian attack campaign on that single San Francisco declaration. Just play the audio while rows of drooling drones dressed in grey stare a thousand yards away. Pan back to reveal images of Hillary, Marx, Stalin, and Mao on Mount Rushmore. Voiceover: She might have been good for the Soviet Union, but is she good for America?
Too easy.
I’m in the Southern or MidWest Governor camp. I think Warner of Virginia is a good pick. Virginia’s a big friggin’ State, population-wise, and his popularity there could overlap to pick up neighboring Southern States that the Democrats can’t usually count on.
Richardson got some good Washington experience plus time at the U.N. in addition to being a Governor. My gut tells me that there would be people who would have a problem with the fact that he spent his childhood outside the U.S.
Schweitzer of Montana seems like the kind of guy who could take some of the States that the Democrats generally lose, but he hasn’t even been Governor a year at this point.
To win which? The nomination, or the presidency?