The 2008 Democratic nomination race is turning into one of the best in more than a generation. Serious, powerhouse candidates coupled with a compelling political backdrop makes for what should be a heck of a race once the primary season comes.
I still maintain that 2008 represents the best chance we have seen in a long time for the Democratic Party fight to carry through to the convention. Imagine if the race is still undecided on Super Tuesday and the voters split between, say, Hillary and Obama with a surprising John Edwards stealing enough delegates away to give the convention some drama (and Edwards much leverage).
Recent history makes such a scenario seem improbable, but that does not make that history deterministic. Strong candidates with enough money and enough of an unyielding constituency makes for a potential extra innings affair. If you are a political junkie, the very thought is sweet ambrosia. For the rest of you it probably sounds like a freaking nightmare.
10 comments:
Probably not cool to ask, but who will you lean with? I'm proud to have voted for Obama when I lived in Illinois. That cat has swing. But I've always respected Hillary.
Matt --
I'm a free agent right now. My heart says Obama, but I am waiting to see the race develop before committing.
dcat
Biden. Heaven forbid we go with the person with the most experience. Let's vote for the rock stars instead (so to speak)
I'm on record as being a fan of Biden, but I am not certain he would be the best president. However, I could see him as a very viable SecDef or SecState candidate. I think almost any of the major Dems would benefit from his counsel.
dcat
I'm going to save you guys a whole lot of time and analysis and tell you what's going to happen. It's so clearly obvious, it's not even funny. Hillary, with more money than god funding her campaign is going to win the democratic nomination, probably sooner in the primaries than most people think. Those moderate Republicans who are just dying to vote Democratic because of the mess that the Bush administration has caused are going to see Hillary as their alternative and their hate of the Clintons is going to push them right back to vote for Guliani or McCain or whoever wins the republican nomination and the Dems will once again blow it.
Speaking as someone who is most likely going to vote democratic, it pisses me off to no end to know this is going to happen. If I was the democratic party I'd be begging Hillary to drop out.
First off, that is the most I have ever seen Thunderstick reflect on politics in one setting.
Second, I'll simply invoke C. Montgomery Burns: "Look at those slackjawed troglodytes, Smithers. Yet if I were to have them killed, I'd be the one to go to prison. That's democracy for you!"
dcat
I don't get that into politics because I can't stand how people get aligned with one line of thought and are never apt to listen to anyone else. I consider myself a conservative when it comes to fiscal issues and a liberal when it comes to social issues and I'm always more than willing to listen to either side. It's absolutely infuriating to me. It's like people pick a side and rather than re-evaluate their position based on facts that come out, they just look for more stuff to defend their position. If science were run like politics, we'd still be debating whether the sun or earth is the center of the universe because there would be a few well-known scientists that just refused to admit they were wrong.
It is absolutely frustrating to me to see what the Democrats are doing in this race. Hillary is such a polarizing figure. There are a ton of moderate republicans looking vote democratic, but when they see that Hillary is their choice, there is going to be a sizable percentage of those moderate republicans that won't vote democratic because they can't stand her. I hate the way the democrats are going in this race. You've got Hillary who will like win the nomination and lose the election because she'll lose those republicans. You've got Biden who nobody seems to be listening to. You've got Edwards who I like, but he just doesn't seem like he's got the legs to do this. The only person in your party that you can find that really energizes people is Obama and that's because as Matthew Guenette wrote, the cat has swing. He's a really likeable guy, but he's got two years of experience. This is the f'in best we can come up with.
I didn't mind Hillary, but her recent behavior has made me dislike her. She won't admit her vote for the war was wrong. To me, this is no different than Bush going through all these years as we all watched Iraq get worse and worse and say "it's not a mistake, we just gotta stay the course." Admit you were freaking wrong. The fact that she won't do this has pretty much eliminated any chance of me voting for her in the democratic primaries because this tells me that if she's president and she makes a mistake, she's just going to do the same thing as Bush--refuse to acknowledge it was a mistake and just keep pressing.
I just can't believe that with Bush absolutely screwing everything up in Iraq and basically handing over the 2008 election to the democrats on a silver platter, this is the best we've got. The democrats should have met behind closed doors, decided who they thought had the best chance to win and just thrown all their support behind that person from the get go. Instead come January 09 we're going to be inaugurating Pres. McCain or Guliani and the talk shows are going to be all about how the democrats let this happen again. It's baffling to me that the writing on the wall is so clear to me already and we're going to have to endure this.
Obviously Rudolph for prez. Adultery is the new cocaine.
Although you always have to be weary of candidates "peaking" so early at this stage in the process, popular appeal and charisma count - (which Obama has and will likely retain through next November) at least as much as does political savvy (Hillary). Scientists don't have to worry as much about looking good and having as appealing a tone to their message. So suffice it to say that I think the Thunderstick's fears - at least on things political - might be a bit premature. And I might be biased when it comes to weighing stances on the war vs. one's attitude concerning personal-political entitlements, but I think Hillary's behavior - such as was exhibited in Gefen-gate - is much more problematic and a turn-off, and I think that fortunately - for me at least (I think/hope) - a good number of Americans will agree.
Obama has a couple of advantages over the other candidates, but the biggest one that will keep him in this race as long as he is viable will be the fact that he should be able to fundraise right alongside Hillary.
For many candidates the money is a problem from the outset -- they need a good showing in New Hampshire and Iowa early on to continue to be viable. Obama will have that money. As long as he has solid showings in the early states -- no worse than third in more than one, with at least one win or second plkace showing -- Obama should be able to compete until the end.
Obviously this assumes no majopr gaffes or skeletons, but that is the standard caveat for everyone. I just see this being really competitive and I can see no reason why it has to be over relatively early because unlike in, say, 2004 when Dean came out of nowhere, Obama has a much bigger name and a much bigger profile from a much bigger state than did the Vermont doctor who reinvented himself as an insurgent lefty outsider. Unlike, say, 2000, there is no anointed candidate a la Gore, even if Hillary wants to claim that mantle.
In toher words, this is somehting of a sui generis race, which is what makes it so exciting.
dcat
Post a Comment