The 2008 Presidential race. What does Matt think?
Inspired by the National Journals race rankings, I am going to take an early stab at the 2008 Presidential field.
The Republicans
The right side of the field breaks down like this. You have the moderates, like McCain and Rice. The intelligent conservatives, like Romney and Gingrich. (Oh man, I know I am going to hear it from the left on Gingrich!) The professional politicians, like Frist and Allen. And the cultural wingnuts, like Santorum and Brownback.
I'm torn about who I want the Republicans to nominate. I love my country, so I sort of want them to nominate someone from the first two categories. But I also love politics, so I sort of want them to nominate someone I'll be happy about mashing into a fine pulp.
The Democrats
I like Senators John Edwards and Russ Feingold. And I have high hopes for Mark Warner.
Hillary would be a great President. But I have this pet theory about voters and careerism. I think a lot of people voted against Kerry because they were turned off by his sheer ambition. The guy lived his whole life like he wanted to be President. War hero. Prosecutor. Senator. People don't like relentless achievers. They're more comfortable with the guy who ambled into history.
If you grant me this (wacky) theory for two seconds, you'll see the biggest problem Hillary really has. It's not the liberalism. It's the political calculation. The fundraising. The move to New York. The staying-with-the-cheating-husband thing. Biden has the same problem. So does Bayh. Their resumes are almost too good to be trusted.
It's early.
I'm not saying Tom Vilsack couldn't get me out waving signs on street corners. I'm just saying that I can't see myself getting fired up over a Biden vs. McCain race. But if it's Edwards vs. Brownback, I'm quitting my job and working full-time to save my country.
The Republicans
The right side of the field breaks down like this. You have the moderates, like McCain and Rice. The intelligent conservatives, like Romney and Gingrich. (Oh man, I know I am going to hear it from the left on Gingrich!) The professional politicians, like Frist and Allen. And the cultural wingnuts, like Santorum and Brownback.
I'm torn about who I want the Republicans to nominate. I love my country, so I sort of want them to nominate someone from the first two categories. But I also love politics, so I sort of want them to nominate someone I'll be happy about mashing into a fine pulp.
The Democrats
I like Senators John Edwards and Russ Feingold. And I have high hopes for Mark Warner.
Hillary would be a great President. But I have this pet theory about voters and careerism. I think a lot of people voted against Kerry because they were turned off by his sheer ambition. The guy lived his whole life like he wanted to be President. War hero. Prosecutor. Senator. People don't like relentless achievers. They're more comfortable with the guy who ambled into history.
If you grant me this (wacky) theory for two seconds, you'll see the biggest problem Hillary really has. It's not the liberalism. It's the political calculation. The fundraising. The move to New York. The staying-with-the-cheating-husband thing. Biden has the same problem. So does Bayh. Their resumes are almost too good to be trusted.
It's early.
I'm not saying Tom Vilsack couldn't get me out waving signs on street corners. I'm just saying that I can't see myself getting fired up over a Biden vs. McCain race. But if it's Edwards vs. Brownback, I'm quitting my job and working full-time to save my country.
3 Comments:
HELLO - General Wesley Clark!!!!!!!
I would definitely quit my job to help him.
There was an article in the magazine section of the Sunday NY Times about two weeks ago that discussed the 2008 campaign with a focus on Mark Warner. Unfortunately, I am less supportive of him than I was prior to reading the article. Minimal national or international experience (duh, as if that seems to matter)and not progressive enough for me. And, according to the Times, there is almost no chance for anyone other than Hillary to get the nomination. She could begin the campaign with 75 million in her warchest as her money will roll over. Warner, on the other hand, is not allowed to roll-over any money.
I still think the best choice is Governor Schweitzer and I think the only reason Hillary is getting all the buzz now is name recognition. Face it, most people don't pay attention and only recognize the most famous names. Personally, I have never been a Hillary fan. I am mystified by her support from the left and by her being called too liberal. The Clintons were always very centrist, triangulating, pro-nafta Dems, not particularly liberal at all. I also don't understand her supposedly being the darling of the left since the left has always opposed the Iraq war. She was one of the most hawkish Senators of either party from the beginning and one of the quickest to drape herself all over Bush and one of the last to utter a word of criticism over his handling of the war. As far as her being a feminist icon, let's face it. If her name was Smith she never would have had a shot at being Senator of a state she never lived in for her very first elective office. Sure she's smart and ambitious but she got to where she is the old fashioned way; marrying the right guy and sticking with him no matter how much trouble he had keeping his pants zipped. No, I just don't get Hillary's popularity and I don't think the nominee will be any of the front runners on the scene now. Who ever heard of Bill Clinton this far out? It's just talking head blather at this point and the media is doing the right a big favor by keeping the Dem they most love to hate in the forefront.
Post a Comment
<< Home