President '08

[EStreetJoe]

I'd like to see John Edwards or Bob Kerrey win the presidency in '08.

You'd have a better chance of seeing a Raiders-Packers Super Bowl...

The thread is who do we want, not who we think will win.

I don't think the changes are that bad, but I will agree that Kerrey is an extreme longshot, not only to win, but to even get into the race in the first place.
But I think Edwards has a decent chance, he ran strong in the primaries and I think at the top of the ticket, he could fare even better.

 

[joe king]

For all the people who want Obama, what qualifications are you basing that on?
And please don't give me the "Fredo wasn't qualified" blah, blah, blah," talking point.
I'm honestly asking those who support him to be leader of the free world to explain what you think makes him qualified to be president. I know he's a great orator and a media darling, but I'm looking for more substance. Perhaps there's enough there there; I honestly don't know. I would just like to hear more from those so quick to support him.

What you want is almost impossible.

For a person in his early 40s to run for president, he has to have (relatively speaking) a very limited background of substance.

Which may not be a bad thing.

Nominate some political lifer (Kerry), and there are bound to be inconsistencies (or votes that can be spun into inconsistencies) in his voting record that the other side can tear to shreds. I think the two times we elected young guys (Theodore Roosevelt and JFK) proved to be fine choices.

I personally believe Obama is an extremely intelligent man who has a handle on what's important and can relate to people at home and abroad.

If, on the other hand, he's deficient in any way as a presidential candidate, it will likely be apparent after a long campaign.

Clinton was in his early 40s too, no?

And on the issue of inconsistencies in voting records, I'm tired of people using ``flip-flopping'' as this horrible negative on a campaign. People change, issues change, attitudes change. People can change their minds or do research and realize they were wrong. Hell, give me a guy who can admit he made a mistake and work to correct it over the tunnel-vision ``stay the course'' crap we have now. If it ain't workin', change it!

 

[Lyman_Bostock]

Rove split the country, pitting working people against each other, for political gain.

It worked.

Hardly admirable -- not to mention that it left everyone with the prevailing clown show.

Well, I could say that Clinton split the country in 1992, with help from Perot ... but if you want to believe your own BS, go right ahead.

 

[dog428]

Rove split the country, pitting working people against each other, for political gain.

It worked.

Hardly admirable -- not to mention that it left everyone with the prevailing clown show.

Well, I could say that Clinton split the country in 1992, with help from Perot ... but if you want to believe your own BS, go right ahead.

Uh, not so much really. Perot split the Republican vote. That was the only split.

The country is divided right now more than ever. And the current administration has done nothing but ensure that remains the case.

With that in mind, I'll take a split ticket -- two moderates from both sides. I don't care who they are. I'm just tired of the ****. This country works best when the two parties are forced to get along to get **** done.

 

[alleyallen]

To all those trying to handicap the race at this stage, remember this little tidbit -- a sitting Senator hasn't won the presidency since JFK.

OK, that was something I did not know. If it holds true to form, the likes of Clinton and McCain are S-O-L. Hello Rudy Giuliani or some funky governor.

 

[sportschick]

A name that was mentioned in the previous thread was Evan Bayh, former governor and current senator from Indiana. Moderate to conservative Dem, he would receive a lot of crossover support and be a lock for 270 against a far-right candidate. Only problem is, he will never receive the Dem nomination because of the far-left element that dominates the Democratic Party.

Reps have a way of giving the nomination to someone when it's their "time". That's what they did for Bob Dole in 1996, and that's what they will do for John McCain in 2008.

Shockingly, I've fairly far to the left and I happen to really like Evan Bayh. He did a really good job as governor in Indiana. The biggest problem with Bayh is the same one Kerry had -- his voting record as a Senator. I'm sure he's got some votes that can be called out and made issues of.

I think that if the Democrats really want to take back the presidency, they'll need to run a governor, who doesn't have a Senate voting record to be used against him/her.

Just my two cents, and another reason why I like Schweitzer, although I don't think he's got any desire to run.

 

[EStreetJoe]

To all those trying to handicap the race at this stage, remember this little tidbit -- a sitting Senator hasn't won the presidency since JFK.

OK, that was something I did not know. If it holds true to form, the likes of Clinton and McCain are S-O-L. Hello Rudy Giuliani or some funky governor.

Think about it... after JFK our presidents have been:
- LBJ, Kennedy's VP
- Nixon, came out of the private sector after a brief absence from politics to run for president
- Ford, Nixon's VP
- Carter, Gov. of Georgia
- Reagan, Gov. of Calif.
- Bush, Reagan's VP
- Clinton, Gov. of Ark.
- Bush, Gov. of Texas

So the question becomes, does the next president break that pattern and emerge from the Senate (or the House) or does the pattern continue?

Before Kennedy, I'm not sure who the last sitting Senator elected was.

 

[Chi City 81]

Warren G. Harding.

 

[alleyallen]

OK, I'm learning more than I thought I would people. Thanks for the scoop EStreet.

 

[tyler durden 71351]

The sad thing is, it's not too soon to talk about 2008. You've got to start lining up the big money donors and sucking up to the big special interests early. That's one of the reasons the political system is so messed up now. The days of a decent guy with qualifications being able to get elected (Harry Truman, Jimmy Carter) are long, long gone.
Whoever gets elected, I would like to see him (or her) be fairly honest and do what's best for the county, instead of just throwing red meat to the base. That's why I like McCain, Bayh and Obama and the thought of Hillary or George Allen getting the nomination disturbs me. Hell, I wanna hear McCain come out and say that he would have Karl Rove deported or Obama call the DailyKos.com crowd "a bunch of annoying liberal weenies".

 

[Fenian_Bastard]

Not too soon to talk about it.
Far too soon to draw any conclusions.

 

[joe king]

I just wonder if Giuliani has too much baggage to get elected. Before 9/11 -- and somewhat since -- I always got the impression he was a pretty slimy guy. Didn't he have all that ruckus with his ex-wife and mistress and crap like that? Granted, I'm looking at him from a distance (then again, in a national election, so are most people), but I don't know if he'll pass the smell test when it comes down to the scrutiny of a presidential campaign.

 

[Football_Bat]

What hurts senators in presidential campaigns is they have this nasty litle thing called "voting records" that opponents can hammer away on. Governors don't.

But a Hillary vs. McCain would cancel that out.