Here are the 12 people I think are most likely to run for President in '08

[StevieM]

I've been told that I cannot start a poll of my own, so this will have to be write in. Feel free to add your own name to the list.

Here are the 12 Democrats that I think are most likely to run (my own two top choices are left off because I don't think they will run):

Hillary Clinton
John Edwards
Wes Clark
Russ Feingold
Mark Warner
Bill Richardson
Evan Bayh
Tom Vilsack
Tommy Carper
Chris Dodd
Ed Rendell
Maria Cantwell

Who would you guys most like to see as the party's nominee. Yes, I know we have a million of these threads already, but looking ahead to '08 helps me get past the image of the awful next 4 years.

Steve

[Renew Deal]

1. My favorites: Clark, Fiengold, Warner, Richardson

Not in that order

[liberalitch]

17. In what order then?

warner 2008

[Renew Deal]

21. That's a tough question

Warner
Fiengold
Clark
Richardson

That's a very loose order. I really need to see Warner and Fiengold in action. I think Richardson has good potential to win, even if he wouldn't be the best candidate. That's why I picked him.

[liberalitch]

25. Are you a virginian?

Warner came into office.... took the huge mess made by George Allen and Jim Gilmore and fixed it I BELIEVE that we now have a surplus.

He just needs to ocupy himself between next year when he must leave office and 2008

[StevieM]

29. Warner has been a great governor....

he has totally saved Virginia from the disaster of Allen/Gilmore. I'm not supporting him in '08 but I will give the credit he deserves for his strong record in Virginia.

Steve

[Comicstripper]

37. I like Warner just fine

I'm from Maryland, and Warner has a nice moderate image. But, you're right, he needs a position between now and then since he can't run for re-election (VA has annoying Gubernatorial term limits). The buzz is that he's going to challenge that twit George Allen for his senate seat. And win, I believe.

[RogueTrooper]

2. You missed out Howard Dean

and I believe he is almost certain to run.

[Renew Deal]

4. I really don't think he'll do it again.

I don't think he wants to and I think he will be DNC chair.

[StevieM]

15. Bleachers, I've been reading your posts and you seem to have

a lot of interesting ideas about this. I'd like to ask your opinion about something.

Is it really that important that a candidate has risen to a certain "level" before running? How many ordinary Americans had heard of John Kerry before he ran? How many people know Evan Bayh, Tom Visack, Bill Richardson or Mark Warner? For that matter, how prominent was Howard Dean?

Why would it be so unreasonable for someone like Martin O'Malley to run even if his top job had been mayor of Baltimore? With Guiliani running it certainly provides cover for him to say "I'm not the only mayor in the race."

I like O'Malley. He's a Gary Hart protege which is always good in my book. Also, he is reasonably liberal, while at the same time he has some ties to moderates in the party. And he is charismatic, articulate, attractive and inteligent. He has "the look" of a president.

Many people think that he will run at some point in the future. Why not in '08? Being governor of Maryland will just open the door for the GOP to find another million things he supposedly did wrong.

Steve

[Renew Deal]

20. Funny how you figured me out.

There is a question about what characteristic is most important in the next nominee. I answered experience. A governor of a good size state with more than 4 years of experience has good experience at the executive level. A good example of that would be Clinton. A general like Clark also fits that a different way. Senators can have good FP experience. Ideology is also important to me, but I am willing to accept almost any real democratic candidate in the end. Name recognition is important, but that can be developed. That's what happened to Dean. Any candidate that beats Hillary Clinton would get that. It's not unreasonable for a mayor, a house rep or others to run. I just don't think they can win because of foreign policy experience issues. Governors can fudge that. Example: Bush 2.

It would be great if O'Malley ran. I'm sur he would make a better president than Bloomberg.

[StevieM]

23. LOL, I must have missed that post where you talked about experience....

I just think that what matters most is ideas and competence/capability. I do want someone who will not trash the Democratic Party or its history. Besides, it never works. Kerry's health care ideas got labeled "a government takeover." So the GOP will try to tarnish us with that no matter what the plan is. Same with taxes, even when they get their way on a lot of things, we get slammed just as badly as tax-and-spend liberals. As a liberal, I have no idea how John Kerry became my ideal candidate and spokesman.

When you said "Bloomberg" did you mean Guliani? I think Bloomberg is much better then his civil rights violating predecessor. Then again, it would be hard not to be.

Steve

[Renew Deal]

28. I meant Bloomberg.

I think Guiliani will come in with an aura of FP experience he doesn't have.

[Comicstripper]

38. Oooh, I wanna say something about O'Malley!

I don't know him that well, BUT I do know that a) yeah, you need more "political capital" than mayorship to run for president (Which is why Giuliani may recieve a cabinet position, although he's too old to run in 2008) and b)he is widely considered a likely challenger to Governor Bob Ehrlich. That would set him up nicely for a run in 2012 or so.

[StevieM]

5. I left him off because I don't think he will run....

I could be wrong though. Anyway, I also left off Al Gore and Martin O'Malley, the mayor of Baltimore, both unlikely to run IMO.

Steve

[RogueTrooper]

9. I am picking up the odd rumor here and there

Bleachers7 may be right, and he may just go for DNC chair. However, he may follow Ronald Regean's 1976 to 1980 strategy. Regean lost the primary in 76. He spent the next four years building the Republican base before returning to win the next primary and become the two term president we all know and "love".

[iwantmycountryback]

3. I could see those people running

Clark wants to get out of politics though. And no to Dodd (Northeast liberal), and hopefully Hillary doesn't. I don't know much about Cantwell. My favorites are Warner and Feingold. Mike Easley, the governor of North Carolina could possibly run as well.

[madfloridian]

6. Please don't exclude Dean.

.

[StevieM]

10. As I said above, I also left off my own top 2 choices....

this is the list of the people I think are most likely to run, and who would be favored amongst them.

I haven't heard anything that indicates to me that Dean will run again, but if other people have different information, or reason to suspect he will run, then by all means add his name.

Steve

[Padraig18]

7. You left out Gov. Blagoevich.

Most people in IL don't doubt that he'll make a run for it, either in '08 or '12.

[terrya]

14. Oh, I agree. He's very interested. Re-elected in 2006.

He'd be in perfect position for a 2008 run.

[Comicstripper]

40. Poor Ro-Blog

He could never be elected president with a name like that. It's sad, but very true. Same reason Kucinich couldn't. If he changes his name to Chip Daniels, then we're talking.

[FrenchieCat]

8. guess my favorite....

Qualities required to snatch the game from the Repugs:

Charisma
Intelligence
articulator of the truth
Southern and perceived as moderate (even if he is not)
No voting record
A man's man - one you'd want to have a beer with
Pro-guns without being NRA poster boy
A true public servant
Humble roots
values orientated
wartime hero....with no skeletons
attractive to Republicans
a positive reputation in with the world community-
National Security creds up the yang-yang
A uniter....not a divider - A perceived Non partisan
One who understands Media Bias and crooked Voting machines
One who speaks the language of the Nascar Dads....and the Security Moms...and the values language.
one Republicans leadership is afraid of
Great at fundraising
Not meek or mild....no nice guys need apply...unless he is talking real nasty....even if there is a smile on his face.

If they run Jeb Bush/McCain....we will need a strong ticket.

Wes Clark is the Warrior we will need....cause the 2008 election will be a real war!

Clark/Obama
Clark/Warner
Clark/Clinton
Clark/Richardson
Clark/Baye

Clark with anyone is strong....no matter what.

[RogueTrooper]

11. I think Clark still needs to get himself

more experiece as a campaigner although it should be said that he was an excellet surrogatte for KE and obviously is a quick learner.

[Adelante]

12. Wes Clark in 2008

:thumbsup:

[Comicstripper]

39. Agreed

But he'd need an elected position first. When will Arkansas elect it's Governor? if it's 2006, he may have a shot. I just don't think that he could run as a general alone (though Eisenhower did it). but, yeah, with just a LITTLE political experience under his belt, his gravitas as a general carries more weight.

[AP]

13. I'd love to see Debbie Stabenow added to that list, and I'd love to see

her get the VP nod.

[americanwomanone]

31. See The Detroit Free Press this morning?

It appears the game plan for the GOP is to get both Granholm and Stabenow out. This is something we need to worry about, especially Stabenow.

[AP]

33. GOP can't stand Democratic women and they can't figure out why fear monger

-ing hasn't gotten these two women out of office.

[liberalitch]

16. Warner certainly....

with richardson or clark to back him up

[PSU84]

18. I love Wes Clark but

I doubt he'll run. Or that he'd be nominated.

Warner, Rendell, Richardson, Vilsack.

The Dem nominee should be a governor or former governor of a swing state or a red state.

NO MORE SENATORS

NO MORE NEW ENGLANDERS

[Renew Deal]

22. I also doubt Clark would run.

[liberalitch]

27. I like richardson too

[Thrill]

19. MIKE EASLEY

[deadmessengers]

24. Why not Jim Hunt?

A 4 term, seriously popular, Southern governor. He'll be a bit old (69) during the next election cycle, but hey, that didn't stop Ronald Reagan or Bob Dole.

[StevieM]

26. In 2000 I really wanted Hunt to be Gore's running mate....

I like him a lot. I also wish that it has been Hunt running for president in '04, rather then Edwards.

I believe he will be 71 in 2008. I don't think he is interested in running. If he was he would have run this time.

Steve

[Thrill]

30. Hunt is too old. He's retired.

He would of been a nice Education secretary. He would of been it for Gore

[Dying Eagle]

32. You can count out Russ Feingold

I love him to death but in several interviews over the last campaign he didn't sound to interested in running for Pres. Plus, some off his votes (Against Patriot Act, Dept. HLS) would be a Repuke Field day!!

[Guaranteed]

34. Dean's the only choice. Everyone else either has already lost,

been running this loser party, is a DLC whore or is Wesley Clark.

[JohnKleeb]

35. How is my governor a DLC whore?

and Feingold is a DLC whore? I had no idea.

[Guaranteed]

41. Feingold isn't at all. Feingold's great, actually.

Who's your governor? Does anyone know him?

[catbert836]

36. Best ticket for '08:

Edwards/Obama: A Fresh Start for America.

[Comicstripper]

42. Not a lick of experience between the two of them.

Sure, as much as bush had, yadda yadda yadda, but Bush had Cheney backing him up. OBAMA HAS TO WAIT, PEOPLE. Run him in 2012 0r, more realistically 2016. Edwards will be twiddling his thumbs for the next four years and will be in no position to run.

[Neshanic]

43. Well that has to be the most uninspired list generated.

Hillary...right. Edwards, tanned and ready to go, but has to clear up some more cases. Wes is sickened by us now. Russ? Oh Brother. Warner, now there's a unique guy....southern, DINO. Richardson....possibly nuts. Tom? who's he?

Oh who gives a shit.

You do not manufacture them. They are the product of the time and situation. Like Dean.

Get back to us in 2007, if we have not been interred into Christian re-education camps.

[zulchzulu]

44. I'd take a bullet for Russ

The fact that he voted against NAFTA, GATT, the Patriot Act, the Iraq War resolutions and much more to prove he has a spine. He is an incredible speaker. A smart man. I personally shook his hand on Election Eve in Madison. He rocks!

The problem is that he is Jewish. He's pro-choice. He's for campaign finance reform.

America doesn't deserve Russ Feingold.

[gauguin57]

45. In PA, I've heard rumors of bimbo eruptions on Ed Rendell ... but they

might be just rumors. If his closet is clear of skeletons, he'd be a heck of a candidate. He is a fabulous campaigner (I've watched him campaign up close and personal for Kerry three times, and he really has "it"). And he comes across as a "regular guy." But not a stupid regular guy like Bush -- a smart, savvy regular guy.

His wife, Midge, couldn't campaign for him, though, because she's a federal judge (ethics rules). But she'd be a helluva first lady!

Ed's not a matinee idol or anything, but having looked at a CHIMP FACE in the Oval Office for 8 years, I doubt the American public will be too picky!



Ed & Midge

http://www.post-gazette.com/election/20021110midge1110p5.asp

[mdguss]

46. Warner, Bayh, Kerry, Edwards:

No particular order. But I think the party also needs to realize it has to heal itself before it can win an election. There's a deep divide between liberals and moderates on which way the party should go. A Clinton candidacy would have a hard time hanging onto the moderates; a Bayh candidacy (though I might support it) would have trouble hanging onto the liberals.

Essentially what happend this year was that Kerry ended up being the compromise candidate (moderates favored Gephardt and liberals favored Dean). He proved to be a very skilled campaigner, and I think he did a great job in his campaign. Four years is a long time, but he could come back and he could win. A lot depends on what happens over the next four years.

Warner could also be that compromise candidate. I've seen him operate when I worked in Virginia, and he's a very effective leader. Even so, he faces the question of where he'll go after his term in Richmond expires.

There are other people out there. Probably a good 25 legitimate candidates will at least test the waters. Given what is going to happen on the Republican side (a brutal primary between three or four factions), we'd be wise to settle on a consensus candidate early in the process. Kerry best fits the bill in my view (Nixon, Reagan and Bush I are examples of defeated candidates who have come back to win). But others like Warner, Bill Richardson, etc may also fit that bill. Three years is a long time. First we should focus on the minor adjustments we need to make to win the election. Second, we should settle on a candidate and raise tons of money early. 2008 is winnable if we keep the passion and determination that we had in 2004.