WP political blog: 5 most likely Democratic '08 Presidential nominees...

[DeepModem Mom]

as of today.

WP political blog, "The Fix," by Chris Cillizza

....EVAN BAYH: We were intrigued to read in the Des Moines Register this week that Bayh is the only 2008 Democrat other than Iowa Gov. Tom Vilsack who has political staff on the ground in the Hawkeye State. We've said all along that Bayh's methodological approach to the nominating process will eventually pay dividends. At some point, however, Bayh needs to show that he is more than just a process candidate (Midwesterner, former governor of a red state) and that he can energize Democratic base voters.

HILLARY RODHAM CLINTON: Clinton's hiring of Peter Daou and Jesse Berney -- two prominent liberal bloggers -- is yet more evidence that she is readying for a 2008 candidacy. Clinton's problems with liberals over the Iraq war aren't going away, and her team needs to figure out a way to placate the left before the Iowa caucuses where anti-war sentiment is sure to run high. We see more holes in Clinton's candidacy now than we did a year ago, but without Gore in the race she is still the odds-on frontrunner.

JOHN EDWARDS: No Democrat had a better month than Edwards. His first place showing in the Des Moines Register poll of likely caucus goers shows that Edwards retains considerable good will in the state after his second-place finish in the 2005 caucuses. We're still not convinced Edwards can turn on the spigot early next year and raise the $10+ million needed to keep him competitive with the lead pack, but the poll goes a long way to keeping him relevant between now and then.

AL GORE: Why add Gore now? Because when we talk to strategists for every other candidate considering the race, one of the first questions they ask is: "What do you hear about Gore?" Talk to former aides and allies of the vice president and you get totally divergent responses. Some believe he will only run if drafted into the race in its latter stages; others are convinced that if Hillary Clinton looks like a winner, Gore will run in order to keep the party from moving more towards the ideological middle. Here's a tidbit that makes us think that Gore might be seriously considering a bid: He not only did an automated call for Democrats in the California 50th special election earlier this month, but he also reached out to Democrat Francine Busby following her defeat in that race. We won't rehash the arguments for and against a Gore candidacy; suffice to say that if he gets in, Gore would have to be considered the co-favorite for the nomination along with Clinton. And what an epic clash it would be.

MARK WARNER: Ahead of the 2006 elections, Warner is running a different type of race compared with other candidates listed here. He is using his Forward Together PAC to prove his fundraising ability and bolster his Democratic bona fides. Forward Together has raised an impressive $7 million since last July, and Warner has sprinkled donations to candidates and party committees all over the country. As a candidate he remains a work in progress. More so than any other candidate in the field, though, we get a sense from Warner that he really wants the nomination and is willing to do whatever he needs to do to get it. Don't underestimate a hungry candidate....

http://blog.washingtonpost.com/thefix/

[acmavm]

1. Right.

:sarcasm:

forgot the sarcasm thingy

[Stinky The Clown]

2. Manipulation, pure and simple

Hey, Wapo .... kiss my DEMOCRATIC ass.

[OzarkDem]

3. Who cares wha WaPo says?

They've lost 100% of their credibility since trying to attack the NYT for revealing Bush's spying, as if Woodward participating in the Plame outing wasn't enough. They're history.

[Totally Committed]

4. With the exception of Gore,

I wouldn't walk across the street to vote for any of them. Why? DLC. CORPORATE MEDIA choosing mostly CORPORATE candidates.

Sorry, I know that pisses some here off, but I refuse to be manipulated into voting for a DLC candidate ever again. I just cannot do it. We all have our "lines in the sand", and that as they say, is that.

TC

P.S. When are we going to stop allowing the MSM to "select" who we elect? It needs to stop.

[blm]

6. How did corpmedia direct who Dems selected in 2004?

They tried to kill off Kerry throughout most of 2003, then gave short shrift to Edwards then Clark, and only by December did they even focus any critical eye on Dean.

They kept OVER-reporting Dean's strength on the ground in Iowa while UNDER-reporting Kerry and Edwards strength on the ground there. Then they HID questions of their poor reporting by hyping the Dean scream, as if Dean were to blame instead of THEIR dishonest coverage.

Why did the media work against Kerry throughout 2003? Coincidence?

Kerry Seeks to Reverse FCC's "Wrongheaded Vote"

Commission Decision May Violate Laws Protecting Small Businesses; Kerry to File Resolution of Disapproval

Monday, June 2, 2003

WASHINGTON - Senator John Kerry today announced plans to file a "Resolution of Disapproval" as a means to overturn today's decision by the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) to raise media ownership caps and loosen various media cross-ownership rules.
Kerry will soon introduce the resolution seeking to reverse this action under the Congressional Review Act and Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act on the grounds that the decision may violate the laws intended to protect America's small businesses and allow them an opportunity to compete.

As Ranking Member of the Senate Committee on Small Business and Entrepreneurship, Kerry expressed concern that the FCC's decision will hurt localism, reduce diversity, and will allow media monopolies to flourish. This raises significant concerns about the potential negative impacts the decision will have on small businesses and their ability to compete in today's media marketplace.

In a statement released earlier today regarding the FCC's decision, Kerry said:

"Nothing is more important in a democracy than public access to debates and information, which lift up our discourse and give Americans an opportunity to make honest informed choices. Today's wrongheaded vote by the Republican members of the FCC to loosen media ownership rules shows a dangerous indifference to the consolidation of power in the hands of a few large entities rather than promoting diversity and independence at the local level. The FCC should do more than rubber stamp the business plans of narrow economic interests.

"Today's vote is a complete dereliction of duty. The Commissioners are well aware that these rules greatly influence the competitive structure of the industry and protect the public's access to multiple sources of information and media. It is the Commission's responsibility to ensure that the rules serve our national goals of diversity, competition, and localism in media. With today's vote, they shirked that responsibility and have dismissed any serious discussion about the impact of media consolidation on our own democracy."

[wyldwolf]

10. as usual, blm, you do much to debunk the whole idea...

...that the "media is picking our candidates."

Too bad eyes are glazing over at your post.

[Totally Committed]

13. I'm not going to argue with you because

I realize, being a Kerry supporter and a very honest poster with real media knowledge chops, you truly believe what you post. I respect that very much. I can only tell you, as someone who was NOT in your camp during the last primaries, it didn't appear that way to me. It's didn't feel that way to me. I can only speak my own truth.

But, I respect your opinion.

TC

[blm]

16. How else can one possibly interpret "Kerry's campaign is dead on arrival"

that was repeated throughout the fall of 2003?

How else can one interpret it when Kerry's fundraising was completely dried up nationwide because of the predictions for MONTHS that he was out of contention? Media talking heads even tried to tell him to drop out.

The DLC sure didn't lift a finger to direct any money to his campaign to help pull him through, did they? Oh yeah - Kerry didn't accept corporate pac money.

I UNDERSTAND that you view it differently, but, I'm curious as to HOW you can come up with a different interpretation based on what ACTUALLY occurred.

[INdemo]

5. Evan Bayh is a Republican lite

When it suits his favor he is right there with the Republicans supporting *.Of course there is the opposite,when it is politically correct to side with the Democrats on issues favored by the majority of the voters ...he's right there..So if Bayh should be nominated he might as well take Lieberman along for the VP.
I think the Repubs would love to see Hillary as the nominee, why else would the MSM be promoting her candidacy?
Gore...For someone that has an open invitation and strong support,I'll be surprised if he doesn't run......
But.......
John Kerry will be right there at the top when all the chips are counted..Don't wanna hear this "he had his chance"..yes he did and he won.

[Clarkansas]

7. He is from Indiana, what do you expect?

Indiana is by far the least progressive great lakes state. It is like a transplanted southern state, in my opinion. Clinton didn't even win it. 1996 election map (the colors are backwards, by the way):



They like their democrats very moderate there.

[Clarkansas]

8. I like Warner and Gore. I am not surprised Clark isn't on the list.

He usually gets ignored.

[FrenchieCat]

18. Yeah...they usually ignore Wes Clark, and make sure that

They don't say his name.....cause they don't want to contribute to his "name rec" anymore than they have to.

I mean, why even mention the one potential candidate that an Osama Tape couldn't "hurt"?

That just wouldn't do!

[INdemo]

23. Why is Indiana so Red?

We have never had a real State Democratic organization since 1964. Every political office is conceded before the election starts..Why I dont know..With the exception of a few counties it is that way statewide...This year we have some exceptional Democratic challengers in the congressional races but that is due to the individual candidates and no credit to the state party organization..

[wyldwolf]

9. I agree 100%

I see several people questioning the list, but what is there to argue with? These five are already laying the groundwork for their campaign, and their names parallel what the polls have been saying for months.

Aide from Fiengold, what has any other more progressive potential candidate been doing?

[Totally Committed]

11. "what has any other more progressive potential candidate been doing?"

I know Wes is working hard for the '06 elections... that's where his focus is. Gore is out touring for his book and movie. I am not a fan of Kerry, but you cannot say he isn't laying the foundation for a campaign.

After the '06 elections, I think you'll see a lot more focus from other candidates who are out there using all their time and resources to get a Democratic majority elected. It's easy to start a campaign early when you've got a lot of corporate $$$ in your coffers.

TC

[wyldwolf]

12. ..for a 2008 run!?

What has any other candidate been doing to lay the groundwork for a 2008 run?

It's easy to start a campaign early when you've got a lot of corporate $$$ in your coffers.

That's beside the point. They ARE starting the campaign early.

[Totally Committed]

14. And others are busy doing something they think is more important --

helping others win their '06 elections, toruing behind a film/book, etc., before deciding to start their own campaigns.

That's what I was saying. And, yes, it IS easier to run a campaign a couple of years out with all that corporate cash, and you know it!

TC

[wyldwolf]

15. so are the ones on that list. But your reply doesn't answer the quesion

The point was that the mentioned ones were the early frontrunners in the 2008 race. Some on this thread have said it isn't true.

Regardless of "corporate money."

Regardless of whether they are or are not helping anyone else for 2006, they are, in fact, the top names in the Dem noninee race.

What has any candidate thought to be more progressive doing to be included on that list?

[Tom Rinaldo]

26. Granted Clark hasn't prioritized 2008, and that might come back

to bite him if he decides to definitely run, but that isn't necessarily the case. What Clark has done is prioritize campaigning for other Democrats, all across the country, non stop over the last year or so, with an eye toward Democrats retaking Congress in 2006. That has given Clark much more face to face exposure with active Democrats than many might realize. Clark has been the keynote speaker at several Democratic Party State Conventions, most recently in Texas where his speech won numerous ovations. Don't be surprised to see Clark pick up a good amount of support from Democrats in traditionally Republican States. It will help that Clark does commentary on FOX, because Red State Democratic leaders understand that the voters they will need to reach are already familiar with and frequently supportive of General Clark as a result of his exposure on FOX.

Clark has also been instrumental in supporting the "Fighting Dems" movement, giving direct assistance to the campaigns of many Democratic Vets for Congress. Eric Massa is also a leader in that group and a close personal friend and ally of General Clark. Clark was the first National Democrat to give strong support to Jim Webb in Virginia also. So if a good percentage of Fighting Dems get elected this November it will both reflect well on Clark and likely increase his base of support within the Democratic Party.

Clark has built solid bridges to the Democratic Party's current Congressional leadership as well by freely and frequently offering them his expertise on international and national security matters in both public and private settings. Though General Clark has not been nearly as frequent a visitor to New Hampshire and Iowa as some other 2008 contenders, he has made it a point to go to both states and meet privately with supporters there.

At least as important as everything else, Clark has already made a strong commitment to the Netroots and blogosphere, as indicated by his recent appearance at Annual Kos which was anything but a hit and run appearance, Clark made himself very available to bloggers there. Which Clark also does all the time through his own website, where a whole very active area is set aside for bloggers; the Clark Community Network. In fact CCN has just completed a major site upgrade which makes it all the more friendly to bloggers. Couple that with the fact that Wes Clark also issues regular Podcasts, and the importance he gives to netroots activists comes into focus, and the response he gets back in return will serve him well should he choose to run for President in 2008.

[chill_wind]

21. Whose polls, specifically?

"their names parallel what the polls have been saying for months."

Links? I'd like to see. It would be interesting to see the sampling sizes, who owns them, etc. Would also be an interesting exercise to see and compare them to the only sizeable netroots dem straw-poll I know of, which is at dKos.

[wyldwolf]

22. here... Gallup, Cook, CNN, NBC, etc.

http://www.pollingreport.com/WH08dem.htm

These are scientific polls, the dKos poll wasn't. As Kos himself said: While this isn't a scientific poll of the Democratic Party rank and file... it's a pretty darn accurate poll of the sentiments of the Daily Kos community.

[chill_wind]

24. Thank you Wyldwolf

Point well taken on the scientific, but the sampling sizes also don't even begin to compare....

As well, I continue to wonder what a similar straw poll like that at kos would look like on DU. We're an equally sizable? and seem to be a fairly varied representation on the spectrum IMHO.

[saltpoint]

17. I wouldn't count anybody out this early. For all we know, Bill Richardson

and Joe Biden will finish strong in the Iowa caucuses.

Kerry had been given last rites two months before the Iowa caucus in 2004 and wound up first.

Edwards didn't have much cash at all and was written off and finished a very convincing second.

A case could be made for a lot of people, in other words.

It's going to be a wild one.

[Norquist Nemesis]

19. argh! Enough with the distraction of Democrats in 2008!

Frustration is not with the OP, but with the incessant speculation by the media! GEEZ!!!! Within 24 hours of the 2004 election we were hearing how the Democratic Party is in shambles, on its way out, irrelevant, in disarray, et cetera, et cetera, et cetera.

Now that the polls are strongly favoring Democrats and those "predictions" of our demise were so greatly exaggerated, what do they do? Why look at 2008, of course! Scare them into Hillary winning the nomination! Warn that an extreme Liberal might be leading the party! Throw out speculation that the "far-Left" is getting the upper hand!

:argh:

[Norquist Nemesis]

20. One more thing...How many "lists" of Republican candidates

were there in 1998 prior to the mid-term election? Maybe I had my head in the sand, but I sure don't recall a whole slew of pieces on who would be facing of against Al Gore (or whomever would like to on the Con side).

[newsguyatl]

25. blah on all of them except GORE