Perky
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Nov-08-06 11:08 AM
Original message |
Wow this really shakes up the '08 presidential calculus |
|
Due respect to your favorite senator and their individual ambitions. Beinbg the party in power really changes the rationale for running for president. You can no longer run because you want to defeat the evil republicans. leadership. You have the power now. You have to lead. You can't run as an outsider if you are in power.
My sense of this is that more GOP Senators might start taking a look at the race and Dem Senators (some though not all) might take a pass.
These are the types of situations where Democratic voters are more likely to choose a governor to lead the ticket rather than a Senator.
There was some discussion last night that even touted HRC as a possible Majority Leader in exchange for not running for president. The GOP base having neither house and Clinton at the top of the ticket is a republican fundraisers wet dream.
For Dems that might elevate someone who is an outsider or has a freshface or ideas.
Thoughts.
|
Kerrytravelers
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Nov-08-06 11:09 AM
Response to Original message |
1. I can see that happening as well. |
TornadoTN
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Nov-08-06 11:11 AM
Response to Original message |
2. A Re-energized Edwards would be nice |
|
Although I'm not sure what his thoughts are at this point. I was hoping for Mark Warner to enter the fray as well, but he has since bowed out.
I think at this point its tough to say who is going to step into the ring. I don't discount anyone at this point, because you never know what is going to come across their desks as Senators that they could generate some waves from.
|
Raiden
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Nov-08-06 11:13 AM
Response to Original message |
3. Imagine Bill Frist vs. Wes Clark |
Perky
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Nov-08-06 11:22 AM
Response to Reply #3 |
|
I think Obama is the exception to the rule with regards to senators. The greatest foil to a nail-chewing republican nominee is someone who appears reasonable and above the fray. He seriously has to be looking at '08
But so does Al Gore.
|
SheilaT
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Nov-08-06 11:55 AM
Response to Original message |
|
I've been saying for a year or more on this board that no one should be pushing for any one candidate for our nominee for president, because it's simply too soon, even now, to know what will happen.
We should just work hard for all the things we need to work for and see what happens, and along about January, 2008, start thinking about who'd be a good President. Unfortunately, by that date someone will probably have the nomination sewn up, which won't be for the best.
|
Perky
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Nov-08-06 12:19 PM
Response to Reply #5 |
|
But do you think the election changes the whole picture?
|
blm
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Nov-08-06 12:27 PM
Response to Reply #6 |
7. Polls said CORRUPTION was the issue - so we need Anti-corruption, Open Government |
|
Democrats to take the lead.
|
SheilaT
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Nov-08-06 10:21 PM
Response to Reply #6 |
8. I don't know if it changes the whole picture, |
|
but I think it changes a lot. It seems to me as though here in Kansas, what with Nancy Boyda's defeat of extremely conservative Jim Ryun in the 2nd District, it opens up the possibility that a strong Democrat could step up here to go against Pat Roberts in two years. I have no idea who could do that, and to start naming names -- the way people do so freely at the national level -- would be foolish, maybe even irresponsible. As active as I am locally in the Democratic Party, I am simply not connected at the state level, and there are probably people out there who now will begin to think about this, start the kind of fund-raising necessary, and go for it. I hope so.
And that applies equally to everything else. There's been a giant shift and it's now possible to think realistically about things that we couldn't even think about before. What I'm getting at is that I don't want to be thinking about Hillary or Kerry or Edwards or anyone at all as potential presidential material at this point, and I don't want to be participating in pointless arguments about anyone's fitness to run or run again. I just want to watch and wait, see how various people behave for the next year or so, and then start looking at the presidential thing.
|
ThomWV
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Nov-08-06 10:23 PM
Response to Original message |
9. As Al Gore Stands Back Unscathed |
|
The Democratic Party will still need a leader at the top, not two in the Congress.
|
ShaneGR
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Nov-08-06 10:29 PM
Response to Original message |
10. Insert Democratic Governor's name here |
|
Not holding a position? Cut
In the House or the Senate? Maybe if your last name starts with a C but please no.
Basically go over the list of 30 or so Dem governor's a pick a winner.
|
DU
AdBot (1000+ posts) |
Thu Apr 25th 2024, 02:19 PM
Response to Original message |