2008 Democratic Nomination

The 2008 Democratic Nomination contest is really between Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton and the reasons why she should not be the party's nominee in 2008. The reasons are many and sometimes contradictory, but her strengths could very well outweigh them, as could her talents as a politician. She is not to be underestimated by either Democrats or Republicans and she would be a formidable general election candidate no matter who she was running against. She seems likely to beat many of the Republican contenders in a general election campaign save for either McCain or Giuliani and its not at all clear that either one of them is going to be nominated. Of the Democrats challenging her, Former Virginia Governor Mark Warner is very likely the strongest alternative, and I say that as someone who lives in Virginia and was here during his entire term as governor. He was a great politician and was able to get things done and outmaneuver his opponents in the legislature which is no easy feat for any governor. After he signed a tax increase into law in 2004 his approval ratings greatly improved and he was able to take credit as someone willing to engage in bipartisan compromise. The downside is that he is not well-known to the public at large and is going to have to introduce himself to voters if he hopes to have a chance in the nomination contest. He does have money from his cell-phone business and that should help him in this regard but he must overcome the name recognition, or lack thereof if he wants to pose a credible threat to Senator Clinton.

Governor Bill Richardson of New Mexico is another potentially strong candidate for the Presidency in 2008, since as a hispanic he can win that crucial constituency, and as a moderate who has reduced income taxes in his state as governor he can work to convince people that their taxes won't greatly rise if he is elected President. Former Senator John Edwards could make another run for the Presidency, and he has the name recognition from being nominated for Vice President in 2004, though being part of a losing ticket could work against him. Iowa Governor Tom Vilsack has extremely negative ratings nationally for some reason (that I don't quite understand) and this could be a hinderance to his campaign for President should he decide to run.

The most erratic candidate is Senator Joseph Biden of Delaware because from listening to his speeches I can say that he moves between spellbinding oratory to simply below average public speaking for no apparent reason. He has the experience from over 30 years in the Senate but he has run before and was forced out of the race for stealing parts of a speech from British Labour Party Leader Neil Kinnock. Not exactly the man one wants to emulate if they want to become President of the United States. I do applaud him though for knowing who Kinnock is, as this demonstrates a grasp of foreign policy that is important for any President of any party.

Senator John Kerry might make another run for the Presidency but he is going to have to convince voters that he has learned from his defeat. Right now it seems that the only thing he learned is to take a liberal line almost all the time, which is not going to be the way to win with the public at large. Also, its telling that even though Kerry would win if the election had been held today instead of 2004, he would not win by an overwhelming margin despite the President's low approval ratings. This says that he is just unable to close the deal with voters and that there is not much that can be improved upon if he is nominated again.