AuH2O,
Despite early polls, Hilllary winning the Democratic nomination is far from being a done deal
Dave
Most polls simply reflect name recognition at this stage which is why Edwards, Kerry and Hillary dominate the polling at the moment just as Gore, Hillary and Lieberman dominated the same polling back in 2001.
Hillary has little in the way of a strong base within the national party, she is generally liked but I just don’t discern a strong base for her, what seems to be happening is that she is now aggressively seeking to define her previously bland and somewhat indistinct record as a senator into a clear record as a Foreign Policy Hawk and Social Moderate, this could be the begging of her attempt to construct a far more solid base within the national party… but as yet she still does not have a big enough and solid enough base within the party IMHO to successfully challenge for the nomination, what is more nationally she remains divisive though the furore over Klien’s
smear job “biography” may actually help her (when Bill O’Rielly and Sean Hannity are defending her, you know someone’s over stepped the mark) her new moderate tone may also help to address the often polar reactions she has prompted in the past.
In short Hillary has no better shot than any of the other credible candidates, her name and profile will help but she is certainly no the run away front runner and at best stands as good a chance as the likes of Mark Warner, Evan Bayh and others of winning the nomination…
At the moment while the Democratic field for 2008 is wide open is also easily handicapped…
Front Runners:These are the candidates with the grassroots support, financial backing, national profile and political/personal narrative that will mean that are capable of running powerful campaigns for the party’s nomination in 2008, though some have a greater chance of success than others…
Hillary Clinton:
– Solid support from Democratic Party donors but only a weak base of support within the party’s grassroots and continues to face concerns that she is too divisive a candidate despite a fairly moderate and hawkish record in the senate.
Evan Bayh:
- Rock Solid support on the right of the party as well as party donors and one of, GOP Dominated, Indiana’s most popular politicians. A long record as a moderate in the senate has earnt him the eminently of the hard left of the party but after two election defeats for the democrats his experience and support leave him in a strong position.
Mark Warner:
- A popular Southern governor with a vast personal fortune (not thanks to marrying a wealthy widow or inheritance) and a proven record of raising money from the party’s big money backers, a populist record which would probably make his task of winning the nomination easier than other moderates, such as Bayh, and yet would mean he would be very competitive in a national contest. His short term in office and his lack of foreign policy experience could be serious weaknesses in both the primaries and a general election however his successes as VA governor and his strong financial backing make him like Bayh and Hillary a very serious candidate.
John Kerry:
- He’s in a very strong financial position and has the basis for a strong national machine, however how much more money and support he could attract after his defeat in the 2004 presidential election remains to be seen, personally I think Kerry will look into a race and in the end decide that he can’t run either that or he will be an early drop out after disappointing performances in NH and IA – Then again he’s “done a Lazarus” before but this time I think he’s going to stay dead.
Russ Feingold:
- The ideological heir of Howard Dean but with a greater gift for communication and modest flare for bi-partisanship, he could reply on a great deal of support from the Liberal wing of the party and no doubt garner the same kind of small donation based financial backing which Dean enjoyed in 2003/04. But Like Dean he could face concerns that he is too liberal to be competitive nationally but the likely strength of his support from the Liberal left mean that he would have a good shot a winning the nomination if not the general election.
Midlevel Candidates: Those candidates who are likely to begin their campaigns from a less strong position than the “front runners” , this does not mean that some will not become stronger candidates as the contest for the nomination moves on (as happened to Howard Dean) but rather that they start from a weaker position.
John Edwards:
– An ill spent six year term as NC Senator where he seemed to only succeed in laying the ground work for his failed run for the Presidential nomination in 04 and raking up a liberal voting record on the back of very low attendance as a Senator. His impressive fundraising in 2003/04 came largely from fellow trial lawyers and it is possible that he might be able to replicate that in a future run for the presidency, but after four years out of office and an unspectacular performance as John Kerry’s running mate I think it is unlikely and he would be best to “play it long” rehabilitant himself as a moderate southern democrat back in NC.
Bill Richardson:
- A good record as NM governor and would be likely to win strong support from Hispanics, but his time as Energy sectary in the Clinton Administration would come back to haunt him and he would be unlikely to garner much popular or financial support from within the Democratic Party.
Ed Rendell
- A moderately successful, ideologically moderate Democratic Governor of an important swing state
But with little national profile, not much of a natural base within the national party and with no inclination it would seem to want to seek the presidency, at least not at the moment, while he would be a credible candidate if he where to run he’d be hard pressed to distinguish himself and would face criticism over his mixed record as PA governor.
Jo Biden
- A foreign Policy Hawk, who in many ways is unchallenged within the Senates Democratic Caucus as an expert on foreign policy, an area of traditional democrat weakens since Vietnam. But with a mixed record on domestic issues as a senator and a previous disastrous run for president in 1988 his foreign policy expertise could count for little. Like many of the other midlevel candidates he would have to work to build up his support and profile with the wider democratic party but could rise to the top tier along a similar path to that of John Kerry in 2003/04 where foreign affairs to be a defining issue at the time.
There are other potential midlevel candidates who could become credible candidates for the nomination (even if their credibility in a general election where to be more suspect), Governors Tom Vilsack, Janet Napolitano, Mike Easley, Brian Schweitzer and Phil Bredesen are all potential candidates as are congressmen and senators such as Blanche Lincoln, Dick Durbin (*shudder*), Loretta Sanchez etc… and non poltical figures such as Wes Clark. There are also the “nut-jobs” such as a Kucinich, Brown, Kaptur and Sharpton, some of whom will no doubt be along for the ride at some point between 2006 and 2008 but will have next to no impact on the mainstream field its self.
