Tuesday, May 03, 2005

John Kerry in '08?

Washington rumors have it that John Kerry is planning another run for the top job in '08. It's sad, really, that Dean hasn't done more in a visible way to shift the party to the center away from the radical liberal left. Hillary has been making some smart moves trying to reach across the aisle even on a couple of high profile issues like abortion. She knows where the middle is and how valuable it can be to her (although I'm not sure it will be easy to find another Republican candidate who comes off as so solidly religious as GWB.

Poor, manipulated, foppish John Kerry. He should save his money, only it's not his. Whole article from USNews and World Report:

With Republicans scrounging around for an able successor to President Bush in the 2008 election, Washington's focus is fast turning to an escalating battle on the Democratic side between front-runner Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton and 2004 nominee Sen. John Kerry . Whispers learns that Kerry is not just testing the waters: He's running. ... Friends of Hillary, meanwhile, are touting her front-runner status and joining in the chorus of Democrats who think Kerry should crawl under a rock and go away.


At Tue May 03, 09:30:00 AM, Blogger Doug said...

I agree that Kerry should go crawl under a rock. Hillary isn't the way to go either though. The Republicans have been demonizing her for the last 13 years, and I don't think the Dems could overcome that kind of established marketing campaign in a general election.

In any event, I don't think Dems are going to pick up votes by reaching across the aisle. The Republicans have pretty much shown that the electorate prefers "strong and wrong" to "weak and right." The Dems need to pick a couple of reasonably easily understood issues, frame them simply, and pound on them relentlessly. (IMHO of course.)

My opinion is that Kerry had his shot and lost. Gore probably doesn't have any real shot but he could theoretically do a Nixon and come back 8 years after a close loss. Hillary would be a horrible choice, imho. Edwards might be a good candidate, but unless he builds up some kind of "gravitas" in the next couple of years, he'd have problems in the general election. Bayh is way to stiff, imho (this from a guy who just gave Gore at least a slim chance). Bill Richardson out of New Mexico has potential. The timing isn't right for him to run for President, I don't think, but Brian Schweitzer, the Governor of Montana shows promise. Barak Obama probably wouldn't be ready until '12. That's all I can think of at the moment.

At Tue May 24, 03:52:00 PM, Blogger torporific said...

What is the radical, liberal left? Do they want universal healthcare especially for those 45 million Americans who have no health insurance? Do they believe that workers should have representation and bargaining power with corporations? Do they believe that the government is not doing enough about poverty? Or is doing too much to protect the rights of corporations than the rights of its citizens?

If so, then I am a member of the radical, liberal left.

Also, I think Doug is right. The Dems tried to reach across the aisle and even act like Republicans in 2002. That didn't work very well. They cannot out-GOP the GOP.

I agree that the Dems need to pick a few issues that resonate with the American people and then hit on them over and over. The Republicans have controlled the rhetoric for far too long.


Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home