Yesterday the Atlanta Journal Constitution ran a series of columns by political science professors on the 2008 race. I thought I could do better.
For the Democrats:
Hillary Clinton:
She will have the highest name recognition, the most money, the best ground operation, the loyalty of her husband’s old supporters, and very strong media support. The media will avoid reviewing the past scandals in which she participated…the $100,000 she made on insider information on cattle futures, the missing Rose law firm billing records, and the attacks on women who had “encounters” with her husband.
She can win if the Democrats feel emboldened enough to support her, which may be the case after their wins last Tuesday and if the Bush administration has a bad last two years, which will hurt the eventual Republican nominee. If the Administration does well in its last two years, the country seems to be turning back to the Right Democrats may decide that Hillary cannot capture the American middle. If that is the case, Democrats may look to a less polarizing figure.
(I also have picked up rumors from DC contacts that Hillary will not run. Evidently Bill has been having a very good time being free to pursue the women of his choice, and Hillary fears that her campaign would be overshadowed by the hard to resist rumors of Bill’s infidelity, which has evidently reached epic proportions now that he is free of the constraints of holding or running for office.)
Al Gore:
I’m betting on Gore to run, and to be formidable. Gore will be the only Democratic candidate who against the Iraq War from the beginning. He is the only Democratic candidate that in early Iowa and New Hampshire debates can say that he opposed the war from the beginning and was right about it.
Remember, Gore ran a very strong race in 1988 for the Democratic nomination, presaging Clinton's (moderate Southern candidate) victory. He will have some old supporters who have worked on his behalf in the early primary states in four campaigns, 1988, 1992, 1996, and 2000. Many Democrats continue to believe he was cheated out of the Presidency in 2000. His movie, while panned on the right, has proved to be popular with some voters, and not only the environmentalist Left.
Gore may be able to pull of a Nixon. Lose a close race for President (1960, 2000) have a few bad public moments (Nixon’s run for California governor, which was followed by a disastrous press conference in 1962, Gore’s strange weight gain and beard in 2001), remove oneself from the public view for a period of time (Nixon, 1962-1966, Gore 2000-2004) and then reemerge with a new program, have long term supporters, work hard for other candidates, and a strong issue (for Nixon, the war in Vietnam and Anti-Communism, for Gore, the environment.)
Evan Bayh:
I recently predicted to a group of DC contacts that if Democrats want to win, they should nominate Even Bayh. I had been asked by a Democrat friend of mine for my prediction for his team for 2008, as I had correctly predicted that Clinton would be the 1992 nominee when very few folks were familiar with him. My thesis then, as it is now, is that if Democrats really want to win, they will turn to a centrist governor with a record of moderate positions. Clinton had the death penalty and opposition to gun control as position, Bayh has a number of similar moderate positions. Bayh has been elected governor and Senator in a red state, Indiana, which although located in the Midwest, has strong southern sectors downstate.
John Edwards:
Edwards is too one dimensional. His only issue is his emphasis on “the two Americas” which may be attractive to some voters, but ignores the facet that most Americans do not hate the rich; they want to be the rich. By and large, voters want to preserve the economic freedoms that allow Americans to rise in one generation from an hourly wage earner to a wealthy individual. Edwards also does not have enough experience, either generally or especially in foreign policy, to be perceived as a strong President in time of war. And even if American troops are no longer in Iraq, we will still be at war with Islamofacism. Think of it as a second Cold War. Voters did not turn to inexperienced Presidents during our struggle with Communism, and they will not turn to Edwards now.
A personal note: I hosted a dinner for a group of North Carolina lawyers about a year ago. One of my guests had shared a beach house with the Edwards family for many years. I asked about Edwards. I was told that while Edwards was a good man, he had never considered a career in public service prior to his son’s tragic death. (His son was killed when his SUV was caught by a high wind and overturned.) My guest said that Edwards had no interest in current events or politics prior to that event. “I don't think John had ever read a Time magazine before that…much less anything heavier. He is really just about the power and the fame, not the issues.”
Barack Obama:
Obama, as Charles Krauthammer pointed out, should run. He will not win due to lack of experience, but he will position himself as the front runner for the VP slot. Indeed, if he did run and lose, the Democrats would have to give him the VP slot to preserve their base of black support. Remember, there was very strong pressure to put Jesse Jackson on the ticket when he showed strongly in Democratic primaries in 1988, and Jesse is a polarizing figure with no experience or reason to be on the ticket other than his skin color. But Obama is too much of a lightweight in the foreign policy realm for him to earn the top spot.
General Wesley Clark:
He’s smart, speaks four languages, and he has the necessary foreign policy experience. But his campaign last time was roiled by internal dissention and mismanagement and he has a personally prickly nature which could harm him. He has worked hard for Democratic candidates, but is not a particularly likable figure. And voters like to think they would like to have a beer with their candidates. (Which was one factor in John Kerry’s loss in 2004, and could harm Gore this time around as it did in 2000).)
Joe Biden:
Biden has been sounding better and better in his public statements on both foreign policy and domestic affairs in last couple of years. He is no longer as far out on the Left as he was in 1980. He will have the highly visible and powerful post as Chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations committee. This will bring him good name recognition, especially if the Democrats hold lengthy hearings on Iraq. But he from a very small state (Delaware) and may be considered somewhat of a retread. And he is far too loquacious. He is not a sound bite guy. He does have a compelling personal story, (his first wife was killed in a car accident leaving him to raise their children alone) a great sense of humor, and is personally attractive in a distinguished senatorial fashion.
Gov Bill Richardson:
Richardson is Hispanic and has positioned himself as a Western moderate governor. He does have some significant problems to overcome. Being from the West, and not a well known figure, he will have trouble getting traction in Iowa and New Hampshire. He is not in good physical shape, and will need to lose some weight. He does not have a signature issue on which he can separate him from what will be a very crowded field, and with a short primary schedule, he may have trouble separating himself from the pack. He also has some lingering problems from his tenure as Clinton’s Secretary of the Interior, when scandals rocked the Los Alamos nuclear laboratory.
Gov Tom Vilsak:
Vilsak has a good record as governor and his home state holds the early caucus. He is relatively moderate. But I continue to believe that Democrats want to win, and with a compressed primary schedule, Vilsak will be hard pressed to capitalize on any success he has in Iowa. New Hampshire voters will not give him credit no matter how highly he finishes in Iowa as a favorite son. (This is partially born of the continuing antagonism that Granite State voters have toward Iowa for usurping their traditional position as the first test for candidates.) He is a possible VP candidate if Obama does not show well or decides against making the run.
John Kerry:
His remarks on servicemen in Iraq doomed him. Democrats want to win, and Kerry is now one of the most polarizing and disliked political figures in America. He probably will not even make the run.
If all of these candidates run:
If Hillary runs, three will emerge from Iowa: Hillary, Gore and Bayh. (Bayh will usurp the old John Edwards pretty boy, moderate support.)
After New Hampshire, the race will depend upon how badly the Democrats want to win:
If they are overly confident, it’s Hillary versus Gore. If not, Gore versus Bayh.
Early prediction: If they all run, Al Gore wins the nomination.
Tomorrow: The Republicans.
