Regurgitating Old Names
In attempting to find a suitable primary challenger for Hillary Clinton, the left has starting tossing out some old names, in hope that one will catch.
While they won't come out and tell Her Majesty Ms. Clinton that she's unelectable as president, the mainstream left knows that she is. There would be no single way to energize the GOP base, and money, than to have Hillary as the nominee in 2008.
John Kerry has gotten tons of news time over the last month, but little traction as a possible challenger. Bad publicity over raising money to sue the Swift Boat folks out of existance, and his own strange actions in congress will doom him.
John Edwards, the failed Veep nominee has been less than quiet of late, showing he might be tossing his hat back in the ring in 2008.
Now the new issue of Newsweek has not one, but two articles on Al Gore, and a possible candidacy. Eleanor Clift does an interview on his new movie and slide show on global warming, and a column on whether or not he's going to run.
By tossing former candidates, who lost close elections to Bush out there, the hope is the base that energized on the left in 2000 and 2004 (to a lesser extent) will come back out and play in '08. Those folks have to show up to neutralize the base of the right that will if Clinton is seen as the only possible candidate.
The problem for the Democrats is all three of these names are the wrong one's to win the White House in 2008. Each has too much baggage, and is too polarizing to get the support needed to win. Two have already proven it, and the third (Clinton) polls horribly against the "unnamed Republican Candidate". She shows even worse against one with a name, like McCain.
They have folks working on setting up shop for 2008 that could bring in new blood to the party, instead of pandering to the vocal minority on the left. But they get ignored, and tossed about as weak challengers. Mark Warner, much like McCain, has shown bipartisan appeal in his homestate, and successfully worked with a GOP lead legislature to get things done in Virginia. Yes, he carries some "tax and spend" baggage, but that's a lot less baggage than losses in national elections, and memories from them.
How does someone like Warner gain a foothold in 2008? That's easy, if the Democrats don't take the House in November he can (and should) start running against the "old party" showing them as weak and ineffective at getting a message across. Directly challenge the direction of Clinton, Kerry and Gore, and show it to be the road to nowhere.
He, and other centrists in the party, need to start making subtle noises about the polarization of Congress; show that partisan bickering hasn't advanced the party agenda, or the nation. With Congressional Democrats approval ratings just as bad as President Bush's, he has something to point to on that front.
The loud left, the netroots, and the Kos Kids will come out to shout him, and others down, because they believe centerist Democrats to be just as evil as Republicans. However, the center can point to the supported candidates of the far left's lousy election showings since 2000 as proof that isn't the winning ticket.
Technorati Tags: John Kerry, politics, Al Gore, Hillary Clinton, White House, elections, Mark Warner, Democrats, netroots, John Edwards, John McCain
While they won't come out and tell Her Majesty Ms. Clinton that she's unelectable as president, the mainstream left knows that she is. There would be no single way to energize the GOP base, and money, than to have Hillary as the nominee in 2008.
John Kerry has gotten tons of news time over the last month, but little traction as a possible challenger. Bad publicity over raising money to sue the Swift Boat folks out of existance, and his own strange actions in congress will doom him.
John Edwards, the failed Veep nominee has been less than quiet of late, showing he might be tossing his hat back in the ring in 2008.
Now the new issue of Newsweek has not one, but two articles on Al Gore, and a possible candidacy. Eleanor Clift does an interview on his new movie and slide show on global warming, and a column on whether or not he's going to run.
By tossing former candidates, who lost close elections to Bush out there, the hope is the base that energized on the left in 2000 and 2004 (to a lesser extent) will come back out and play in '08. Those folks have to show up to neutralize the base of the right that will if Clinton is seen as the only possible candidate.
The problem for the Democrats is all three of these names are the wrong one's to win the White House in 2008. Each has too much baggage, and is too polarizing to get the support needed to win. Two have already proven it, and the third (Clinton) polls horribly against the "unnamed Republican Candidate". She shows even worse against one with a name, like McCain.
They have folks working on setting up shop for 2008 that could bring in new blood to the party, instead of pandering to the vocal minority on the left. But they get ignored, and tossed about as weak challengers. Mark Warner, much like McCain, has shown bipartisan appeal in his homestate, and successfully worked with a GOP lead legislature to get things done in Virginia. Yes, he carries some "tax and spend" baggage, but that's a lot less baggage than losses in national elections, and memories from them.
How does someone like Warner gain a foothold in 2008? That's easy, if the Democrats don't take the House in November he can (and should) start running against the "old party" showing them as weak and ineffective at getting a message across. Directly challenge the direction of Clinton, Kerry and Gore, and show it to be the road to nowhere.
He, and other centrists in the party, need to start making subtle noises about the polarization of Congress; show that partisan bickering hasn't advanced the party agenda, or the nation. With Congressional Democrats approval ratings just as bad as President Bush's, he has something to point to on that front.
The loud left, the netroots, and the Kos Kids will come out to shout him, and others down, because they believe centerist Democrats to be just as evil as Republicans. However, the center can point to the supported candidates of the far left's lousy election showings since 2000 as proof that isn't the winning ticket.
Technorati Tags: John Kerry, politics, Al Gore, Hillary Clinton, White House, elections, Mark Warner, Democrats, netroots, John Edwards, John McCain
posted by Crazy Politico at 5:41 AM
1Comments:
Congressional Democrats poll as badly as Bush?
Funny
I don't recall reading that in any of the newspapers/
Post a Comment
<< Home