Reply #76: Thing is... we have a plethora of excellent choices.

[Piscis Austrinus]

I think the earlier post about Iran/Contra - BCCI was incorrect. If I remember correctly, John Kerry played a role in exposing the BCCI scandal.

But going through the possibilities:

1) Mark Warner - southern governor. Last two Dems to win the White House were southern governors. Seems to be a winning formula.

2) Howard Dean - I like him, but the opposition has too many ways to come after him. I think the strategy would be to blame the Dems for everything that's gone wrong in the last 5 (it will be 8 by the election) years, and gloss over the obvious fact that the Dems have been the minority party for the duration. Dean would provide a bridge for the "Blame (Bill) Clinton" crowd.

3) Barack Obama - consummate politician and likable figure, but probably not yet. At any rate, he has stated for the record that he will not run in 2008.

4) Al Gore - the Wronged Man of American politics. The great thing about Al Gore is that he could go toe-to-toe with any Republican with absolutely genuine ire about almost any issue. Not only is he smarter than anyone in the GOP, but he can out-mad them, too. That's not insignificant, when you consider...

5) John Kerry - who absolutely should have won in 2004 (notwithstanding the fact that we may never know whether or not he did). He lost because he failed to counter two issues that wound up framing him throughout the campaign: the religious issue, and the Swift Boat ads. I posted in about June 2004 that Kerry needed to do as Rove does, and attack BushCo on what was considered his strongest point - namely, his religious base. It would have been remarkably easy; by presenting Bush's actions in contrast to Scriptural passages, he might have had a chance to break the hypnosis that has gripped the Christian right. At the very least, he would have forced Christofascists like James Dobson et al. to go on record with their reasons for supporting this president - and that would have destroyed those men in 2006, because all of those quotes could have been resurrected in the Congressional elections. I liked Kerry, but I think the 2004 elections have defined him too much in the public eye: bright, thoughtful, cerebral - and lacking in passion, at least by appearance. But he would make a terrific man in a Democratic cabinet.

6) Mario Cuomo - another bright mind. He'd be tougher than Kerry, but the problem here is that he's been around a long time, and it would be tough to claim a new vision for America while trotting out a guy who's been on the political scene for ages.

7) Wesley Clark. Military figure. Above reproach. Smart, and has a reputation for integrity. I like him. The only question for me is whether he can persuade the independents (though I think he can); surely the Democratic base has to be energized for 2006, and even if the Dems take Congress and rid the nation of the damnable occupants of the executive branch, chances are that we will remain energized for the foreseeable future - certainly through 2008 at the least.

8) John Edwards - I like him, but I hope he sits this one out. I'd rather see him in 2012 or 2016. He has all the qualifications, but I think politically he would be wiser to let the 2004 election collect some more dust.

9) Hillary Clinton.

I saved Hillary for last, because I just don't know what to make of her. She's obviously brilliant, centrist, and clearly not just Bill's spouse. I think it would be dangerous for the GOP to attack her, unless they have something on her or Bill that no one knows about. I do think that anything of that stripe would have come out by now, however, because the GOP has no control when it comes to trying to smear the Clintons. If they had anything, they would have used it before now.
To me, this makes her viable in two ways: they can't say anything more about her; she's been through the wringer and come out a Senator. She has to have enough anger at the rough treatment she's received to last a lifetime.
Moreover, attacking Hillary has the potential for grave backfire on the GOP. They've lied about her so many times that bringing these lies to the fore, in a time where Republicans are increasingly being perceived as corrupt, deceptive, secretive and untrustworthy - might cause more people to make the connection: "You've lied about everything else; you've been lying about her, too."
On the other hand, if you ask me if she's the BEST candidate, I would have to say no, even if Bill comes along. I would not be unhappy with another Clinton presidency. Certainly she would hit the ground running in a way that probably no one but Gore could. On the other hand, her voting record in the Senate isn't exactly exemplary in the eyes of the Democratic faithful. What she could gain from the middle, she might lose on the end.

My own choices would be Gore, Clark, Warner. Kerry, Clinton in roughly that order. That said, I feel compelled to relate this:

About six months ago, I had a very powerful dream. In the dream, I was in a city that was remarkably reminiscent of Moscow - cold, gray, wide empty streets, generally forbidding. It was an overcast morning.
In the dream, I was somehow - there's no other word for it - joyful. Here I was in what had to be the most depressing setting for a free-worlder to be in, and I was completely happy. Ahead of me, in the middle of the gray street, was a blonde, blue-eyed woman wearing a royal-blue coat. I walked up to her and she gave me a hug, and as she did, I said, "Congratulations. You're the President."

I know there is a lot of time between now and 2008. However, if the 2006 elections turn Congress over to the Democrats - and that is looking increasingly likely; the numbers are reaching the point where an electronic fix would be almost impossible and would raise an incredible hue and cry if it were to occur - then Congress will in all likelihood begin cleaning out the executive branch, one impeachment at a time. With subpoena power, we would finally be able to see much of what this White House has been endeavoring to hide. I wonder whether we might actually witness the spectacle of federal marshals entering the White House in order to secure documents (assuming that they all haven't been turned into confetti). In a nutshell, I believe that conditions moving into 2008 will continue the erosion of GOP support, with no new sources of support to tap.

So my prediction, and it's just mine, is: if Hillary Clinton runs, she will win. And while some might be disappointed with the election result, it is undeniable that she would be vastly superior to the guy that's in the Oval Office now.

Peace
PsA