Walter Shapiro's early peek at the 2008 race

[whometense]

From anyone else, obnoxious, but done with Shapiro's trademark wit and clear eye, I think it's worth reading.

http://www.salon.com/news/feature/2006/03/23/democrats/



Kerry-related bits:

The Non-Hillary Field: Start with Mark Warner and 2004 V.P. candidate John Edwards, who are unabashedly running. Indiana Sen. Evan Bayh has privately put his own odds at 90 percent, and the latest word from Iowa is that Gov. Tom Vilsack is similarly poised to run. Wisconsin Sen. Russ Feingold -- who wins headlines every other week with an anti-Bush gambit like a censure resolution -- has to be counted among the likeliest contenders. And finally, Sen. Joe Biden, the Delaware motor-mouth who performed so garrulously during the Alito confirmation hearings, keeps insisting that he's definitely running.

Depending on whom you talk to, John Kerry is either running or merely keeping his options open for a mid-2007 decision by maintaining his visibility and e-mail list. (An e-mail appeal from Kerry raised over $100,000 for Tammy Duckworth, an Iraq war veteran running for the House in Illinois.) Al Gore represents another puzzle; his wife, Tipper, is said to be definitely opposed, while his politically active daughter Karenna seems severely tempted. Bill Richardson is seriously mulling his chances, while former Senate Majority Leader Tom Daschle is also playing the maybe game. And don't forget former Gen. Wesley Clark, who has never lacked ambition or self-confidence.

How to Think About the Field: Like old-fashioned slot machines, the final round of most presidential races comes down to three possibilities. (Granted, there have been a number of past years when pushing the lever produced three Democratic lemons.) The conventional method is to group the contenders in starkly different terms. There would be the left-wing political purist option, which would right now go to Feingold, though Gore and even Kerry could make claims based on the fervor of their antiwar rhetoric. Hillary, of course, would have an Heiress Apparent slot of her own. And the final position would belong to the winner of the Democratic Electability Bake-off: Warner, Edwards and Bayh are all vying for that honor. Yes, JPW, you're in this final mix with your landslide border-state reelection victory and, yes, the "Tennetucky Miracle."

But there is another way to slice and dice the 2008 wannabes. And that is to assume that the race will ultimately come down to Hillary, one intriguing fresh face (Warner, Bayh, Feingold, JPW, etc.) and one sadder-but-wiser repeat candidate (Gore, Kerry, Edwards, Clark or even Biden). The importance of these slots is to figure out who is vying against whom for supporters. Are Feingold and Warner battling to be the candidate of the blog-based "netroots"? Or is Warner, say, locked in a battle of Southern pragmatists with Edwards?

[TayTay]

1. Walter Shapiro is a great writer.

I loved his last book. I think his insights are a good snapshot of what he sees in March 2006. I also agree with him on the speeded up nature of the cycle this time. Sigh. Welcome to the permanent campaign where the stakes are so high that only the very, very few can play. (We will never have a nother Jimmy Carter or Bill Clinton win in the primaries. The States they were Govs of were just too small to support these candidates or their money raising needs.)

[whometense]

2. I love the way he writes.

And I like that he is one of the few political writers out there these days who seems to be truly reporting rather than trying to promote (or demote) any candidate.

Who knows what will actually happen? But his analysis makes a lot of sense to me as of right now.

[Dr Ron]

3. Too early to say much

I am glad that he refers to Kerry as one of the anti-war candidates.

Looking at his thoughts on the early caucuses and primaries my feeling was not that it shows Hillary as necessary having the inside track but that things can go so many different ways. If Hillary does poorly in one of the early races and someone like Kerry wins (as he did in Iowa last time) then it is an entirely different race.

I'm not sure if it will end quickly or not. If a couple of well funded candidates such as Clinton and Kerry should win the early contests and knock out the others, it is also possible that they might divide the early delegates to the point where both remain viable for a while.

[karynnj]

5. I agree with your observations

I agree with him that Kerry can be seen as anti-war - especially if Feingold implodes before the primaries (I don't think this will happen, but I do think it will be very hard to be the spot lighted leader of the left for 2 years.) Gore really does seem to have no interest in subjecting himself to the pain of a run again. I find it interesting that he did not place Edwards there - it looks like Edwards wants to be there, but he was pretty pro-war throughout 2003 and there far too much video exists on that.

I agree that the point on the caucuses could be any well funded candidate. Imagine that instead of Hillary, Feingold or Kerry come number 2 in Iowa. This assumes that Vilsack gets the party vote and the much of the "DLC" vote, the remaining votes are to the left and it's always been said the left is over represented there. Let's assume it's, Kerry. Two things happen: Hillary will have underpreformed expextations and many people who thought highly of Kerry in 2004 and felt he couldn't win will be more open with their view that he's ok. If the party offical quoted in the NH article saying that Kerry was well liked in NH and all the MA Kerrycrats cross the border to help DD, Kerry could win NH. Then if he did well in Nevada or Colorado, he would be the leading candidate. Especially if South Carolina splits nearly in thirds to Edwards, Hillary, and Warner - so none get a huge number of delegates. (You can make the same points with Feingold.)

[wisteria]

4. This piece was fair to all those he wrote about.

I am disheartened by Senator Clinton's ability to raise large sums of money, and the suggestion that this will win it for her.I do feel however, this is, as Tay Tay mentioned, a snapshot of 2006.I will remain optimistic on Kerry's chances and not by into the Hillary hype.

[karynnj]

6. Also, note that the candidates he listed as not being able

to get internet money does not include Kerry. It's intersting to me that his scenario is not that Hillary will come in and get the 40 or so % that she gets in some polls in each state - blowing out several early primaries. This is the least optimistic view that I've seen of Hillary's chances. As Shapiro is very credible (and a great writer), this is a cause for optimism.

Bill Clinton's actions (while not bad) on the Dubai/Ports issue, do open a concern. Can you have the President's husband taking independent stands? There have been wives who disagree on things like abortion, but they don't have Clinton's standing in the world. It does indicate an awkwardness - and Bill's personality may make it very difficult for him to avoid these situations. (Oddly, I really think Kerry could - if it were Teresa - if it weren't unconstitutional.)

[Dr Ron]

7. Hillary now in charge

There was an article earlier this week following the Dubai issue. They say from here on in, Bill clears these things with Hillary.

[karynnj]

8. Saw that post, but question if he will have sufficient impluse control

The real problem is that he has always been able to offer his views and suggestions. As an exPresident every thing he does is covered and is given huge weight. Actually committing to 11 years of taking a back seat and filtering everything he wants to say to insure it doesn't contradict Hillary may be impossible. (He would seem to be as good a surrogate as Biden - where Biden's answer to the $87 billion wasn't based on Kerry's reasons - which were explainable (lack of oversight created a slush fund for Hallibuton, just as Kerry said, and it should have been paid for. - these are really good reasons and good issues) -but instead he said Kerry was wrong unlike himself.)

[whometense]

11. "sufficient impulse control" - hahahahahaha

I agree. I wouldn't want to be the one in charge of keeping his muzzle on. In fact, I think the whole issue works to highlight both of their less attractive qualities. It emphasizes his "me me me" need to be in the center of everyone's attention, while it also accentuates her bossiness.

[karynnj]

12. The "muzzle slips' are likely to be many

Although he is pretty ego-centrict. I just think it would take an enormous amount of discipline for someone who has for so long had a strong voice at many tables, to change a life times actions. Also, as an ex-President he will be asked questions a first spouse won't.

I doubt Teresa agrees with John on everything - but her comments will not have the weight of an ex-President or even a possible future President. Also, in the C-Span events though she did speak of herself when she switched to issues, it was "John would ....". I can she Bill doing that when he thinks about it but there will likely be times where he will without thinking just give his views. (and Teresa was seen as the independent woman she is.)

[ginnyinWI]

9. we'll know in less than a year

I really isn't that long: around January next year we'll see this all begin to sort out. A lot of it has to do with money, as always. And I think there is still sufficient alarm among those of us on the left to inspire us to give both time and money, especially those of us motivated by love of country and fear of what's happened to it.

[Dr Ron]

10. Partially

Some of the weaker candidates might stop to drop out (or it will be obvoius they should). Others like Clinton, Kerry, Edwards, Warner and some others are likely to be able to raise enough money for at least the early primaries.

[Island Blue]

13. I just finished reading "One Car Caravan"

which I thought was excellent. (I know some of you have already read it.) In that book, Shapiro had lots of insight into the candidates (and the nomination process) that were quite interesting. I enjoyed the book because he was fair to everyone - he didn't seem to have an agenda other than telling a story about battle for the Democratic nomination.

I loved one sentence toward the end of the book, "John Kerry is the candidate with whom I would most enjoy going out for a beer." Yeah Walter, I would highly recommend that you do that!

IMO "One Car Caravan" is a must read for any political junkie. (And it has just enough Kerry Catnip in it to make it fun!)

[whometense]

14. I'm so glad you liked it!

I wish he'd write a new one every four years - I learned more about who all the dems were as people by reading his book than by any other method (even including obsessive c-span watching!)

[Island Blue]

16. I agree.

He could write the exact same kind of book in '08, and even if some of the candidates were the same, the story would be totally fresh and different.

One thing that I found a bit scary about he whole primary process is how it's really all about the Benjamins. A candidate can have the best ideas in the world, but if he (or she) doesn't have money, he doesn't have a prayer.

After reading this I really like Lieberman a whole lot better than I did before (although I'd still never voluntarily vote for him) and think that Bob Graham is probably WAY too obsessive/compulsive to be president. Other than that, I came away with the feeling that there were obviously at least a couple of candidates (who shall remain nameless) who were no where near ready for prime time.

[globalvillage]

15. I bookmarked that page.

I loved the book, but that was my favorite paragraph.

John Kerry is the candidate with whom I would most enjoy going out for a beer. But then I have a weakness for cerebral guys who talk in complex sentences, get caught up in the nuances of policy, remember Vietnam and seem just depressed enough to be interesting.

[TayTay]

17. Yeah, it's like that GV.

Except I don't think he's depressed. I would put in that he is occasionally toughtful or a bit serious.

[Island Blue]

18. But is it possible to be serious, thoughtful and intelligent

in today's world without being at least a little bit depressed? I do think that people who possess those qualities are more prone to at least some level of depression. (I'm not trying to psychoanalyze JK here btw, I'm just making a general observation.) I think heredity also has a lot to do with it.

[TayTay]

19. Yeah, point taken.

I just have to turn on the news and see *'s face and I get depressed. Sen. Kerry has to deal with that stuff up close and personal every friggin day. (And he gets to see Allen and Coleman, big as life and twice as ugly, in SFRC from time to time. That would make me just this close <> to suicidal.)

On the other hand, I think you can psych yourself up to fight this. That sort of does get you motivated to get out of bed in the morning. (Okay, well it works for me. I wake up, think about all the friggin bastids in the world, think that maybe I have to do my teensy part to put them back under the rocks they crawled our from under and then get dressed and start the day. Sometimes, it's better than coffee at getting me up and going.)

[globalvillage]

20. I don't think he meant actually 'depressed'.

Certainly not in any clinical sense. 'Seems depressed enough to be interesting' sounds more like a comment re JK's thoughtfulness than a diagnosis. At least thats how I read it. I don't know that you could replace the word and get the same feeling (although one might want to try).

I really don't think 'depressed' is anywhere near an accurate description of the Senator. In the context of the sentence, though, it doesn't seem insulting.
If someone described me that way, I'd take it as a compliment.

[ProSense]

21. I'm sorry, but every time I see Warner's smile, he reminds me of

The actor Conrad Veidt