An occasional blog on U.S. politics.

Monday, March 13, 2006

Some thoughts on '08

2008 is still far on the horizon, but since I can never keep my mind off of presidential elections, here is the first of many posts on the 2008 presidential elections.

There were three articles in the New York Times today that directly or indirectly dealt with the 2008 election (here and here are two of them; you can't get the third unless you're a Times Select subscriber). And each of them was interesting for different reasons.

The first, which was about the "budgetary restraint" theme in the GOP primary, was interesting enough in its own right, but the funniest bit was a glaring error by its author, Adam Nagourney:
One of the most striking moments involved a speech not by a possible presidential candidate, but by Senator Lindsey Graham of South Carolina. Mr. Graham stood up, speaking softly but urgently, and apologized to the audience for what had happened with spending in this era of Republican rule in Washington.
Since when is Lindsey Graham not a potential presidential candidate in '08? He was lumped in with the "potential candidates" group by others reporting at the event, and I would consider him the strongest candidate the Republicans have to offer (certainly more so than the cat-torturer Frist, the too-edgy-for-GOP-primetime McCain or Giuliani, or the funny-named Huckabee). If he doesn't receive the nomination, I'll thank the Democratic Party's lucky stars.

But how about that Republican primary? I know I will be contradicting what I just wrote, but the liberal candidates (which do not include McCain, as Paul Krugman rightly pointed out today) may have a better chance than conventional wisdom tells us. The reason is clear: the field is crowded with conservatives. Sam Brownback, Rick Santorum, Newt Gingrich, George Allen, Bill Frist, Tom Tancredo, John McCain, and potentially more. The liberal side, in contrast, is meager: Giuliani is all alone right now. Giuliani has little chance of winning the primary, but not because of his politics; no, personal baggage will derail his chances. However, if Condi Rice entered the race, I would call the nomination for her right there and then. Not only would she be the only credible liberal, but she would probably pick up some conservative votes to boot. She recently won an online poll of Human Events readers as the favorite GOP candidate; this is hardly scientific, but impressive nevertheless considering HE's radical conservative credentials.

Finally, on the Democratic side. I like what Russ Feingold is doing. No, that doesn't mean I would like him to win the primary (I like the guy, but he would be a disastrous nominee). Rather, I like that he's putting pressure on Hillary from the left by tossing some slabs of red meat to the Democratic base. Caught between Feingold and Clark on the left and Warner and Vilsack on the right, it's looking more and more possible that the nomination will slip through her fingers. From there, hopefully it will fall onto Mark Warner's lap...

Anyway, that's my round up. I'm sure there will be more as the months wear on.

2 Comments:

Blogger Unknown said...

Two posts in a week? The sky is falling!

Anyway, I don't know if Condi has enough strength among the rabid con base to win the nomination. Her support in the conservative blogs and sites is probably mostly due to that she is inextricably tied to Bush's nutball foreign policy, and is likely to continue it. Most of the anti-woman, anti-gay, anti-science, anti-mexican and anti-black folks who make up the base that needs constant red meat to turn out. She's not suffifient in any of these categories, and the paleocons are not really satisfied by the neocon agenda.

Lindsay Graham would be a winner for the republicans... he's got that "maverick" reputation despite being a skeezy dipshit. However, the "maverick" thing is a kiss of death among the GOP faithful. Goodbye, John McCain. Frist has lost the base because he's inept. Giuliani's dead because of personal baggage.

I'd say George Allen is their man. And Mark Warner mops him up.

2:40 AM

 
Blogger binkyping said...

Condi's lack of support among the true believers is half the point, though. I don't think she'd pick up too many conservatives once it became common knowledge that she's pro-choice and favors affirmative action. However, she would get all of the centrist/liberal republicans voting in the primary (which is not insubstantial) while the conservatives split among the multitude of hard-right candidates.

2:53 PM

 

Post a Comment

<< Home