Presidential Politics

[broceliand]

Those of you who have known me a while know that I was seriously pissed at the Democratic Party for nominating John Kerry in 2004. It wasn't personal - but anyone who'd heard the man over the previous 20 years in the Senate knew he was a policy wonk. While that might be welcome in Massachusetts, it certainly was not going to play well outside the

Comments

[jessebc]

See my last reply as far the electability of a woman. I didn't think anybody else would vote for a woman either, but it appears that a lot of us think we're the only ones who would.

Like I said, they all have major drawbacks and it's still early. So we're speculating.

I don't think Clinton's problem is so much gender as that she invokes strong reactions from people (particularly women, but then we're often our own worst enemies). But she has the biggest tumescent aura and the most money and a popular husband who loves to campaign, so I'm betting at this point that she'll get the nomination.

I'm guessing Obama is an all-or-nothing candidate. His biggest advantage is that a lot of people adore him, but no one really hates him. He has the potential to fire up Democratic voters like a rock star. But if he fails to do that, he's dead.

Edwards' biggest problems are that he sounds really lame when he talks about foreign policy (you can tell he has no idea what he's talking about) and voters motivated by the Iraq War are going to hold that over both him and Hillary (though Edwards seems to be getting more direct criticism for it). Edwards strikes me as anachronistic. A candidate I'd have loved in the 90s, but now that everyone's gotten so cynical and right-wing, he seems sort of out-of-place. He may have the same problem as John McCain -- they're both probably the BEST overall candidates for their side, but, in the strange world of politics, that may make them the WEAKEST overall candidates.

But it's early. At this point, anything could happen.

[broceliand]

Indeed. It's early.

BTW, Edwards has done a lot of work on foreign policy stuff in the last four years, and presents much better on the topic than he did in 2004.

[jessebc]

I've been reading a lot about an Edwards press interview where they asked him to explain his foreign policy positions and he responded, with a golly-gee over-enthusiasm, "I just love this stuff!" Which many were happy to point out doesn't really qualify as a foreign policy position.

I should point out here, though, that, by saying I think Hillary will get the nomination doesn't mean I necessarily think she SHOULD. But I think there's a lot of that self-fulfilling prophecy going on among Democrats. I was chatting with party Dems on TPMCafe and they're always talking up Hillary. I was suggesting the benefits of other candidates and they kept saying, "But Hillary's going to win!" They couldn't understand that that, in itself, isn't a reason to vote for her. But they want to bet on the winning horse.

I think by that logic, she probably WILL win, but that doesn't mean she SHOULD.

However, I think Hillary's facing with women the same thing Obama is facing with blacks. We have so much pinned on the first female president that, no matter who it is, she's going to be a disappointment. And, on balance, I do think Hillary would be as good a first female president as any.

[broceliand]

Don't get me wrong. Hillary would certainly be no worse than mediocre as president. I just dont believe she can get elected. And that is only partly because she is a woman. Most of it is because she is Hillary.

You might find this an interesting read:
http://www.prospect.org/web/page.ww?section=root&name=ViewWeb&articleId=12434

[jessebc]

I think I'm rooting for Obama largely because I was in Illinois when he got elected to the Senate and it was so exciting. He has a populist quality that makes the young girls cry and those of us who remember no president before Nixon have never had a president to be excited about so we've gotten cynical. The only shot he has is if he can route around the political machine and I think my generation NEEDS to see someone do that. He would be our generation's JFK.

[jessebc]

I read the Prospect article, but I'm not sure what's so exciting about it. Edwards has just memorized the script -- keep "all options on the table" regarding Iran and coddle Israel no matter what they do.

He muffed it a bit with: "I felt a great conflict then about giving George Bush this authority, because I didn’t trust him. And I resolved that conflict on the side of voting for it."

But, otherwise, it's orthodox party line.