John Edwards declares
December 28th, 2006 at 3:22 pm by David Farrar2004 VP Candidate John Edwards has formally declared his candiacy for the Democratic nomination for 2008. Edwards has been doing a lot of work with organised labour and will be a serious contender.
This is the first election since 1928 when neither the incumbent President oe Vice-President has sought the candidacy.
So far the following are the official candidates:
Democrats:
Senator Mike Gravel, aged 78, Senator for Alaska from 1969 to 1981. Highly unlikely.
Congressman Dennis Kucinch, aged 60, Ohio Congresman since 1997. Hard left, not electable.
Governor Tom Vilsack, aged 56, Iowa Governor since 1999, Chair of the centrist DLC, one to watch.
Senator Joe Biden, aged 64, Senator for Delaware since 1973! Past his prime.
Senator John Edwards, aged 53, North Carolina Senator from 1999 to 2005. The leading contender so far.
Republicans:
John Cox, aged 51, never held elected office. A nobody.
Of course it will get more interesting as others declare. Will Clinton, Obama and Gore seek the Democratic nomination and same for McCain, Giulani and Gingrich for the Republicans?
December 28th, 2006 at 6:10 pm
Go Newt! Poor man doesn’t have a dogs show of winning, but we can dream can’t we?
Vote:December 28th, 2006 at 7:39 pm
The yay sayers and environmentalists are already touting the 2008 election as the “climate change election” (!)
Vote:December 28th, 2006 at 8:06 pm
Word from the States is that Edwards is a notorious slimbag attorney….in a bad way.
Vote:December 28th, 2006 at 8:20 pm
In his absence McCain will have to do!
Vote:December 28th, 2006 at 8:34 pm
You’ve forgotten the Republican Mitt Romney, who could end up being the first Mormon president and who has excellent conservative credentials and an awesome CV, including saving the 2002 winter olympics after the preparations fell into disaster.
He has stated he will be discussing declaring for a run for the nomination with his family over the christmas break.
He’s the one to watch IMHO
Vote:December 28th, 2006 at 10:25 pm
Clinton and Obama are the tow biggies. Clinton has to prove she can win West of the Mason Dixon line where the Democrats did surprisingly well in the recent elections. Clinton is Helen Clark reconstructed, naturally I sincerely hope she crashes and burns.
Vote:December 28th, 2006 at 11:32 pm
Its will be Clinton/Obama or Obama/Clinton. No one else will be in the running for presidential candidate at least.
I still pray every day that they will change the law so that it can be Arne vs Clinton in 2008 – just for the sheer fun of it.
Clinton wouldn’t be a bad president actually – she would know exactly which side her country’s bread is buttered on. After a night of the long knives where she perhaps raised divorce lawyers status and changed it so that wives got most of the estate, she’d be as good as any other president at protecting America’s intersts – unlike clark who is running NZ into a pink 3rd world hole.
Vote:December 28th, 2006 at 11:33 pm
The real canditates havn’t thrown their hats (fully) in yet.
Democrat nomination will be won by Clinton – she’s a woman and she has massive power behind her. Obama’s way too soon to run at this point.
Republicians will be a tossup between McCain and Giuliani. Whoever of those two who wins the nomination will take the country.
Vote:December 29th, 2006 at 4:38 am
Edwards will be a serious contender. He has done a huge amount of work in areas of poverty and organized labor and is a far stronger candidate than his VP run in 04.
Look to Obama and Clinton to nullify each other and candidates such as Edwards to emerge through the pack as (to use that great American political phrase) a “uniter”.
Vote:December 29th, 2006 at 7:33 am
Said it before, say it again. Rudi for Pres, Condi for VP.
Vote:December 29th, 2006 at 8:44 am
“This is the first election since 1928 when neither the incumbent President nor Vice-President has sought the candidacy.”
You’re assuming the new Congress won’t impeach anyone…
Vote:December 29th, 2006 at 10:05 am
Clinton has been working southern conservative women. She’s disliked by the Kossacks, but that’s all to her advantage.
Obama is probably her biggest threat. Normally the outcome would be her Pres him VP on the ticket. The problem is that Clinton will get the black vote anyway, Obama on the same ticket will not pick up any new votes there. It would be a great combination but odds are the Dems will opt for a white male with conservative credentials to balance Hillary.
Unless Obama can really capitalise on his ability to appeal to conservative Christians. That would put him in the running.
Working agianst the Dems is that they now control the Senate and Congress which will have taken some of the steam out of anti-Rep sentiment.
Vote:December 29th, 2006 at 11:08 am
Helen Clark cannot be reconstructed. There is too much rot throughout the structure.
Vote:December 29th, 2006 at 11:24 am
So Tim thinks Hilary is H3.
Vote:Hilary is closer to John Key than Helen.
But of course when it comes to a balanced budget John Key is much more like GW.
As for Barack HUSSEIN Obama ( the wing nuts are allready calling him Osama) he too is just like John Key but without the slipperyness.
December 29th, 2006 at 11:52 am
Vilsack is a lightweight – his interview on the Daily show was hilarious. “The population of Iraq needs to stand up and take responsiblity for itself, we’ve given them every opportunity” as if the death squads that murder middle class Iraqi civilians are a result of the victims being selfish and lazy.
The American public love this sort of rhetoric, so I guess he’s in with a chance.
Vote:December 29th, 2006 at 12:09 pm
My pick is that Obama will be the VP candidate for whoever gets the nomination. I believe that it will become obvious that Hilary just can’t win and that Gore will become the candidate – and win.
Vote:December 29th, 2006 at 12:42 pm
Graeme – it doesn’t affect things if there are impeachments.
Vote:December 29th, 2006 at 8:27 pm
Andrei, the problem is that in the eyes of Evangelical voters, he’s Mittmormon Romormoney McMormonpants which is one step up from being a pagan. As much as I like Romney, I think his religion will play too large a role in the primaries.
Vote:December 29th, 2006 at 11:16 pm
I didn’t even know he was batting.
Vote:December 30th, 2006 at 8:42 am
Obama will crash and burn because he’s an empty vessel with almost no substantive experience plus the Clinton political machine will wipe him out. He is a dead cert for the VP ticket though. If Gore runs he is Clinton’s only real competition. Edwards has cleverly worked Iowa and organised labour but he too is an empty vessel with a skinny record in the Senate and he made his money as a ‘slip and fall ambulance chasing’ lawyer.
McCain and Gulliani are general election winners but both have substantial baggage with Republicans in their primaries (McCain due to his Gang of 14 over judicial nominations+soft on immigration;Rudi over his liberal abortion,guns&gays positions).Both easily beat any of the 4 Democrat contenders in a face to face general election race in all but the most blatantly pro-Democrat polls (eg Newsweek mag). Romney is the dark horse and is an exceptional candidate. His has real intellectual horsepower,is very telegenic&articulate, governed uber liberal MA as a conservative,he’s rich&well connected so raising the $ will be a snap, he rescued the 2002 Winter Olympics from oblivion and turned them into a roaring success and he managed a minor miracle in passing landmark healthcare reform through MA’s overwhelming Democrat legislature. He is spot on with all the major conservative litmus tests BUT I dont believe he could beat Clinton or Gore due to the Mormon factor. Romney has absolutely no skeletons – running against Ted Kennedy meant that clan put him through the ringer but in a tight 08 race, independents and potential crossover Democrats would be swayed by the subtle anti Mormon messages that would inevitably surface.
Im picking Rudi as his success as NYC mayor/US attorney (plummeting crime rate&breaking the mafia)+ the 9/11 aura will overcome his personal liberalism. Rudi will spank any Democrat in the hunt right now.
Vote:December 30th, 2006 at 9:25 am
Good article on dems here:
http://www.anklebitingpundits.com/content/index.php?p=1467
As they point out, there’s a solid base of around 40-44% that will never vote for Clinton so she’s pretty much stuffed.
Vote:December 31st, 2006 at 1:46 pm
Tim – the Mason-Dixon line runs almost exactly east-west. You might pedantically argue that anywhere west of Penn. or W.V. is west of the line, but in popular speech it divides the north from the south.
Vote:January 2nd, 2007 at 10:41 pm
Good analysis kiwi.
McCain just never impressed me (when I was in America) as having the carisma to get that ultimate vote. I think he’s passed his use by.
I think clinton/Obama vs Rudi/? would be a good and fun race.
I hope the democrats dont go for Gore – his self interest in GW is becoming more apparent daily. The environmental groups are gearing up to make this the “global warming” election – which is sick really given all the other envrionmental and social challenges facing the world.
btw I think one thing that is happening in NZ is that trough the GW issue we are getting a look at lobbying on a professional level that has existed in the US for decades but us country bumkins are not used to. Our closest to a professional lobbying machine is the capitalist iwi. I wonder if this is the future direction of NZ politics as well.
Vote:January 3rd, 2007 at 12:18 am
“Graeme – it doesn’t affect things if there are impeachments.”
For example, Bush is impeached and convicted by the Senate, Cheney assumes the Presidency, and then nominates McCain as his VeeP, who, upon being confirmed by the Senate seeks the Republican Nomination and receives it.
An incumbent Vice-President would then have sought both the candidacy and the presidency, which suggests the rather obscure problem I had with your statement that: “This is the first election since 1928 when neither the incumbent President oe Vice-President has sought the candidacy.” is well-founded (if rather obscure…).
Your ‘blog finally caught up with the comments though – it had been on 16 comments (even though I could see more new comments had been given – including one from you that began “Graeme – it doesn’t affect…”) for a couple of days…
Vote: