The Rock Star And The Rest
nationaljournal.com
By James A. Barnes, National Journal
© National Journal Group Inc.
Friday, April 29, 2005
Glendower: "I can call spirits from the vasty deep."
Hotspur: "Why, so can I, or so can any man. But will they come when you do call for them?"
John F. Kennedy, who knew a thing or two about connecting with voters and pursuing the presidency, loved those lines from Shakespeare's Henry IV. "But will they come when you do call?" remains the vital question for anyone contemplating a run for the White House.
At this stage in a presidential election cycle, every would-be candidate is usually playing the confident "Glendower" role, at least in private. And 2008 appears to be no exception to that rule -- perhaps with good reason, especially on the Republican side, where for once the party has no obvious front-runner for the role of standard-bearer.
For the past two decades, two families have had hegemony over the GOP presidential-selection process. Now, unless Florida Gov. Jeb Bush changes his mind about not seeking the presidency in 2008, the streak of a Bush or a Dole capturing every Republican presidential nomination since 1988 is almost certain to be broken.
And at the opening gun in the 2008 presidential nominating contest -- the Iowa caucuses -- the lack of an establishment Republican favorite will break an even longer record. Ever since 1980, a Bush or Dole has won the Hawkeye State's GOP caucuses every time the race for the party's crown has been competitive. With the party's line of succession anything but fixed this time around, a dozen men, plus Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, received at least one first-place vote this week when National Journal asked Republican insiders to predict who is most likely to be their next presidential nominee.
Further blurring the outlook for the 2008 Republican race is the fact that the party's conservative wing is far from settling on its choice. Even at this early stage of the "invisible primary," the GOP's traditional-values set usually has a clear favorite or two.
Even though Iowa's caucuses and the New Hampshire primary are still 33 months away, this potential muddle has some Republicans worried about how long their lease on 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue will last. "On our side, I think it's the most undefined field I've ever seen. And right now, it looks like the weakest," says Rep. Tom Cole of Oklahoma, the GOP's chief deputy whip in the House. "That may not be the case come 2008, but that's what it looks like today."
This kind of uncertainty and worry may well spur even more Republicans to take a look at running in 2008: With no heirs apparent -- establishment or conservative -- they'll figure that the race will continue to be more wide open than normal for their party.
By contrast, the upcoming Democratic presidential sweepstakes seems simple. "On our side, it's kind of Hillary and everybody else," said Democratic National Committee adviser and political consultant Tom Ochs, referring to Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton of New York. "It's boring, but it is what it is."
To be sure, Clinton is the front-runner. Sixty-eight of the 90 Democrats who participated in National Journal's Insiders Poll this week rated her most likely to clinch their party's presidential nomination. A Gallup poll conducted on February 4-6 for CNN and USA Today found that 40 percent of self-identified Democrats favored Clinton; 25 percent preferred to renominate Sen. John Kerry of Massachusetts, the party's 2004 choice; and 18 percent supported former Sen. John Edwards of North Carolina, Kerry's 2004 running mate. All other Democratic possibilities combined drew the support of 6 percent. The remaining 11 percent of respondents had no preference.
If Clinton ends up capturing the Democratic nomination, her success will mark the first time since Adlai Stevenson in 1956 that a Democratic front-runner who was neither an incumbent president nor an incumbent vice president has won after being identified as the leader of the pack in Gallup's first post-election poll of the cycle. Unlike the Republicans, who're in the habit of nominating their early front-runner, Democrats frequently reject theirs.
In fact, more often than not, the first Democratic front-runner doesn't even make it to the starting gate of the Democratic race. That was true of Edward Kennedy in the 1976, 1984, and 1988 election cycles. In 1992, then-Gov. Mario Cuomo of New York was the early front-runner. He didn't run either.
For the 2004 race, Gallup's first post-2000 reading found that the front-runner was former Vice President Gore, followed by Sen. Clinton and former Sen. Bill Bradley of New Jersey; none of them entered the race. Kerry, the eventual nominee, ran sixth in Gallup's first survey looking ahead to 2004. All of that history gives second- and third-tier Democratic wannabes reason to be hopeful about 2008, even in the face of Hillary Clinton's early dominance.
The Republicans
Usually the Republican presidential-selection machinery operates on a hierarchical model. GOP standard-bearers tend to get groomed, first failing to win the nomination in one cycle before bouncing back to take the throne (if not the presidency) the next time it becomes vacant. The process worked that way for Ronald Reagan in 1980 (after his loss in '76), George H.W. Bush in 1988 (after losing in '80), and Bob Dole in 1996 (after his losses in 1980 and 1988). And the only reason the GOP race didn't follow that pattern in 2000 was that the party establishment had a real heir -- George W. Bush -- to carry on its lineage.
The GOP's modus operandi would seem to favor four-term Sen. John McCain of Arizona for the party's 2008 nomination. After all, he is the only one in the probable field who has been around the track before, having finished second in the 2000 race. That invaluable experience has given him contacts in many key states and an enduring base of support. But it may not give McCain what usually comes to a GOP White House hopeful who has been a runner-up -- the sense among party activists that it is his turn.
That's because the outspoken McCain is a maverick who occasionally breaks with President Bush on high-profile issues and, at times, almost seems to enjoy doing so. He has bucked his party on tax cuts, on campaign finance, and on patients' rights legislation.
"He's done a lot of things that conservative Republicans love and a few they just don't like," said Richard Schwarm, a former chairman of the Iowa Republican Party. "He probably has the most status at this point, but whether that can translate the way it did for Dole or George W. [is] unclear."
And while McCain remains opposed to abortion rights, he started to stray from the GOP fold on other social issues last year, voting against the gun lobby to prohibit the sale of handguns without a safety device and to require criminal-background checks on all firearms purchasers at large gun shows. McCain also voted last July against limiting debate on a Bush-endorsed constitutional amendment to ban same-sex marriage.
According to National Journal's vote ratings for 2004, McCain's composite conservative score placed him close to the ideological center of the entire Senate. He was tied with Sen. Arlen Specter of Pennsylvania as the Senate's third-most-liberal Republican, behind only Lincoln Chafee of Rhode Island and Olympia Snowe of Maine.
It's the ideological company that McCain keeps that causes more than a few conservative Republicans to fear that, if elected president, the Arizonan would not govern from as far to the right as they would want. And some of McCain's stands against the Bush administration and the GOP Senate majority, including his recent decision to side with Democrats who are fighting to retain the filibuster for judicial appointments, have caused some Republican stalwarts to wonder whether he's really one of them.
"He's got to stop pulling the elephant's trunk every time you turn around," warned a veteran GOP strategist who requested anonymity. "That gets you on the Sunday talk shows, but I don't think it gets you many activists. He's got to pick a fight with the Democrats, and one where he's a leader. And it would be really good if [Senators] Susan Collins [of Maine], Olympia Snowe, and Lincoln Chafee were on the other side for a change."
Rick Davis, McCain's 2000 campaign manager, bristled at the suggestions that McCain, who campaigned for Bush in both 2000 and 2004, isn't a team player and that he might have to start voting "right" in order to position himself for another run for the White House. "He's been the most outspoken senator in supporting the president and defining the Republican position on the seminal issue of the last campaign, Iraq," Davis said. "The last thing he's ever going to do is gear his position on a national issue to gain political advantage; which, by the way, is one of the reasons that he's the most popular politician in America."
But before McCain could present himself to the nation at large, he would need to win the GOP nomination. Among Republicans, the edge may go to former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani. In the February 4-6 CNN/USA Today poll about 2008, Giuliani ranked first, with 33 percent. He was followed by McCain, 30 percent; Florida Gov. Bush, 12 percent; and Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist of Tennessee, 7 percent. All other candidates named received a combined total of 6 percent. Twelve percent of respondents chose no one.
Much of Giuliani's popularity comes from his iconic performance on 9/11 and the days that followed. Few politicians get to be Time's "Man of the Year," and few enjoy near-universal name recognition. In this age of Internet fundraising, such assets can almost instantly translate into a huge campaign war chest. The ability to raise mountains of cash has never been more important: Nearly every top campaign operative in both parties says that to be taken seriously, White House contenders will have to opt out of federal matching funds (and their spending limits) for the primary season. (George W. Bush started the trend by opting out in 2000.)
Veteran GOP presidential campaign strategist Charlie Black says that Giuliani "is like a national hero. And on terrorism, he's been very loyal to the president. That being said, I have a hard time figuring out a scenario where he gets nominated, because he is a liberal on social issues."
Being perceived as a national hero didn't rocket Sen. John Glenn, D-Ohio, into the White House when he ran in 1984. And Giuliani would have to figure out how to defuse his liberal stands on abortion rights and gay rights in the South, where the Republican nomination has been decided since 1980.
Giuliani hasn't always been a staunch defender of abortion rights. Before he made his first run for mayor in 1989, he reportedly favored reversing the Supreme Court's 1973 Roe v. Wade decision. But by the end of that contest, Giuliani was supporting public funding of abortions for poor women, touting the fact that the New York chapter of the National Abortion Rights Action League had certified him as "pro-choice." He was also claiming that his stance was identical to that of David Dinkins, the liberal Democrat who defeated him.
GOP pollster Fred Steeper, who worked for Giuliani on his first run for Gracie Mansion, says, "I don't know if the Republican Party can nominate someone who cannot say, 'I am pro-life.' Maybe he can reach some sort of accommodation with the pro-life people in terms of parental notification, but it will be very difficult because they are such purists. This is not like negotiating with a labor union." As McCain looks ahead, one of his strengths is that in a contest with Giuliani, he'd likely garner most of the conservative vote.
Some Republicans have looked longingly to Florida to extend the Bush run in Washington, but Jeb Bush apparently has no interest in following his older brother into the Oval Office, at least not immediately. The governor, who cannot seek re-election in 2006 because of term limits, has said he plans to move back to Miami and has no intention of running for president in 2008.
One Republican National Committee member said, only half jokingly, that it is the "secret fantasy" of some RNC members that Jeb Bush will reconsider. The committee member added, "Too much of a good thing is still good."
Nonetheless, most party insiders take Jeb Bush at his word that he's not running this time. "He told me that, and he's told everybody that," said GOP strategist Black. "He's just not interested, and I don't know what would get him to change his mind." Former President George H.W. Bush told Newsweek last month, "My expectation is that Mrs. Clinton will run and Governor Bush won't in 2008."
Conversely, Bill Frist, who is retiring from the Senate after the 2006 election, is already working to get his next government job. He has traveled to New Hampshire twice this year. And when the Sioux City, Iowa, Chamber of Commerce made its annual trek to Washington this spring, he sought to visit with the group. "Senator Frist is, of course, very anxious to meet with us," said Debi Durham, president of the Siouxland chamber before the trip. "What does that tell you?" To most people, it means he's running hard for the Republican presidential nomination in 2008.
Frist, a former surgeon, is known as being more effective one-on-one than with crowds. "He's not a great campaigner, but Bill Frist is really, really smart," commented a high-powered GOP association chief. "He's very crafty, so I don't count him out." Echoed another well-connected GOP lobbyist: "He's so smart and talented, you've got to believe that he's going to figure out how to connect with people."
Then there's what GOP pollster Steeper calls the "gratitude factor." Frist doesn't have a long history as a member of the "family values" conservative Christian movement. And he's viewed suspiciously in some of its quarters. But his recent efforts to end Democratic senators' ability to filibuster against conservative judicial nominees could pay huge dividends in the contest to become the favorite of the party's right wing.
Gratitude helped get Richard Nixon the GOP nomination in 1968, recalled Steeper, because the former vice president placed Barry Goldwater's name in nomination at the 1964 convention and was just about the only mainline Republican leader to campaign for Goldwater in 1964. Conservatives understood that Nixon was not a true conservative, but gratitude put most of them in his camp for the 1968 primary campaign.
Likewise, Reagan's rise in national Republican politics began with a half-hour television speech he gave on Goldwater's behalf in 1964. Of course, Reagan was the real McCoy for conservatives. Reagan's vice president, George H.W. Bush, was not, but his loyalty to the Gipper earned him his spurs with many rank-and-file conservatives. Their support was critical to Bush's sweep of the Southern GOP presidential primaries in 1988 and his eventual nomination.
Still, Frist won't have the conservative territory to himself. A number of GOP hopefuls are seeking to gain a foothold with that influential part of the party's base.
Sen. Sam Brownback, R-Kan., making a side trip from a scheduled speech on stem-cell research at Harvard Law School, spoke in mid-April to a breakfast gathering of nearly 150 conservative social activists in New Hampshire. Brownback, reported PoliticsNH.com, said that issues of life, the definition of marriage, and church-state relations were the coming battles of American politics. He's also recently visited Iowa and South Carolina, the states that hold the other two early critical contests in the nominating process.
In North Carolina in March, Sen. George Allen of Virginia addressed the 15th anniversary dinner of the John Locke Foundation, a conservative Raleigh think tank that aggressively promotes free markets. When Allen recruited one of the GOP's top campaign operatives to be his new Senate chief of staff -- Dick Wadhams, who last year managed John Thune's successful campaign to oust Senate Minority Leader Tom Daschle, D-S.D. -- most Republican operatives assumed it wasn't solely to help with his 2006 re-election campaign.
In South Carolina in February, Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney tested the waters with a speech to party activists in which he touted his fights back home against stem-cell cloning and gay marriage.
If Sen. Rick Santorum, an outspoken opponent of gay rights and abortion, can get past what appears to be a difficult re-election race in Pennsylvania in 2006, he can be expected to make a pitch for the Republican Right's support.
Two others who may be in the hunt on the more moderate side of the spectrum are Sen. Chuck Hagel of Nebraska, who would benefit if McCain doesn't run, and New York Gov. George Pataki, who would benefit if Giuliani stays out.
Meanwhile, even some Republicans who until recently had not signaled much interest in the presidency -- Mississippi Gov. Haley Barbour, for example -- are exploring the possibility of running. A former chairman of the Republican National Committee, Barbour has personal ties to state and local party leaders across the country. A close associate said that when Barbour looked at the Republican field, he wasn't intimidated.
Barbour is not the only Republican to be unimpressed. "How do you stack the lesser-knowns and charisma-challenged up against the likes of Hillary, in spite of her negatives, or John Edwards, to name a couple of Democratic potentials?" asked longtime GOP National Committeeman Steve Roberts of Iowa. "I am not saying all these folks are not capable, just that they are virtually unknown and don't tend to fire people up."
Neither of the party's two early front-runners, McCain and Giuliani, can count on the support of social conservatives, who have a disproportionate influence in the GOP primaries. So, with Jeb Bush unlikely to run and Frist scoring only in single digits in the polls, an ambitious conservative Republican might well see the road to the nomination as none too steep.
Moreover, the lack of an establishment front-runner on the Republican side is probably going to accentuate the importance of retail politics in Iowa, whose process tends to level the playing field among candidates with varying degrees of resources. A GOP establishment favorite can pick up a good many caucus votes because he looks like a winner and a safe choice. But no candidate is likely to be able to play that role in 2008. And for the first time since 1976, when the Republicans began holding Iowa caucuses, no one in the GOP field will have ever competed in the state before.
"People are going to want to see, touch, even pinch candidates before they decide," predicted veteran Iowa GOP stalwart Doug Gross, the party's 2002 gubernatorial nominee.
The Democrats
John Kerry attracted 8 million more votes than Gore had four years earlier, and he raised some $235 million in the 2004 election cycle -- an amount that amazed party leaders and approached the $270 million collected by the Republicans. But when Democrats think about 2008, their 2004 nominee is generally missing from the picture.
"I really haven't heard anybody excited about Kerry running again," said Jerry Messer, director of organizing and political affairs for Local 431 of the United Food and Commercial Workers International Union in Davenport, Iowa, and one of organized labor's top operatives in the state. "The senator has got a great voting record and would have made a good president, but I just don't know if he has the personality."
It's been almost 50 years since a presidential candidate who wasn't an incumbent has won his party's nomination twice in a row. Democrat Adlai Stevenson got his party's nod in 1952 and again in 1956, only to be crushed both times by Dwight Eisenhower. The last failed nominee to even try to bounce back immediately was one of the most beloved Democrats of his generation, 1968 standard-bearer Hubert Humphrey. He was blocked by George McGovern in 1972.
These days, anyone who makes it to the fall classic of politics had better win, because, as Kerry must realize by now, party activists are reluctant to give past nominees a do-over in presidential elections. "I think there's just a general belief that [Kerry] had a shot and that the nation is looking for a different kind of leader in '08," said Sheila McGuire Riggs, a former Iowa Democratic Party chairwoman.
Similarly, in the other early battleground for the nomination, New Hampshire, enthusiasm for Kerry has largely evaporated. "Honestly, I don't think anybody has thought much about him," remarked Democratic House Minority Leader Jim Craig. "The feeling is, he had his shot, came close, but I don't think people would be inclined to do that again."
Yet Kerry has seemingly managed the post-defeat chapter of his presidential campaign far better than Gore did. Rather than going away to lick his wounds, Kerry has hosted thank-you events for supporters and called many of them. And unlike Gore, who dropped out of sight for about seven months, Kerry was back at work in the Senate days after Bush's second inauguration, interrogating Condoleezza Rice and voting against her nomination to be secretary of State. In March, Kerry helped lead the unsuccessful fight to continue barring oil drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge. On top of that, Kerry has doled out leftover campaign cash, including more than $2.5 million to party committees and $250,000 to finance the come-from-behind recount that made Christine Gregoire governor of Washington.
Four years ago, a Gallup poll for CNN and USA Today found that by more than a 2-to-1 ratio, rank-and-file Democrats wanted Gore to run again in 2004. Many Democratic professionals, however, doubt that Kerry would get a similar green light if that question were asked today about him. Even some who worked for Kerry in 2004 aren't sure he would be able to reassemble his troops. "My sense is, beyond the Boston crowd, I don't think he's going to have a lot of support," said a former senior operative on Kerry's presidential bid. "I think he's going to be rudely surprised, but the vast majority of money and energy that went into that campaign was anti-Bush. It's going to be a vastly different dynamic in 2008."
Kerry is not without assets that he can bring to bear to try to bolster his standing in the party. For starters, he has a Web site that he branded with millions of campaign advertising dollars and that has some 3 million names on its e-mail lists. If Kerry can raise significant sums for himself and others over the Internet, he might earn new respect. He also has the experience and standing to campaign for fellow Democrats in the 2006 midterm elections. Perhaps most important, Kerry's got to preserve and nurture the political organizations he built in Iowa and New Hampshire. One early indicator of Kerry's potential 2008 strength will be whether key supporters -- especially those in the early states -- stick with him. Sen. Kennedy said recently on ABC's This Week that Kerry is "my man" if he seeks the White House again in 2008.
But former New Hampshire Gov. Jeanne Shaheen, Kerry's 2004 national campaign chair, was much more circumspect when asked at a recent conference on women in politics what she'd do if Kerry asked for her help in making another run. "It's a long time from now until 2008," she replied, according to The Union Leader of Manchester, N.H. Shaheen and her husband, Bill, who publicly signed on with Kerry before the ex-governor did, have a vast political network in the Granite State; the couple is as close as New Hampshire gets to having Democratic kingmakers. "An early bellwether is to see what the Shaheens will do," said Steve Marchand, a Portsmouth City Council member who is a Democratic activist. "If they think he's viable, that's a big factor other people will follow."
In Iowa, where Kerry's unexpected victory in the first-in-the-nation caucuses propelled him to the nomination, state Senate Democratic floor leader Michael Gronstal sees more signs of life in the camp of Kerry's former running mate. "John Edwards has a significant operation here," said Gronstal, who has received "two or three" post-election calls from Edwards, compared with one from Kerry. Gronstal's wife, Connie, recorded a get-out-the-vote message for Kerry last year. Michael Gronstal backed the Massachusetts senator on caucus night, but he's firmly on the sidelines now. "It's not a pretend neutral; it's a really neutral," said Gronstal.
Iowa Democratic consultant Jeff Link, assessing the mood of former Kerry supporters, said, "I don't think there is the energy for a second Kerry run. They may come back to Kerry, but I think they're going to look around first."
During the first week of May, Kerry's advisers say, Kerry will try to ignite interest in his latest cause, health care for poor children [PDF], when he takes a coast-to-coast swing through California, Washington state, Minnesota, Louisiana, Florida, and Boston. In Beantown, he will host a fundraiser for Sen. Clinton's re-election campaign, the second one he's done this year. The six-state swing is funded by Kerry's Keeping America's Promise political action committee. The PAC has set its sights on recruiting 100,000 Democratic volunteers for the 2005 off-year elections and 500,000 for the midterms. "He drew 3,000 people at a town hall meeting in Austin, and folks around the country are very excited about what John Kerry has been doing to promote Democratic values and help Democratic candidates," said Jenny Backus, an adviser to Kerry's PAC. "He is committed to helping Democrats in 2005 and 2006."
Even if Kerry can capture some attention, Sen. Clinton is undoubtedly the potential 2008 contender who is going to get the most looks in Iowa, New Hampshire, and elsewhere. She will be the front-runner unless she takes herself out of the race.
For now, even her modest trips fuel expectations of a White House run. For instance, on April 30, Sen. Clinton is scheduled to address the 100th anniversary dinner of the Legal Aid Society of Cleveland. But before that, she will also attend an election-reform forum in Cleveland with Rep. Stephanie Tubbs Jones, D-Ohio, to tout legislation they've introduced to amend the Help America Vote Act of 2002 to change the rules on provisional balloting. And Clinton will attend a Cleveland fundraiser for her Senate re-election campaign, as well as a VIP reception associated with the forum, which is a ticketed event. "The outreach around this makes one feel like it is already 2008," said Cleveland Central Labor Council Director John Ryan. "Although that's not what these events are about, a lot of the interest in the events is about that and her."
Clinton's national stature dwarfs any potential Democratic rivals, and it hurts Kerry most: As a former nominee, he ought to already loom large in the national consciousness -- but doesn't. A former nominee has name recognition, experience, and vital contacts. Clinton, although she's never personally run for national office, possesses all those advantages and more, having shared her husband's trials and triumphs in the public arena, and having benefited from his legendary networking skills.
"Kerry doesn't get the benefit of the normal assets that the former nominee would have over the next field, because there's somebody else that surpasses him in all those areas," noted Democratic consultant Bill Carrick, who managed presidential campaigns for Ted Kennedy and then-Rep. Dick Gephardt of Missouri.
"People would flip on a dime for her," said former New Hampshire Democratic Party Chairman George Bruno, who backed Bill Clinton in 1992. "She's in a very strong position. And, given the big vacuum that exists in the national Democratic Party leadership, she looms very large."
But "dream" candidates often peak the day they declare. And while her husband can be a huge asset to her campaign -- most presidential-candidate spouses can fill a living room in New Hampshire, but he could pack a gymnasium -- Sen. Clinton can't let voters think that it's a team effort, because that would risk putting her campaign in his shadow. "To distinguish herself as a stand-alone candidate in light of his history and their marriage -- I think that's going to be complicated," a veteran Democratic strategist said.
What's more, Sen. Clinton is the quintessential national lightning rod. If she "calls for them," millions of supporters won't be the only ones who'll come. Ever since her husband stepped onto the national stage, she's been vilified by many on the Right. And her ill-fated effort as first lady to revamp the nation's health care system only added to her enemies. Many Democrats, therefore, wonder how she could possibly win enough Bush territory to recapture the White House.
After back-to-back defeats, many Democrats are fixated on nominating a presidential candidate who can put more states into play in the general election. The 2008 hopeful who seems most able to do that could well emerge from the early jockeying as the anti-Hillary candidate. The competition to be Clinton's chief rival is likely to favor moderates, although her Senate record, as National Journal's ratings show, is far more moderate than her liberal reputation would indicate.
Could the un-Hillary be Edwards? Having run last time "gives Senator Edwards an advantage -- having people who know him, know his style, know his issues, and are passionately committed to getting him elected," said New Hampshire Democratic activist Jim Demers. Edwards, who no longer has to deal with roll-call votes and committee markups, has plenty of time to nurture those troops. But one of Edwards's problems in 2004 was the perception that he lacked gravitas. It's hard to see how he closes the gravitas gap while out of office.
The Democratic contest could be a three-layer cake, with a rock-star front-runner (Sen. Clinton) at the top, followed by the two men on the party's 2004 ticket, and the rest of the field starting, literally, at the bottom. The advantage of being in the third group -- to the extent there is one -- is that Democratic primary voters seem to be drawn to fresh faces.
"There is a very strong argument to be made that the front-runner and the 2004 gang will be seen as the past, and others can argue that they are the future," said veteran Democratic media consultant Anita Dunn, an adviser to Sen. Evan Bayh of Indiana. If the two-term senator seeks the presidency, expect to hear a lot about his two terms as governor of a very red state.
Govs. Rod Blagojevich of Illinois, Ed Rendell of Pennsylvania, and Tom Vilsack of Iowa can also tout their executive experience. And that may be more important to rank-and-file primary voters than the fact that they govern blue states.
Democratic activists, on the other hand, are likely to be impressed by the political skills that being a red-state governor implies. Red-state Govs. Bill Richardson of New Mexico and Mark Warner of Virginia would bring vastly different resumes to the 2008 race: Richardson's highlights his time in Congress, as ambassador to the United Nations, and in the Clinton Cabinet as Energy secretary. Plus, Richardson is Hispanic, making him part of the nation's fastest-growing minority group. The experience of Warner, who would argue that he'd make the party competitive in the South, is largely in business.
After three decades in Washington, Sen. Joseph Biden of Delaware might have a harder time looking fresh, but those years seem to have given him the self-assurance to speak with McCain-like candor.
Retired Army Gen. Wesley Clark might also get another look. The more experience he got on the campaign trail in 2004, the better Clark became. And his Vietnam War service is unlikely to spark the controversy that Kerry's did.
And for real experience, Gore's two terms as vice president give him unique qualifications. Just imagine a debate in which Gore turned to Hillary Clinton and said, "While you were in the family quarters -- "
But in the end, Hillary Clinton might be able to defeat any un-Hillary, Democratic or Republican. There's a growing sentiment among Republicans that their party will be up against her in 2008 and that she won't be easy to keep out of the Oval Office. "She projects strength and the capacity to run the country, to pick smart people, to know when to compromise. Those are things that the last few years have proven to me she can do," said GOP Rep. Cole. "I don't see any of our guys who could beat her -- at least not today." |
