AIEEE! RUN! SHE'S COMING FOR US!
Hillary has announced her candidacy for the White House.
She'll have to become shrill, uber-Leftist Hillary again- her true self- in order to beat out Obama and Edwards for the nomination. If she gets that far (and I have a hunch that she might not), she'll then revert to the "moderate" Hillary the worshipping MSM pretends she is in order to try to win the election.
I remain convinced that she's doomed. Nobody for whom over forty percent of the electorate says going in that they will never, under any circumstances, vote has a chance of being elected president. Ain't gonna happen.
My money is on Edwards for the Democratic nomination. He looks like he's got has populist, hard-Left line all laid out for him, national health insurance (wasn't that Hillary's plan?) and all. He and Bill Richardson, IMO, are the Democrats' two toughest contenders, November-wise. If it weren't for the fact that Hillary's candidacy will make it hard for Edwards not to pick a woman, I'd think that Edwards-Richardson might just be the Democrats' ticket in 2008.
Edwards, btw, continues to lead all the polls here in Iowa, with Hillary second. Not a good sign for Hillary, who will be badly damaged if she loses here.
Over on the GOP side, I still see Mitt Romney as the likely nominee- unless a social conservative (probably Huckabee or Brownback, both of whom have started to put together organizations here in Iowa with some good people, despite Mitt's huge head start) does a Jimmy Carter/Bill Clinton and comes out of nowhere to win Iowa. Then it might be interesting. While I see John McCain as slightly more viable than Rudy Giuliani, I don't think either has a shot at the nomination- and to differing degrees, both would have trouble turning out the base in November even in the unlikely event that they won the nomination. McCain is just too disliked by too many conservatives, especially party activists; Giuliani's positions on abortion, gay rights, stem cell research,guns and other social issues will blow him out of the water just as soon as he starts to be compared with rivals whose positions on these issues are more orthodox for Republicans, and especially for the activists who trudge through the snow and devote an entire evening to their precinct caucus here in Iowa.
In November, it's anybody's guess. My guess is that Iraq will basically be a non-issue in 2008. The terms on which things work themselves out there will obviously have a huge impact on the presidential election. So, of course, will the shape of the economy. Either Edwards or Richardson- especially Edwards- would be a formidable opponent. Romney would be a good candidate, if only he were a Southern governor. Huckabee is exactly that, though his lack of experience in the national stage is worrisome. Both are very effectives speakers.
Brownback is a good guy whom it would probably be easy for the Dems and the MSM to marginalize.
Too bad Jim Gilmore isn't more popular back in Virginia. His security credentials are impressive. I don't know enough about his speaking ability or his ability to think on his feet to be able to judge. One thing is sure: after Bush, the next Republican presidential nominee had better be articulate- especially since Edwards, Obama, and Hillary all are!
I'm still on the lookout for a newcomer (Fred Thompson is probably unrealistic, being too old as well as having too good a time as an actor), but right now for the most part I'm personally looking at Romney and Huckabee.
She'll have to become shrill, uber-Leftist Hillary again- her true self- in order to beat out Obama and Edwards for the nomination. If she gets that far (and I have a hunch that she might not), she'll then revert to the "moderate" Hillary the worshipping MSM pretends she is in order to try to win the election.
I remain convinced that she's doomed. Nobody for whom over forty percent of the electorate says going in that they will never, under any circumstances, vote has a chance of being elected president. Ain't gonna happen.
My money is on Edwards for the Democratic nomination. He looks like he's got has populist, hard-Left line all laid out for him, national health insurance (wasn't that Hillary's plan?) and all. He and Bill Richardson, IMO, are the Democrats' two toughest contenders, November-wise. If it weren't for the fact that Hillary's candidacy will make it hard for Edwards not to pick a woman, I'd think that Edwards-Richardson might just be the Democrats' ticket in 2008.
Edwards, btw, continues to lead all the polls here in Iowa, with Hillary second. Not a good sign for Hillary, who will be badly damaged if she loses here.
Over on the GOP side, I still see Mitt Romney as the likely nominee- unless a social conservative (probably Huckabee or Brownback, both of whom have started to put together organizations here in Iowa with some good people, despite Mitt's huge head start) does a Jimmy Carter/Bill Clinton and comes out of nowhere to win Iowa. Then it might be interesting. While I see John McCain as slightly more viable than Rudy Giuliani, I don't think either has a shot at the nomination- and to differing degrees, both would have trouble turning out the base in November even in the unlikely event that they won the nomination. McCain is just too disliked by too many conservatives, especially party activists; Giuliani's positions on abortion, gay rights, stem cell research,guns and other social issues will blow him out of the water just as soon as he starts to be compared with rivals whose positions on these issues are more orthodox for Republicans, and especially for the activists who trudge through the snow and devote an entire evening to their precinct caucus here in Iowa.
In November, it's anybody's guess. My guess is that Iraq will basically be a non-issue in 2008. The terms on which things work themselves out there will obviously have a huge impact on the presidential election. So, of course, will the shape of the economy. Either Edwards or Richardson- especially Edwards- would be a formidable opponent. Romney would be a good candidate, if only he were a Southern governor. Huckabee is exactly that, though his lack of experience in the national stage is worrisome. Both are very effectives speakers.
Brownback is a good guy whom it would probably be easy for the Dems and the MSM to marginalize.
Too bad Jim Gilmore isn't more popular back in Virginia. His security credentials are impressive. I don't know enough about his speaking ability or his ability to think on his feet to be able to judge. One thing is sure: after Bush, the next Republican presidential nominee had better be articulate- especially since Edwards, Obama, and Hillary all are!
I'm still on the lookout for a newcomer (Fred Thompson is probably unrealistic, being too old as well as having too good a time as an actor), but right now for the most part I'm personally looking at Romney and Huckabee.
Comments