Is the 'Perfect Storm' of Presidential Politics Developing Right Before Our Eyes?

[Blackhatjack]

Bush is leaving office with all time low approval ratings, and the mere mention of his name on the campaign trail by Repub Candidates is pure poison.

We are unable to extricate ourselves from the war in Iraq, while the dollar tanks, and the economy is on the brink of major collapse because of the housing crisis --all BEFORE the General Election takes place in Nov of 2008.

None of the Repub Candidates for President register with a winning margin against the top tier Dem Candidates. To make matters worse, Giuliani alienates the Right Wing Fundamentalist voters in the Repub Party, and Romney likely will be unacceptable to the same voters because he is a Mormon.

The air of 'inevitability' is being promoted by the Clinton Campaign, even though she has high unfavorability numbers and has taken few polarizing stands on important issues at this point. Over the next 3 months Edwards and Obama will take her to task over these issues, and as the frontrunner she will be subject to tougher questioning.

The Democratic Primary Schedule is in a state of flux at this late date. Florida is still on schedule to hold its Primary BEFORE Super Tuesday, and other states are still considering 'moving up.' Will they be stripped of their delegates at the Democratic Convention? Democratic candidates are being prohibited from campaigning in Florida, and Florida Democrats have filed suit against the National Democratic Party over this issue.

Very popular Al Gore still stands in the wings as the Democratic Candidate who was 'robbed' of his Presidency.

Michael Bloomberg has a billion dollars he could spend at the drop of a hat if he decided to enter the race as a 3rd Party Candidate. Add Chuck Hagel as a VP running mate and you just took out a good portion of the Independent/Undecided and Unaffiliated Voters who would likely side with the Democratic Candidate.

There will be so many parts moving simultaneously over the next 3 months it is hard to forsee exactly how things will play out.

Democrats need to keep in mind --when the winner of a political race is predicted as 'inevitable' that is when Murphy's Law usually crops up.

Winning political campaigns usually build momentum as the election date approaches, and the goal is to generate a wave of support that crests just as the election day arrives. The same wave that crests too early or too late can be fatal.

This should be an election to remember.

[dysfunctional press]

1. it may be an election to remember- but it will be a presidency to forget.

there are a MOUNTAIN of problems waiting for the next potus...i'm guessing it will be a one-term presidency for WHOEVER gets it.

[Blackhatjack]

2. I agree with the 'mountain of problems' assessment, but not the one term prediction...

That will only happen if the people lost hope in the next President taking action to fix our problems.

You would be right if the next President failed to act and maintained the same path we are on today.

[dysfunctional press]

3. all of the 'top tier' dem candidates have said that they would maintain our iraqi presence.

sounds a lot like the same path in that respect.

[Blackhatjack]

5. That is not true -- Edwards would withdraw all combat troops and stop combat missions....

... but any President is going to have to maintain protective forces for our Embassy and humanitarian workers as Edwards proposes. That is a stark difference from Clinton, and a long slow deployment proposed by Obama.

Of course if you consider maintaining an Embassy and protecting humanitarian workers to be the same as "maintaining our Iraqi presence" then I can see how you arrived at your conclusion.

But keep in mind that we did the same thing in Kosovo and other places we have provided with humanitarian relief.

[MannyGoldstein]

4. Same Thing Faced Lincoln & FDR

Sadly, I'm notthinking that there's a Lincoln or FDR on deck. But who knows.

[Arkham House]

13. But then--who could have predicted that Lincoln or FDR...

...would become Lincoln or FDR...? Lincoln was the dark horse of dark horses in 1860, and his nomination was probably the greatest upset in the history of American politics...he was almost totally unknown to the country at large, and the unique circumstances of the convention being held in Illinois, and the GOP needing a "moderate" from a vital swing state--to oppose the supposedly-too-radical Seward--gave him the nomination. As for FDR--well, the general opinion of him in 1932 was given by Walter Lippmann, who said he wasa nice, well-meaning man without too many gifts who very much wanted to be President...he was still known, nationally, in 1932 as Teddy Roosevelt's cousin... So, maybe, one of our guys will turn out to be a legend too...:-)...

[Virginia Dare]

16. Not quite that bad yet...

but Bush still has a little time to further fuck things up.

[TwilightGardener]

6. It's definitely looking good for Hillary right now--but it's rare to see something

sewn up so early, I think--you're probably right in that there are probably forces brewing that we can't see right now. I don't know how much of the country is even really paying attention at all to the campaigns at this point, and after eight years of disaster with Chimpy (and even Repubs acknowledge the disaster) the public will hopefully be looking for competence and for someone who won't wage further war, UNLESS a terror attack happens and the fear card wins out big. Just too damn hard to see the future from here.

[Blackhatjack]

7. I purposefully did not throw in the possibility of a domestic terror attack or our attack on Iran...

.... either of which would undoubtedly upset the present set of election options.

I believe there is a good possibility that a domestic terror attack could result in 'delayed' elections in Nov 2008.

Can you imagine what that would lead to?

IF Bush were to engage us in an attack on Iran before he leaves office, and Iran retaliated bringing in regional fighting, the mood of the country could change significantly.

[petersjo02]

8. Studies done about what happens if Bloomberg gets in...

have shown that, rather than harming Dems, such a candidacy would syphon voters most heavily from Republican ranks.

[BenDavid]

9. Only ones trying their best to repeat that

'inevitable' mantra over and over is the media.....You watch cnn and you will see there are more negatives reporting about HRC, and just today it was Clinton running away with the nomination and she is the 'inevitable winner of the campaign.....Evening news is the same on the three major networks......BUT a funny thing happened...HRC is how there on the campaign trail going from town to town and working hard for this nomination....Wanna know why folks are attracted to her? They she the fire she has in wanting to be president. There is the passion she shows in her speeches to the folks.....Yes HRC will never say she is the winner already...She will work hard for this nomination and she is like a bear......a damn grizzley....

Ben David

[Golden Raisin]

10. Based on the last 2 presidential elections,

which in my opinion were rigged/manipulated, I think all bets are off, particularly if it is a close election. And as for who will be the nominees --- it's still a long way away --- alot can happen. Things will change drastically if (when) Bush bombs Iran.

[xchrom]

11. i think there is a perfect storm developing -- but i don't think it has a thing to do with HRC.

economics, the debt and deficit, the contual flow of money to the pentagon and iraq, the weakening dollar, -- there's your perfect storm.

i'm not an HRC fan - nor do i want to see her as prez -- but she will be light years better than anything we've seen in a long time.

she's not a part of this particular problem.

bushco and their monumental screw-ups are what everything is about -- and we won't know all that we need to know until we have a dem prez.

[MiniMe]

12. Remember, 4 years ago, Gephardt was the runaway favorite

Kerry was just an afterthought. We really don't know what the general population will actually do until they get into the voting booth.

[NewJeffCT]

14. I thought Dean was surging around this time 4 years ago?

I remember Kerry being an early front-runner, then fading to almost nothing through 2003 before bouncing back in January '04. I also don't remember Gephardt being a front-runner.

My memory could be wrong, however.

[MiniMe]

17. Found a local Iowa poll from 2003

GEPHARDT, DEAN TIED IN NEW IOWA POLL. Dick Gephardt and Howard Dean continue to exchange the leader position in the see-sawing Democratic contest to win the Iowa Presidential caucuses in January. The latest independent poll now has the two men tied at 26% apiece. John Kerry was third with 15%, followed by John Edwards at 8%. Joe Lieberman and Wesley Clark -- who both announced earlier this month that they would not actively compete in Iowa -- were tied for fifth place with 3% each. Dennis Kucinich, Al Sharpton and Carol Braun trailed behind. In related news, the poll also showed that President Bush would currently defeat either Gephardt, Dean or Kerry in the state in the general election. The poll was conducted for KCCI TV-8 in Des Moines.


From October 2003

http://politics1.com/blog-1003.htm

As we know, neither one of them got the nomination.

[Odin2005]

15. 2008 = 1932

The Dems are going to win in a landslide, mark my words. Of course, we still need to tell the modern-day Al Smith types (*cough* DLC *cough*) to quit getting in the way.