[Congressman Billybob]

No, Hillary! has no more chance to defeat Bush than Dean does. Quarrel my facts and my logic if you choose. Visceral fear is not a substitute for analysis.

John / Billybob

[2iron]

Excellent summary of the situation. With the economy receding as an issue, that leaves Iraq and terrorism. None of the Democrats who have foreign policy credibility can adequately appeal to their own left wing primary voters. Except possibly Gebhardt. He leads in the Iowa polling and should run better than Dean in the south. I see a two man race therefore, Dean and and Dick. Because of the loss of manufacturing jobs to China issue, Dick probably has some support in the midwest as well. I'm picking Gebhardt. He still loses big to Bush, however.

[mo]

you need to run the numbers on Hillary vs Cheney, sir. And not because anybody nominated Cheney-but because on 10/20/04 he's all that left if she's the Dem Candidate.

[Monti Cello]

Hillary might be looking at the Schwarzenegger campaign as a model for victory.

Surprise late entrance, a campaign of only about 60 days, massive use of name recog and star power to wow the media and create nonstop buzz. A campaign too short for details or numerous debates, keeping to very general themes, and based on attacking the incumbent. Arnold escaped a thorough vetting and won in a state that disfavors his party.

The key difference is the level of distaste among the electorate for the status quo. Depending on events, that could swing against Bush, though surely not to the levels of Gray Davis.

A short campaign/coronation with limited questioning is certainly what she'd prefer, and it's probably the only way she could win.

[My2Cents]

I agree with you. Hillary is totally unelectable. The only thing that keeps her name afloat are her own megalomania, and panic in the ranks at the prospect of a McGovernesque wipe out.