Don't say I didn't warn you.
Posted on 11/03/2004 12:29:48 PM PST by Michael Goldsberry
WASHINGTON (AFP) - Scarred from their second defeat at the hands of George W. Bush, the Democratic party will be searching for names who can take on the Republicans in four years. And an obvious one is Clinton.
Many Democrats and experts believe that if Senator John Kerry (news - web sites) had the same charisma as ex-president Bill Clinton (news - web sites) he would have easily taken revenge this week for Bush's controversial defeat of Al Gore (news - web sites) in 2000.
But Hillary Clinton (news - web sites) is the most quoted name for the next contender.
University of Virginia political scientist Larry Sabato believes there are several reasons why Kerry lost Tuesday's vote.
"One, he is too liberal, well to the left of the American mainstream on the critical social and cultural issues such as abortion, gay rights and gun control."
More important for Sabato was personality.
"John Kerry is no Bill Clinton. There is very little warmth there, and people didn't warm to him. A moderate Democratic candidate with personal warmth would have defeated George W. Bush easily."
The new defeat is certain to lead to some painful soul-searching within the Democratic party.
After Bill Clinton's victory in 1992 and re-election in 1996, his vice-president Al Gore was narrowly defeated by Bush in 2000 even though he won the popular vote.
The Democrats were hit hard in 2002 mid-term elections, losing control of the Senate and seeing the Republicans extend their advantage in House of Representatives.
Bush's new victory left a bitter taste for many Democrats who look back to the Clinton years with affection even though the ex-president divided the country with many of his actions.
Bill Clinton electrified a crowd of tens of thousands when he returned from a quadruple heart by-pass to appear at a rally with Kerry eight days before the vote.
Though thinner, Clinton was given rapturous applause after castigating the Bush administration and telling adoring fans "my fellow Americans, we can do better."
Clinton remains wildly popular with core Democratic voters, especially black Americans, a voting bloc Kerry was never able to touch in the same way.
Kerry has been criticized as a one-dimensional campaigner compared to Clinton.
Now Hillary Clinton, the senator for New York state, is likely to dominate the Democratic party debate while she makes up her mind whether to stand.
"Hillary Clinton is the natural heir apparent" of Bill, according to Allan Lichtman, a political science professor at the American University in Washington.
Wildly popular among Democratic loyalists and able to raise vast amounts of campaign funds, Hillary Clinton has "worked very, very hard not to play into a caricature of herself," according to a Democratic party strategist who asked not to be named.
She is however the Democrat that hard-core Republicans most love to hate.
"The Republicans will very happily reverse to a caricature, and she becomes a lot less appealing when she puts herself forward" as a candidate, the strategist said.
So there is an outside chance that the Democratic party's 2008 presidential candidate is a long shot bet.
Barack Obama, a 43-year-old rising star in the party who became the lone black American senator in Tuesday's election, is talked about as a possible future candidate.
The Democrats "need only nominate a moderate candidate with warmth," said Sabato, pointing to figures like telegenic Indiana Senator Evan Bayh.
2008 will be Hitlery's try for the WH and perhaps Puce Pelosi. If that occurs, I bet Liddy Dole will try in 2008 too.
One Democrat that was happy about yesterday. It's not too early to start thinking about 2008-you know her shrillness is.
If the Democrats "need only nominate a moderate candidate with warmth" then why in the world would they look to Hitlery in 2008? She never even met either concept.
I don't know about presidental material, but I can see her qualification as the dem's VP candidate growing on her lip.
New Clinton
Let's see never got 50% of the vote despite being an incumbent with no war and the MSM kisssin his butt and covering for his scandals
Cost the dems the house and senate in 94
All the candidates he campaigns for loses
Yeah they need a new Clinton
Any party with a first term Senator as leader hasn't much of a lineup, let alone a bench.
A thin line separates Martha and Hillary.
Folks, I do not vote for a Senator of any party.
Regan said "Washington isn't the solution, it's the problem".
I want GWB's ownership society.
PLEASE, at the most just one hole.
My lunch is now all over my keyboard
He is not electable outside Democratic strongholds. Not even close.
If Hillary doesn't change her Pro-Choice tune (Yeah, Right! Like THAT Will Happen) She'll be massacred in 2008.
Which realllllly wouldn't be a Bad Thing!
Jack.
Don't say I didn't warn you.
THIS WAS AN AWESOME YEAR!!! The significance of the victories conservatives scored this election cycle can't be overestimated.
And don't forget Terry McAwful - the Clintons' gift that keeps on giving! (laughing)
If she needs to, she'll reinvent herself whether the Michael Moore Left likes it or it not and if they stand in the way, they'll be run over.
NOOOOOO NOT THAT!!!
Now why in the 'H' did you have to go and do that?
"Get thee hence Satan!"
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.