Posted on 12/28/2006 7:22:02 AM PST by areafiftyone
Every New Year, millions of people around the globe make resolutions to improve themselves. Usually, their extra time at the gym or increased studying doesn’t exactly change the world. But every four years a few people make resolutions that dramatically impact the rest of us. The men and women who decide to run for president of the United States in 2008 will leave an enormous footprint on our country and on each of us whether or not they win control of the White House.
In less than two years, we will elect a new president for our country. But in less than two months a group of folks will begin barnstorming the countryside begging, pleading, and plowing for support. These congressmen, senators, governors, and life-long politicians listed below will use every single day of 2007 to prepare for the election in November 2008.
Potential Democratic Candidates: Retired Gen. Wesley Clark of Arkansas; Sen. Hillary Clinton of New York; Sen. Christopher Dodd of Connecticut; former Sen. John Edwards of North Carolina; former Vice President Al Gore; Sen. John Kerry of Massachusetts; Sen. Barack Obama of Illinois; Gov. Bill Richardson of New Mexico; Gov. Tom Vilsack of Iowa
Potential Republican Candidates: Sen. Sam Brownback of Kansas; former House Speaker Newt Gingrich; former New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani; Sen. Chuck Hagel of Nebraska; Gov. Mike Huckabee of Arkansas; Rep. Duncan Hunter of California; former Gov. Frank Keating of Oklahoma; Sen. John McCain of Arizona; Gov. George Pataki of New York; Gov. Mitt Romney of Massachusetts.
Of these major-party candidates, one democrat and one republican will survive the 2008 primaries. They will vie for the open Oval Office seat left vacant by the departing two-term president, George W. Bush.
Although my guess is as good as yours at this point in the game, I do have some ideas about who will make it to the primaries, and who will become the standard bearers of their parties. For the Democrats, the top three candidates are Hillary Rodham Clinton, Vice President, Al Gore and Barack Obama. All three have solid name recognition, plenty of money (with the exception of Obama), and enough political experience. Although, they each have their problems (Clinton is a left-leaning woman who stirs up vats of animosity. Obama is a bit too young and inexperienced. Gore is steadily reinventing himself.), these three will be the key democratic candidates in 2008, and in the end, will be a photo finish horse race between Clinton and Gore for the nomination. The Democratic winner: Al Gore.
The top three Republican candidates are John McCain, Mitt Romney and Rudy Giuliani. These three guys bring some serious star power to the game, and despite some minor flaws (McCain consistently upsets his conservative base. Romney’s faith and immigration problems have stirred up a lot of fervor. Giuliani’s three marriages and other relationship problems have been well chronicled.), each could become our next president. The Republican winner: John McCain.
So, the way I see it, in November 2008, you will have a choice of John McCain or Al Gore as the next U.S. president.
Giuliani, the former mayor of New York and 2001 Time “Person of the Year” will energize the Republican base and draw substantial support from independents who respected his handling of the 9/11 attack aftermath and liberal social views. He is a pro-choice Catholic, who supports same-sex civil unions, gun control, and embryonic stem-cell research.
Obama, the junior senator from Illinois, is the latest media created sensation, and made popular beyond his wildest dreams. His central stances and non-polarizing rhetoric make him likable to democrats, independents and conservatives. Time magazine named him one of the “World’s Most Influential People” for his work in America and around the globe. Obama did not have to cast a vote for the Iraq War (he was not yet elected) so the war cannot weigh him down. He opposes gay marriage (but voted against a constitutional ban), is pro-choice, for stem-cell research funding, supportive of affirmative action, and he opposes the death penalty.
Clinton, the former first lady and wife of a former president, has more money and resources than all the Democratic candidates combined. Her name recognition is global and she’s shown her willingness to appeal to conservatives and defend her liberal base as necessary. Though her negatives are in the high 40’s she stands the best chance of any woman in American history of becoming its first female president. With the love affair her liberal base and mainstream media is having with her, this should be an interesting presidential cycle.
Gore is the sleeper in this race. He has been on point with his positions of global warming and gaining many admirers. Many still feel that the 2000 election was taken from him and therefore deserves a credible shot at another chance. Gore has the money contacts and organizations now in place to make a serious bid for the White House.
The 2008 U.S. presidential election will be influenced by more than these three men and the campaigns they wage. For example, if there is a lack of progress in Iraq and Afghanistan, Americans may be looking for a Democratic president no matter whom it is. If the economy is down and the Democratic-led Congress has yet to have a positive impact, the country may look for Republican leadership in the White House once again. The point is; the political climate in the summer and spring of 2008 might choose our president for us.
However, assuming nothing drastic occurs, I will cast my vote for Rudy Giuliani. But I believe the Democratic charge will not let up and Barack Obama will be our 44th president. Regardless of my predictions, the latest polls, or the political climate, just keep your eye on all these people because their 2007 New Year’s resolutions are sure to impact all of our lives.
Hillary vs. Romney
Romney carries NH & Michigan and wins comfortably.
Ok, here goes:
It all hinges on whether Iraq will still be on the front pages when the race gets going in earnest in January 2008. And that, IMO, will turn on when Saddam actually swings.
If Saddam is sent to his dirt nap in the next 30 days without any further legal wrangling, the situation in Iraq will change drastically. There may be a slight uptick in violence immediately following Saddam's execution, but IMHO it will soon be evident that the animating force behind much of the Sunni insurgency will be gone. The Iraqi government will then gain a great deal of legitimacy among the Sunni population, and if they can also deal effectively with the Shiite militias, the security problems currently plaguing the country will dramatically decrease over the next year. That will allow a significant drawdown of US forces, and a concurrent drop in casualties, which should push Iraq off the front pages and the network newscasts. That should bode well for Republicans, as GWB's Iraq policy will finally be vindicated.
So, to make a long story short:
Saddam swings, Giuliani wins. Saddam lives, and we get President Algore.
Would someone please tell me the difference in any of them with the exception of Gingrich?
Irag will be another Bosnia by then.
Don't underestimate your enemy. Obama, remember, was Editor-in-Chief of the Harvard Law Review. I doubt seriously that he's an idiot.
God, please save this once-proud nation.
I like Armstrong, but Al Gore as the Dem Nominee? No way.
I was thinking that myself. Where these two separate columns by two separate authors?
If Armstrong is right, I'll hold my nose and vote for McLame. But the primary season will NOT see me supporting him.
Me too!
Wesley Clark? I don't think so.
Hunter is my hope as well.
I think he is wrong about Gore, the Dems may be crazy but they aren't that stupid. The Breck Girl would have a better shot.
I think it's an easy Repub win UNLESS they pick a RINO in which case, the voters might prefer a real liberal over a fake conservative.
jw
Duncan Hunter has my vote!!
We are in deep doo doo.
He's a flash in the media pan and not a serious candidate............not that the RATS have a serious candidate......
First, we're talking about democratic candidates. None of them are good.
The question is this: "Of those on the list of democrats, who would be best for the nation, given that we don't want the dems to win, but IF one of them does?"
My answer is still Clark.
I never hired a man who responded to an offer by saying that he had to ask his wife.
And a Happy New Year to you as well, Christian!
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.