While I’m in the mood to make an idiot of myself, why not predict the presidential contest, too? I think that you’d have to be deaf and blind, under the circumstances a blessed state, not to believe that Hillary Clinton will be the nominee of the Democratic Party for the presidency in 2008. She has her hands on the reins of the nearest thing we have at the national level to a good old-fashioned political machine and I really doubt that she’s stoppable. The deck is stacked in her favor and it would take a remarkable confluence of unlikely events for anything else to happen.
I also believe that nominating her would be a tremendous error on the part of Democrats, seizing defeat from the jaws of victory. Her actual credentials for the job are slim, historically candidates with her credentials lose presidential elections, and I can think of no candidate more able to excite the base. Of the other party. However, Sen. Clinton has one enormous advantage (besides an unpopular war and the organization mentioned above). Her opponents are today’s Republican Party and I think that the Republicans may find it irresistible to nominate a candidate that Sen. Clinton is pretty likely to beat: Mitt Romney.
On paper Mitt Romney fits every qualification for a solid regular Republican presidential candidate to a “T”. Unfortunately, he’s rather creepy and has already managed to alienate virtually every sub-constituency in the Republican Party in one way or another.
Clinton vs. Romney could possibly be the most boring, enervated contest in the history of presidential politics.
I would be nonplussed (but not displeased) if John McCain were to secure the nomination. He has made too many enemies within his own party. I don’t think he can do it.
I continue to think that Giuliani is a solid nomination for the Republicans and although he’s shown quite a talent for shooting himself in the foot lately I think he’s great with a microphone. Clinton vs. Giuliani would certainly be a more interesting contest and it’s one that I wouldn’t be surprised if Giuliani could win, even in a year in which Republicans suffer.
I don’t believe that Barack Obama can secure the nomination this time around nor be elected to the presidency even if he were to do but I think whatever happens he’ll win. If he wins, he wins. If he loses, he’ll run for Illinois governor in three years and be back for another, stronger try for the presidency in four or eight years.
I think the Democrat’s strongest candidate is John Edwards. He’s at least as experienced as Sen. Clinton and an advocate of proven skills. As I interpret his career he has made a fortune by persuading appeal. Don’t underestimate that. He’s got the kind of profile that has historically won the presidency and as I see it his populist message is winning points.
It’s too early predict Fred Thompson’s prospects. I think an Edwards vs. Thompson contest would be pretty exciting. Battle of the Populists.
I’ll predict Clinton v. Guilliani. A few months ago I was predicting Clinton v Thompson.
I think Romney’s strategy, spend early and often in the first few states makes sense, but won’t work because (a) the front-loaded primary schedule devalues IA & NH, (b) his opponents have much higher name recognition, (c) his faith is a drag on his support, and (d) he is running out of money. I see Romney winning IA, NH and NV, but a week later Guiliani wins Florida and claims the most delegates. Then a week later, Super Tuesday reveals Romney’s national weakness.
I can’t imagine the scenario in which Clinton loses. It would probably entail the exit of either Edwards or Obama to centralize her opposition and some huge gaffe on her part. Neither seem likely.
I find it interesting how neither party looks beyond their own primaries. I’ve listened closely to all candidates on both sides speak, and I think its pretty simple when you look at the larger picture. Democrats will likely pick Clinton… although she probably has the least charisma of any of the Democratic hopefuls. She is probably the one Democrat who could actually lose the general election to the Republican contender. As for Republicans, they seem to be intent to lose at any cost. I believe the reality is that there is only one Republican candidate who can actually win a general election with some ease. Like him or not, it’s Ron Paul. Even the odds-givers in Vegas have him as the most likely to win the presidency if a Democrat does not. He appeals to many Republicans, Independents, and Democrats. None of the other Republican candidates can pull off anything like that. And yet the party seems to be making every effort to be rid of the guy.
So… why are both parties so intent on shooting themselves in the foot?