From Instapundit, we get this USA Today article. 53% if those polled said that they are likely to vote for Hillary Clinton if she runs for the presidency in 2008.
Only if she were running against The Devil Himself.
Naah, couldn't do it, even then. I'd have to sit that one out, sharpening knives and reloading ammo to be cached.
The one thing that gives me hope is that generally, those who start a run for the presidency early are not long in the race. Frontrunners just don't often do that well over the long haul. The 29% who were "very likely" to vote for her represent the base of her support, those Democrats who would vote the straight party ticket regardless.
The President that will be elected in 2008 is likely a person who is still under the radar. It seems to me that both parties need to do some more work. I know for a fact that in Louisiana we generally vote for the person rather than the party. Here in Louisiana, we have open primaries which lead to some fairly bizarre results. We are, after all, the state that gave you the race between David Duke and Edwin Edwards.
3 comments:
"The President that will be elected in 2008 is likely a person who is still under the radar."
Couldn't agree more.
But whom is my question? Which governors are in a position to make a serious run but have not started the whisper campaign to sideline donors from donating to potential rivals and to keep top campaign talent from making a committment as of yet?
Bush started to make it known that he wanted to run by early '99, 8 of the 9 Dems were in running mode by January 2003, and most were in informal running mode several months before that, and the top traditional candidates (Kerry, Gephardt, Lieberman) had laid their groundwork in early 2002. Dean was a surprise candidate in the fall of 2002 and Clark was making rumbles by winter 2003 --- so we should start to see the rumbles from any likely candidates pretty damn soon.
Wouldn't you love to see Shrillary running against a Cheney/Rice ticket?
Post a Comment