Obama in the race!

I want him to be Hill's VP. they wont' win, but it'll be fuckin' awesome

i'd rather have bloomberg in 2008...

Carnivore wrote: No way. Obama #1 on the ticket. He totally won my vote in 2004.

I'm big on Obama, but his lack of experience is a key factor. And if he became a serious contender I fear instances of race-baiting will rise to the surface that would make good ole (Bill)Clinton-bashing seem like a clambake.
Hillary is probably EVEN MORE of a polarizing candidate than her hubby. I seriously think hordes of otherwise undecided voters would come out of the woodwork just to vote against her. Plus, she's just not that convincing for me to take seriously as a presidential candidate.
I have plenty of reasons not to vote for Bloomberg, but my being a smoker is more than enough to guarantee I never will. His chances on the national level? Slightly less than Giuliani's. (How the latter thinks that the GOP will ever nominate a pro-gay, pro choice Catholic form NYC is beyond me. He could perhaps be on McCain's ticket as VP, though.)
escap may be kidding but if Arnold's paperwork is in shape--meaning a foreign-born candidate was able to run for President--I wouldn't be surprised to see the flip side: a Schwarzenegger/Bloomberg ticket. (As the largest single-donor the GOP has--$7 million and rising--Bloomberg's gonna get somethin' from his peeps in '08.)

Laugh at me if you want, but the only real chance for the Dems to win back the White House is...Al Gore.

A stiff vice president campaigns on his administration's legacy of unprecedented prosperity. Looks terrible on TV. Bows out, following a disputed vote count. Then, two terms later, with no incumbent in the race, he re-enters the fray. Promises to change the course of a disastrous war founded on lies. And charges to victory. I'm referring, of course, to the 1968 campaign of Richard Milhous Nixon. But four decades later, history has a chance to repeat itself for Albert Arnold Gore.
If the Democrats were going to sit down and construct the perfect candidate for 2008, they'd be hard-pressed to improve on Gore. Unlike Hillary Clinton, he has no controversial vote on Iraq to defend. Unlike Barack Obama and John Edwards, he has extensive experience in both the Senate and the White House. He has put aside his wooden, policy-wonk demeanor to emerge as the Bush administration's most eloquent critic. And thanks to 'An Inconvenient Truth', Gore is not only the most impassioned leader on the most urgent crisis facing the planet, he's also a Hollywood celebrity, the star of the third-highest-grossing documentary of all time.
"He's perceived very differently now than he was six years ago," says Frank Luntz, the Republican consultant who advised George W. Bush to dispute global warming during the 2000 and 2004 elections. "He's an icon. Imagine that: Al Gore, Mr. Straight and Narrow, Mr. Dull on Wheels -- now he's culturally cool."
Indeed, Gore is unique among the increasingly crowded field of Democratic contenders. He has the buzz to beat Obama, the substance to supplant Hillary, and enough stature to enter the race late in the game and still raise the millions needed to mount a successful campaign. "Very few people who run for president can just step in when they want, with a superstar, titanic presence," says James Carville, the dean of Democratic strategists. "But Gore clearly is one of those. He's going to run, and he's going to be formidable. If he didn't run, I'd be shocked."
http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/story/13248532/why_gore_should_run__and_how_he_can_win/print

escap wrote: [quote=MichaelKeys]
Laugh at me if you want, but the only real chance for the Dems to win back the White House is...Al Gore.

I disagree. In fact, I think the Dems could send Dan Goldstein into the race and he would win. With Bush staying true to form and shedding support by the day, nothing but horrendous scenarios ahead for Iraq, and no GOP candidate who can simultaneously excite the conservative base and appeal to moderates, I predict a landslide victory by the Democrats. But, of course, we'll see.
Good point, escap. But, I think McCain's got a fighting chance and if there's at least of a sliver of a see-I-told-you-so scenario regarding Iraq--highly unliquely, but still--it would definitely solidify his standing a bit more with the voters.
And you couldn't help take another swipe at poor Dan, huh?

Oh, and don't forget Spitzer. If the Dems lose in 2008, he may well be our president in 2012. You know he's got his eye on it already.

It's all too early to predict
Obama was a charmer on 60 Minutes
The train left the station too long ago for Al G
[*there's* plenty of Inconvenient Truth]
John Edwards is going to sweep in, in a few months
I have nothing to say about HRC

pitu wrote: It's all too early to predict
Obama was a charmer on 60 Minutes
The train left the station too long ago for Al G
[*there's* plenty of Inconvenient Truth]
John Edwards is going to sweep in, in a few months
I have nothing to say about HRC

o wait, one more
lest we forget
An Unreasonable Man

(O Ralph)

p.s.
in the midwest, people - Republican people - were asking me about Rudy
I can't see it, but there you are. Them's curious.

p.p.s.
I'll wager a Growler against Bloomie making it on to the Repub ticket, billions not withstanding.
a. I don't think he wants it
b. he's Jewish (and is comfortable with that, unlike say George Allen)

Q is correct - Rudy has a LOT of ghosts in his closet. He won't survive the scrutiny of his private life.

um, that is a huge report. Care to summarize?

ok, will go back and look. The lack of paragraphs turned me off from reading it.

Plus, the report is from 1993. He's made a lot of enemies since then

Don't discount Rudy yet. Our present Pres. had many a skeleton. In between his coke habits. his DWI's and his questionable service record, he beat them all. Rudy's marrying his cousin and his many divorce looks very tame.

that's bernard, not donald...

no worries.

As for Rudy v. Baby Bush - Rudy doesn't come from TX oil money and generations of political connections and payoffs.

I agree. Like him or not, Rudy will make a strong GOP candidate. And frankly, from the Dem standpoint, if we must tolerate another Republican pres, we could do worse than him. As a New Yorker, I'm personally just happy that two New Yorkers are among the contenders--this city and the northeast in general are constantly having to take a backseat to the south and midwest in presidential elections, and are constantly getting shafted. A little representation for us would be fantastic.