Who do you THINK WILL WIN the Democratic Nomination?

[© tweed]

I did this back in May.  Warner edged out Clinton

[Frodo]

Russ Feingold, especially when you consider the deteriorating situation in Iraq and continued deaths of American troops, as well as the example that Ned Lamont set for the antiwar movement by ousting Joe Lieberman. 

[TomC]

Al Gore

[ian]

Feingold, I'm pretty sure.

[WalterMitty]

if al gore runs, he will win the nomination easily.

[Michael Z]

Al Gore, if he runs (and I hope he will). Otherwise, Warner or Bayh.

[nini2287]

Mark Warner

[Joe Biden 2020]

As much I cringe at the thought, Russ Feingold.

[Nym90]

Warner. Democrats are going to want electability above all else after 8 years out of the White House.

[jerusalemcar5]

I said it before, I'll say it again, Hillary Rodham Clinton will not seek and most certainly will not win the Demcoratic nomination.  That said, I see a Warner/Feingold ticket emerging, though I'd favor a Feingold/Warner ticket.

[Fmr President & Senator Polnut]

I would love Feingold to get the nom he's my #4 choice right now - but I think the bosses won't have the cajones to nominate someone who could isolate voters.

I think if Gore runs it will be like Nixon in 1968 - my bet is Gore will either nominate early or very late... or not at all. The reasoning being

Early: The democrats need Unity - obviously the reasoning behind a very front-loaded primary season, if Gore nominates around August/September 2007 - then frankly I think many possible candidate will be very hesitant to enter the race against someone who will get the base incredibly energised.

Late: The primaries become brutal and bitching and squabbles continue on until there is no clear winner and there are about 3 candidates remaining in say... April. Gore is drafted and steps in as a unity candidate.

Not at all: The polls may not show good things. Gore will run if he thinks he can win the general election (since I think he knows he will get the dem nom if he really wants it) - but if he thinks the environment (the political one) is not right for him - he'll step out. But should the Dem win (why on EARTH is everyone assuming that the Reps will get the WH back? The political tide is turning - and the Dems better realise that the American people are rejecting the Bush platforms, and are looking for ALTERNATIVES - not the Republican-lites they have been since 9/11.) He'll get a very important position in the next Dem admin... look for Sec of State

[skybridge]

Since they're both nominated, I think the primaries between Hillary and Gore would be interesting--though I'd give Gore the edge. Anyway, I voted Feingold

[minionofmidas]

Some Senator without working class appeal again, I fear.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

Some Senator without working class appeal again, I fear.

^^^

I do hope not though...

[afleitch]

Warner; he'll do a Kerry, but with slightly more appeal. Feingold I can see being an early front runner; we need to see how he performs in the 06-08 political season.

[Joe Biden 2020]

I would love Feingold to get the nom he's my #4 choice right now - but I think the bosses won't have the cajones to nominate someone who could isolate voters.

I think if Gore runs it will be like Nixon in 1968 - my bet is Gore will either nominate early or very late... or not at all. The reasoning being

Early: The democrats need Unity - obviously the reasoning behind a very front-loaded primary season, if Gore nominates around August/September 2007 - then frankly I think many possible candidate will be very hesitant to enter the race against someone who will get the base incredibly energised.

Late: The primaries become brutal and bitching and squabbles continue on until there is no clear winner and there are about 3 candidates remaining in say... April. Gore is drafted and steps in as a unity candidate.

Not at all: The polls may not show good things. Gore will run if he thinks he can win the general election (since I think he knows he will get the dem nom if he really wants it) - but if he thinks the environment (the political one) is not right for him - he'll step out. But should the Dem win (why on EARTH is everyone assuming that the Reps will get the WH back? The political tide is turning - and the Dems better realise that the American people are rejecting the Bush platforms, and are looking for ALTERNATIVES - not the Republican-lites they have been since 9/11.) He'll get a very important position in the next Dem admin... look for Sec of State

An endorsement by Al Gore doesn't mean anything, just ask Howard Dean.

I give Gore a 45% chance of running.  I base that on he didn't run in 2004 because he didn't want to put the country through a sequel.  Now that Bush is leaving office, he might seize the opportunity again.  If he runs he will be a late entrance, like Wesley Clark in 2004, after he sees who he will be up against.  Plus, I think Gore is happy being a passionate orator.

If he does run and win in 2008, it would mean the 1992 and 2000 elections would have filtered its effects all the way through at least 2012 and maybe 2016.

One thing Gore has against him is the same thing Hillary has against her, its called the Bill effect.  Though, its more pronounced on Hillary, Gore is still known as Clinton's Vice President, partly why he ended up not winning the White House in 2000.  In November 2000, Bush, except for being the son of a former President, was fresh blood in Washington.  In 2008, America is going to want completely fresh blood and that means no Bushes, no Cheneys, no Clintons, and no Gores.

[CPT MikeyMike]

if al gore runs, he will win the nomination easily.

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

[Lincoln Republican]

Mark Warner.

Brings a fresh face and maybe new ideas and new politics to the table.

He is a "New" Democrat, and that may be his appeal.

[© tweed]

Some Senator without working class appeal again, I fear.

Biden?  Kerry again?  I don't see who that could possibly be.

I think the the candidate that the progressive left backs will win.  That's either Al Gore or Russ Feingold.  As of now, I don't see Gore running, so Feingold.

[WalterMitty]

Some Senator without working class appeal again, I fear.

Biden?  Kerry again?  I don't see who that could possibly be.

I think the the candidate that the progressive left backs will win.  That's either Al Gore or Russ Feingold.  As of now, I don't see Gore running, so Feingold.

so gore isnt a dlc 'new democrat' anymore?

[Boris]

Some Senator without working class appeal again, I fear.

Biden?  Kerry again?  I don't see who that could possibly be.

I think the the candidate that the progressive left backs will win.  That's either Al Gore or Russ Feingold.  As of now, I don't see Gore running, so Feingold.

so gore isnt a dlc 'new democrat' anymore?

Most people don't see him as one, and he's moved considerably to the left after leaving the Vice Presidency. I'd imagine that if he were to run, he'd move back to the center (after the nomination phase) and act like his 1992 self, with a little more energy and passion.

[auburntiger]

Warner probably, though it depends how worse the situation in Iraq gets. A McCain vs. Warner race would be very intersting and probably very close in the general.

If the Iraq war is THE issue in the '08 campaign season, yall might nominate Feingold, who woud stir alot of anti-Iraq war support.

Either Warner or Feingold.

[Tender Branson]

Well, ask me that before the primaries, when all candidates are visible. For now i can say it´s Hillary because of the base in Iowa, NV and NH but that can all change.

[Dr. Cynic]

Well, if you ask me, I think a Hillary candidacy would be the kiss of automatic defeat in 2008.

Now, it is going to probably go to Mark Warner, and the Veep slot will probably go to Russ Feingold.

[Boris]

Hopefully Mark Warner, although at this point, 2008 is looking like a McCain vs. Clinton matchup.