Obama '08?

Anon, the middle huh? Well the middle has enabled Bushie's war crimes, torture, warrantless spying and attacks on liberty. The middle means more war as far as I can see. Obama's sabre rattling dont even come from the middle. ElBaradei is my middle as he was in Iraq. He proved America's hysteria over nukes to be hysteria and called their evidence fake and fabricated. And that story is repeating in Iran. Neither Bushie or Obama seem to care about the facts ElBaradei has presented on Iran. They're spreading fear and Americans are buying lies once again. Also I do understand that pols go towards the middle in elections but I have grave doubts that our votes count anymore anyway. But that's another conspiracy theory altogether.

Your source's denial of this is as silly as it is false and should a debate be necessary to prove this to you, a different thread should be utilized. It has little to do with Obama in 08.

'08 reasons why Obama will run for president


Published January 20, 2005

"I am not running for president. I am not running for president in four years. I am not running for president in 2008."

--Barack Obama, Nov. 3, 2004

Oh, but he will.

And here, for your Inauguration Day reading pleasure, are the top 8 reasons why the new junior senator from Illinois will change his mind about '08.

1. He can't be sure when the bloom will fade.

Sure, Obama is a huge celebrity now, an eloquent, charismatic embodiment of the best the Democratic Party can offer. But The Next Big Thing multiplied by Overexposure plus Time equals Yesterday's News.

Momentum like he has now is a powerful commodity, and there's no guarantee--not even much chance--that he'll still have anything like it in 2012.

2. The Democratic field appears weak.

Hillary Clinton has come out on top of every survey I've seen in which pollsters ask Democrats whom they'd like to see atop the ticket in 2008.

But I suspect this is the name-recognition factor at work, and that when primary season rolls around, Democrats will see her as a poisonously polarizing figure who will build a bridge back to the 20th Century and those dreadful Clinton Wars.

Other names mentioned along with Obama include John Edwards, John Kerry, Al Gore, Howard Dean, Wesley Clark, Joseph Biden, Tom Vilsack, Mark Warner, Russ Feingold, Evan Bayh, Harold Ford Jr. and Bill Richardson.

Among average Democrats, Obama's is the only name that doesn't tend to provoke either a yawn, a puzzled look or an anguished cry of, "Please, God, not again!"

3. The Republican field looks weak too.

Vice President Dick Cheney is out of the picture for health reasons, so unless he resigns and someone else takes his place, the 2008 presidential election will be the first since 1952 in which an incumbent president or vice president isn't running.

Former New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani might be formidable in the general election but is too moderate to survive the GOP primary process. Sen. John McCain's time will have passed. Ahn-old can't run because he's foreign-born.

There's talk of Bill Frist, George Pataki, George Allen, Mitt Romney, Bill Owens, Chuck Hagel, Haley Barbour and Jeb Bush, but it doesn't leave Democrats crumpled in despair and resignation.

4. Another shooting-star, hope-for-tomorrow politician is coming up behind him in the Democratic ranks.

Four years ago, Obama was a little-known state senator still licking his wounds after taking a 30-point thrashing in a 2000 congressional primary.

And though we don't know who he is today, four years from now, some currently obscure but brilliant young man or woman will be the talk of Washington and on everybody's short list for the 2012 national ticket.

The brass ring may also still be there for Obama to grab in 2012, but ...

5. A long voting record in Congress has a way of muddying the track for presidential hopefuls.

We're often reminded that, though many have tried, only two men in history--Warren G. Harding, in 1921, and John F. Kennedy, in 1961--have moved directly from the U.S. Senate to the White House.

A big reason seems to be that the legislative process demands significant compromises and yes/no votes on often complicated proposals--all of which opponents then twist, chop into misleading sound bites and throw back in your face during campaigns.

6. The chance might not present itself again until 2016.

If another Democrat wins the presidency in 2008, that person will likely run for re-election in 2012. In 2016 Obama will only be 54 going on 55, but reasons 1, 4 and 5 above suggest he won't be as attractive a candidate.

7. He'll have the money.

Obama is the Midas of fundraisers these days, and his spokesman Robert Gibbs says his campaign fund still (already) has roughly $600,000.

8. He'll want at least to lay the groundwork for future national races.

Win or lose, making friends in Iowa and New Hampshire and testing himself in the early caucus-primary season against tougher challengers than Alan Keyes won't hurt Obama's long-term prospects. His political style is well-suited to small-state races.

Gibbs denied again Wednesday that Obama will run in 2008.

Don't you believe it.

Indeed.

I dunno what I think about #8. I don't think anyone views Kerry or Edwards as having "laid the groundwork for future national races" in 2004. They lost, and they have that loser aura now, and that hurts 'em bad in terms of any future bids. That's probably my biggest concern about '08 vs. '12, is that Obama would try before he was really ready and then, by trying, actually endanger whatever he would've otherwise been able to accomplish.

But the point about maybe not having a chance until '16 is an interesting one.

I dunno what I think about #8. I don't think anyone views Kerry or Edwards as having "laid the groundwork for future national races" in 2004. They lost, and they have that loser aura now, and that hurts 'em bad in terms of any future bids.

Take the House, put Murtha as Speaker, impeach and remove Bush and Cheney.