So families have claimed one more potential Presidential candidate: Mark Warner. Before him, it was Colin Powell. Why can't families claim people who shouldn't be running in the first place - like John Kerry, George Allen, or George W. Bush? And where was Ralph Nader's family when he was scratching and clawing for 2% of the vote that probably belonged to Gore?
I don't know a whole lot about Warner, but what I do know suggests I would have liked hearing him make his case for 2008. Now it looks like we are left with Hillary and maybe a Gore and / or Kerry retread. Perfect. Granted, there are bound to be others; like Harry Reid who might grace us with his vague but poll-tested policies, or Joe Biden who would be a great candidate as long as he writes his own speeches. Is it too much to hope that Bill Nelson will rise above the crowded field?
By the way - with all the talk about Hillary, I think it says something about our political system and how big name recognition is when there is every possibility that four presidents in a row could be from only two families.
You don't honestly think Hillary could win in 2008 do you?
ReplyDeleteI think fundraising is huge in primaries, especially crowded fields. Looking back on the Republican primary in 2000, Bush had a huge financial advantage from the beginning because he was considered the frontrunner and everyone gave to him. Granted, in 2000, there weren't a lot of other great candidates in the GOP, but I could make the same argument looking to 2008 for the dems.
ReplyDeleteI have heard the situation is similar with Hillary. She might start at such a huge advantage that others will not be able to compete.