I agree with most of your assessment, but as a supporter of Edwards in the primaries in 04, I came away unimpressed during the general. I think his time is already past.

I think Kerry would be a disaster, but I am intrigued by the return of Gore. Jack, if Gore was the only candidate who could stop Hillary, would you change your tune about his candidacy?

No. They're both losers.

Have you read Frank Luntz's focus group assessments of the D candidates?

John McCain vs. Mark Warner.

Joe Biden will secure the nomination

Gore, as a person AND as a politician, has impressed me since 2000. He got a raw deal from the media during the campaign, and also suffered from some self-inflicted wounds. I don't know if he can pull of another nomination, but I'd probably vote for him. Not so for Kerry--he lost a race he should have won. I think the media is thirsty for a Hillary-McCain race in 08, so I worry that she'll coast to the nomination without anyone bothering to ask some basic questions--like "what do you believe?" and stuff like that.

Schweitzer!

Let's start the groundswell here.

It's McCain for the GOP, by a longshot IMO. He's got the name recognition, enough perceived distance from Dumb'n'Mean, and tons of moderates still think he's... well, moderate. Take a look at what he's been doing lately. It's the beginning of a series of negotiations with the christian right.

I still have some hope for JohnJohn Edwards. He's got tricks in him I don't think we got to see last time in the shadow of Herman Munster.

Feingold in '08... I think a Gore/Feingold ticket is do-able too.

McCain won't make it past the first primary. The GOP base hates him. Expect George Allen to emerge as the front runner after his Senate re-election this November. He will run with Condi Rice as his VP.

On the democrat side, Hillary-Richardson will be the ticket, unless the whole amnesty for illegals thing blows over, in which case it will be Hillary-Obama. Gotta have the minority du jour on the ticket.

If Obama is on any ticket (which I don't think he will), he'd get out the Dem's base more than Hillary would. If anyone thinks McCain will be the GOP's dude, do the following:

Go to Google.com and type in the following, "McCain 2000 South Carolina black baby". That's why he won't win.

No way Condi does anything beyond '08. She will go back to Stanford and not be liked before she left in '02. I know some Stanford folk who just couldn't stand her and they are the most calm and rational folks I know.

My fello Dems... Please, PLEASE say no to Hillary. We don't need GOP-lite. We don't need consultant-suppressed version that doesn't speak truth to power, even when the elephant is in the room. God forbid she choose another milktoast Dem like Lieberman for a running mate. Choose Dean, Gore, Feingold, Clark, Warner, whatever, fine. Can you hear Rove salivating? Hillary is revered just slightly more than Clarence Darrow and Charles Darwin in the South.

Schweitzer! Let's start the groundswell here.

Groundswell has been underway for over a year.

since the govenator can't do it, what about Bruce Willis?

maybe, just maybe, they can modify the constitution to make it a shared office and Brangelina could do double duty with their 19 adopted kids (watch out, they want to adopt your child next.)

bud clark anyone?

Maybe it's just me, but I am counting more and more liberal smart friends who are packing it in, picking up their young families and moving overseas to live elsewhere, giving up their citizenship even in some cases, because they don't feel this country is a place to teach their family the values they remember growing up with. The latest couple I know, he was the mayor of a city for last decade or so and decided this country isn't worth paying taxes to.

I still love my country; I willingly and happily pay taxes here; but it's getting harder to justify this love daily.

Whoever decides to run for President or any other office would behoove themselves by first acknowledging that this country has run off many a-track; I, for one American, don't recognize the place where I grew up. The greed, the religious extremism, the fashionista, the warring; I look around Portland on a daily basis and think "where the hell do I live?" and lately that thought has been seconded by "...and why do I live here?"

I am counting more and more liberal smart friends who are packing it in

Great. That makes more opportunities for those who are willing to give up everything to come here.

Hillary vs. McCain. What McCain will lose in R support he will gain in D crossover.

When was the last time either party put "the minority du jour" on the ticket? Are you counting Ferraro? Okay, so that's one. Kennedy? Two. Oh, Lieberman, you say?

Please. Unless Lloyd Bentsen was secretly half Chicano? I supposed you could say Dick Cheney is emotionally handicapped?

You want to know why everyone posits that Hillary is the Dem candidate to beat? Name recognition. Yikes.

Hillary is the candidate for the lazy, casual voter. Any Dem who bothers to read or pay attention to federal politics knows she has triangulated and played it safe to gain favor with Republicans. Amercia is so sick of the GOP, she doesn't even need their blessing anymore. The country will vote in a dyed in blue Dem without their help, but she doesn't see it.

All these comments and no one says anything about Kitzhaber. The Archimedes project, which he's billing as a state-by-state way to get national health care reform, provides a perfect launching pad for a presidential bid. Sure he's a long shot, but given the dissatisfaction with current choices (Hilary? Please.), it's not an impossibility and wouldn't be the first time a small state governor catches fire. Kitz has a folksy charm that would play well to middle America, and he's a middle-of-the-road Democrat.

Keep your eyes on his travel schedule -- I won't be surprised to see some "health care reform" speeches in Iowa and New Hampshire. If nothing else, strategically Kitz may use a bid to get publicity for the Archimedes movement.

Well, on the one hand, with Hillary, you get Bill. Then again, on the other hand, with Hillary, you get Bill.
What the heck, maybe they deserve another chance to get it right on health care, gays in the military, global warming, etc.
On triangulation: we take it for granted that the R's lie to broaden their appeal and get elected. Why should we accept it from them, and not from the D's?

Allan,

Most of us who object to it from Hillary hardly accept it from Republicans.

You know we are considered the lonny left and so on:-)

If the Clinton's idea of getting it 'right' on Healthcare includes socialized medicine ala Canada, then they're irrefutably wrong.

I love this quote I saw on the NW republican blog:

"There are three key components to health care: Affordability, Ease of Access, and Quality of Care. As a consumer, you can only have two."

Eric,
But we've accepted it -- these liars are running our government! I'm desperate to the point of being willing to take different liars. Chris,
"Irrefutably wrong"? I don't think so. Cheaper, with better outcomes up there. All you need is a neighboring country to the south with a crazy system like ours and, suddenly, you've got a threefer.

Guilliani for the Republicans. Campaign theme:
" He stood tall on 9/11" and before that he cleaned up crime in New York, or so they say.
Anyhow that be were my money goes.
Didn't say I approve of him though.
M.

Yep, I'll also put money on Giuliani.

And I wouildn't be so quick to dismiss Gore, either. He's unthawed a lot, learned from his mistakes, and gotten out from the shadow of Clinton. What, you don't believe in second chances, Jack?

The simple fact that Hillary supposedly hates Gore makes me love him that much more...

Ah, the old "Canada's Health Care...long waits..." chesnut. The thing is, there are many ways to implement universal health care, and every country presents a different set of factors and complexities. The U.S. would have to figure out a way to deal with the countless strata of middlemen and their countless layers of profit built into health care costs.

As taxpayers and voters, if we really WANT universal health care, it can be done. If we want it without having to pay more in taxes, it can be done (hint: Once we have a prez who understands that terrorists can't be fought with expensive Defense pork projects, we can eliminate just a slice of that pie and pay for many necessary programs).

My insurance from my last employer cost $450 per pay period, we each shared half the cost. Our pay periods were two weeks long... so, $900 per month? It was a company with over 60 employees. I know everyone pays different amounts, but are you happy with the status quo? I think it's sh*t, and I hope most Americans are fed up too.

Maybe we can't wrap our minds around the perfect solution now, but we can at least agree something needs to be done. We're being nickel and dimed and our incomes aren't rising fast enough to keep up.

Health care is my number one issue in '08. We CAN do something about our own failing healthcare system.

Maybe that's why I'd totally vote for Kitzhaber.

Except for the opportunity to do something about health care, I'd think the Dems might prefer to take a pass in 2008: Iraq, deficits, expiring tax cuts, oil prices and supplies -- it's all toxic.

My prediction: Clinton beats Allen (proving the backers of the Republican politicians are not done with "Dumb'n'Mean") despite the massive vote fraud in Allen's favor. Republican voters will begin to jump on the Verifiable Elections bandwagon much to the dismay of certain Republican politicians. Clinton's presidency will begin rocky but will gain support by stopping the financial hemorrhaging of the country and withdrawing some soldiers from Iraq.

Of course, I will refuse to vote for candidates of either of these corrupt parties and will support another candidate.

Paul Allen's running next time?

I'm sorry, but John Edwards is a joke. While arguing a case in court, he actually claimed to be channeling the spirit of a girl with cerebral palsy named Jennifer Campbell.

Edwards' trial summaries "routinely went beyond a recitation of his case to a heart-wrenching plea to jurors to listen to the unspoken voices of injured children," according to a comprehensive analysis of Edwards' legal career by The Boston Globe in 2003.

The Globe cited an example of Edwards' oratorical skills from a medical malpractice trial in 1985. Edwards had alleged that a doctor and a hospital had been responsible for the cerebral palsy afflicting then-five-year-old Jennifer Campbell.

'I have to tell you right now -- I didn't plan to talk about this -- right now I feel her (Jennifer), I feel her presence,' Edwards told the jury according to court records. "[Jennifer's] inside me and she's talking to you ... And this is what she says to you. She says, 'I don't ask for your pity. What I ask for is your strength. And I don't ask for your sympathy, but I do ask for your courage.'"

Edwards' emotional plea worked. Jennifer Campbell's family won a record jury verdict of $6.5 million against the hospital where the girl was born -- a judgment reduced later to $2.75 million on appeal. Edwards also settled with Jennifer's obstetrician for $1.5 million

Source: CNS news

We should be looking to him to try and fix our high health care costs? Lawyers like him are part of the problem, not the solution.

The man is nothing more than an ethically challenged lawyer (pardon the redundancy), and I still cannot believe that he was a serious presidential candidate for the Democratic Party. He belongs on Coast-to-Coast AM, not in the White House.