I know you'll be as shocked as I was to learn that Hillary Clinton is running for president. But I don't think that the Slick Grope Vets For Truth will be deployed before she actually gets the nomination.

I think it unlikely that Mrs. Clinton will get the nomination. Everyone's heard of her, and we've largely made up our minds about her. So I think her numbers can only move in one direction.

The second problem is that she supported the war on and continuing occupation of Iraq. Regardless of how you feel about that subject, I don't see that as being of any appeal at all to the Democratic primary voter. Contrast this with, say Edwards' position, who supported the war at one time but now explicitly disavows his previous support - a refreshing "I was wrong" from a politician.

I think it unlikely that Mrs. Clinton will get the nomination. Everyone's heard of her, and we've largely made up our minds about her. So I think her numbers can only move in one direction.

The second problem is that she supported the war on and continuing occupation of Iraq. Regardless of how you feel about that subject, I don't see that as being of any appeal at all to the Democratic primary voter. Contrast this with, say Edwards' position, who supported the war at one time but now explicitly disavows his previous support - a refreshing "I was wrong" from a politician.

And since I get to vote twice, it seems.. Edwards' chances are improved.

Anyone here want to comment on Sam Brownbacks chances ? Now there's a different candidate.

Brownback is outspokenly pro-life, which will endear him with the religious elements of the base but could hurt him with moderates and libertarians (small-l), depending on just how he presents it and how much it is focused on.

On the other hand, he is signing on to the Senate Democrats' resolution opposing the "surge", which may appeal to moderates and independents tired of the war but which can easily be played (by primary challengers in particular) as a betrayal of Bush or being "wobbly" on Iraq/the GWOT, which will turn off much of the base. (Even if some in the base are growing tired of Iraq and even Bush himself, Brownback's support for the resolution may still come across as a betrayal, and one motivated less by principal than by opportunism and positioning.)

I agree with Dick Morris in as much as the Clinton machine will get her as far as the nomination.

Obama is a blessing to her as he pulls some of the 'not Hillary' votes.

As for Edwards, he decided to not run again for senate well before the 04 race. Word fom politico friends in NC was he was going to lose if he ran again. I don't think he will stand up to hard scrutny.

Don't confuse Senator Clinton's chances of getting the nomination with her chances of becoming president. I believe the TradeSports odds have her a little over 50% chance to lead the Democrat ticket. And if she ends up facing the Republican favorite, Senator McCain, then I think her odds improve. IMHO one of her bigger weaknesses is her lack of experience running a large organization. McCain doesn't have that experience either.

Heard it. I can't believe that "Basic Bargain" did well in focus group. Most people already know the government provides the services of the lowest bidder and yet the costs of basic items turn out to be more expensive.

Obamma cant seriously think that he can get the nomination. I believe that Hillery will get the nom, and Probably get Obamma as her veep.

And Bill Richardson has just announced his decision to run.
Bill's well liked here (I voted for him) but he's got as much chance as a snowball in a cyclotron.

Edwards' chances are improved.

Edwards is the Wesley Crusher of the 2008 race.

And if she ends up facing the Republican favorite, Senator McCain

McCain might get four votes from conservatives. The McCain-Feingold and "Gang of 14" outrages alone make him unelectable, unless Democrats vote in the GOP primaries in droves.

Indeed. McCain is the "Republican favorite" of the drive-by media -- which doesn't exactly get him closer to the GOP nomination.