2nd in an occaisional series
Part I: Al Gore for President -- 2008
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2005/5/16/194421/475
As we all know, John Kerry narrowly lost his bid for the presidency in 2004, losing 51% to 48 %. While the election did not go to the Supreme Court, it was gut-wrenching nonetheless. For the 2nd time in a row, a razor-thin close election did not go our way.
When looking back at the 2004 election, there were a number obstacles that Kerry faced. First, the presence of 9/11 still loomed large. Second, although the execution of the war in Iraq was a terrible, Bush was still a wartime president. And wartime presidents aren't easy to defeat. Finally, in 2002-2003, our chances of victory appeared slim. With all of these considerations, Kerry's performance could be considered very credible and positive.
Is this a positive spin? Yes. Still, the above facts can't be denied.
John Kerry has kept his options open for 2008 and has kept his website going. He has championed health care for children this year. He publicly came out against Bush nominees such as Condi Rice, and was a prominent questioner of Rice during her confirmation hearings. His website/e-mails have been used as a platform for his views on current issues that he is voting on as a Senator.
With this in mind, I figured it would be interesting to evaluate the pros and cons of a Kerry run in 2008:
Pros:
1. Kerry won 48%, and came within 100,000 votes (in Ohio) of becoming President. With a little bit of improvement in campaign strategies, he may be able to get over the hump and become President in 2008
2. Kerry was dominant in the 2004 primaries. I think he won something like 20 of the first 22 primaries.
Cons:
1. Kerry is a Senator. There are limitations to running as a Senator, and the 2004 election bore these out. It may have been the deciding factor in 2004. Governors have real experience developing policies and agendas that Senators don't.
2. Kerry fatigue has set in. He is not the most charismatic or exciting candidate around. A 2nd try makes a lot of people weary.
3. Kerry had his chance in 2004. It's time to step aside.
4. Edwards will almost certainly run in 2008. If Kerry runs against his old running mate, well, this is awkward.
When compared to Al Gore, John Kerry's pros appear less impressive and his cons more worrisome. And Gore's chances of running in 2008 seem remote.
With this in mind, I believe that John Kerry will not run in 2008. If he is still inclined by the time it is necessary to declare his candidacy, I think that elder statesmen (i.e. Bill Clinton) and/or party leaders will talk to Kerry and ask him to not run for the good of the party, so that the party can move onto 2008 and not relive 2004.
That said, who can blame Kerry for keeping his options open? He would be foolish not to. And if pursuing worthwhile initiatives such as health care for kids is the result, more power to him. His close loss in 2004 makes him a leading Democrat whose has earned the right to have his voice heard, and have a leading voice in the Party.
So what is Kerry's future? He is up for re-election for US Senator in 2008. It is my belief that he will not seek re-election in 2008. After all, when you have run for President and come so close, where is the inspiration to submit yourself to a "mere" US Senate race. I just don't see it. I think that he will be ready to be a private citizen and an elder statesman in the Democratic Party after 2008.