The 2008 Campaign has begun

[sam h]

With a strong showing early, boosted by his Iowa base, I think Vilsack could put himself into the mix for a VP nod. I really doubt he will have the money and name recognition to make much of dent in the presidential.

[Case Closed]

I am still new to the politicing scene(only 20 years old). How long till all the dems and reps come out of the woodwork and make it offical about running for president?

[iron81]

Most of them will declare by August or September. Not unheard of to get a straggler in November (next november).

[Case Closed]

[ QUOTE ]
Most of them will declare by August or September. Not unheard of to get a straggler in November (next november).

[/ QUOTE ]

Ok, then they campaign for the primaries which is around march 08?

[iron81]

They start in January nowadays. States keep moving up their primaries so that they are close to the front. States that are close to the front have more influence and more attention from the candidates. The nominees will have a lock no later than the middle of March.

[DVaut1]

[ QUOTE ]
I am still new to the politicing scene(only 20 years old). How long till all the dems and reps come out of the woodwork and make it offical about running for president?

[/ QUOTE ]

As it is right now, you can probably make a short list candidates from each party with a very real shot of running and winning the nomination. While an "official announement" is a nice way to spill some ink and get some face time, you can narrow down the possible field right now, regardless of an official announcement -- running for President is a lengthy process and many have been getting their organizations, fund-raisers, PACs, strategy teams, etc. in place for a quite a while now:



Democrats Almost Certainly Running:
Sen. Clinton
former Sen. Edwards
Gov. Vilsack
Sen. Bayh
Sen. Feingold
Wesley Clark
Gov. Richardson

Democrats Maybe Running But With No Real Shot of Winning the Nomination:
Sen. Kerry
Sen. Biden
Sen. Dodd

Wildcards:
former VP Gore
Sen. Obama

----------------

GOPers Almost Certainly Running:
Sen. McCain
Gov. Romney
Gov. Huckabee
former NYC mayor Rudy Giuliani
former House Speaker Newt Gingrich

GOPers Maybe Running But With No Real Short of Winning the Nomination:
former Sen. Allen
Sen. Hagel
Sen. Brownback
former Sen. Frist
Rep. Tancredo

Wilcards:
Gov. Jeb Bush
Sec. State Rice

I think this is pretty comprehensive. If I've left anyone out, they likely fall under the "No Real Shot of Winning" groups, with the caveat that Howard Dean was relatively unkown and a huge long shot to win the '04 Dem. Nomination in the autumn of 2002. He obviously didn't win, but it's hard to say he didn't become very relevant in the nomination process.

[Nate tha\\\' Great]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I am still new to the politicing scene(only 20 years old). How long till all the dems and reps come out of the woodwork and make it offical about running for president?

[/ QUOTE ]

As it is right now, you can probably make a short list candidates from each party with a very real shot of running and winning the nomination. While an "official announement" is a nice way to spill some ink and get some face time, you can narrow down the possible field right now, regardless of an official announcement -- running for President is a lengthy process and many have been getting their organizations, fund-raisers, PACs, strategy teams, etc. in place for a quite a while now:



Democrats Almost Certainly Running:
Sen. Clinton
former Sen. Edwards
Gov. Vilsack
Sen. Bayh
Sen. Feingold
Wesley Clark
Gov. Richardson

Democrats Maybe Running But With No Real Shot of Winning the Nomination:
Sen. Kerry
Sen. Biden
Sen. Dodd

Wildcards:
former VP Gore
Sen. Obama

----------------

GOPers Almost Certainly Running:
Sen. McCain
Gov. Romney
Gov. Huckabee
former NYC mayor Rudy Giuliani
former House Speaker Newt Gingrich

GOPers Maybe Running But With No Real Short of Winning the Nomination:
former Sen. Allen
Sen. Hagel
Sen. Brownback
former Sen. Frist
Rep. Tancredo

Wilcards:
Gov. Jeb Bush
Sec. State Rice

I think this is pretty comprehensive. If I've left anyone out, they likely fall under the "No Real Shot of Winning" groups, with the caveat that Howard Dean was relatively unkown and a huge long shot to win the '04 Dem. Nomination in the autumn of 2002. He obviously didn't win, but it's hard to say he didn't become very relevant in the nomination process.

[/ QUOTE ]

Vilsack, Feingold and Richardson might belong in the "no real shot of winning" camp. I don't mean to sounds like a cynic, but they all seem like the classic "5th place in the New Hampshire primary" candidate. Plus Dems will have at least one (HRC) and possibly 2-3 huge names running, which kills fundraising efforts.

Wesley Clark is in the "wild card" category as far as I know.

Duncan Hunter is running for the Republicans but has no shot at winning.

Pataki should be listed somewhere on the Republican side but I don't know which category he belongs in.

In terms of most-to-least likely to become our next president, we're probably looking at:

1) McCain (R)
2) Clinton (D)
3) Giuliani (R)
4) Obama (D)
5) Gore (D)
6) Edwards (D)
7) Romney (R)
8) Huckabaee (R)
9) Bayh (D)
10) Gingrich (R)

[DVaut1]

[ QUOTE ]
Vilsack, Feingold and Richardson might belong in the "no real shot of winning" camp. I don't mean to sounds like a cynic, but they all seem like the classic "5th place in the New Hampshire primary" candidate.

[/ QUOTE ]

Vilsack, Feingold and Richardson are all between 2%-3% on Tradesports. So that's a fair point. Given that there's 5%-10% chance that one of them end's up being the nominee, perhaps I should have added a 4th category for "Low Probability of Winning Worthy of Mention", although that's not entirely different from the "Guys With No Shot" category. However, I think it's important to distinguish between these three and the likes of Kerry, Biden, and Dodd, who are all strongly considering a run but effectively have no chance (in fairness, Kerry is listed at 2% at Tradesports).

I'm fairly certain an "anti-Hillary" effort will be mounted in the Democratic primaries -- and that certainly "anti-Hillary" movement could be manifest itself in the form of support and cash for Vilsack, Feingold, or Richardson. Many of the best empirical studies demonstrate that primary voters are indeed strategic, so if voters are questioning voting for Hillary in the primary because of her electability in the general election, I just don't see Biden/Kerry/Dodd filling that void.

[ QUOTE ]
Plus Dems will have at least one (HRC) and possibly 2-3 huge names running, which kills fundraising efforts.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is true and a good point. It's why I'm completely ruling out Biden, Dodd, and Kerry -- they're all dipping from Northeastern center-left donor pool that Clinton currently pwns.

[ QUOTE ]
Wesley Clark is in the "wild card" category as far as I know.

[/ QUOTE ]

Even if he decides to run, I question what his real chances are. But this is a good point that the likelihood of him running is nowhere no certain.

[ QUOTE ]
Duncan Hunter is running for the Republicans but has no shot at winning.

Pataki should be listed somewhere on the Republican side but I don't know which category he belongs in.

[/ QUOTE ]

Tradesports has both of these guys at < 1%.

[ QUOTE ]
In terms of most-to-least likely to become our next president, we're probably looking at:

1) McCain (R)
2) Clinton (D)
3) Giuliani (R)
4) Obama (D)
5) Gore (D)
6) Edwards (D)
7) Romney (R)
8) Huckabaee (R)
9) Bayh (D)
10) Gingrich (R)

[/ QUOTE ]

A pretty good list. I think we could probably draw a dotted-line after Romney, because I'm not bullish on Huckabee, Bayh or Gingrich having any real shot.

[disjunction]

[ QUOTE ]

This is true and a good point. It's why I'm completely ruling out Biden, Dodd, and Kerry -- they're all dipping from Northeastern center-left donor pool that Clinton currently pwns.

[/ QUOTE ]

Biden is on Imus and MSNBC a lot. Don't you think he could get a lot of donations from rich Wall Street democrats who don't like Hillary?

[DVaut1]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

This is true and a good point. It's why I'm completely ruling out Biden, Dodd, and Kerry -- they're all dipping from Northeastern center-left donor pool that Clinton currently pwns.

[/ QUOTE ]

Biden is on Imus and MSNBC a lot. Don't you think he could get a lot of donations from rich Wall Street democrats who don't like Hillary?

[/ QUOTE ]

Biden was thinking about putting together a run in '04 but he couldn't get the money together. He's essentially tried to run twice now ('88 and '04) and has made no secret he plans on exploring another run in '08. Despite being one of the most visible Democrats in the Senate, each time (including now) he's failed to build any kind of momentum (I concede he had some missteps in '88). Maybe something unique will happen where he can convey to activists/donors that he's worthy of their resources, but I just don't see it being a likely outcome.

Of course, anything could happen.