Say the 06 House flips blue but Dems' 08 presidential field bottlenecks.

[saltpoint]

This post asks who would emerge as the consensus candidate for the party in a convention at which no one Democratic candidate has the requisite majority of delegate votes for the nomination.

Not the candidate you personally like best. But which candidate the convention would agree upon as the nominee.

Remember that all the candidates in this scenario have significant support, some from centrists, some from leftist factions, and so forth. A first, second, or even third ballot victory is not within reach for any of the candidates.

There would likely be backroom deals and strategic re-alliances common to any convention, but especially characteristic of a brokered one.

Potential candidates for the Democratic Party in 08, in alphabetical order, might include:

1. Sen. Evan Bayh (IN)
2. Sen. Joe Biden (DE)
3. Sen. Barbara Boxer (CA)
4. Sen. Bill Bradley (NJ)
5. General Wesley Clark (AR)
6. Sen. Hillary Clinton (NY)
7 Sen. Christopher Dodd (CT)
8. Congressman Lloyd Doggett (TX)
9. Sen. Dick Durbin (IL)
10. Sen. John Edwards (NC)
11. Sen. Russ Feingold (WI)
12. Vice President Al Gore (TN)
13. Sen. John Kerry (MA)
14. Congressman Dennis Kucinich (OH)
15. Sen. Blanche Lincoln (AR)
16. Ambassador Carol Mosely-Braun (IL)
17. Gov. Bill Richardson (NM)
18. Gov. Brian Schweitzer (MT)
19. Rev. Al Sharpton (NY)
20. Gov. Tom Vilsack (IA)
21. Gov. Mark Warner (VA)
22. -- Other --

Again -- you're going for the consensus candidate who emerges as the nominee.

QUESTION:

Who emerges as the consensus candidate to head the 08 Democratic ticket if no one candidate has enough to win a first, second, or third ballot victory, and none of the candidates is within easy deal-making distance of threshold?

[longship]

1. If Gore jumps in, he'll be the de facto standard bearer.

No doubt about it.

[saltpoint]

39. Hi to you, longship. Just read this afternoon the article called

"New New Gore" by Ezra Klein in THE AMERICAN PROSPECT.

It's a winner.

http://www.prospect.org/web/page.ww?section=root&name=V...


It paints a picture of Al Gore that is just remarkable. Overwhelmingly positive, it's also encouraging.

[longship]

42. Way ahead of ya, Ol' Crusoe.

:-)

[saltpoint]

46. Ah! I should have known. Anybody that posts Good John Conyers in

a signature field has got to be way ahead of just about everybody.

More power to ya!


:thumbsup:

[longship]

54. Grew up in Detroit.

That's why I love Conyers, as would any true Detroiter.

[saltpoint]

55. And I hope after next November 7th he will be the new Chairman of

the House Judiciary Committee.

THAT would be excellent.

[Douglas Carpenter]

51. good article but that link doesn't seem to work: here is another link to

to the same article:

http://www.prospect.org/web/page.ww?section=root&name=ViewPrint&articleId=11299

thanks

[saltpoint]

52. Thank you for the stronger link.

And go, Dems!

[MadMaddie]

2. Gore/Feingold...

[ladjf]

8. That ticket will do it.

[dave502d]

3. 10. Sen. John Edwards (NC) n/t

[saltpoint]

21. A contact in Iowa tells me that Senator Edwards remains very popular

there, and expects him to be a formidable presence in the 08 caucuses.

When John and Elizabeth Edwards stand together on a platform or stage, or even in a room, or on a haywagon in Iowa for that matter, they just look completely natural.

They've got brains to spare, but there's that very appealing, natural glow they give off.

Incredible.

[mitchtv]

4. yes to any of the major candidates

Clark, Gore, Kerry, Edwards, Feingold, maybe Clinton,
no to a few, Warner,Bayh,Dodd, Lincoln, Biden

[nickshepDEM]

5. Probably Clinton.

[saltpoint]

31. Hi, nickshepDEM. I could surely envision a scenario where Sen. Clinton

emerges as the consensus nominee. Especially if she led in delegate votes going into the first ballot.

But I'm not sure she'd survive the deal-making. If she did not emerge as consensus candidate, I would hope it's not because she's a woman. Because I want the Democrats to be the pro-woman party.

At the same time, I wonder if the party might turn to a Gore candidacy, and put maybe Bill Richardson to capture a larger % of the men and women marching for immigration reform in the streets these past few weeks.

Anyway, it is going to be damned interesting.

[ruggerson]

6. Schweitzer without a doubt

When more Democrats get informed as to what he's doing in Montana and get to know his personality - he's the only candidate who has virtually every quality we need to win.

[saltpoint]

13. I made sure to include Schweitzer on my list for the post question

because the Democrats must have SOME kind of profile for the western states in 08. Either the convention city should be in one of the western states, or someone on the ticket -- something.

Schweitzer is having quite a success story in Montana.

[ruggerson]

15. I think '08 is going to be a huge ANTI-Washington year

A fresh face will emerge and voters will reject every single beltway candidate, including Gore, Clinton, Kerry, Bayh and Biden.

People want a Harry Truman populist who will be the voice of the working man and woman against the corporate lock on Washington.

Enter Brian Schweitzer.

[saltpoint]

17. It could happen. I think there is at the very least a strong chance

that he could be the veep nominee.

Not often that Montana gets to be the state a nominee is from, let alone the Vice Presidency or Presidency.

[spag68]

7. My vote goes to

a Gore Clinton ticket.

[OzarkDem]

9. Gore

and anybody else.

[saltpoint]

14. Hi, OzarkDem. Gotta say, if Gore does not enter the caucus and primary

races and is "available" in a locked convention, I think it's very easy to picture him getting that phone call.

If you are interested, here is a great article on Al Gore in the current issue of THE AMERICAN PROSPECT.

http://www.prospect.org/web/page.ww?section=root&name=V...

[Stinky The Clown]

10. If I understand you question correctly ....... you're asking who we think

the party delegates will settle on once it is clear there is no clear winner or front runner.

I can see a few from your list making the cut ....... (these are PURE speculations ... NOT my personal opinions/views) (Its DU ... ya hafta say that kinda shit or they go fer yer throat, yanno?)

I think Edwards and Kerry will fall by the wayside quickly (speculative reasons, not mine) because they didn't get it done in 04. Kerry cuz he just ended flat footed and Edwards will be said to have no gravitas or experience.

Clinton will hang in a for while, but she'll be seen as too polarizing, particularly in an unclear party convention.

Feingold will be seen as a loose cannon for his call for censure.

In fact, all the sitting Senators will be out of the running pretty quickly. Left standing, in alphabetical order, from your list, will be

Clark
Gore
Richardson
Schweitzer
Vilsak
Warner

Gore will remain coy and not actively seek the nod.

Vilsack will be sacked for a deficeit personality (no charisma).

Schweitzer will meet with Edward's fate ... no experience/gravitas

That leaves Clark, Richardson and Warner. And Gore.

None of the three will have the ability to capture the whole arena.

A few party elders will get together over a few cigars in a back room someplace. People like Mario Cuomo, Jesse Jackson, maybe Ed Rendell or even Jimmy Carter or Bill Clinton (well, probably not Clinton).

The result will be a call to Gore.

We'll find out he was really serious about not running.

The nod will go to Clark and Richardson.

Again ... PURE speculation and a bit of fantasy baseball. :)

[saltpoint]

12. You have the question exactly right and your scenario is plausbile.

I just think that we have so many strong candidates that a bottlenecked convention is a possibility, maybe a distinct possibility.

[saltpoint]

11. former Congressman Lee Hamilton (D-IN) ?

[Mz Pip]

16. I like that.

I think someone coming out of nowhere would be really exciting. Hamilton would fit that fill as would Schweitzer.

I think the Dems have to think outside the box and go with some new blood. NOt that they will, just that they should. I liked Clark last time around for that reason.

Mz Pip
:dem:

[ruggerson]

18. Agreed

and it would be very exciting.

It would also capture the imagination of the American people. Something we sorely need.

[saltpoint]

19. Hi to you, Mz Pip.

I would be delighted to have Senator Boxer head our ticket, but I think she would probably scare the bejesus out of people in Indiana and Mississippi.

A Hamilton-Schweitzer ticket would be a startling ticket to emerge from a locked convention. I think it would give the Republicans fits.

[Mz Pip]

22. I love my Senator

and my Congresswoman Barbara Lee. But neither one would win a Red State. They work well here but would probably not have a lot of appeal outside CA. Sad but true. :cry:

So we need to come out of nowhere with someone totally unexpected. All the focus on Hillary and Kerry and Gore. Interesting but not interesting enough to really shake up the landscape. We need a "whoooaaa!!" candidate. IMHO

Mz Pip
:dem:

[saltpoint]

25. Just occurred to me, Mz Pip, that with Lee and Boxer, you are

going to be envied by a LOT of people in red states.

I think Barbara Boxer is the cat's pajamas. Always have.

Well, it's early on one hand and late on the other. I'm volunteering for blue candidates and I hope it will be a big blue tsunami in both 06 and 08 -- and this very night for Francine Busby in California.

[karynnj]

63. No -

He didn't even compare well to Kean on the 911 committee hearings.

[worldgonekrazy]

67. That's right

Thomas Kean, who constantly looked as if he had been just dragged out of bed and hastily pulled together after a week long bender. Perhaps the only politician to regularly appear on national television with dandruff completely covering his shoulders. THAT Kean. And Hamilton looked like an amateur next to him.

(that wasn't sarcasm, just pointing out that its sad when you're overshadowed by Kean)

[saltpoint]

69. Indiana Democrats, especially life-long Indiana Democrats in the

party apparatus will tell you different about Lee Hamilton.

Don't undersell the man. The Nine/Eleven Commission is not the right gauge.

[Sooner75]

20. Ah, the good ole days......

As a 53 year old political junkie, I can recall those "good ole days" when we all tuned into the two national conventions to find out who would get the nomination for president. Sure, there were the "smoke filled" rooms where the deals were made and the cameras and reporters were not welcome. However, it was much more of a free-for-all and money was much less of a factor. A good orator could use his powers of persuasion to get the nomination without selling out to big campaign donors.

Nowadays, you might as well put the two party nominations on ebay.

[saltpoint]

23. I hear you on the debasement of a once-more-common convention

but damn it, I think the delegates need their clocks cleaned once in awhile by tricks of history, and I want a deadlocked convention!

In Denver!

And I want a consensus ticket to emerge that will kick the Republicans' ass from here to Hong Kong.

__

Thanks for your post, Sooner75. Much appreciated.

[Mz Pip]

24. THe Party picked JFK

THere was tension on the floor to see if Stevenson might pull off something!

No More. Now Iowa chooses. Oh, well. A bit of sarcasm here, because I know it isn't quite that simplistic. But whoever wins Iowa has a huge advantage coming into the rest of the primaries.
Mz Pip
:dem:

[saltpoint]

26. PBS's Bill Moyers, former member of the LBJ White House &

a certified Baptist minister, an unabashed liberal, from TEXAS.

And he wouldn't be bad in the debates, either.

[Stinky The Clown]

28. I could go with someone like that.

Talk about a 'Whoa!" candidate!

[saltpoint]

30. Hi, Husb2Sparkly. He'd be a 'whoa' candidate for me, too.

A big whoa indeed.

My first choice of all U.S. citizens, I believe.

It might be nice to have an emotionally mature, intellectually evolved Texan in the White House. Compared with, say, the guy who's in there now.

Nice to see you on these boards.

[Anarcho-Socialist]

64. Bill Moyers would be a wonderful president

Although I know there's little chance of it.

[saltpoint]

65. Yes. Despite the long, long odds, what a national leader he would make.

And those State of the Union addresses -- I would make a POINT to tune in to those. With Dubya's I head for the hills and try not to think about it.

[saltpoint]

27. former Senator George Mitchell (D-Maine)?

[saltpoint]

29. Alexis Herman, former Sec. of Labor under Bill Clinton?

[Clarkie1]

32. This is way, way, way too much speculation for me on 4/11/06. n/t

[snowbear]

33. Hmmm... Looking at your list Old Crusoe....

I definitely think that #22 will win it all! ~~

[saltpoint]

37. Could be. I'm not convinced Senator Clinton is the frontrunner, or

if she is, I'm not convinced she will have a first-ballot victory.

I think #22 has a REAL good chance.

[saltpoint]

34. Leon Panetta. Clinton chief-of-staff, longtime CA Congressman?

[snowbear]

36. We could very well wind up with a dark horse candidate ..

We have the lists that we keep producing over and over again, and of course the media has their "Hillary is untouchable" polls...

But what if a dark horse steps into the limelight in the next year or so?

Anything can still happen!!

[saltpoint]

35. Vernon Jordan. Blue-ribbon attorney, advisor to presidents?

[saltpoint]

38. Dale Bumpers, former Democratic Senator from Arkansas.

Not difficult to imagine an all-Arkansas ticket with Clark-Bumpers.

I think it would flip a lot of red states blue.

[oasis]

40. Can't have same state ticket. Remember that's why Cheney had to

register in Wyoming after having resided in Texas for five years wheeling and dealing with his Halliburton pirates.

[saltpoint]

41. Hi, oasis. I thought Cheney had to register because he WASN'T

a registered voter.

Is there a Constitutional prohibition on both candidates being registered in the same state?

[oasis]

43. That's my understanding.

:hi: Hi back at ya.

[saltpoint]

44. Well, damn. I flat-out didn't know that. I'll withdraw the proposal

then, but I thought it would make a tough ticket to beat.

[oasis]

45. Bumpers left the senate and took a job as a college administrator. He's

probably had it with public service. Especially being under the DC microscope.

[saltpoint]

47. Well double-damn. You've whittled my tall oak tree down to

saw dust, oasis.

On the other hand, what lucky students to have Dale Bumpers for an instructor. Nice turn of luck there.

Well, if the convention is bottlenecked, I think the line-up of "knowns" is very strong, and even many of our "unknowns" are strong, too.

I like our chances against the Repblicans in 08.

[oasis]

48. Yes, Democrats have a strong bench for 2008. I can't wait 'till 2008.

:bounce:

[Douglas Carpenter]

49. dispassionately I believe Al Gore would be the strongest consensus

candidate. The second strongest consensus candidate in my opinion would probably be Wesley Clark, followed by John Edwards.

This is not a statement of who I agree with the most on issues or who my personal favorites would be.

[saltpoint]

50. A good post, Douglas Carpenter, and right of a piece with a

possible circumstance requiring a consensus candidate.

I'm not insisting it will happen, but we have so many strong options this time that it might.

Have you seen this yet?

http://www.prospect.org/web/page.ww?section=root&name=V...

--It's a surprisingly well-written article about Gore in the AMERICAN PROSPECT. It kind of stunned me. Anyway, you might give it a look and see what you think.

Clark & Edwards would also make very convincing consensus candidates, no question.

I appreciate your post. Thanks.

[worldgonekrazy]

68. I put Clark ahead of Gore

With Gore there would be a significant faction that would not want to have him as the nominee out of (probably justified) fear that the media and public would see him as a loser and a has-been. That is, of course, not my personal opinion of Gore, but there is a significant risk that this would become the public perception of his candidacy. So I think Clark would be the first choice because he has much less political baggage.

[blitzen]

53. Clark, Edwards, Gore...the only ones with enough charisma

Gore would be my choice

[sandnsea]

56. Mark Warner

Okay on abortion rights, not completely terrible on gay rights, opposed welfare reform. Apparently did okay in Virginia. He could be a consensus candidate. Warner/Richardson, Gore/Warner, some combination. If Kerry can overcome the combination of sour grapes and beltway bashing, maybe. Clark, maybe as well, especially if foreign policy is still completely screwed up. But like 2004, people may want a proven commodity in foreign and domestic. Gore/Warner/Richardson look good in that regard. Or Gore/Kerry, that'd work too.

[saltpoint]

57. Hi, sandnsea. You've got a lot of sound strategy there --

-- and I could see it happening.

Warner is still a bit of a mystery to me. I've read some, but need to read more. He seems like a hell of a nice guy but I wonder if he can stand on a stage and speak to a crowd without putting them to sleep? He's terribly flat-spirited.

Still, the success in Virginia is a major plus.

Well. It's going to be interesting. First, we'll take the House back in 06!

[AtomicKitten]

58. I believe it's Gore's if he wants it.

and, yes, that is wishful thinking. :)

[saltpoint]

59. Hi, AtomicKitten. I'm not sure you should sell yourself short on that.

The current issue of THE AMERICAN PROSPECT has a cover story on "The New New Gore," by Ezra Klein, and it is a terrific read. If you have a chance, pick it up. A couple of the posts above give a link.

Anyway, I think you're right -- Gore would be formidable. Either if he jumped in right away after the 06 elections or if he waited in the wings and stepped in as a consensus candidate. Of course either one is one form of gamble or another, but I think Gore has not lost his instinct for the presidency, and at this point I believe he would be one of the great American presidents.

[AtomicKitten]

60. thanks for the tip on the article - I will definitely read it

I think the whole ugly experience has molded Gore into a kickass candidate.

Sometimes in life you have to crawl through glass to reach the promised land. He has spoken out forcefully against BushCo and doesn't have the stink of any of the complicity most of the other possible contenders share, in particular the IWR vote. And, of course, the planet would thank us for having the good sense to elect an environmentally aware and savvy leader.

Yes, it would be the high point of my life to have the privilege of working my ass off (again) for this man. Let Hillary take the hits til then; she's used to it. What brilliant subterfuge, and then have him pop into the fray.

[saltpoint]

61. I say thanks to you for mentioning the environment, and Gore's very

effective stature in regard to it.

He's our true champion on that issue, despite impressive records by others. There would be no doubt as to the verity and nobility of Science in a Gore adminsitration, either. That alone would be a welcome change from the Chimp.

[Larry in KC]

62. Clark, because * has guaranteed national security crises

Putting aside the other excellent qualities which DO make Clark my personal choice...,

Put simply, it's hard to imagine that two more years of * administration will lead to a lessening of crises in national security/foreign policy. It's very much more likely that it will be at least as high a priority as in 2004, that more * damage will have been done in this arena.

Clark is the only one who combines the experience, the insights, gravitas and respect in this arena (both at home and abroad) to be listened to as he presents both the magnitude of the problems and the visions for real solutions. While they'll try, he can't be swift-boated, either.

It makes eminent sense to choose the best, strongest voice on the dominant issue.

[saltpoint]

66. And on that point I think you're right that Clark's profile would be a

natural consensus possibility.

I'm unsure how much support he has in the party apparatus, and wondering if he has to win a string of primaries to establish himself with them.

That may not be any fault of General Clark's, but of the way we nominate candidates.

[saltpoint]

70. The news came too late for this poll, but Alaska's Mike Gravel is

evidently going to announce his candidacy for the 2008 nomination for president.

Sorry to his supporters that I didn't include him but we went to press prior to his announcement.