I Want Me Some A' That!

Goodness me, but SouthKnox Bubba seems to be imbibing something strong these days. He actually wrote this:

This might give us a sense of just how worried they [Republicans] are about this powerful field of Democratic challengers.

Worried? Whatever it is he's drinking is some strong stuff, indeed. None of the eight seven candidates could be called powerful.

Only three have credibility: Kerry, Leiberman and Gephardt. The Gepper's just dropped out. Lieberman is watching his party drift more and more to the Angry Left of him and his DLC-lite politics, even as he sounds like an old man wandering through his dusty, empty home. Kerry was, until Monday night, seen widely as missing the mark badly, and fading fast. Kerry is the most presidential of the bunch, but I don't know many who would call him "powerful."

Dean? YEEEEEEEAAAAAARRRRRRGGGGGHHHHH, as he would say. He's about to cross his Rubicon when he goes below the Mason-Dixon line into his Waterloo, I suspect. (How's that for a mixed metaphor? But I like it anyway.)

Clark? Even though he is appearing on the big political talk shows, I'm still waiting for the next visit with Tim Russert, farther into the primary season when more folks have a bigger interest, where Clark gets the bulldog-Russert instead of the bug-eyed Russert. Tim will force him to confront every flip-flop without mercy; it'll be brutal and Clark will be badly shown up, much as Edwards was last year.

Edwards? Not his time yet. Yeah, suddenly he's the darling of the media, but he's not seasoned enough. Remember his Russert visit? It was a debacle for him, and doesn't seem to be remembered any more. He supposedly speaks well, and projects a sincerity and positivity that is resonating for a lot of folks, but he lacks depth. Age and more political years will bring that.

Clark? He's nothing but a straw man for the Clintons. I don't think he's Hillary's stalking horse anymore, but I do think he mostly exists to keep the troops trained and toned for Hillary in 2008. You just can't take this guy seriously as Presidential-candidate timber. Rather, only a media-driven, shallow, short-term memory only, politics-is-life kind of person could.

Ahhh, but what do I know? I thought Gephardt was going to take Iowa by a few points over Dean and I sure was wrong on that count. His loss showed that unions may not be a strength in the Democratic Party these days. Dean's big loss just showed that because you have Internet buzz and media flash doesn't mean you actually matter.

All New Hampshire will contribute is sustaining Dean's viability a bit longer. How well Kerry and Clark do will be most watched there. If Kerry is second, he's on a roll; if he's behind Clark, he's slumping again and risks losing momentum. If Clark polls second, he'll benefit when the primaries move to the South, where I think it'll be him and Kerry leading most polls.

I still think there's a battle coming up soon over control of the Democratic Party's direction and tone. The Clintons and the establishment that favors Kerry-types are still in control. Kerry is just the kind of old-school politico they like -- years in the trenches, a long Congressional record, obligations all over. He's just short on the kinds of favors he needs to start calling in. The Howard Dean Fun Machine is, as many have noted, really building a parallel movement within the party. If he wins the nomination, or comes close, then you'll see some real squirming and in-fighting up to the convention. Deanies want to pull the party still more to the left than Clintonites and DLCer believe is safe. If they lose, you'll see some bolting to the Greens, like in 2000, but maybe worse. The convention itself might actual generate some real news!