Reprints Online

New York Senator and former First Lady Hillary Clinton would seem to have the inside track to the Democratic nomination for 2008. However, she could be seen as a far too polarizing figure whose candidacy in the general election could bring out the evangelicals in droves for the Republicans as Kerry's did this year. She will probably have to moderate a bit over the next two years in order to prove that she could win a general election. If she can't do this, the Democrats may seek a candidate with broader appeal. Right now, though, the nomination appears to be hers to lose.

Will Hillary's 2008 presidential campaign crash and burn in 2007? Similar things have happened before. Off the top of my head, I can think of at least two presidential campaigns that officially began and ended in the year before the election - Gary Hart in 1987 (although he futilely attempted to restart his campaign later that year) and Dan Quayle in 1999.

I see a distinct possibility that Hillary's campaign could implode early next year, shortly after she officially announces her candidacy. Even now, at least eight months before her official announcement will come, her popularity with Democratic voters is starting to freefall. And that's not supposed to happen to any candidate until after he or she announces. Yes, she's probably collected the most money of any of the potential Democratic contenders so far, but that alone will not save her. Ask Howard Dean. If she sees the handwriting on the wall, I believe she will pull the plug quickly. She's too proud to risk the humiliation of being drubbed in the primaries.

The problem with Hillary is that more and more Democrats are coming to grips with the fact that she probably could not win in the general election, even against the nominee of an unpopular Republican Party. I keep hearing the word "polarizing" coming from the mouths of many Democrats when they are asked about their opinion of her. That characteristic might be inconsequential in a state or district in which one party dominates, but it usually proves disastrous in a general election for President of the United States. Democrats have no desire to extend their presidential losing streak to three and therefore match the Carter-Mondale-Dukakis debacle of the 1980's.

Also, as the stature of Red State Democrats like Evan Bayh and Mark Warner starts to rise, hers will likely diminish even further. Keep in mind that the last three Democrats to capture the White House came from what are now "red" states. The last time I checked, New York didn't qualify.



About the Author

Terry Mitchell is a software engineer, free-lance writer, amateur political analyst, and blogger from Hopewell, VA. On his blog - http://commenterry.blogs.com - he posts commentaries on various subjects such as politics, technology, religion, health and well-being, personal finance, and sports. His commentaries offer a unique point of view that is not often found in mainstream media.