Like it or not, it looks increasingly likely that Hillary will be the Dem nominee in 2008. Why? There are lots of reasons. She has a ton of money. She is most favored in national polls. She has Bill. She is highly visible. And maybe most importantly, none of the other Dems can beat her, unless Al Gore decides to run (Gore has indicated he's not interested, and loyalty to the Clintons may keep him from running, especially if Hillary continues to bash the Bush Administration's top officials as she has done to Rumsfeld and Chaney in the past two weeks). Hillary is starting to realize that she must define herself as a strong opponent to the Bush regime. Kerry? He lost in 2004, and people won't want to give him a second chance, after blowing his lead last time around. Feingold? Lots of downsides to a Feingold candidacy. He's liberal, twice divorced, and not strong in the red states
Edwards? He's weak on foreign policy, and did poorly in debate against Chaney. Also, Edwards was weak in the Fall, 2004 campaign. He didn't help Kerry, and Kerry/Edwards didn't win a single red state. Clark? Not enough money. I'd say that if anyone can beat Hillary, besides Gore, it's Clark. But Clark wasn't a strong campaigner in 2004. He had a chance to win nomination when Dean pulled out, but completely blew his opportunity. For some reason, a lot of Americans don't seem to like Clark very much. Warner? He can win red states, which may make him one of the strongest Democrats in Nov.2008. And he has a lot of money. But, so far, he hasn't built up much momentum. Also, does he have any foreign policy credentials? Richardson? His chances aren't much better than Biden's or Vilsack's or Daschle's. It appears to me that Hillary will probably win the nomination in a cakewalk.