Gep may be the last hope for moderate Dems, and that could really help him after the NH hype dies down.

Lieberman has been flatline for a while and Kerry can't get anything going despite a lot of media exposure. Clark always has been a decoy, and the rest are fodder.

Dean has momentum, but the only way he can keep it up is by moving farther and farther left. If Dean alienates enough voters to lose Iowa and SC to Gephardt, he's done. That "if" depends on Gep getting his act together, however, since he's been quite the nobody so far.

My prediction remains the same. Dean isn't stupid and will try to triangulate voters by changing his message everywhere he goes. He'll win the nom, but this will cost him his credibility and he'll get murdered by Bush in the national election.

If Hillary's focus groups tell her Bush is vulnerable and can be beaten, she'll allow herself to be drafted at the convention with Richardson, alleged Hispanic, as her VP.

If Bush's numbers are high and show him to be unbeatable, Gephardt will be sacrificed with perhaps Clark as VP.

All the nonsense going on now among Democrat candidates is just so much smoke and mirrors. Dean is far more likely to be taken to the mother ship and then on to his home planet in a faraway part of the galaxy than be the Democrat nominee for president of the United States of America.

I disagree with your conclusion.

The invisible primary is almost over, with Dean the hands-down winner in terms of support, money, endorsements and whatnot. The nomination is his to lose.

For that to happen, two things would have to happen: that Dean quickly loses a lot of support, and that one of the other candidates equally quickly gains support, gravitas, endorsements, money and good press.

I don't see either happening. The core Dean supporters are truebelievers who will stay with him no matter what. And the rest of the candidates have been rather uninspiring, coming across as unserious, incoherent doom-and-gloom opportunists.

The only dem candidate who could be described as serious is Lieberman, and there's no way the democrats are going to nominate a jew in 2004.

erp --

Let's suppose that anyone-but-Dean is nominated. Do you think Dean would be offered the VP slot? Accept it?

And if Dean is not the nominee (or VP candidate), do you think he would take his ball and go home?

erp, While I agree with your sentiment about Dean's home planet, there is certainly a very good chance he can win the nomination.

He has some good political instincts, at least in his read of the electorate. He recognized the core Democratic anger over an aggressive American foreign policy. He recognized the need to get the redneck vote (even if his follow through was...er...poor). He recognizes the importance of faith to many Americans. He recognizes the nuanced opinion of guns by most Americans.

Unfortunately for him he can't nurture those instincts in to an effective strategy since he seems to be pulling a Clinton, and trying to speak to the crowd at every turn while being totally unaware that he is contradicting himself.

He is strange bird and his policy prescriptions are just this side of terrifying. But, he has one heck of a political organization. The "anybody but Dean" meme only works if it figures out who that "anybody" is. Right now, the anti-Deans aren't anywhere close to figuring that out.

Howard Dean is a candle that has to be fully burnt out for it to go away. There is genuine anger within the core Democrats. That anger requires pure humiliating electoral defeat at the hands of the enemy (i.e. George Bush) for it to fully burn out.

Hillary knows this, which is why she's likely holding off until '08 and playing it very cool. The other candidates grasped this too late and looked like a "me too" chorus when trying to coop Dean's anti-war message, and destroyed their credibility in the process.

Yes, the general public is not paying attention. But, that general public doesn't vote in primaries. The people who do ARE paying attention and Dean is largely their man.

Like I said, there is no other candidate that garners the attention of primary voters the way that Dean does. Gep, Lieberman, Kerry, Clark & Edwards simply aren't that different, rhetorically speaking.

Kerry is easily as loony and inconsistent as Howard Dean. Like Vodkaman said, Gep's credentials are impecable, but other than Unions, he excites nobody. Edwards could still make a run (why isn't he in the S.C. poll, is he doing THAT bad?) but likewise isn't exciting anybody. Leiberman's the only one with anything resembling a unique political history, but that Joe Leiberman hasn't been seen since early 2000. And Clark has looked like a rank amateur. Clark has gotten this far only because of his handlers. He's what all the Democrats think George Bush was: An emtpy suit (or uniform to borrow from something I read somewhere).

Seriously, it's Dean and every else. Like him or not, you know what Dean represents. Outside a few political junkies, you can't say the same for all the other guys.

On Hillary pulling a convention surprise:

I suppose it is a remote possibility, but that requires several things to happen:

A) Things have to go really bad in Iraq and Bush has to become far more vulnerable. This is a possibility though I think an improbability. Plus, if that happens, it could help Dean.

B) The economy needs to cool off. I don't see it happening.

C) The electorate has to suddenly care about deficits. Didn't happen in '84, '88, '92, '96, and '02 and supluses didn't help in '00. Don't see it happening now.

D) That Democratic anger needs to burn out before then. Possible, but that still requires an anti-Dean coming to the fore. As I say in a previous post, I don't see where that comes from.

E) No clear frontrunner emerges. Not just one who doesn't get the necessary delegates, but a split that has two or three guys close to each other AND unwilling to relinquish those delegates before the convention.

F) She has to be REAL sure that Dean won't pull a George Wallace and go Independent or Green.

On points E & F, ws we've already stated it's Dean or an Anti-Dean. For her to come in that late would require no clear frontrunner. But, one of those challengers will be Dean. If Dean is in the lead (even though not with a majority) I think he's VERY likely to split from the party if she comes in and tries to take the nomination from him. THAT may be even enough to piss off the party base. Especially when you figure "stealing elections" might be a big theme at next year's convention. Dean, has already shown a willingness to take on the Clinton-wing of the party. Why wouldn't he carry this onto November.

There are some reasons to think Hillary is positioning herself for a late run though.

1) She's becoming more and more visable on the policy front, including visiting the troops.

2) The later she enters the race the less likely other Democrats are to attack her fairly sleazy past and bloody her up for the Bushies.

3) I believe McCauliffe has stated he doesn't think everyone's entered the race yet.

4) There's got to be SOME reason McCauliffe still has his job. To manage a Hillary run could be that.

5) Hillary is both pragmatic but also daring. A late entrance would be THE BIG STORY. Given that she her ego is 2nd only to her "husband's", that would be music to her ears.

With all that said, I don't see it happening. This is a fight about the idealogy of the Democrats. Are they willing to fight the war on terror, and are they willing to accept all the nastiness that that entails. Are they willing to piss off foreign elites, which apparently is a big swing vote in Democratic circles.

Given that the Clinton's have never been big on idealogy I don't think Hillary wants to get involved in a such a fight. Idealogy tends to get in the way of getting elected and that's really what Bill and Hillary has always been about.

I agree that any of the excellent analyses above can be correct. Things change. Right now Bush looks very good, but don't forget Soros and the gazillions of dollars at the disposal of the Clinton/DNC cabal, the most shameless, power-mad, greedy and lying group ever to be assembled in living memory and their willing accomplices in the media. They all know that Hillary is the only Democrat who has a chance to beat Bush if he can't withstand the onslaught coming his way.

It's all academic anyway because Dean will not be the candidate for a lot of reasons, the most important of which, is that he's thrown a monkey wrench into the Clinton/DNC's carefully laid out plans. I think this bunch of silly losers was deliberately assembled so that none of them would get enough primary votes to win the nomination on the first ballot allowing Hillary to wait until the last minute before deciding whether or not she wants the nomination.

If Dean wins enough primary votes for a first ballot victory, he'd bring in his own people to fill Democrat party leadership positions and the Clinton./DNC cabal will be on the outside looking in. Too many people have a vested interest in keeping the status quo, so heaven and earth will be moved to eliminate Dean.

Even if I'm wrong about all the above and Dean were the nominee, I don't believe Dean could win. He's a loose cannon and wouldn't appeal to older voters who have traditionally voted for Democrats, and I'm not sure that minorities would feel comfortable voting for him unless he is heavily endorsed by black leaders and I don't see that happening either. The usual suspects in the entertainment world haven't endorsed him. Both McGovern and Humphrey, although as far left as one can go without meeting yourself coming back, were likeable as people. Dean is not likeable.

His constituency is the far left loony-toons. Not reliable.

I doubt very much that Dean would be offered or accept a vice-presidency (and neither would Hillary) and I do expect that he would take his bat and ball and walk away in a huff taking his supporters with him. I'd love it if he ran as an independent, perhaps for the Greens now that Nader has opted out.

What I worry about the most is McCain running as an independent. He'd have no lack of encouragement from the media and no lack of funding from the left, so he can be the spoiler and elect Hillary just like Perot elected bubba.

There are a lot of very smart people saying that Hillary is waiting for 2008. They very well may be right, but a lot of things can happen between then and now (if there is a God she and bubba will be shackled and led to jail before then).

From Lucianne.com quote from Dr. Dean.

"If I don't win the nomination, where do you think those million and a half people, half a million on the Internet, where do you think they're going to go? I don't know where they're going to go. They're certainly not going to vote for a conventional Washington politician."

Why can't the lunatic left discuss issues instead of childish name calling? I'm discussing the various Democrat candidates and their chances of winning the nomination. Dean raised 1.5 million and I didn't. That's your best shot?

In my opinion Dean will not be allowed to be the Democrat nominee for the reasons already stated above, so how much he raises is immaterial.

As far as hating Clinton. No way. I thought he was a disaster as a president and as a human being and we're paying the price for his reign of terror now. Thank God for Bush who is everything that Clinton isn't and I think we'll prevail and rid the world of Islamic terrorists who were encouraged by Clinton's appeasement policies.

Bush hatred is irrational. The far left cannot deal with the fact that they are no longer in power and will probably never be in power again. It has unhinged their minds.

Are the Clintons pushing another left loser so that in '08 they can swing hard-right and the hardcore dems will know they must vote for them if they want a dem prez, maybe?

Also leaving a place to step in if they smell weakness?