A) I would move out of the country if Hillary Clinton was even considered for the presidency.

B) There is no way Tom Daschle would be considered for Presidency in 2008...he just lost a very important seat for the democrats. Plus, he is almost too far to the left, and they really need someone from a southern state that is moderate if the democrats want any chance of a win. I wont begin to state my opinions on Tom Daschle =) I will try to remain a classy Theta!!!

C) 4 MORE YEARS!!!!! WHAT AN ELECTION OF 2004!!!!
W STANDS FOR WINNER!!!!

D) What classy lady Laura Bush is. She really makes Theta's proud...Lynne was also a Theta and she is such an amazing woman. Jenna Bush was also a Theta--what a great feeling!!! What amazing greeks we have in the White House!!!

If you're a Democrat & you want to be elected President? You need to be from the South -- check Lyndon Johnson...Jimmy Carter...Bill Clinton.

P.S. Al Gore was from D.C. (not thought of from Tennessee) & Hillary is from IL/NY)

OMG TOTALLY AGREE.

Although, having lost, Daschle has even less of a chance than Hilary does.

But I don't get this jazz about electing a moderate over a liberal. Newsflash: this is what they attempted to do this year. Kerry instead of Dean. (No, Kerry is not THAT liberal. Although, to be honest, Dean wasn't that much moreso than Kerry -- but people thought he was.) Aiming for the moderate will alienate just as many voters as it attracts, ESPECIALLY with the possibility of John McCain being the opponent. I'd vote for McCain over a Lieberman-type character anyday, and y'all know how bleeding-heart I am. I feel like I could trust McCain in office -- I don't get that vibe from Lieberman. Now obviously I am not saying, Go Communist, but we can't make the "a moderate candidate will appeal to the moderates" mistake again. Kerry got cut some slack from the further left factions this year because of the "Anybody but Bush" campaign but I doubt that the Democratic '08 candidate will get that help. People are just too frustrated with the system.

I actually think somebody like McCain in office would be a good strategy for uniting America -- which it will desperately need after Bush's second term -- since McCain is the type of politician who seems to draw admirerers, if not supporters, from all sides of the political spectrum. Obviously I'd rather have a decent Democrat, but I'd much rather have McCain in office than any administration that resembles the current one.

I'm also not sure where people are getting this "Obama is secretly a moderate/conservative" jazz from, but clearly I have a different conception of "moderate" than most of the world. And if this means that a significant number of moderates and conservatives would vote for him if he ran in '08, hey, I can't argue.

For the most part though -- it is WAY too early to be thinking about this. Let's concentrate on '06.

Sorry, but Bill Clinton was very moderate. As mentioned earlier, it is very crucial for a Dem to be from a Southern state, which allows them to take a state from the south away from the Republicans. Your statements about Howard Dean and John Kerry being moderate show exactly where you are in the political spectrum.

I agree. I think we need someone like McCain or Giuliani to run since it will hopefully bring the country together after the next 4 years. I don't think this administration will stop the division in their next term; in fact, I believe they'll make it even worse.

Hilary would not be a good choice unless a lot changes in 4 years (and I do mean a lot). There are too many people who do not like her and that's including people within the Democratic party. The Democrats need someone who can win and I don't think it's Hilary. Obama would be a great choice....in 2012. He hasn't even begun his term as senator so I think 2008 is too soon to run for President.

I know this might be a stretch but does anyone think Al Gore would run again?

I would have loved to Florida Senator and former Governor, Bob Graham, run for presidency (he was a contender for a while) but he's retiring. :(

Re: Clinton for Pres in 2008?
 

God, I hope not. But in a way, I hope she does run with Obama. With her being a woman and Obama being who he is.....they wouldn't win. ;)


And if I had to pick out of McCain or Rudy G., Rudy G it'd be. :D

I also agree with this. I'd vote for John McCain, mostly because I don't get the feeling that our country would go to hell in a handbasket within his four year term. I don't agree with everything he believes in, but you can just tell that he's an intelligent person. I respect that.

I would not, however, support Rudy Guiliani.

Martin Van Buren - New York
Franklin Pierce - New Hampshire
James Buchanan - Pennsylvania
Grover Cleveland - New Jersey
Franklin Roosevelt - New York
Harry Truman - Missouri, although this may be questionalbe
John Kennedy - Massachussetts

Oh, I'm sorry -- I was talking about the recent past -- the last 40 years.

I think it would be pretty neat to have a woman president, and I think Hillary is an amazing person, but I honestly don't think America is ready for a woman president.

Furniture stores? :p

I think Teddy Kennedy has a better chance of getting elected Prez than Hilary Rodham Clinton.

Missouris not questionable. Its southern.

The Van Buren part was gold, though :D

Why do people say/write that they would move out of the country if someone they don't like is elected or even nominated? It's seems like a hallow threat especially when people never back it up. I would never consider leaving the United States just because I don't like an elected official.

I agree that if it's a hollow threat, which most of them are, it's ridiculous. Moving to Canada is not going to miraculously solve all your problems, and it's going to make it even harder for all the people still living in this country who need your support.

However, some elections force people to come to terms with certain facts about this country which can be really hard for them to face, and I think that's what's going on here. I can come to terms with the Bush re-election because I think that some people have reasons for it that are valid -- they aren't my reasons, but that doesn't make them not valid reasons. However, I have had a lot of trouble over the past couple days trying to deal with the fact that I live in a country where people want to write discrimination against homosexuals into our Constitution. This is not what I was brought up to believe that the US was about, and I have lost a lot of faith in this country because of it.

This could just be a temporary period of disillusionment -- or it could be more permanent. And if the second is the case, I will probably end up moving out of this country. The way this country voted made me realize that I am simply at odds with one of the fundamental facts about our country (its relationship with religion) and I don't want to spend the rest of my life fighting that.

So while I'm not planning to leave the country because of a specific politician that was elected, I can understand how other people might if they felt that the election of a certain politician taught them things about this country that they had not previously understood and didn't feel they could live with.

Interesting - just today, I got an email about Mary Jo Kopechne (anyone remember her?).


Frankly, so much can happen in the next four years, any talk about 2008 - with the exception of HRC having high ambitions - is really much too speculative.