Democratic Party - how to win in 2008

Ok, 2006 is looking good and it's possible that by 2008 Iraq will be such a disaster that no republican can win. But that's what we thought in 2004 and we still blew it. And by we I mean the leaders of the part and the primary voters in Iowa, New Hampshire, and North Carolina.

Problem 1: When the democratic party thinks the general election is won, they will nominate the candidate that they think should be president, not the one they think has the best chance of winning. The only thing Kerry had going for him was that amoung the liberal elite in Washington and to a lesser extent elsewhere, he was viewed as the best president. (And I think even that judgment was way off.) But he was not the best candidate.

Problem 2: Why does New Hampshire get such a big say in who is nominated. New England is basically a gimme for the democrats. This would be like Mississippi deciding who the republican nominee is. It's a great deal for New Hampshire but a lousy one for the democratic party and the country. (At least Iowa is a state where the race tends to be close.)

The first 5 primaries should be set as follows. Take the 5 states with the closest votes in the last presidential election by percentage. Then schedule them out with one primary a week from the lowest to highest population state. This starts of the nomination in the states where the election will be decided - giving us a candidate best positioned to win. And by taking those 5 in population size, the process still starts with a state where candidates can sell themselves at the retail level.

This would set the primaries for 2008 as:

1. New Mexico
2. Nevada
3. Iowa
4. Wisconsin
5. Ohio

Problem 3: This country tends to only elect candidates who were governors or managed very large federal organizations (see below). I think Gore would have easily won if he had been governor of Tennessee prior to becoming Vice President. Part of this is people view this as good experience for the job. And equally big part is people with executive responsibility talk different from legislators. Legislators talk about bills they passed. Executives talk about things they have accomplished. To be elected president you need to talk like one.

So what does the party need to do? Here is my take on it now:

1. Concentrate on the 2006 election. Gaining control of at least one side of congress is crucial, for the sake of the world and the country even more so than for the sake of the democratic party. This is the only job for right now.
2. Revisit the primary schedule. Tell New Hampshire the country and the party is more important than their ego and they lose their special position. Iowa should be ok with the change as they will make it to the top 5 somewhat regularly.
3. Make the primary open. Do not anoint Hillary. She's a strong candidate and she could follow JFK. But history is not in her favor - she has never held an executive position. And that could be a major factor in the election.

Presidents of the 20^th Century

• McKinley - governor
• Roosevelt - governor
• Taft - governor
• Wilson - governor
• Harding - senator (one of the worst presidents)
• Coolidge - governor
• Hoover - head American Food Administration, Supreme Economic Council, American Relief Administration, etc.
• Roosevelt - governor
• Truman - V.P. when FDR died
• Eisenhower - Supreme commander allied forces in Europe
• Kennedy - senator
• Johnson - V.P. when JFK was shot.
• Nixon - governor correction: Congress, V.P., lost race for governor
• Ford - appointed
• Carter - governor
• Reagan - governor
• Bush I - ambassador, director of the CIA
• Clinton - governor
• Bush II - governor

Put aside a sitting vice president who becomes president when the president dies (OMG - President Cheney!) and aside from Harding (who was an anomaly) and JFK, it takes executive experience to win. And yes Gore would have won a fair vote in Florida - but with executive experience he would have won with enough votes that the republican cheating would not have mattered.

And by the same token, JFK arguably won only because of vote fraud for the democrats in Chicago and Texas giving him Illinois and Texas.

For this reason I am very worried about Hillary being the democratic candidate. If she can win a highly competitive primary in competitive states, then fine. But lets test it first with a valid primary.

What do you think? Please comment.

trackbacks: DailyKos, Mudville Gazette