Despite what media/pundits and half the political junkies in this country would have you believe, I think Warner is the probable Democratic nominee. I think if Brad Henry is re-elected, he may run too. Because the thing about the Democrats is, in the post-Kennedy era, they have only had success when running Southerners who were percieved as moderate at the time. Every idiot knows this. Therefore, Hillary fails the first test of what's necessary to actually be elected, and never mind the fact she can raise alot of money, Cuomo was able to raise alot of money in 1991 and what happened, and Carter couldn't raise a dime before Iowa as far as 1976 goes. The Democrats are idiots, and they have a consistent record of shooting themselves in the foot, but I doubt it's consistent enough to where they're throwing 2008 away.
Another simple political truth of the post-JFK era, when you run a Southern Democrat at the top of a ticket and have him oppose two Yankees, the Southern Democrat will at least break even in the Southeast. It is for this reason that I think that as a part, we should forget even entertaining the idea of having a non-Southerner as nominee.
The Democrats can write off the South, like the Republicans used to. They very nearly won an electoral college majority in 2000 and 2004 with no Southern states...winning New Hampshire in 2000 (which Bush carried by 7,000 votes) would have given Gore the magic number of 270 electoral votes.
Very good points.
That is one reason why Republicans who talk about wanting Rudy Giuliani on the ticket are so deluded. That could do lasting damage to the GOP in the South, especially if the Dems ran Warner.
Giuliani is anti-2nd amendment, pro-abortion and pro-homosexual agenda.