July 23, 2007
Why Neither Field is Set
By
Blake D. Dvorak
We don't need to dig deep into American political history to see why the 2008 presidential field is anything but set at the present moment. In August 2003, a CBS News poll found that 32% of registered Democrats didn't know which of the announced candidates they preferred and 15% said "other." With nearly half of the Democratic electorate undecided and unhappy with the choices, is it any wonder Wesley Clark joined the race a month later?
Today, the Republican electorate mirrors where Democratic voters were in 2003. Although we're not seeing the same degree of unhappiness among GOP voters that we saw with Democrats, a recent AP-Ipsos poll found that a quarter of Republicans are unhappy with the field. That's 10-points higher than a month earlier -- a month in which conservative angst appeared to have been placated by the certainty of a Fred Thompson candidacy.
Perhaps once Thompson begins to campaign in earnest we'll see some of that discontent drop, as GOP spirits rise. There will likely remain, however, an opening for another high-profile conservative candidate. The obvious choice is Newt Gingrich, who has said that he'll survey the field in the fall to see if the leading candidates are meeting the needs of conservatives. Translation: If Thompson fails to impress, Gingrich will have his opening.
Chuck Hagel, meanwhile, has already defined himself quite clearly as the anti-war Republican, but without any of the eccentricities of, say, Ron Paul's anti-war views. His opening could occur in September if Gen. David Petraeus' progress report on Iraq shows that the "surge" is failing. Even if the report is less definitive, it is more likely that the ranks of war-weary GOP voters will have grown, rather than shrunk - maybe not enough to win the nomination, but enough to justify a candidacy.
On the Democratic side, how different it is from four years ago. Not only are Democratic voters quite happy with their candidates (83%, according to today's ABC News/Wash Post poll), the mood of the country clearly favors them. Under these circumstances, it is less likely that we'll see another Democratic candidate than Republican. However, the poll also found that of the 73% of Democratic voters who have not watched any of the debates, a plurality of 47% said it was because it's too early in the campaign. As with the GOP field, there's still time for a high-profile candidate with wide-spread name recognition and a base of popular as well as financial support to join the race without being at a major disadvantage.
Even with exciting candidates like Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama, former Vice President Al Gore maintains a strong following among the Democratic base (he stands at 13% in the latest national RCP average). And though she remains the frontrunner, Clinton is by no means a runaway favorite (in fact, a majority of Democrats prefer someone else as the nominee). So Gore's prospects are far from weak, and while he would not lead on day one, his ability to collect online contributions would give him a leg up on the entire field, minus the two frontrunners, making him an instant competitor. Finally, his unwillingness to utter a Shermanesque statement about his withdrawal conveniently leaves the door open for a third White House bid.
Blake D. Dvorak is an assistant editor at RealClearPolitics.
