On Deck?

As the calendar brings us to June 2006, you surely know what political event is right around the corner? No, not mid-term congressional elections…I'm talking about the 2008 presidential campaign!

Senator Russ Feingold and Governor Mark Warner, two high-profile Democrats (and likely presidential candidates), were in New Hampshire over the weekend, speaking to and getting the rockstar treatment from the state's party convention (rockstar treatment meaning standing ovations and photo-ops, not lines of coke off of whore asses…though I wouldn't put it past that rascal Feingold). Notably absent was Hillary Clinton, who, though an extraordinarily competent politician, would do he party the most good by not challenging for the nomination.

Why are Feingold and Warner generating such early buzz? Salon suggests it is because they represent "the purist and pragmatic wings of the party".

Feingold has made other Democrats look timorous by championing withdrawal from Iraq and a Senate resolution censuring the president. Warner has emerged as the party's latest Southern white knight, the red-state dragon slayer who combines a sterling record as governor with an appealing business background as a mega-rich cellphone entrepreneur who helped found Nextel.

Sounds good, right? Perhaps if we get these two in front of the nation early, we can avoid a drawn out primary season filled with Democratic in-fighting. The problem is that Feingold may have a bit too much Dean in him to be a viable threat to carry battleground states in the Midwest, and Warner may not be different enough to truly bring the party back to its core values.

The Iraq war serves as a prime illustration of this yin-yang debate. Feingold in his speech was characteristically direct: "Why are so many Democrats too timid to say what everyone in America knows? It's time to redeploy the troops. It's time to bring the troops out of Iraq. I say bring them home by the end of the year."

"The new Iraqi government," Warner said, "has to …step up and disband the militias and try to bring about some level of stability. …The only way it can happen is if we involve the balance of the Iraqi neighbors. Bring them all to the table. Form some level of a Regional Contact Group, so this is no longer simply an American problem."

The Dean/Lieberman comparisons aside, the differences between the two candidates are more than, as Salon points out, a study in "dueling bumper stickers reading: 'Bring Our Troops Home for Xmas' and 'Form a Regional Contact Group – Now!'"

No, looking at Feingold and Warner today is really looking at the future of the Democratic Party. While Warner stands a much better chance of picking up support in swing states, Feingold is a more vocal bearer of liberal values. Is it worth sacrificing another presidential election to ensure that the party's core beliefs are represented in our candidate? I don't know, and I don't know if either guy can beat John McCain…but I guess we have 28 more months to figure things out.