January 12, 2003
ANOTHER ONE BITES THE DUST:
Graham: 'I am going to be president' (Brian E. Crowley, January 12, 2003, Palm Beach Post)Making his boldest statement yet about a possible presidential campaign, U.S. Sen. Bob Graham told reporters Saturday, "I am going to be president of the United States."Minutes later, Graham told The Palm Beach Post that he has already talked to potential political strategists and media consultants and plans to meet this week with possible campaign managers. [...]
Earlier, with television cameras rolling and newspaper reporters writing, Graham responded to a series of questions about whether he will stay in the race even if it meant losing his Senate seat by suggesting that no candidate can run for president without believing he will win.
"I am not running for president," he said. "I am going to to be the president of the United States."
Despite the surprisingly strong declaration, Graham would not definitely answer whether he would run for reelection to his Senate seat if his campaign for president failed. The presidential caucuses and primaries begin in January 2004 and will be largely wrapped up by early spring, leaving Graham plenty of time to run for a fourth term in the U.S. Senate if he chooses.
While Graham hinted broadly that if he commits to a presidential run he would not try to return to the Senate, he did not specifically rule it out.
Given the vote in FL this past November, this Senate seat automatically goes from safe Democrat to leaning Republican, in what is rapidly shaping up as a potential 7+ seat loss for the Democrats in '04 (GA, SC, FL, NC, AR, NV, WA).
Meanwhile, though he has no shot at his party's nomination, Bob Graham may be the first Democrat since Scoop Jackson who might make a good president. I'll certainly vote for him in the NH primary. In the next administration, President Bush should ask him to take over and transform the CIA.
Posted by Orrin Judd at January 12, 2003 8:21 AMI'm gonna be a fireman when I grow up!
Posted by: Mr. Michael La at January 12, 2003 7:57 AMErr...sorry..that's how his comment struck me.I'll grow up now.
Posted by: Mr. Michael La at January 12, 2003 7:57 AMThe problem with Graham is he is too much like W. He's a moderate Dem from a southern state who is hawkish on the war. So he'll have to hope for the economy to tank further or the war to go badly to win. Americans don't like pessimists. But, he may be positioning for 2008.
I wonder how many Dems are hoping McCain will pull a Perot on W so they can slide in on a plurality or is everyone looking ahead to 2008.
Oops, my computer left my nom de plume off again. drats.
Posted by: Buttercup at January 12, 2003 8:26 AMAlso, Graham would win the reelection to the senate very easily, the man is very well liked and very well known by everyone in FLA. Even if he had a shortened time to campaign for senate he'd still win. Unless, Jeb were to throw his hat in, but I was hoping Jeb would go after Airhead Nelson's seat.
Posted by: Buttercup at January 12, 2003 8:33 AMYou get to vote in Dem primaries, Orrin?
Posted by: pj at January 12, 2003 8:36 AMOJ,
I would add same Nunn to your list of potentially good presidents.
BC,
Make a contribution to Nader, who desperately needs it, just in case McCain, or more likely, Buchannon runs again.
P.J.,
Registered Independents in N.H. may vote in either parties primary. I'd vote for Graham in the primary too. Is this a great state ... or what?
pj:
Sure, we have open primaries as long as you switch registration for the day. How do you think guys like McCain win here.
genecis:
He never actually ran, I don't think.
OJ,
He declined on the basis that he initially voted against the Gulf War and felt that would be an insurmountable issue for his candidacy. So, he's sleeping in Georgia and the Dems. have lost a potentially excellent candidate. Perhaps, in reality, he's smart enough not to want the job.
He'd certainly have been better than Clinton.
Posted by: oj at January 12, 2003 10:49 AMSo would have Dole.
Posted by: Genecis at January 12, 2003 1:03 PMMaybe my memory of Sam Nunn is worse than y'all's, but I was never especially fond of him. I preferred him to, say, Mitchell, but if both were by the side of the road and I had to go, I'd have to think about whether or not to drive on to the next rest stop.
Posted by: Christopher Badeaux at January 12, 2003 1:44 PMThat's "Spacecadet" Nelson. Like "Barfin' Jake" Garn, he managed to get hisself a space junket. Unfortunately, his was the flight before Challenger.
Posted by: Raoul Ortega at January 12, 2003 2:24 PMCorrection: If both were on fire
by the side of the road...
Only seven Senate seats in 2004? I have my fantasy that, with a good economy, a well regarded disarmament of Saddam (we don't say "war", Condi for Senate in CA, Giuliani for Senate in NY and a huge money edge, Rove is plotting a "Win 50, elect 60" strategy.
The 50, obviously, tops Reagan '84 and Nixon '72.
Given an environment like that of this past fall with W. at the top of the ticket and Condi as VP, the GOP might well pick up the seadts in CA, WI, NY, HI and at least one of the Dakotas. But two things have to happen to create that environment, the war after Iraq (whether in Syria or N. Korea or wherever) needs to be going well and the Dow needs to start going up again, up towards 11,000.
Posted by: oj at January 12, 2003 5:02 PM> In the next administration, President Bush should ask him to take over and transform the CIA.
For heaven's sake, why wait: offer him the CIA post now
!
Kirk,
That would be good for the country but bad for the Dems: Jeb would appoint a Republican to fill the seat until the special election, and one would think that a good, smart Republican would be favored to win that election by a fair margin. It would be a pickup for the Reps, and Graham is enough of a party loyalist not to want that.
I seem to recall this situation existed when W was picking his first cabinet -- he couldn't pick anyone from the Senate unless the governor of that state was of the same party, so as not to upset the (then) 50-50 balance.