Witness the Future
Who would've thought 8 years ago that Democrats would be where we are right now? I mean Bush had just been declared the victor by the supreme court and Republicans had control of the House of Reps. and were poised to take back the Senate. Democrats now control 60 seats in the Senate, a strong majority in the House of Reps. as well as the Presidency. But way back then it was not easy to see the road ahead or just who would be traveling with us. Hardly anybody outside Illinois' thirteenth district had even heard of Barack Obama. Al Franken hadn't even written "Lying Liars" yet. Nancy Pelosi had just been elected the first female minority whip in congressional history and Harry Reid was majority whip over in the Senate. Yet here we are all these years later and these are the power players, among others of course. My point is that most onlookers were oblivious of what was to come for our current leaders but was the rise to leadership unpredictable (surely in Al's case) or could careful observers have seen the possibilities. Well I'm an observer and as carefully as I could I have assembled a list of 8 Democrats to watch in the next 8. (years that is)
Legacy Politicians
Christopher G. Kennedy- The 8th son of the late Sen. Robert F. Kennedy, a businessman and political operative, Kennedy is mulling a run for the Illinois Senate seat currently held by Roland Burris. With his successful business background and family legacy he'd make a formidable contender and would immediately be a big player in party politics were he to get elected.
Robin Carnahan- In Missouri, the Carnahan's are political royalty Robin Carnahan's parents both held statewide elected office as Governor (her father) and Senator (mother) and she has been elected twice as the Secretary of State in Missouri, actually setting the record for most votes garnered for any candidate in Missouri electoral history. Carnahan is a powerhouse in what has been a swing midwestern state and may play on the Presidential stage someday.
Beau Biden- Well this one is obvious. The guy is a U.S. Senator if he wants it and there's no reason he wouldn't. His father is.......... Do I have to explain this one?
Rising Stars
Gavin Newsom- Christian Bale's doppelganger? The Plumpjack guy? Mr. Gay Rights? Yes awesome Mr. Newsom has a shot at being the next Governor of California and with his fresh brand of progressivism that is unashamed he's one to watch. As Mayor of San Francisco Newsom has been agressive and innovative much like his approach to his successful wine business Plumpjack. Newsom is photogenic and articulate which means national politics is on his horizon.
Corey Booker- Booker is the heir apparent. Given, Obama has been in office for barely six months. Obama has set a tone and made explicit his style which should allow him to win re-election and have a successful 2 terms by the time he leaves office. When that time comes, a power vacuum will be left in the party and a mad scramble will ensue. Booker will be the man that has to do the least scrambling. If any politician in America is a reflection of the Obama brand on any level it would be Booker. Booker was the "new" politician that ended up being elected to replace disgraced former Newark Mayor Sharpe James. In his short tenure, Booker has been able to attract business to the city, cut down on crime and create a new sense of pride in the New Jersey city. There is wide speculation that Booker will run for Governor some day (maybe in four years) or take an appointment from the President. No matter what, Booker is the embodiment of the new politics that has swept the nation.
Artur Davis- He's a Harvard guy, a moderate, from the south in his third term in congress. Davis is also running for Governor of Alabama which if he wins would make him only the 5th African-American Governor in our nations History. Davis is popular in his district and early polls show that he's a strong statewide candidate and with the support of President Obama Davis may be on his way to prominence.
Kamala Harris- A candidate for Attorney General of California and current District Attorney for the city of San Francisco. Harris is an interesting figure, her mother is an Indian-American and her father is Jamaican-American. She has a strong legal record famously challenging the current Attorney General on a capital punishment case opposing the death penalty and winning. Here is a leader with a serious future in California and maybe beyond.
This Guy Had To Be On The List
Tim Kaine- OK so Kaine is the Governor of Virginia and the Chairman of the Democratic Party. He was handpicked by President Obama to oversee and update the organization of the party infrastructure. Of course, before that there was widespread speculation that he would be the Vice Presidential nominee on the party ticket all the way up to just before Joe Biden was announced. So Kaine is already in a leadership position but what after this one? Many a party chairman has used the connections one can build to catapult them further. It is a fact, however, that Kaine has alread done the Governor thing and that the options he has are therefore diminished. Still I'd watch Kaine, he may be on a national ticket yet.
Well that's my list of future power players. I included 2 politicians from the four major regions Northeast, Midwest, South, and West and therefore did not mention all of the potential out there. Surely my fellow TPMers have some clues on up and coming talent out there plus I'd love to know what you all think of my list.
Legacy Politicians
Christopher G. Kennedy- The 8th son of the late Sen. Robert F. Kennedy, a businessman and political operative, Kennedy is mulling a run for the Illinois Senate seat currently held by Roland Burris. With his successful business background and family legacy he'd make a formidable contender and would immediately be a big player in party politics were he to get elected.
Robin Carnahan- In Missouri, the Carnahan's are political royalty Robin Carnahan's parents both held statewide elected office as Governor (her father) and Senator (mother) and she has been elected twice as the Secretary of State in Missouri, actually setting the record for most votes garnered for any candidate in Missouri electoral history. Carnahan is a powerhouse in what has been a swing midwestern state and may play on the Presidential stage someday.
Beau Biden- Well this one is obvious. The guy is a U.S. Senator if he wants it and there's no reason he wouldn't. His father is.......... Do I have to explain this one?
Rising Stars
Gavin Newsom- Christian Bale's doppelganger? The Plumpjack guy? Mr. Gay Rights? Yes awesome Mr. Newsom has a shot at being the next Governor of California and with his fresh brand of progressivism that is unashamed he's one to watch. As Mayor of San Francisco Newsom has been agressive and innovative much like his approach to his successful wine business Plumpjack. Newsom is photogenic and articulate which means national politics is on his horizon.
Corey Booker- Booker is the heir apparent. Given, Obama has been in office for barely six months. Obama has set a tone and made explicit his style which should allow him to win re-election and have a successful 2 terms by the time he leaves office. When that time comes, a power vacuum will be left in the party and a mad scramble will ensue. Booker will be the man that has to do the least scrambling. If any politician in America is a reflection of the Obama brand on any level it would be Booker. Booker was the "new" politician that ended up being elected to replace disgraced former Newark Mayor Sharpe James. In his short tenure, Booker has been able to attract business to the city, cut down on crime and create a new sense of pride in the New Jersey city. There is wide speculation that Booker will run for Governor some day (maybe in four years) or take an appointment from the President. No matter what, Booker is the embodiment of the new politics that has swept the nation.
Artur Davis- He's a Harvard guy, a moderate, from the south in his third term in congress. Davis is also running for Governor of Alabama which if he wins would make him only the 5th African-American Governor in our nations History. Davis is popular in his district and early polls show that he's a strong statewide candidate and with the support of President Obama Davis may be on his way to prominence.
Kamala Harris- A candidate for Attorney General of California and current District Attorney for the city of San Francisco. Harris is an interesting figure, her mother is an Indian-American and her father is Jamaican-American. She has a strong legal record famously challenging the current Attorney General on a capital punishment case opposing the death penalty and winning. Here is a leader with a serious future in California and maybe beyond.
This Guy Had To Be On The List
Tim Kaine- OK so Kaine is the Governor of Virginia and the Chairman of the Democratic Party. He was handpicked by President Obama to oversee and update the organization of the party infrastructure. Of course, before that there was widespread speculation that he would be the Vice Presidential nominee on the party ticket all the way up to just before Joe Biden was announced. So Kaine is already in a leadership position but what after this one? Many a party chairman has used the connections one can build to catapult them further. It is a fact, however, that Kaine has alread done the Governor thing and that the options he has are therefore diminished. Still I'd watch Kaine, he may be on a national ticket yet.
Well that's my list of future power players. I included 2 politicians from the four major regions Northeast, Midwest, South, and West and therefore did not mention all of the potential out there. Surely my fellow TPMers have some clues on up and coming talent out there plus I'd love to know what you all think of my list.
Advertisement













This is a great list. Newsom is highly intriguing.
July 8, 2009 7:48 PM | Reply | Permalink
Oh I do agree, he's a big reason I came up with this post.
July 8, 2009 7:54 PM | Reply | Permalink
I do wonder, though, if his being so outwardly pro-GLBT will be an issue later in a Presidential run, if he should make one. Your thoughts?
July 8, 2009 7:59 PM | Reply | Permalink
Well if Newsom did run (in 2016)he would have had to fill out his resume a bit by then. So he wouldn't only be known as the pro-GLBT mayor of San Fran. Though, I do think it will be more a boon than liability by then. The country is trending progressive especially on the social issues and 8 years from now he will be seen as a hero by most.
July 8, 2009 8:04 PM | Reply | Permalink
Good point. I wiki'd him today and was very impressed with what he's done so far. And, yeah, he DOES look like Christian Bale in American Psycho, heh heh. I kept waiting to see a picture of him in a clear rain slicker with an axe in his hand (I love American Psycho).
I think you're spot on re: Kennedy too.
July 8, 2009 8:07 PM | Reply | Permalink
Great, I'm glad you liked the post. Kennedy is under the radar now but as soon as he announces it will be the top story. "The Kennedy renewal" "Camelot Restored", and so on.
July 8, 2009 8:19 PM | Reply | Permalink
Awesome list profb, I am equally as excited to watch Newsom. He's been on MSNBC a few times on the Rachel Maddow show and has been a strong supporter of the LGTB community.
One name I'd like to add to the list even though it's more personal than national, but Rep. Sestak in PA is great as well. He wanted to challenge Specter, but unfortunately the governor said anyone who challenged specter would lose and would have no support. Annoying.
July 8, 2009 8:40 PM | Reply | Permalink
If Sestak can somehow defeat Specter then he will definitely be a national figure to watch.
July 8, 2009 8:59 PM | Reply | Permalink
The combination of dynasty politics and party politics is interesting.
It's pretty disgusting to me that the dem party power players are willing to shut out any challenges to Senator Specter. I thought Sestak was going to run.
It's good to look ahead. Nice post:)
July 8, 2009 9:02 PM | Reply | Permalink
I didn't realize that so many folks were mad about the Specter thing. He was always one of the few republicans that I liked and I thought it was great to have him as a Dem but maybe I'm just looking at strategy too much. Anyway, it's always a pleasure to look forward.
July 8, 2009 9:17 PM | Reply | Permalink
I'll wager a deal was struck - cross the aisle and not have to face a primary challenge. The guy is in his 80's and not in good health, multiple bouts of cancer. They are giving him the chance to go out on top. And he has shaped up relative to his voting, being somewhat closer to the Dems' line than he really was to the Repubs' during his time with them.
Not quite the evangelist convert we'd all like, still, it's incremental progress, and Sestak's a young guy in Congressional terms. He'll be in line, I suspect.
It's a sometimes dingy business, this politics stuff.
July 9, 2009 10:29 AM | Reply | Permalink
Really fine rundown. A week or so ago I saw a poll. Maybe that 536 or 8 guy?
All dem senators up in 2010 are secure
REps looking at 7 seats not doin so goooood
Oh and do not forget my buddy Dean
He hits the cable news regularly...and he IS GOOD.
July 8, 2009 9:15 PM | Reply | Permalink
Oh I love Dr. Dean. I personally think he should've been over at HHS instead of Sebelius. But what are ya gonna do.
July 8, 2009 9:19 PM | Reply | Permalink
I like the idea of Dean standing by for progressives to run against Obama in 2012 if Obama steps too far out line.
July 8, 2009 11:43 PM | Reply | Permalink
Not going to happen.
Can you name me one successful* intraparty challenge to an incumbent President in either of our lifetimes?
* Took the nomination, went on to win the general.
July 9, 2009 12:04 AM | Reply | Permalink
That's really not much of an argument (e.g. "hasn't happened before so it can't happen now")
One could argue that Ted Kennedy's run for office really helped Reagan more than anything else. That's an unintended effect -- but a real one nonetheless.
Having said that, I agree -- for other reasons -- that Obama won't be challenged by Howard Dean. If Dean was very popular and from, say, California or New York, it might be another story.
July 9, 2009 5:18 AM | Reply | Permalink
Past being prologue obviously having no meaning for you whatsoever.
Trends being indicative, you know, actual analyzing - with that nasty data stuff.
Sorry, NonThinker, you lose. Thanks for playing.
July 9, 2009 10:05 AM | Reply | Permalink
"Past being prologue"?
That's exactly the argument used for us to go into Vietnam.
You see? You can't just blinding apply "known" thoughts.
Every situation is different and requires careful thinking. Sometimes previous situations provide good insights. Sometimes not. The difference is to know the difference.
July 9, 2009 11:56 AM | Reply | Permalink
Clearly, you don't.
July 9, 2009 12:08 PM | Reply | Permalink
As an original Deaniac, I still love the good Dr. I'm thinking that if I were President Obama (perish the thought) I'd want Dean exactly where he is--not because I would see him as a rival, but because he provides the leverage I would need to get a good health plan approved in Congress. Dean can do things to recalcitrant Democrats that Sebelius cannot do and that Obama can only do at his peril regarding other issues on which he needs their support. I think Obama realizes this. He can publicly "regret" that Dean is going after "moderate" democrats while privately he thinks "hit 'em again, harder, harder".
Providentially, just as I was proofreading this I received an e-mail from Dr. Dean (as did maybe a million or so others). For those not on Democracy for America's mailing list, here's a salient quote.
No member of the Administration could apply this kind of pressure.
Incidentally, Dean will be liveblogging on Daily Kos today at 12:00 eastern time.
July 9, 2009 9:08 AM | Reply | Permalink
And that, amike, is exactly what we need on our side. The non-Administration, non-Congress cable chat show visitors who speak boldly and forthrightly. And in our case, we have the advantage of having some actual facts on our side, rather than the wishful thinking and dogma that have characterized the Republican Party in recent years.
What we've needed, over and above the facts, is someone (better, several someones) who can present them clearly, concisely, and with enough "stickiness" to reshape the debate in the public sphere. And that is the single best place for Dean.
(I will refrain from going into why he was a lost cause in 2004, as it's no longer of any importance.)
July 9, 2009 10:16 AM | Reply | Permalink
Yep. And he can do this as an "outside agitator" better than as Democratic Party Chair, as well. Sort of like Al Gore, who could do more to focus on global warning as a "private" citizen with a strong public persona.
July 9, 2009 1:05 PM | Reply | Permalink
Thanks for the post, PrfB. You know my recent conversion so I am busy getting caught up on the "other side". Your list of people to keep an eye on will be helpful to me. Being a gal from PA, I too am a bit upset about Sestak being pushed out of the race, if indeed that happens.
Anyway - thanks.
July 8, 2009 9:16 PM | Reply | Permalink
wow!
excellent info and summaries
You totally rawk!
July 8, 2009 9:20 PM | Reply | Permalink
From Michigan, keep an eye out for the dem. mayor of Lansing to rise. Virg Bernero.
What about the Republicans that are on the rise? Got any insights for them?
July 8, 2009 11:15 PM | Reply | Permalink
Virg Bernero, I'll have to check him out. And as for the Republicans, I'll handicap 2012 with one name Mitt Romney.
July 9, 2009 12:39 AM | Reply | Permalink
Professor B, your list seems based entirely on personality, star power and identity politics. You don't say anything at all about what policy positions or agendas these figures advocate, or why anyone should support them. Pretty shallow.
July 8, 2009 11:51 PM | Reply | Permalink
Shallow yes but those "shallow" indicators have more to do with success on the national stage than all the credentials these individuals possess and they all have extensive records. If it were about records in 2008, Joe Biden and Chris Dodd would have been the favorites for the Dems along with Bill Richardson. The truth is that on top of qualifications and positions, individuals need a bit of that pizazz to make them stand out.
July 9, 2009 12:11 AM | Reply | Permalink
I'd offer, Dan, that these people, by their pedigrees alone, if for no other reason, are far more closely aligned on policy with "our" (the American people's) interests than anyone on "the other side", and remind you as well of the Molly Ivins dictum that successful politicians not only need to take the right positions, they also need "a little Elvis" in order to win.
The alternative is to issue incredibly detailed position papers that no voter will take the time to rad, and content ourselves with "losing pure" - which was the mistake we made for far too long.
Even if we have to move one step at a time, even if we get half a loaf now and then, we're making progress. I'll take that, and continue to vote for those who offer further improvement with the passage of time. Especially considering the alternative.
July 9, 2009 10:22 AM | Reply | Permalink
I'm just saying that there is nothing in the post that tells me whether these are people I should support.
July 9, 2009 11:36 AM | Reply | Permalink
Unless you are in their state, or they run for POTUS, it's a moot point about whom to support. That's part of the real issue on TPM. Everyone only has 3 reps in Congress: 2 Senators, 1 Congressman. That's it. Unless you plan on giving out of state politicians money for their campaign, there's little reason for them to even care about you. You simply don't count on their radar.
July 9, 2009 12:25 PM | Reply | Permalink
Send them some money and they will care about you, plain and simple. I read many expressions of joy from people outside Minnesota who felt their contributions were well-founded once Al Franken was sworn into office. National politicians all get money from outside their state. There's something wrong with that, but then again, if they are going to have a national voice, why should they not hear from the nation as well as their immediate constituencies?
July 9, 2009 2:24 PM | Reply | Permalink
OK, support them.
July 9, 2009 3:09 PM | Reply | Permalink
The stopped clock below you (NonThinker) actually has a couple valid points, although, as per usual for stopped clocks, they are through no direct agency of his own.
ProfB is simply pointing to those who we might want to watch going forward. Some of them, we'll be hearing a lot from, others, maybe less. Fact is, right now, the Dems are the team with a deeper bench. Good for us.
July 9, 2009 4:08 PM | Reply | Permalink
Sadly, you should have to. But no one requests it.
Nepotism is such an ugly word -- except in politics.
Joe Kennedy II blew into office (House of Rep) by his name alone. He by-based far more experienced people. There was no need for a primary all of a sudden.
Hillary Clinton? Ditto. Merely mentioning her name screwed the primary season in NY. And Hillary wasn't even from NY!
You mentioned Nancy Pelosi. How's this for pedigree:
Father (Thomas D'Alesandro, Jr.) - Congressman from MD *and* Mayor of Baltimore
Brother (Thomas D'Alesandro III) - mayor of Baltimore
Al Gore, Jr.? Well, Al Gore, Sr. was Congressman *and* Senator.
Prescott Bush? Serves as Senator. Sires a President (GHWB) who begats another President (GWB) -- and a Governor (Jeb) to boot.
Of course, Prescott would have understood Joe Kennedy, Sr. quite well. And vice versa.
Need more? Wiki the Cabot Lodges. Or the Rockefellers. The list goes on and on.
Oh... PS: Joe Kennedy II may get a chance to be a Senator now if Uncle Ted goes suddenly.
I'd say all this is UnAmerican (and it should be) -- but we have a fine tradition of this going back to John and John Quincy Adams.
July 9, 2009 5:13 AM | Reply | Permalink
Sure. Because "going into the family business" is never, ever done anywhere else, under any circumstance imaginable.
July 9, 2009 10:24 AM | Reply | Permalink
High elected office is not supposed to be a "family business."
See also: Oligarchies, Monarchies.
Maybe you'd prefer to live under one of those? The United States is supposed to be different.
July 9, 2009 11:58 AM | Reply | Permalink
Maybe I'd prefer people who did a decent job to caring about their ancestry.
Why don't you grow up? You concern yourself with irrelevancies at the expense of what matters. And you're disturbingly proud of it.
Get lost, you arrogant little POS.
July 9, 2009 12:10 PM | Reply | Permalink
If you let me know where in Michigan you are, I can recommend a good anger management class.
You remind me of a left-of-center version of the same people that attend the Tea Party rallies. You've fancied yourself as a journeyman, but have never really delved into the world of power politics except 2nd or 3rd hand. You fancy yourself educated and sophisticated -- which is exactly how your elected officials want you to feel. Meanwhile, they inhabit an entirely different world than you where power and privilege are handed down, generation to generation. If you don't believe me, why not check out Warren Buffet's will and see what he has to say about the topic and why his children aren't going to be jagillionaires when he goes.
July 9, 2009 12:21 PM | Reply | Permalink
Kid, you are among the most delusional people I've ever seen here.
First, I'm a product of the working class. And despite that, well enough educated both in academia and the street to know that you are a complete fool, and an utter tool.
Second, you've got my state wrong. By hundreds of miles, in fact. Not that accuracy ever bothered you before - why start now?
Third, I've been involved in multiple campaigns, local, state, and national. Care to put up something of evidence of your superior understanding and involvement? (Oh, I forgot - you're a punk kid with nothing to show for his life yet.)
Fourth, I am also capable of recognizing that there are those who "went into the family business" of politics that do a good job, and those like the Bushes, who declined with every generation. You're stuck with rash generalizations and confusing babies with bathwater.
And fifth, I think that it's time for you to grab your giant bag of Cheetos and your two-liter bottle of Mountain Dew and get back down to your mother's basement. You're clearly ill-equipped to deal with the adult world, and given both your illogic and your temperament, I suspect you will remain so no matter how long you live.
You want to throw down, Junior, you're gonna get your head handed to you. Best you quit now - you're so far out of your league it isn't even funny any longer.
July 9, 2009 4:04 PM | Reply | Permalink
There are pluses and minuses to being of the hereditary nobility, if you will. It's not all bad. Connections are there and knowledge of the process is practically instinctive. Legacies do have certain very real avantages. However, there are also the disconnects to consider. A representative should repreent the people and have an awareness of what they want. Being familiar with the lobbyists sets the graft machinery into high gear very quickly.
The point is that we, the people, should be more conscious of whether the children have the same talents as the parents because often, it was the experience of the parent that made them great and not the bloodline. Still, no sense in trying to get a German Shepherd to hunt ducks when a Labrador takes to the water like none other.
July 9, 2009 2:34 PM | Reply | Permalink
Well stated Gregor,I couldn't have said it better myself.
July 9, 2009 3:15 PM | Reply | Permalink
Thanks!
Can you tell I own a Lab mix but have a little Shepherd envy every time I see one? It's the Border Collie, you see. Only a Lab would tolerate being "herded" with a nip at it's bum and turn around as if to say, "Whaddya do that for! Wanna play chase me?" and it starts all over, but they never really fight.
July 9, 2009 6:39 PM | Reply | Permalink