Basically, this election was the end of the line as I see it for the baby-boomer generation liberals. Clinton was a centrist and given 20/20 hindsight, a lot of people still wanted Bush to go, but some might have been scared off by the supposed "Massachusetts Liberal" tag so often put on Democrats. Basically, the Republicans have co-opted the political landscape, have defined the issues, and have sold much of working class America on their platform.
The Democrats are largely reactionary in approach rather than taking charge. It took the modern GOP from Nixon to Reagan (most of the 70s) to redefine their party, which was in shambles at that point. (God Bless Him, but who really counts Ford?) The Dems need to find their game plan and re-establish themselves as well. Quite possibly, Republicans could win again in 2008 given the state of the parties and that historically, probably in 1 1/2 to 2 years, the economy will be in better shape despite the GOP's best efforts to f--k it up.....
I think Al Gore is the smart choice in 2008. YES I SAID IT. He represents the best of the glory days of the Democratic Party when social progressiveness and economic centrism could go hand in hand. The term "Clinton Conservative" exists for a reason. Gore's from Tennessee and only Southerners really can win the White House as Democrats (LBJ, Carter, Clinton). I think Al Gore could run with Evan Bayh of Indiana (a popular, young democratic Governor/Senator from a GOP state) and that team would make a definitive but not radical contrast to the Bush administration and the candidate they put up in 2008; McCain would be tough, but Bush already did the dirty work unscrupulously and tastelessly attacking him for his obvious lack of patriotism. (I hear they made up, but if I spent years at the Hanoi Hilton being physically and psychologically tortured for my country only to have some rich-boy brat who had his daddy buy his way out of service snicker and tell me he was a better American, I'd be livid).
Sorry, I'm not over this yet, I'm trying to be rational and positive....so, the Democratic Party could take a real stab at the South and the Midwest with a Gore/Bayh ticket. If they could win Tennessee, Missouri, or perhaps Ohio and hold onto the blue states from 2000 and 2004, they'd win. Remember, they'd only have to swing about 5% to 10% in those states, and less than 3% in the nationwide poll.
It's eerily similar to Nixon in 1960. He had the election bribed out from under him by JFK and, like Gore, many in his party were bitter that he didn't put up a better organized fight. In 1964, Nixon didn't run but instead through all his support behind Barry Goldwater, the GOP nominee. Gore worked really hard for Dean, and then Kerry. Both challenging parties lost their respective elections. In 1964, Viet Nam was heating up, but people weren't ready for change. In 2004, the war in Iraq is getting messy but again, people opted to stick it out. In 1968, people were fed up with the war and were ready for Nixon to get another shot and he had earned his stripes within the party. Gore, with his public speaking, books on the environment (he is our most environmentally sound politician) and unselfish support of the party, is doing the same; he will get his chance to right the wrongs out of the party's control in 2000 and the mistakes we made in 2004.
AL GORE FOR PRESIDENT IN 2008!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!