Like father like son?

In politics, 20 months is an eternity. That being said, with the first day to declare campaign funds (Mar. 31) not too far off, it's not too early to think about what the 2004 Presidential Race will look like. Two questions will need to be answered: 1) Will Bush be vulnerable? 2) Which Democrat has the best chance of dethroning Bush Number Two?

It's amazing how history repeats itself. As soon as W's approval ratings skyrocketed after September 11, 2001, every talking head in America was talking about how W. had learned from his father's mistakes. No way would he pay too much attention to foreign policy and neglect domestic economic troubles. No way would he let his popularity slide from its giddy wartime height to actually losing the election for his second term. No way.

Well that was then, and that was even a few months ago, but this is now. Bush's approval ratings, while still high, have dropped significantly, leaving him little room for error. Bush has taken a huge risk by placing so much importance on the conflict with Iraq. If it goes awry _ if America is forced to go into Iraq alone, or if the war effort is unsuccessful, or if the rebuilding effort is unsuccessful, Bush's popularity will take a hit.

What's more, the economy will continue to sour as investors don't know how the Iraq situation will resolve itself and oil prices keep rising. This will lead to the same criticisms Bush Sr. faced: too much attention paid to foreign policy, not enough to the American economy.

A Bush aide would tell you that the White House has taken aggressive action to right the economic ship, with a huge tax cut as the most important component of the Bush economic plan. But not many people are really fooled. Many Americans, even Republicans, are worried about how the tax cuts are distributed, both across income brackets and across time. The best stimulus would be to give short-term tax breaks to lower income brackets, who would spend a larger part of that money. Bush's plan gives breaks to higher income brackets, and spaces them out over ten years. What's more, the tax cut only exacerbates the fundamental imbalance in the US economy _ its huge debt and lack of savings.

Now, none of this will matter if America gets UN backing and cruises into Iraq without a problem, puts a stable government in Saddam's place, and the price of oil plummets down to $10 a barrel. And that's not impossible. And in that case, Bush will be very hard to beat in 2004.

But let's say the war in Iraq doesn't go so well. The economy is still struggling, and voters are looking for other options. Who in the Democratic party can step up to meet Bush?

First let's just eliminate a couple of contenders that have no chance. Dick Gephardt and Joe Lieberman. No chance. At all. Americans are tired of seeing Lieberman from the Gore campaign, he's too conservative to attract liberal votes, and besides he's Jewish. I'm willing to bet that America will have a female president before it has a Jewish one. Gephardt went out of style with jean jackets around 1988. He is the old-style protectionist labor-union backed Democrat that Bill Clinton made obsolete. Besides, Lieberman and Gephardt are just plain boring. Both of these guys will get a fair amount of money and stay alive for a while because they're well-known, but neither of them has any chance at winning the presidency. Zero.

Now to the real contenders. There are three: John Kerry of Massachussetts, Howard Dean of Vermont, and John Edwards of North Carolina. Americans are worried about security more than anything else right now. Kerry is in the best position to allay those fears. He is a war veteran, but at the same time he has strong liberal anti-war credentials _ which could become important if the war in Iraq goes bad. In that case, Americans will be looking for a different approach to foreign policy, which Kerry could provide. At the same time, Kerry isn't all that exciting. He's not incredibly personable. He'll have to overcome that in order to beat Bush.

Howard Dean has impressed some in the early going. Right now his main obstacle is his obscurity. But he has a lot of energy and has the advantage of being an "outsider." Many recent presidents _ George W., Clinton, Reagan, etc. _ have gotten to the presidency by side-stepping Washington politics (one more reason why Gephardt and Lieberman are hopeless _ they are steeped in Washington politics).

John Edwards may have the best chance of the three. Like the last three successful Democratic candidates, he is from the South. He is as charming and personable as Bush, and as intelligent as Gore. His domestic policies (civil rights, education, tax policy, etc.) can win liberal voters, while his foreign policy won't scare the right (he stands with Bush against Iraq). But he will have to prove to the electorate that he is capable of doing the job. As a first-term senator, many view him as ill-prepared for the presidency. Also, his hawkish stance on Iraq may make it hard for him to differentiate himself from Bush if it becomes the main issue in the campaign.

Right now the Democratic party is lost. It needs a new face. But if Bush loses in 2004, the Republicans will be in complete disarray. Either way, it should be an interesting race.