Mother, should I run for president? Mother, should I trust the government?

So, it was asked in the comments who I'm supporting in the Democratic primary for the Presidency. Oddly enough, we have a split decision at home, with my #2 as her #1 at the moment, and vice versa. Noting that my opinion may very well change, and that certain candidates may either join or drop out of the race, here's how they rank at the moment, from last to first.

6. Other:: In this category, we'll include everyone not mentioned below. Suffice it to say, there are already two candidates I'm relatively thrilled about, so I'm not looking for a darkhorse, nor do I think we need one.

5. Hillary Clinton: Unlike the candidate to be found at #2 below, Hillary combines the worst of both worlds: A candidate who's not a particularly reliable progressive on some issues, primarily foreign policy (Hotline has her at 66 for foreign policy where 100 is ultra-liberal and 0 ultra-conservative), who's seen by many in the country as a loony liberal. Honestly, even though very little of it is her fault, I worry about a candidate that so many people view so negatively. Beyond this, too, some of her advisers or just those in general still associated with the Clintons have to be among the most noxious of the backstabbing inside-the-beltway democratic crowd, and I'd be happy to see their influence wane (this list includes Carville, Begala, Lanny Davis, Mike McCurry, Larry Summers, and a few others). Hillary deserves more credit than she gets, but she's the one candidate on the list likely to hurt the party with the infighting we really don't need.

3 (tie). Wesley Clark: For a bunch of reasons, I think his strengths will be less crucial now than they would have been in 2004, and his weaknesses more of a liability. Last time around, he was the military voice that could have stood up to Bush, Cheney, and their chickenhawkishness. Kerry should have been this way too, but he was tarred early as a fake and did an awful job of fighting back properly. In 2008, with the war going badly, the Republican love for national security as theater, rather than as something to plan out in a serious manner, will be coming back to bite them. Already, we're hearing an escalation of troops described as "The McCain Doctrine", and it's going to be an albatross for them. Thus, Clark's advantage as a General is less necessary, and his status as a campaigner becomes more important. Unfortunately, he was a good general but a rather poor campaigner, and I don't see what will have changed in the past few years to alleviate this.

3 (tie): Bill Richardson: Has good foreign policy chops and executive experience as governor of New Mexico, but can't really be said to have a ton of charisma. Maybe a good darkhorse Veep choice.

2. Barack Obama: My wife's top pick. I'd love to vote for him in the primary, but I can't commit to that yet. Oddly enough, race has nothing to do with it; he's not associated with the urban machine politics that tars a lot of black congressmen in some white voters' eyes (e.g., like Harold Ford). My big problem is the lack of policy in his message. He's all about tone, and he's by far the most gifted political speaker I've ever heard (better than Bill Clinton, who's damn good). He exudes charisma. He also has yet to say much beyond the need for changing the tone. If he would propose something big, he's got my vote. Calling for a redeployment out of Iraq helps a ton, but I want to hear something bold domestically as well. Presidents spend much of their time in office compromising, so I'd really prefer that he stakes out a bold set of policies as a starting point for negotiating ahead of time. If he endorses universal healthcare or something like that, he might become my number 1.

1. John Edwards: More charismatic than anyone besides Obama, he's been far and away the most substantive Democrat on the issues so far (noting that it's still early in the process). Trying to alleviate poverty is important, and I'm still a bit stunned that he seems to be the only major politician out there who noticed that New Orleans has been forgotten about by the President, a whole US city shattered and only rebuilt with piecemeal measures. Even if he ends up not winning the nomination, I think he and Obama will force each other in the right directions. Both will have to out-positive the other with the vision of an optimistic and progressive future, a message I think will have real resonance with the voters. There is a synergy to be found with their messages that would really make it difficult for Republicans to smear them, and I think this kind of optimism will win in the end against either McCain or Giuliani and their facade of strength, which in reality is a stubborn insistence on burying our military in Iraq while singing hollow platitudes to those sent off to die unnecessarily.

Wild Card: Al Gore: If he jumps in, all bets are off. He'd instantly become my favorite. I really, really doubt that he's running.