Not my choice.  Hems and haws too much.  Voted for the credit card bill.  Has dirty laundry from a prior effort (lifting a speech and trying to pass it off as his own).  Plus senators don't win.

People want change and he comes across as more of the beltway?business crowd.

But Vice President Biden?

I'm not a big fan of the guy, and don't particularly want him in either spot, but to me, it feels like he's running for Vice President, not President. He's getting his name out there, making noise to get noticed, but at the same time he's been talking up other people's candidacies more than his own. He called Senator Clinton "the overwhelming, prohibitive favorite" for the nomination (which is probably true right now), and, even more obviously, I noticed this on the DraftMarkWarner.com website:

"On a possible Warner run for the White House, Senator Joe Biden teased the February 5th Jefferson-Jackson dinner crowd with lines such as "My name is Joe Biden and I'm here to audition for Vice President of the United States of America" and even more obviously, "When I'm Mark Warner's Vice President."."

And this would make sense in a way. If an outsider governor from Virginia or New Mexico were to win the nomination, wouldn't they want a DC insider with recent foreign policy experience? That could be his thinking.

That's my thought, anyway. I could be wrong.

(Can you tell them apart? They even have the same haircut.)

"Freedom is irrelevant. Resistance is futile. You will be assimilated."

I hate to make myself this unpopular in only my second comment on this site but... I'd be excited about a Biden candidacy.  You make excellent points that he's spent three decades in the senate - which serves as two strikes (Beltway and Senators don't win the White House)...  However, I think he can insulate himself from the Beltway charge... afterall he does live among his constituents.  Every day he rides the train to and from Delaware, not a car ride to a posh residence in Georgetown.  Plus, he's also got the foreign policy chops, being generally among the most consistent and clearest voice on foreign policy matters in the party.  He's got solid domestic policy background to use as well (he was Chairman of the Senate Judiciary committee, and we've already seen how often those sorts of issues come up)

Is he the perfect candidate for '08?  It's too early to tell.  I know he'll be looked at with skepticism on the netroots because of his comments regarding Dean of late, but I would humbly suggest that we not allow Biden to be judged solely on those comments or by the amount of time in the Senate.  He is a clear speaker, who has a way of relating complex issues in a straightforward manner.  I think he could be an excellent candidate, but I, too, could be wrong.

needs to catch a clue.  He's not presidential material.

And I think he gets an unfair rap in alot of ways.  The whole plagearism thing was unfair in alot of ways, he had given credit to Neil Kinnock for the line about government giving people "a platform to stand on" many times before the speech in Iowa when he forgot to do so and John Sasso (Dukakis's main man) passed comparitive tapes on to the media to ruin him.

Having said that, while I think President Biden could probably do a pretty good job, I don't see any way he could get elected.  He might be a good pick as Warner's VP (he has foreign policy cred) but otherwise I don't see much excitement or anything coming from him.

Anybody else tired of the "been there, done that" crowd?  He ran in 1988 and didn't get anywhere (in fact he was embarrassed out of the race with the speech plagiarism).  Now, 17 years later, he wants to take another crack at it?  His time has passed, just like Gephardt's last year.

He brings nothing to the table as a VP candidate either, except maybe, maybe if Hillary is the nominee.  Even then I think Hillary would be better off with Clark.

He has the national security cred, needed to lead. I think his time may have passed but I could definatly see him as POTUS...definatly presidential material.

I think we'll be routinely surprised how much support Biden has.  No matter how stupid or silly he is in words and issues, he's got charisma and power just sort of seems to wear well on him.  If he were less corrupted and had more support of the progressive wing, he'd be pretty formidable.

I see little likelihood of Biden filling out a Veep ticket unless someone desperately needs some foreign policy credentials.  He definitely adds nothing to a Hillary ticket; maybe a Richardson or Schweitzer ticket but I can't see how either of them gets the nomination in the first place.  Geographically, he's  a zero.  He's articulate but is that enough?

"I would guess that Biden feels like it's now or never."

I would have preferred "never," myself.

I'm ambivalent about Biden.  He's got the foreign affairs credentials, and unlike the commenter above, I do think he's "presidential," whatever that means.  I hope the Democrats come up with a good line of candidates to choose from.  '08 is our year, so we need to be very thoughtful in our selection...

http://asilentcacophony.blogspot.com

Biden's (D-MBNA) not going anywhere in the primaries, but he is great Sec of State material. In fact I hear he was on Kerry's shortlist to replace Powell if he would have won.
But no way is he ready for a big national campaign.

So who's running so far?

Kerry
Edwards
Clinton
Bayh
Warner
Biden
Richardson

Damn...

If Biden got the nomination, I might just vote for him, but I'd feel incredibly dirty.  There's no way I'd work for him.  The bankruptcy bill makes him worse than Lieberman in my mind.

And frankly, I don't want a candidate who voted for the war period.

Delaware and Connecticut. Get on the bandwagon early!

...candidate goes, I'd rather see a guy like Gen. Clark.  I think he'd have a much better understanding of what's going on out there than even Biden with his many years of foreign policy work in the Senate.  Plus, he doesn't have any black eyes on the home front with Senate or House votes for which he could be taken to task.  

About the only thing that could be used against him from overseas is how long it took the forces under his command to somewhat clean up the Bosnia issue in the late 90s.  Even that, though, had fairly wide support from both sides of Congress (not always, but most of the time).

Just a thought.  I'm still waiting for some of the smoke to clear out there and find out who really is running.

is who Joe Biden is, IMO. Notwithstanding his recent
Dean remarks, I never found him to have
conviction on any matter except for continuing
his cushy Senate occupancy.

His greatest accomplishment as a Senator seems to
have been the botched-up Anita Hill hearings. But,
then again, I could be wrong. If so, who will point
out 10 of the greatest bills (2 for each 6 year
term is not unreasonable) that he has authored 5 of
which made it all the way through. Heck, just let
me know if there even one important bill of his
that went onto to become a law.

Show me the Bills, Senator!!!

He's not a bad choice for the Republican nomination.

One this Father's Day one can dream, can't he?

Just say no to Biden.

He's of the bankers, by the bankers, for the bankers.

I do think Biden is presidential material despite his comments about Dean.  He is about as much of a foreign policy guru our party has, and he has always done well attacking Bush (giving him slight praise and then really go after him in the same sentence).  However, he is uninspiring and more of a senate relic than anything else.  I think he would make an excellent Sec of State or VP (though he doesn't add anything geographically significant to the ticket).  I've said it before many times on here and I'll say it again, Feingold should be our pick with maybe Richardson as VP, although richardson has some baggage from the Clinton Admin.  

Not sure how I feel about this one.  I don't get the impression that he supports the draft so much as he is arguing that Bush has so illegitimized the Iraq war and the GWOT that to complete our military tasks we might have to use the draft.  That being said, I don't see the draft happening.  But to me it always seemed more of a lateral attack on the administration.  Did I miss something here?

On most foreign policy he sounds halfway decent to me.  I think his attack of Dean was laughable.  I just haven't heard anything cool come out of him on the domestic front.

In any event, it's way too early to be whipping your dick out for '08.  I don't see myself weighing candidates for '08 seriously until I see how we stand after '06.

If Dean does well and makes us some headway in '06, and if he does it with OUR kind of candidate... well the Democratic party might be a whol' 'nuther animal going into the primaries.

Personally, though... I just know that '08 is gonna be a BLAST.  God I hope I can get a job in NH after I graduate!

Anyway... Biden has obviously been strutting his stuff, jumping through his own imaginary hoops... trying to look moderate, whatever the hell that means.  It's all in good fun, I suppose.  Just take his ass-kissing w/ a grain of salt, I guess.

Similar to Bayh, I can't come up with one sellable quality Biden has that others in the field don't.  I am not really saying this rhetorically, if someone knows what he can offer please tell me.

One thing that baffles me is that people refuse to let go of the myth that strong foreign policy credentials get you into the white house. Same with the idea that a war hero is shoo in. since watergate the only time the candidate viewed stronger on foreign policy has won was '88 and I guess arguably '04. Its a shame but its true.

Of MBNA.

Howard Dean for Prez, 2008 & 2012!

He might make a decent Sec of State, but I don't like his pretty conservative economic politics.

The cabinet is the best place for Biden. His decades of foreign policy experience make him a prime candidate for Secretary of State in the next democratic administration.

Biden No, Kerry No, Clark maybe, Edwards No, Hillary maybe,  Richardson maybe, Dean no, Gore no, Warner Yes, Bayh Yes, Kerrey Yes,  Bill Gates Yes.  VP Claudia Kennedy, Zinni, Boxer, Bill Moyers

I think it is wishful thinking on Joe's part ... or just pure power drunkeness.  After his comments about Howard Dean, I'd most certainly work against Joe Biden because I fear he'd be just another LIeberman .... bad for the party, bad for everyone but Joe.

Sorry-no Senators.  And esp. a senator that made comments about Dean as he did.

His history would be no better than Kerry's and believe me every vote would haunt him.

Clark was not my first choice but he is clearly moving into many folks first choice now.

...was Al Sharpton.

Can you imagine Joe Biden donning the FUBU and doing a rendition of "C.R.E.A.M"? Me neither. Hopefully the Senator comes up with a better schtick to keep us entertained between now and whenever he announces he's abandoning his bid on Larry King Live.

Is another "I'm a Democrat, And I'm Sorry" Dem.  

I'm happy he's running; hopefully his candidacy will give the DLC something to talk about other than how bad the Democratic Party is.  

The thread here is pretty predictable ... If a Democrat does not match up exactly with what one believes to be a true Democrat, then he or she must be a Republican (ie, traitor).  Since when did supposedly open-minded liberals become enforcers of strict ideological purity and a knee-jerk reaction against anyone who stands for something even slightly different from "orthodoxy".  

This attitude sounds like "You're either with us, or you're against us."  What's different from Bush and those who constantly argue that Lieberman, Biden, and anyone who criticizes Dean are bad people?  There is none.

Joe Lieberman and Joe Biden are better than any Republican in the Senate -- even a moderate like Chafee.  Replace them with Republicans (because they don't measure up or because, God forbid, they criticize Leader Dean) then Bush's majority gets larger and larger.  Bush and the right-wing have more and more power to push their agenda.

To paraphrase a great bumpersticker: "Think.  It's easier than being a self-righteous blogger."

A Biden candidacy is absurd. More inside-the-Beltway moderation, message-stomping confusion.

Stick with MBNA.

don't get me wrong, I like Joe Biden, I think he's massively entertaining, but he is too crazy to be a serious candidate for President.