DEMOCRATS
Hillary Clinton - Mostly the big name establishment candidate that Democrats believe will bring sanity and competence (a.k.a. Bill Clinton) back into the White House. Her biggest advantage is that because she's a Clinton, she can color herself as the Anti-Bush Candidate. Ironically, she's effectively a warhawk and her political style is - out of all the top tier Democrat candidates - most similar to George W. Bush's. Top fund-raising numbers will make her formidable.
Barak Obama - Currently the top Anti-Hillary Candidate. Good style and a commanding presence. The trendy candidate, who likes to present himself as the fresh face that will change Washington. It's an illusion. He has had virtually no influence in Washington, and has had no connection at all with any significant legislation passed through Congress. His supporters like to point out he was against the war since the beginning, but seem unaware with the fact that his actual voting record on Iraq is identical with Hillary Clinton's, and neither he nor Clinton can say that they will have the US withdrawn from Iraq in their first term.
John Edwards - Smart and pretty, he's the populist candidate. His youthfulness and polish can be a liability. He will have a lot of trouble because he seems most honest about the possibility of raising taxes. His signature issues involve expanding domestic welfare programs as well as creating global welfare programs (including taxing to pay for public education in Africa). Currently fighting to replace Obama as the Anti-Hillary Candidate, which very well may happen - for racial rather than political reasons. He'll be the last resort for the people who don't believe a woman or a black man CAN win the general election in 2008.REPUBLICANS
Rudy Giuliani - a social moderate (relative the to rest of the Republican field), which is a liability in the primaries but an asset in the general election. A fearmonger, but for honest purposes - he sees terrorism as a huge threat and he's a pitbull that wants to go for Al Qaeda's throat. Extremely intelligent and articulate, his snappish and impatient demeanor may not win the affection of Middle America. Also needs to expand his message: he's too often associated only with New York and 9/11, and his foreign policy is to continue GW Bush's.
John McCain - Has the best politics, but has lost his roguish charm - he's an establishment candidate. He's starting to at least appear old and senile, losing his ability to inspire excitement. His campaign is in a disarray, he's shedding support (although he's gaining some back). Out of the top tier of the GOP Candidates, he's least likely to give specific answers and explanations to the issues of the day. His Immigration bill hurt him... a LOT. It remains to be seen whether or not he will be able to raise enough money now to continue a top tier campaign.
Mitt Romney - Most organized and disciplined campaigner. But also most vulnerable to the "flip-flopper"-image that crippled Kerry's campaign in 2004. Extremely nuanced, he lacks the clarity of GW Bush. It's difficult to really understand his politics on a deeper level - he's extremely good at selling his ideas even when they're not good. It remains to be seen how his Mormonism affects his chances, but he has relatively few vulnerabilities. In fact, his biggest vulnerability (other than flip-flopping) may be that he seems to be to good to be true. Soon we'll have the "robot" and "mannequin" references that slowed down Al Gore's and Kerry's unsuccessful campaigns.
My favorite candidate overall: Joe Biden. I'd encourage all to look him up.
