Tom Daschle has decided not to run for President. Basically, it seems he's decided to stay in the Senate and attempt to block as much of Bush's agenda as he can.
As should be obvious, I still haven't dived back into political commentary yet (with the economy and Korea, plus the administration's singleminded determination to attack Iraq, there's almost too much), but I think standing pat is the right move. For starters, I think Daschle would have a hard time rounding up support in the first place, even among Democrats (like me) who see him as too timid at confronting the more rancid portions of Bush's agenda. And, frankly, the GOP wouldn't have hesitated--and won't hesitate--at blasting Daschle's obstructionism, regardless of whether the public really supports the GOP agenda. (Memo to Republicans, especially Mr. Bipartisainship Bush: Craft legislation even faintly palatable to both sides, and it'll likely pass. Pretend the GOP enjoys more support than it does, and you're doomed. Have a nice day.)
But I've noted one interesting trend--despite Bush's wartime popularity, the Democrats are lining up to challenge him for the Presidency in 2004. My read of this fact is that the Dems see Bush as vulnerable (and if the centerpiece of his economic plan is an elimination of the dividends tax, it's reasonable to conclude that this administration has nothing to offer but discredited trickle-down economics). It's a marked difference from 1992, when the perceived popularity of Bush the Elder discouraged many prominent Democrats from what they considered a losing bid for the Presidency, enabling an obscure Arkansas governor to grab the nomination.