Gore’s return to D.C. was, for me, the unofficial start of the presidential election “cycle”-the three-year-long Giant Slalom of politics. Yes, George W. Bush enjoys an 80 percent approval rating and, for now, dominates the landscape. But there will be a presidential campaign in 2004, and there is a surprisingly large number of Democrats-11, by my count-brave enough (or foolhardy enough) to be considering a run.

Out in the real world, nobody is paying attention. But the campaign already has begun among the insiders, a league that includes the ever-vigilant Karl Rove at the White House, and Democratic operatives and fund-raisers in Washington, Chicago, Florida and New York. Every four years, it seems, the contest begins earlier than the last one. This time, collecting “early money” is especially crucial, since the primaries will bunched together at the start of 2004. If you want to preserve the option to run later, you have to run hard right now to raise cash-and your profile.

WHY CHALLENGE BUSH?

Why, you might ask, would anyone bother? Bush is riding high. The war on terrorism is producing changes in American society that may be deep indeed, and at least potentially advantageous to Bush and perhaps the Republican Party he now runs.

Well, there are some Democratic reasons for running, reasons common to all the would-be candidates.

For one, they remember 1991. Another President Bush was riding high in the polls-even higher than his son is now. Daddy had just “won” the Gulf War. His popularity scared off a number of Democrats, but Bill Clinton-who was too hungry to be daunted by the odds-stuck with it. The rest, as they say, is history. Things are operating at an even slower speed now than they were a decade ago, and politics is not a straight-line universe. There is time for things to change, big time, as Vice President Dick Cheney would say. Who knows where the world will be in 2004, or the economy?

Then there is the real fear of being run over by Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton of New York. Many insiders think she can get the party’s nomination any time she wants it, but believe she is shrewd enough not to want it until 2008, by which time she will have completed at least one term in the Senate and, if things go according to her plan, will have won re-election to a second term in New York. Better run before Hillary does …

YOUNG TALENT IN THE WINGS

There are “kids” to worry about, too, a crop of younger talent struggling to climb the ladder. Democrats are hoping to win more governorships in 2002, and some of those winners-if they materialize-will want to “go national” quickly. They include Andrew Cuomo of New York and Kathleen Kennedy Townsend of Maryland.

Beyond these general reasons, each of the Democrats has his own mix of hopes, dreams and sales points.

For Gore, it’s a chance to turn the bitterness of defeat into a passion for seeking a fair deal for all. If he runs as the Friend of the Left Out, he certainly has the right life experience. After 2000, he could appeal to no Olympic Committee to award him a medal. There was nothing at the bottom of the Presidential Downhill for him but a deep pool of anger-and the prospect of an arduous climb back to the top.

When I saw Gore the other night, the unspoken question in the room was: Is he going to run again? The unspoken answer for most of those present-wired Democrats with good ties coast to coast-was: We hope not. To be sure, they think Gore got screwed in Florida, and by the U.S. Supreme Court. They think he wants to run again. They think he probably will run again, despite what are likely to be ever louder warnings not to. They think another Gore race would be hell for the party, a bloody and painful exercise. They doubt that Big Money will back him again. But they can’t quite bring themselves to say categorically that he couldn’t win the nomination.

DEMOCRATS DISTANCE FROM GORE

The story is widely, privately, told of a dinner at the home of a prominent Democrat in Los Angeles recently. Gore was there with a tableful of influentials. He launched into a long disquisition on the state of the world, and, after a while, stopped to catch his breath. “Hope I’m not boring you,” he said. Of the 10 people at the table, only two spoke up to insist, politely, that no, he wasn’t boring them at all. People at the party had heard the story, too, and spoke sympathetically-but not that sympathetically-about it. Despite his indubitable victimhood, he is not beloved. “He’s not going to get the L.A. folks if he runs again,” a prominent Democrat from California told me flatly. “It’s over, but I don’t think he wants to admit it.”

Maybe it’s over. But don’t tell that to rank-and-file Democrats. Visit a union hall or a big-city party meeting and you hear support for Gore, who remains the best known-and, by hard-core Democratic voters (the kind who vote in primaries), most highly regarded.

Sen. Joe Lieberman, Gore’s 2000 running mate, has said that he won’t run in 2004 if Gore does. And yet Lieberman desperately wants to run, which means, I think, that he is convinced Gore will fold his cards. Lieberman was touched by the fire last time, and believes fervent support in Florida-a literal laying-on of hands-was an almost divine sign. Also, his statements on the Gore question have varied somewhat over the months. When I talked to him last a few weeks ago, he added a new wrinkle. He said that he would give Gore until the end of this year to decide. Meaning: If you don’t declare soon, pal, I’m in. And you know what? Even if Gore does run, I think Lieberman will find a way to ignore his past statements and enter the race.

LIEBERMAN WATCHES GORE

While Gore and Lieberman conduct their dance at a distance, others are running flat out as of now. The winner of the Most Unabashed award is Sen. John Kerry of Massachusetts. He has an easy Senate re-election race this year, and seems to have decided that this is his moment. He’s been in the Senate a remarkably long time-since 1984-for a relatively young man, and noted in an interview with me recently that he was the only Democrat in his Senate “class” not to have run for president already. A stately figure, he thinks he’s been properly patient and is now properly seasoned. He has a sterling Vietnam War record and foreign policy expertise, and a genuine passion about issues such as the environment and global warming. He’s also got a family fortune (from his wife, Teresa Heinz) to help him out.

If Kerry thinks he’s waited his turn, Sen. John Edwards thinks time’s a-wastin’. He entered politics less than four years ago, and has been in the Senate since only 1999, but Edwards is running faster and louder than a stock car in his own North Carolina. Making a virtue of necessity, he’s positioning himself as an outsider-not a senator by nature, but rather the humble son of small-town textile mill workers. He’s also one of the nation’s leading trial lawyers, a millionaire many times over, but Edwards will try to make a virtue of that necessity as well. He will argue that he knows what it’s like to fight for little people, the focus of his practice.

WORRIES ABOUT EDWARDS

White House strategists are keeping an especially close eye on Edwards. Why? Because he’s young, he’s Southern, he’s articulate and he has a rationale: which is that the court system, of which he is a master, can help solve problems if Congress and the president pass the right laws-and select the right judges to interpret them. The last thing Bush’s consigliere, Karl Rove, would want to face in 2004 is a Southerner. The South has become GOP territory in presidential races, but not necessarily in local ones, and Edwards would force Bush to defend his own home turf.

So far I’ve mentioned three sitting senators and one former senator (Gore). It’s generally not a good sign for a party’s chances when so many Washington insiders are thinking of seeking its nomination. Presidencies tend to be launched from outside the Beltway. With the exception of the former President Bush, the winner of every presidential election since 1976 has been a governor or former governor. Voters seem to prefer chief executives who’ve actually had executive experience in government.

Still, that isn’t preventing even more members of Congress-and now we are talking about the true insiders’ insiders-from considering the race. Senate Democratic Leader Tom Daschle of South Dakota is eager to run. I’ve been told that he considers this year’s Senate elections a preliminary referendum on his potential for national leadership. If the Dems pick up a seat or two, he’s definitely in, telling Democrats that he stood up to Bush successfully on the Hill and can do so across the entire country.

DASCHLE, GEPHARDT, ET AL.

I’ve also been told that House Democratic Leader Dick Gephardt of Missouri is going to run-even if his party manages to win back the House, which would make him speaker. For Gephardt, this is the one last clear chance to do it right; he did, after all, come close to winning the nomination in 1988. Once a candidate comes that close, there usually is no way to stop him from trying it again.

Daschle and Gephardt would run with rather similar rationales: two guys from the heartland, unassuming mainstream Democrats with vast experience, who know how to take on the GOP and who know how to get things done.

There’s another paired entry of sorts: Sens. Chris Dodd of Connecticut and Joe Biden of Delaware. Both are genial, savvy pols with vast experience, powerful positions in the Senate, and, I think, harbor a vague resentment that their extensive talents and knowledge aren’t fully appreciated by the Washington Wise Guys. Biden ran once before, in 1988, and went nowhere-a humiliation for a man with as much street smarts as anyone in the Senate. Dodd, who lost the Senate leadership race to Daschle by one vote years ago, hails from a long tradition of politics. He’s never run for president, but is always at the center of the action in the Senate and would like to be on the national stage. He recently became a father for the first time, which, I think, has given him a new sense of pride and urgency. Biden and Dodd are easygoing on the surface-but formidable, and both would be treated with great respect if they choose to run.

There are governors out there, too, but not many. Gray Davis is fighting for his political life in California, and recently fell behind in test match-ups against all three GOP potential foes in the 2002 governor’s race. If Davis manages to win a second term, it’ll be the political resurrection of the decade-and give his presidential prospects a huge boost. Vermont Gov. Howard Dean is eager to run, and has the virtue of living next door to New Hampshire. He’s a doctor, too, and a tireless campaigner who has two other important advantages: obscurity and low expectations.

DON’T RULE OUT SHARPTON

And no 2004 morning line could be complete without mentioning the Rev. Al Sharpton. He says he’s running, and I take him at his word. He has not only cut his bouffant hairdo, he’s trimmed his rhetorical flourishes as well. He’s a serious big-city liberal-which after all, remains the base of the Democratic Party.

When I heard that Sharpton was considering the race, I remembered the day we invited Jesse Jackson to Newsweek headquarters in New York City. Sharpton hadn’t been invited separately, but he came along anyway. He soon took over the luncheon conversation. Jackson tried to talk, but Sharpton commandeered the discussion. I remember watching Jesse’s growing but silent amazement and annoyance.

Now there’s a qualification for the nomination: “I got Jesse Jackson stop talking!”