Charlie Cook has not been assimilated into the Pence collective. Resistance is futile....
Posted on 05/04/2005 7:55:52 PM PDT by bitt
Only in a place as obsessed with politics as Washington could an election more than three and a half years away dominate so many discussions. But, heading into the first presidential campaign in 80 years without an incumbent president or vice president running, the possibilities are fascinating.
On the Republican side, virtually every national poll shows former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani leading the pack, with 25 to 30 percent of the vote. Sen. John McCain of Arizona tends to run second, with 20 to 25 percent, and Florida Gov. Jeb Bush, former House Speaker Newt Gingrich of Georgia, and Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist of Tennessee score in the mid-to-high single digits.
After that, the GOP has a long cast of potential candidates who are drawing support in, at most, the low single digits: Sen. George Allen of Virginia, Gov. Haley Barbour of Mississippi, Sen. Sam Brownback of Kansas, Sen. Chuck Hagel of Nebraska, Gov. Mike Huckabee of Arkansas, Gov. George Pataki of New York, Gov. Tim Pawlenty of Minnesota, Gov. Mitt Romney of Massachusetts, Gov. Mark Sanford of South Carolina, and Sen. Rick Santorum of Pennsylvania.
Although Giuliani leads the field in every survey of Republican voters, the smart money discounts his popularity -- few trained observers think that a "pro-choice," pro-gun-control, and pro-gay-rights candidate has much of a chance of winning the 2008 Republican presidential nomination. Giuliani drew large and enthusiastic crowds everywhere he went last year as he campaigned for President Bush and other GOP candidates, yet it is difficult to imagine that the social, cultural, and religious conservatives who play such an important role in the GOP's presidential-selection process will find Giuliani acceptable.
(Excerpt) Read more at govexec.com ...
And McCain I wouldn't vote for under any circumstance. He's worse than Hillary.
How on earth did Mike Pence not make the list?
"...the first presidential campaign in 80 years without an incumbent president or vice president running..."
Now, that IS exciting!
Something tells me that unless a good, solid conservative gets up and running, we're going to be stuck with either Rudy Giuliani or John McCain as our standard bearer. We've got to do better than that...
It's the first election in 56, not 80 years to not have an incumbent president or vice president.
"we're going to be stuck with either Rudy Giuliani or John McCain as our standard bearer. We've got to do better than that"...
If it comes down to those two, I'll sit the 2008 election out. That only amounts to one vote, but at least I'd be able to live with myself.
Charlie Cook has not been assimilated into the Pence collective. Resistance is futile....
The only thing which is worse than Hillary is Al Sharpton. McCain ought to be honorably credited for his time in Hanoi Hilton.
At least the GOP will take on Hillary, so if it's McCain vs her, I go 3rd party.
I won't sit out. I'll vote against both of them.
Quite right! 1952: Eisenhower vs. Stevenson.
Then too, though, "Cheney '08" has a certain ring to it.
Forget polls. It is way too early and too many things will happen between now and then. The polls are just to give the pundits something to talk about.
Its just name recognition. When Repubs are polled they probably go with name recognition rather than trying to figure out who should run for president from some state. The other Republicans are not well known outside their respective states. McCain and Rudy are VERY Popular and have name recognition. Frist is the only other one well known.
"If it comes down to those two, I'll sit the 2008 election out. That only amounts to one vote, but at least I'd be able to live with myself."
I used to feel the same way, until I remembered that phrase about "good men doing nothing" (someone will post the whole thing, I hope). Kind of like cutting off your nose to spite your face.
The best way to change things is to get into the fray; Bill and Hillary did not reach the level they're at now by sitting quietly by. There was a lot of low-level "strategery", planning, and HARD work.
Don't quit now!! Do you REALLY want to see her in the White House!? That's WHY I've renewed my involvement with the Republican Party!
Exactly. We DO need a good conservative Republican to get started on making his name a household word. Otherwise, we risk the "Howard Dean" effect, to have someone go from zero to sixty in a very short time, then watch as the media makes the candidate fizzle out too quickly.
Yes, Howie shot himself in the foot too many times from our perspective, but his gaffes didn't bother Iowa Rat voters, something else did. The scream wasn't until AFTER Iowa caucus goers had met. My theory is that Dean attracted too much of the wrong media (intense examination of personal life) too soon, and that could happen to our candidate, too.
that is what my very first thread posting was about here on freerepublic, after the election. I would vote constitution party or something like that, if it came down to those two.
Dean lost the Iowa voters when he shouted down the old guy in the town meeting with comments to the effect of "George Bush is not my neighbor" among other things.
I'm almost certain someone has brought this up before--and if not, it might be because the idea could be lacking in all merit--but why not just convince Laura Bush to run? I mean, if ex-first-lady Hillary can, certainly Laura can. She might be inexperienced in the matter of world politics and governing in the world's sole remaining superpower, but I'm sure she could get excellent advice.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.