The Spectator is right: the Dems are playing for 2008...so who do WE want to run in 2008

Vanity | 1/15/04 | self

[Salgak]

OK, gang.

Barring a catastrophe or another 9/11 attack, it's pretty much a given that President Bush will be re-elected in just under 10 months from today. That's been already listed here on FR today. And Jay Currie has a VERY good point. The Dems KNOW they've already lost this election, and are using it to position for 2008 and, God Help Us, Hillary.

Who do we have / want who is in position to run for the Republican nomination in 2008 ???

Given that President Bush would want to have his successor continue his policies, who you all of you think is a worthy successor to George W. Bush, and our best defense against the Hildebeast ???

[thoughtomator]

Compared to what we have now, Guiliani is more conservative with regards to law. I think you had to have lived through it to truly understand what a transformation he made in New York City. He took on all the big liberal interests and won!

This city was a total mess from the Dinkins years, when the Left ran wild and turned the city into a virtual war zone. Then came Guiliani - and by the time he was done, 42nd street went from the world's pornography capital to a place where families could take their children. While politically adept, he was not cowed by politics - and he did get re-elected. And of course was the historic role into which he stepped after Sept. 11, rallying the people of the city together in a hopeful manner, to overcome that which was wrought upon us.

Guiliani has also been in politics a long time, so he's already been vetted on the basics of being a candidate, and would not make any newcomer's mistakes. I do think he has to be considered an excellent chance for the right to maintain the Presidency after 2008.

[futureceo31]

Middle of the road wins presidential elections. Thats fact. So you have to compromise to win elections, especially with a liberal media against us. I was so pissed off today with CNN that identified Move-on as an "organization" when they were talking about its sponsorship of Al Bored.... IF it had been Judicial watch, we would have the "right-wing" "hard ring-wing" and every other conservative term thrown right after it.

[Pubbie]

"Middle of the road wins presidential elections."

Nonsense - Reagan never campaigned as anything but a Strong Conservative.

[isasis]

Rudy and Condie - That would be a great ticket

[JohnnyZ]

I like Jeb Bush. I understand the dynasty issue, but I think he would be on everybody's short list if his name were Jones instead of Bush.

If he were named Jones he would BE my list. No need for anyone else. Jeb is the best governor in America. Look at the Florida GOP under Jeb. Wouldn't you like America to look like that, with conservative supermajorities in both houses? Jeb Jones starts his second term as President, says "hey, you know, we're gonna have to stop this abortion thing", calls a special session, gets a constitutional amendment passed, and ships it off to the states to ratify, just like Terri's Law, but different.

However . . . he's the president's brother and son of the other president. I would vote for him in a heartbeat, but I don't think he'll run.

[Jack Black]

Great, I think I've found my man. Let's convince him to run.

[Pubbie]

He IS running in 2008 - we just need to help him win the nomination...

[webheart]

Can somebody name a great - or even good - president who was elected there from the Senate?

Can someone name any president that was ever a senator before becoming president?

[JohnBDay]

My picks for the top contenders are Frist, Owens, Jeb and Santorum. Rice is somewhat liberal, not a politician and I haven't seen her in a while so I have to wonder her influence. Guiliani will run for NY governor against Eliot Spitzer in what will be an epic match-up.

Of the four I listed as the top contenders, Jeb is the one I'd least like to see with the nomination because I want a Republican president who isn't named Bush. Frist, Owens and Santorum are conservative and electable, so I'd be be ok with any of the three.

[JohnnyZ]

Can someone name any president that was ever a senator before becoming president?

GHWB, Ford, Kennedy, Truman.

[JohnBDay]

Can someone name any president that was ever a senator before becoming president? Richard Nixon was the last president to have served in the Senate, but John Kennedy was the last to be elected directy from the Senate.

[JohnBDay]

GHWB was in the House, not the Senate

[RoseofTexas]

SILLY QUESTION...Rudy of course!

[eleni121]

Rick is an excellent choice for 08. I also like Tom DeLay. I know---I'm dreaming...or not?

[woodyinscc]

GHWB was never a Senator, he was head of the CIA.

Gerald Ford was the House minority leader and was named VP when Spiro Agnew had to resign. He then took over the Presidency when Nixon resigned.

[edsheppa]

I would vote for [Jeb] in a heartbeat, but I don't think he'll run.

A perfectly plausible, even good, scenario is Jeb for VP in '08.

[StormEye]

"Colorado Governor Bill Owens! He signed a bill barring instate tuition for Illegal Immigrants,
he barred the state of COlorado from accepting Matricular Consular cards, and he has vowed
to sign a bill to ban Affirmative action in Colorado universities! "

He has my vote!!!

[tjwmason]

please not jeb. we don't live in a monarchy.

Speaking as a loyal subject of Her Majesty the Queen, poor you. We don't have to bother with all of this every four years, we just elect the House of Commons every so often (usually around four years) in the same manner as the House of Representatives, and that is all.

My first point would be to get the field narrow, keep it narrow, make the decision early (I mean the real decision, obviously you have to go through the primaries and convention). I am enjoying the sight of the Democrats tear each other up at the moment, but this is bound to be damaging as regards public perception of the candidates.

Secondly, the point about holders of executive positions is also well learnt. Look at the governors more than the Senators or Congressmen.

Giuliani would be far better to contest N.Y. Senate seat in 2006. A defeat for Hilary Clinton there would mean that her electoral record is two elections, one loss, hardly very convincing.