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 ???

[NCPAC]

Yes, Barry became much more libertarian with age, that's for sure. I remember him ripping into Reagan a few times during the Gipper's first term. Still, a true American hero in my book - even when I did disagree with him!

[NCPAC]

I'll admit that, outside of Condi's stance on affirmative action, I don't know much about her views. Does anyone?

Running against Hillary in 2008, any Republican or 3rd party conservative who crashed the election would have to be considered forever a traitor. And I'm someone who was brought up on and worked professionally on the right (I still think the USA should have backed D'Aubission over Duarte in El Salvador in 1984)! We simply cannot allow Hillary to be President.

[NCPAC]

I agree with you for the most part: I am pretty hard right / libertarian, myself: Limited government, constitutionalis; a Patrick Henry over Thomas Jefferson type. Still, it does come down to basic choices and, because of those views, I don't see how we can not do everything in our power to stop Hillary in 2008. As stated previously, I have serious concerns with Rudy on a number of issues - but they pale in comparison to my dread at the thought of an HRC presidency.

[ozzysmom]

He is from Texarkana (he lived on the Arkansas side and I live on the Texas side of town). I believe he was a local preacher before entering politics. Very conservative and I believe is stirring the pot in Arkansas over some education issues...stopped taking the local liberal rag so I really don't have a clear view of what he stands for but I believe he is a good conservative Christian.

[republicanwizard]

Okay, wiseguy, tell me what qualities he has which are unpresidential?

Can you name me any candidate who is better? Owens never really appealed to me that much. This divorce only makes it worse. If it is to be a Governor, then I'd go with Pawlenty or Sanford. Of course I'd love to see Tom Ridge, but he just won't switch on one critical issue.

However, Kyl just seems to me to be a sure winner no matter who the Democrats pick.

[republicanwizard]

Um, two Texans would be unconstitutional.

[TASMANIANRED]

Timing might be a little bad for Fletcher this time around but he looks mighty good for the job.

Actually, although it looked like I was flogging Fletcher for the post,what I was attempting to convey was the richness of choice on the Republican side of the isle.

There is talent and quality all over the place. The House of Representatives has so many people I'd crawl through glass to be able to vote for. I'd love to be able to vote for Santorum or DeLay.

McConnell in the Senate is a man of character. The Republican governors across the US are having real impact.

[Spiff]

Tom Tancredo!

[republicanwizard]

In the Senate, I see our possibilities being Gregg, Santorum, Frist, Coleman, Allen, Chambliss, Dole, Brownback, Hagel, and Kyl.

Now I have never heard Gregg mentioned as desiring the Presidency. So he probably wouldn't run. Hagel is too obnoxious for my tastes. Santorum should aim for the Majority Leadership before running for President. Dole is, well, past that point in her career. Brownback is a conservative from a small state. If we're going to go with an ideologue Senator, then let's go with one with Santorum.

So the likely Senators are Santorum, Frist, Coleman, Chambliss, Allen, and Kyl.

In the Governorships, I see Benson, Romney, Ehrlich, Pataki, Taft, Pawlenty, Bush, Sanford, Fletcher, and Owens.

However, Bush would be dynastic. Fletcher would have a difficult time with only five years. Taft comes from an excellent state but has been unimpressive. Benson comes from a small New England state. I'd prefer Gregg over Benson. Romney, Ehrlich, and Pataki would have to overcome the abortion issue.

Outside of the state houses and the Senate, I see Condi Rice, Rudy Giuliani, or Tom Ridge. Anyone disagree?

[republicanwizard]

Go with Kyl, please...

[republicanwizard]

Sure...want me to stay home?

[Spiff]

Sure...want me to stay home?

If you're not going to vote for representatives who are going to protect our borders, then YES, I do want you to stay home.

[republicanwizard]

"If you're not going to vote for representatives who are going to protect our borders, then YES, I do want you to stay home."

Response:

Fill in any two words of your choice.

[republicanwizard]

Hmm.

[Blue Scourge]

ha, it's really like a sick poker game....

"Oh yeah, well will meet your female and raise you a minority..."

ahhh politics...

[Bryan]

I think we need to realize that the Democrats will be gunning for us in 2008 like never before.

Gephardt will be back. So will Edwards. Hillary will be a washed-up sixty-something frump by then, but I wouldn't underestimate her ambition and the left-wingers love her. Gore will definitely be back. I think Clark may give it a try as well.

I think that some combination of Jeb Bush, Condi Rice and Elizabeth Dole would make a great ticket. Most presidents in the past 30 years were governors of Southern states and Jeb is the governor of a Southern state.

[sourcery]

E. Dole/A. Keynes

[hosepipe]

[ You don't understand a thing about politics, the candidates you rant about, and your posts prove that. ]

True, I'm out of my place commenting on these things with my betters like you and others.. But I'm pretty dumb and go on and on about RINOS... democrats and other abject traitors.. I can't and won't be placated either.. If Al Gore can pretty nearly win in 2000 and Bill Clinton can actually be elected twice with literally most all mainstream media going to bat for him/them -AND- with the republican party on a steep slide leftwards (not just lately), then I get a bit bitchy and incalcitrant. All those with more politcal savvy then me are wroth to use words like socialist and communist and sedition in expressing concern over common events in D.C. and other places in this country because they see the truth as hyperbolic.. and it really pisses me off... Same folks call Ann Coulter hyperbolic when speaking the truth documented, catagorized and footnoted with easily checked sources.. Shes a genius.. went right to the crux of the matter.. Joe McCarthy was a hero an patriot..

I'd have to say my betters are full of bull sperm and are injecting wishful thinking into the conversations impregnating discretion with arrogant condescension which will lead only to more faulty thinking that has lead to electing a faux republican as president.. And it pisses me off too.. I think my betters are ball-less arrogant cowards.. does that include you?... probably..

But I do appreciate a fiesty rant like yours.. cudos.. So, am I baiting you... no, you are the master..

[Bushforever]

I'm amazed nobody has suggested the most obvious answer.

We should repeal the 22nd Amendment and re-elect the greatest President we've ever had: George W. Bush!

[wardaddy]

"I have a Dream!"