Posted on 05/24/2006 4:18:08 PM PDT by Tolerance Sucks Rocks
As we look toward 2008, it is obvious Republicans would like to see their GOP nominee triumph. Democrats clearly want one of their own in the White House. But there are many who want to see ABH – "anybody but Hillary" – get elected.
The former first lady's unique brand of transparently phony moderation, heartfelt inner socialism, Nixonian disregard for the norms of civilized politics and governance, and her well-documented tin ear on ethical issues make her the most dangerous aspirant for president since George Wallace (and he never had a chance of winning).
The more John McCain runs and Rudy Giuliani tests the waters, the clearer it gets that neither of these good men can command the Republican nomination.
McCain is too independent and Rudy too liberal. Republicans will not forgive the Arizona senator for his anti-torture bill, his backing for campaign finance reform, his support of major reforms in corporate governance, his opposition to big tobacco, his antipathy toward making the tax cuts permanent and his backing for citizenship for illegal immigrants. Nor will they overlook Rudy's support for abortion choice, gun control, affirmative action or gay rights.
Condoleezza Rice, long the object of our affections, has not moved any closer to running despite our ceaseless prodding.
That leaves no Republican who can beat Hillary. George Allen, of confederate flag/tobacco spitting fame, is not likely to win over any female votes from the Democrats. Allen can get his usual complement of gun-toting white males but the female vote is the swing one in our politics.
Governor Mitt Romney is sinking fast in the Massachusetts polls. And Senator Bill Frist can't get out of his own way to even be an effective majority leader.
As for Governor George Pataki, fleeing your home state because you wouldn't get re-elected is hardly a springboard to national office.
Al Gore - poor benighted Al Gore - offers the best chance to stop Hillary, albeit in the Democratic primary.
History is repeating itself. In 1960 and 2000, a popular president (Eisenhower/Clinton) prompted his vice president (Nixon/Gore) to run for president. Each lost very, very narrowly. Each was sharply attacked within his own party for not using the popular incumbent more to campaign on his behalf.
After their defeats, neither seemed likely to get another presidential nomination. But then the party blew the next election by a considerably larger margin (Goldwater/Kerry) and the former VP's defeat didn't look so bad in retrospect. Each rode opposition to a current war into renewed popularity. And Nixon got elected.
Gore has several key advantages over Hillary. He has always strongly opposed the war, while she and the other possible Democratic candidates – Kerry, Edwards, Bayh and Biden – all voted for it. His historic warnings about the dangers of climate change seem to be coming true all around us. The major national issue – energy prices – is right up his alley. Gore has been advocating alternative fuels and major conservation for decades.
Gore would exploit a soft-core negative against Hillary that is sweeping the ranks of Democrats. Hungry for victory and suspicious of Hillary's ability to win, they whisper to one another: "I like her but isn't she too divisive to win?"
Gore has become personally wealthy with the appreciation of his Google stock and his equity position in his Current TV network. And he has access to much of the donor base that he used in 2000 for his run for the presidency. Hillary will take many of these supporters with her, but the truly left-wing Democrats who are turned off by her moderation and backing for the war will likely provide a sufficiently wealthy and enraged base for funding an Al Gore campaign.
John Kerry and John Edwards both lack the purism of Gore on the Iraq War. Both backed it and voted for the resolution. Former Virginia Governor Mark Warner, the current fair-haired boy being touted in the Democratic Party, probably will not be able to get a word in edgewise as the two giants – Hillary and Al – square off with each other.
Any bad blood between Gore and Hillary? I once asked the vice president if there was any friction between Tipper and the first lady. "There is no friction between Tipper and Hillary" came the deadpan, earnest reply.
"Well," I rephrased my question "at the convention how do you think Hillary would react to Tipper introducing her?"
"There is no friction between Tipper and Hillary" came the automaton answer.
"So neither one would mind?" I ventured.
"There is no friction . . ." You get the point. There wouldn't be any friction between Al and Hillary were they to run against each other.
None at all.
Dick Morris is scared stiff (more scared than we are) that Hillary would win the POTUS job -- he would be the first one shot.
After Bill Clinton won in 1992, London had an influx of Americans. I have a strange feeling history would repeat itself if Hillary won.
Regards, Ivan
The only way Gore will run is if he is 100% sure he will win. He's not going to risk another loser run.
Al Gore is a loony. Why in the world would we want to encourage him? He belongs in an asylum next to the guy dressed as Napoleon.
My nightmare is coming true!
"ABH – "anybody but Hillary" – get elected. The former first lady's unique brand of transparently phony moderation, heartfelt inner socialism, Nixonian disregard for the norms of civilized politics and governance, and her well-documented tin ear on ethical issues make her the most dangerous aspirant for president"
What more can I say about HC? But PLEASE do not defame Nixon; compared to Clinton, he was forth right and a Gentleman. There are a few negatives among a lot of positives... for example... he declared "War on Cancer". That war is coming to fruition.
I do not condemn Nixon and I still like Joe McCarthy!
if Dick Morris said it, then the opposite is true... Al Gore stands no chance against Hillary...
Hillary will get the Democratic nomination, almost by acclimation. Yes Warner will present himself as an alternative. But it won't make the slightest difference. He is running for Veep.
The more she talks, the less I fear her.
He likes being at Sundance. He likes being at Cannes. He likes putting together documentaries and I think he liked teaching at the college. Gore doesn't deal with pressure well. At the end of the 2000 campaign, it was obvious he was sick of being told what to wear, to keep his weight down, being pumped with answers for debates, and being confrontational. He's not a confrontational man by nature. That's why he came off so badly when he tried to bully Bush in the first debate.
Gore might run again, because he detests Hillary. I don't think he's ever forgiven her for kneecapping him as much as she could in 2000. But at heart, he doesn't want to be president. He wants to do what he's doing now.
Isn't this the same toe sucker who declared that only Rice could stop Hillary?
"Hillary will get the Democratic nomination, almost by acclimation. Yes Warner will present himself as an alternative. But it won't make the slightest difference. He is running for Veep."
Perhaps, but I think that the Dems are so hungry for the White House that whoever ends up as the nominee will choose Obama as the VP running mate. I believe they think that choosing him will ensure a Democrat win.
If Morris is serious, then he needs to get his prognosticator retuned.
But if this is just a bit of agitprop, then great. Absolutely nothing would be more fun than another Gore run for the presidency, except maybe a Gore-Clinton Fight of the Century. That would be worth the price of admission.
Gore is dumb as a stick, and more than a little unbalanced. So I admit that the enjoyment would be a guilty pleasure, rather like pulling the legs off a caterpillar, or squeezing a grasshopper to make him "give tobacco".
Clinton, on the other hand, while she comes off as Macchiaveli, and she is pretty bright, she's also a bit unbalanced, and would not survive a brawl in the primary that would force her all over the map ideologically, as well as expose her inner self to the light of day.
No, she has Gore's FBI file too.
Neither the Hildabeast or Gore will be the nominee for the same reason, which is the albatross which is Bill Clinton around their neck. With Gore, the albatross is professional, with Mrs. Bill Clinton it is both professional AND personal. It is a negative that cannot be overcome.
And even if Bill Clinton were not a factor, Gore has totally sold out to the lunatic left, there are so many examples of his severe case of BDS (Bush Derangement Syndrome), one of the best being when, with finger raised like an Old Testament prophet, he bellows (about Bush) "HE BETRAYED THIS COUNTRY!!!!" - all the GOP would have to do is to run that clip over and over and Gore would be finished.
As for Hillary? She will never make it through the primaries without a fatal political injury. She has NO experience in running as a national candidate where she cannot filter herself via her bully boys and girls who control what the media gets to report about the PIAPS, and her temper is so hair trigger that sooner or later Americans will conclude what the GOP's Mehlman already pointed out, that the junior Senator from New York is an "angry" person.
As for Kerry? No way. Too many Swift Boat Vets still out there, and they will never surrender, and after 2004 Kerry has a "loser" tattoo all over his forehead (it was always there, even back when he was serving in Vietnam, did you people know that he was in Vietnam? LOL) and it is even more visible now. Kerry is an abominable loser and America knows it.
As things stand right now, there are no 'Rat Governors who could deliver a hefty electoral chunk of votes from their states, and of all the 'Rat Senators, the only one who can possibly appear presidential is Joe Biden (as I see it).
And yet Biden would run into that same far left lunatic barrier constructed by the MoveOn.Org morons, and their shriekin, freakin' brethren the DUmmies. Chris Dodd of Connecticut? Not a chance.
If I were Howard Dean, I would be mentally preparing myself to jump off some tall building the day after Election Day 2008, because right now there is no way the 'Rats can win, they just don't have the starpower, nor the firepower.
The GOP has plenty of problems too, but they could win by default because "they're not Democrats".
But the income taxes....
BTW, did you do a replacement to FreeBritannia?
You've got less than 30 seconds and it has to get half the country.
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.