Posted on 08/23/2006 12:15:39 PM PDT by no dems
The idea of a woman president is not so abstract now that the 2008 election nears, Lynne Cheney, wife of vice president Dick Cheney said Wednesday.
"If you're thinking of Condi Rice, I think she has good credentials," Cheney said.
During an appearance sponsored by the Aspen Institute, Cheney talked mostly about education and history but did venture into current politics, including the possibility of women running for president. She did not mention New York Sen. Hillary Clinton, widely thought to be considering a presidential run in 2008.
"(National security) is the driving issue," Cheney said. "The stereotype exists that women are softer. Maybe it's not true. I don't think it's true. But it's a little bit of a challenge to overcome for a woman president."
(Excerpt) Read more at newsmax.com ...
I guess 40 million abortions since Roe don't matter to you. In that case, I have no use for you. Have a nice life.
In case you haven't noticed, Republican politicians have no choice in the matter as long as abortion remains the primary political issue for the DNC.
That said, no pardons is correct. Though Rudy should not have cheated, his wife is a truly evil woman and he apparently suffered through a great deal more than most men would have before he strayed.
Presidio, if you pinged me to this so I'd jump in with you, you picked the wrong boy.
You said Condi and other restrictionists are "pro-murder." Well, let me use similarly strong language, and let me state this categorically: Anyone, and I mean ANYONE who does ANYTHING that makes it more likely that Hillary Clinton will be the next president is doing damage to the pro-life, and doing it through idiocy disguised as principle. Abortion will either disappear through incrementalism and education, or it will disappear because the SCOTUS overturns Roe. President Hillary will halt progress on incrementalism, do her best to damage education, and if she appoints th next justice, end any hopes of an overturn for a decade or more.
The pro-life movement cannot afford a Dem in the White House. The entire nation can afford one in the Whjite House in a time of war even less. Principle doesn't mean diddly if it makes the way clear for the other party to implement their principles.
I believe he would make a great President of Israel, but he can't be a President of the U.S.
He was born in Tel Aviv, Israel in 1949.
In the U.S. Constitution, Article 2, Section 1 you'll find:
"No Person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States , at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President;"
That's all well and good, but the facts remain that Condoleezza Rice is (a) not running, and (b) DEFINITELY on the record as pro-choice. And, BTW, there is no trustworthy indication that she would beat Clinton if she ran anyway.
Want to stop abortion? Wear a condom, dude.
You seem to use gender as the main citerion. Rice is not the strongest or best candidate the GOP can muster for the nomination. We don't need a political neophyte without the experience and political organization to go up against the Clinton machine. Obviously, we can support whatever candidates we want. I am not trying to change your mind. We can agree to disagree.
I don't care what anybody says or anybody thinks - if Hillary runs there will be MILLIONS of women who will vote for her regardless of politics. It will be a simple case of "it's about time for a woman president". No matter how much conservatives hate Hillary - we will never be able to overcome the "it's about time" arguement.
So what? If it is just a matter of gender, then Hillary will win. However, Hillary is just as polarizing a figure among women as men. Will she attract support from men?
Condi is the perfect answer to that. Women will vote for her and blacks will vote for her. Party and politics will not matter as much as "it's about time".
Nonsense, we don't have to follow the Dem lead. We didn't have woman on the ticket to match Geraldine Ferraro. Blacks will vote for Hillary just like they did for her husband. It is not a matter of race but political party as far as blacks are concerned. They will continue to vote around 90% for the Dems.
Thanks, that's one off the list. And on taxes, social security reform, judicial nominations, immigration, etc.? My point is that we know very little about Condi's domestic political views, which makes it very difficult to support her for President.
There's no trustworthy indication that anyone will beat anyone, that's why they're called elections instead of coronations. That said, I predict Hillary will be an unmitigated disaster for the Dems unless stupid "conservatives" stay home because her opponent isn't pure enough for them. In that case, she'd be a disaster for the whole nation for four years.
BTW, if you figure Condi's not running, then why don't you stow calling the woman a murderer and find something productive to do?
Correction: Her position in support of the Second Amendment is more solid than ANY other potential Republican candidate for President who could defeat any potential Democrat candidate (all of whom are for more restrictions, registration and banning of guns).
Some here use a single-issue litmus test for a candidate. I too use a single issue litmus test. Unless a candidate supports our Second Amendment Right to Keep and Bear Arms then they get no further consideration from me. There is no other Republican with a decent chance of winning who I'd trust with my RKBA -- period!
I do have some concerns about Dr. Rice's handling of foreign affairs but the other Republican candidates (governors, senators, etc. with no experience in such affairs) would not be any better and many would be worse.
I'd rather someone who was a military combat veteran of mid-level command rank or who had at least some basic enlisted experience. Yet Ronald Reagan did well in spite of having no more military experience than Al Gore.
I believe Condi Rice could do just as well as Reagan. Yes, that is a strong statement.
Simply put -- Condi is the best candidate for President.
Yes, that seems to be not saying much about an otherwise sorry field to choose from. I'd rather we had someone who is pro-RKBA and was a military combat veteran of mid-level command rank AND who is well traveled and versed in international affairs AND who has substantial administrative/business experience AND who has served in a legislative or governing office. Condi is three out of those five. No other serious Republican candidate has more than three out of five AND passes the single issue litmus test on our Second Amendment Right to Keep and Bear Arms.
You are wrong. I know polls are not the end-all and be-all, but most polls show that Condi would beat Hillary, Kerry, Gore or Edwards:
"A poll, conducted by the Siena College Research Institute and sponsored by the Hearst Newspapers, found that 81 percent of voters surveyed would vote for a woman for president; 62 percent said the country is ready for a woman president; and 67 percent said a female president would be better than a male chief executive in handling domestic issues."
Who Would You Vote For, If It Came Down To Hillary Clinton And Condi Rice?
Hillary Clinton 34%
Condoleezza Rice 66%
"Of these potential presidential draft candidates for 2008, which of these candidates would you most like to see drafted into office?"
Condoleezza Rice 33%
Hillary Clinton 21%
Rudolph Giuliani 20%
Mark Warner 7%
We asked registered Republican voters: "Concerning the movement seeking to draft Condoleezza Rice into the Oval Office in 2008, is it likely that you will support this draft movement, possible that you might support this draft movement in the near future, possible that you might support this draft movement for a presidential election after 2008, or impossible that you will ever support this draft movement?"
Likely to support 29%
Possibly support in the near future 53%
Possibly support in later election 10%
Never support 2%
Unsure/Other 6%
You will note that only 2%of Republicans polled said they wound never support Condi. You anti-Condi folks are in the very small minority.
"Other surveys have also placed Dr. Rice in the top tier of Republican potentials, including Gallup, Zogby, Rasmussen, and FOX News, while many, including NewsMax, Ruffini, Marist, and Diageo/Hotline have her as the GOP frontrunner. In fact, the polling company, Strategic Vision, has conducted polls in a dozen different states, and on average, almost half of voters said they would like to see Dr. Rice in the 2008 race, while less than a third said she should sit it out."
I would vote for a woman President is she was another Maggie Thatcher. These generic polls are worthless and depending upon the question, elicit politically correct answers. Dr. Rice is the feel good candidate, but she is a cardboard cutout devoid any real substance because we know so little about her. Let's see her win one election before running for the highest office in the land. Can she develop a first rate political organization, raise money, and handle the rough and tumble of an election? I don't want to find that out in a Presidential campaign.
Consider their ages -- anyone over 70 in 2008 may be viewed as too old. Even though some may live into their eighties or nineties, people remember Reagan's Alzheimers in his second term.
Ronald Reagan was 73 in 1984 (6 February 1911) and was the oldest ever even when elected at 69 in 1980.
Robert Dole was 73 in 1996 (22 July 1923). Age was a major factor in his defeat.
In the following webpage, scroll down to "The Age Issue"
John McCain will be 72 years old in 2008, which will make him 3 years older than Ronald Reagan was when he became the oldest man to ever be inaugurated as president back in 1981. In the Senate, where doddering fossils like Strom Thurmond and Robert Byrd can be elected over and over, McCain looks like a spring chicken in comparison. But, Reagan's age turned out to be a campaign issue and McCain, who would be 80 years old at the end of his 2nd term, would certainly have a lot of people questioning --with good reason -- whether he's up to the job. Were McCain to be the nominee, his age could be the deciding factor that puts a Democrat in office.
In birth order, their age in 2008 and their birthdate.
Charles Grassley will be 75 (17 September 1933); Elizabeth Dole will be 72 (29 July 1936); John McCain will be 72 (29 August 1936); Colin Powell will be 71 (5 April 1937); Nancy Pelosi will be 68 (26 March 1940); Dick Cheney will be 67 (30 January 1941)
Dr. Rice has written several books and numerous articles. How many of them have you read?
If you know nothing about Condi - then you obviously haven't tried.
Just because the LameStreamMedia isn't going to trumpet her views like they do Shillary's - doesn't mean they aren't there for the reading.
The age issue is being used by those against the candidacy of McCain. I can recall Reagan [age 73] dealing with the issue when he debated Mondale.
Reagan: "Not at all, Mr. Trewhitt and I want you to know that also I will not make age an issue of this campaign. I am not going to exploit for political purposes my opponent's youth and inexperience. If I still have time, I might add, Mr. Trewhitt, I might add that it was Seneca or it was Cicero, I don't know which, that said if it was not for the elders correcting the mistakes of the young, there would be no state."
I don't think age will be an issue as long as the candidate is healthy and vibrant. The entire country is aging and the group of voters who participate the most in elections is our older citizens.
Robert Dole was 73 in 1996 (22 July 1923). Age was a major factor in his defeat.
Age mattered little. Dole was the sacrificial GOP candidate. He had no chance against Clinton and his poor campaign style contributed to his defeat. He closed the gap a little by finally going on the offensive late in the campaign. Dole was a worse candidate for President than he was earlier when he ran for VP with Ford 20 years earlier.
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.