Posted on 06/12/2004 5:46:24 AM PDT by 11th Earl of Mar
My extremely liberal friends do not like Kerry either. However, they hate Bush more.
People trust Cheney. He has a hard time getting airplay on the majors because they always try to deep six him. When he gets in an interview the inverviewrs are automatically cowed into something approaching respect. I love when he is talking to Russert, he looks like his is talking to his homeschool principle.
Cheney is a tremendous asset.
Cheney and Dole don't compare very well. Dole thought he was "owed" the GOP nomination because of his long service in the Senate and provided the Clintons a pushover target to prove it. Cheney has had a career in industry, topped off by his brief posting to the House, then as a team member of a couple of GOP administrations. He's not going to run for the presidency in 2008.
The Iowa gov is an excellent selection as VP for Mr. Kerry.
With his careful maintenance of the IRRATIONALLY OUTRAGEOUS TAX RATES he has driven a fair amount of business elsewhere, so we need not worry about congestion on our roads or in our schools.
He has, almost daily maintained a personal LASER LIKE FOCUS, and that of his party, on the crucial issues of transvestite crossdresser restroom access in the state capitol. This matter festered for years before he came up with a workable solution for the citizenry.
One cannot say enough about this great lawyerman, and what a tremendous boost (he may have served in Vietnam, or at least sweet potatoes) he will provide the great Rat party at the national level. HE MUST BE NOMINATED WITHOUT DELAY(or with Mr. Delay) to avert the next state (IOWA) crisis.
then why have him as your VP on '04 ??????
He will NEEVVVEERRRRRR be president.....ever!
Who said he is going to run for President? We are talking about the VP slot here.
Can you name for me the last 3 Presidents that were elected from the position of Vice-President?
The last three were:
Bush (1988)
Van Buren (1836)
Adams (1796)
As you can see, the seat of the Vice-President is rarely the cat birds seat when it comes to winning the Presidency.
Probably.
But, I must say, if Cheney were to fall ill, I'd support Zell Miller for VP.
Wouldn't Nixon count?
And also, it's worthy of note that Harry Truman and Teddy Roosevelt were both re-elected when the Pres. died in office and they assumed control.
No duh. He's said since 2000 he isn't interested in running for President. We don't have to worry about Cheney vs. Hillary.
No, Nixon was not Vice-President at the time he won election. Neither were Truman or Teddy Vice-President at the time they were elected.
Only 3 men were sitting in the office of Vice-President at the time they were elected to the Presidency.
Actually, there is one more: Thomas Jefferson, who was Vice President under John Adams.
I'm sure Kerry is looking for his Veep nomination to put some spark in his campaign, but it is liable to disappoint many on the left, if its a white guy. The McCain trial balloon has inspired interesting reactions on the left (as seen on DU), everything from the hysterical: "I'm going to vote for Nader, if this is the best Kerry can do," to the delusional: "This is just Kerry trying to mess with Karl Rove's mind."
But those were the old days, when whoever came in second got to be Vice President, before the parties ran Prez-VP tickets.
You are right, of course. That was a wierd election, though, because it was the sitting Vice-President (Jefferson) against the sitting President (Adams).
My whole point though is this thought that we would want our best 2008 candidate in the VP slot for 2004. It provides no reasonable advantage to do that. Our best shot is a popular Governor or former Governor, they tend to win more than a Vice-President or Senator together.
He makes an OUTSTANDING Vice President. However he's not a future candidate for President. We need somebody (PLEASE God, NOT RUDY!) who can be handed the baton to carry on for another generation. Cheney is a great, deliberate man. But he lacks the charisma to make a run against the likes of Hillary. What we really need if Cheney is to be replaced is a Condi Rice.
The current buzz in the national capital's high-level Democratic circles has projected that Iowa Gov. Tom Vilsack, previously considered a dark horse as John Kerry's running mate, is now the leading prospect.
Political consultant John Lapp, a former Vilsack aide, is in Washington beating the drums for the governor. One senior aide in the 2000 Gore-for-president campaign flatly predicts a Kerry-Vilsack ticket.
Kerry likes and admires Vilsack and is grateful for the endorsement by Vilsack's wife, Christie, in the Iowa caucuses at a time when Howard Dean was considered a heavy favorite. However, Vilsack lacks national security expertise, and his experience is limited to Iowa. He was elected governor in 1998 at age 47 after serving as a state senator and mayor of Mount Pleasant.
Robert D. Novak in today's NY Post
Cheney should stay on the ticket and we will cross that bridge when we come to it. Given how high profile Bush cabinet members are, the next President could well come out of a SECDEF or SECSTATE spot, as well as the VP slot. There is no reason to believe that we have the slightest notion of where the electorate will be in four years. Let us worry about this election.
Cheney is throwing off the customary model by serving he country in the background with a great deal of humility and anonimity. He should be allowed to continue to do so. Replacing Cheney would be unwise.
And Rudy would make a great President, IMHO. People who make complaints about him do not realize the political necessities of being in New York politics. At any rate, he will most likely be the strongest candidate they can field if the country still wants a strong "veteran" of the WOT and 911 in office. I would imagine that you would see something like a Guliani/Owens ticket in 08 if Rudy does not want to go after Hilly or Pataki. If he wants in the administration you will see him at a high level running State, The DoJ or the CIA. With enough face time it will be enough. It all depends on how conservative the country is in 4 years. My guess is it will be less so, not more so. That is certainly the trend in the GOP. On the other hand, maybe Reagan's passing will reignite the movement. it will be the successful prosecution of the WOT and a string and sustainable "Bush Boom" that will save the GOP in 08, not who we pick in 04 for the VP slot.
Hillary is not going to run for President. Folks on FR that think that are just living in the past. She will have a very hard time even holding on to her Senate seat even if Pataki ran against her. If Bush actually get a majority of the popular vote - even 52% - The Democrat Party will dump the Clintons like hot potatoes. People worry to much about Hillary. The male voters in the Democrat Party lone would vote here out. This woman will never be President. THe American peole never want ot see Bill Clinton in the White House again, even as a "First Man."
Who know what the landscape will be like by then. The central issue could be an implosion in China or a rearmed Russia. We shoud stay the course and worry about the war at hand.
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.