Posted on 08/25/2004 11:26:45 AM PDT by French-American Republican
What politicians are seen as likely contenders for the Republican nomination? Who is most likely to get the nomination? Who would you like to see as the candidate? Should Cheney run? Is Cheney planning to run?
Ted Nugent or Alice Cooper???
I agree he's a RINO but this is below the belt. The man had CANCER for Pete's sake.
Ask me in about two years...
You heard it here first: This kid could very well be a dark horse in '08. He's got the credentials.
GMTA
Maybe they'll save Jorge P to run with Vincente, once the border is totally gone.
I like that idea, too. But Condi has said she's not interested. :-/
I nominate Ted Nugent.
Rudy is the only one who could beat Hillary. The dims will steamroller any of the others mentioned here.
So, in your mind a RINO cancer victim is the best man the GOP can put forth?
Our bench is stronger than that.
He's fine for NY. But he's never even proved he can carry his home state in an election for federal office.
We can and must do better.
Electing Rudy is akin to throwing in the towel.
Reagan was old but still won. It will be McCain vs. Hillary.
I don't agree.
The choice will be Rudy vs Hilly. Hilly won't be able to convincingly waltz to the right on abortion or gun control.
Rudy, on the other hand, has that flexibility. I suspect that Rudy will attract a posture on both those issues that will resonate positively with a wide base of people, while Hilly will be much more contrained on those issues.
It won't be Rudy vs Bill. And it won't be Rudy vs Edwards, either, since Edwards will be out of the spotlight for four long years. So much for the VP candidate having some advantage in the next primary -'Joementum' Lieberman found that out. It will be Rudy vs Hilly, make no mistake about it. Rudy has kept a good profile since he left office in 2002, and my guess is that he will gain an even greater posture by joining the Bush admin in some capacity during the 2nd term (as VP or in Homeland Security, for example).
As far as the War on Terror goes, it is just beginning. In fact, I fully expect more stateside attacks on the USA in 2004-2008. I think the grave situation we are in will be made more clear by 2008, and not become more ambiguous. I am not as optimistic as you are on the matter.
I covered 3rd party candidates in another post, since there won't be a credible one it isn't that much of a big deal. If in a Rudy vs Hilly matchup (and forget the other matchups since they aren't likely at all), if Rudy can't beat her, even given a challenge on the right from him by a minor candidate (which, everyone seems to forget, would largely be offset by a farther-left challenge a la Nader on the dem side), then we frankly don't deserve to win.
Rudy is one tough SOB and well suited to lead the next phase on the War on Islamic Fundamentalism. If any conservatives are so petty as to not see that, and it costs him the election, they (and all of us) will get what they deserve.
HINT: It isn't pretty.
What makes you think the national security situation will get worse? If anything, it ought to get better after all Bush has done to teach the world what happens when you f*** with the United States.
Scroll up to my previous posts. I never said Rudy would be a good choice for President. He's too liberal. Would make a great NSA or SOD but keep him away from social policy!
Ultimately there are a lot of variables and we will be in a better position to judge this in 4 years.
I do think Rudy can modify his stand on guns and abortion enough to appeal to most americans. He will remain pro choice but come down well on the front line issues of 2008 for abortion.
He will have an easier time doing this than Hilly, whose political posture presents a much narrower range of options on these issues.
Your fixation on Edwards is misplaced. First, Edwards isn't a billionare (I don't know where that came from), but as I said it won't matter. He is out of a job in Janaury 2005 and I don't see him staying in the public eye that long as a credible candidate, especially since Hilly wants it so badly.
So it won't be Edwards, and it will be NY Rudy vs NY Hilly (if it is indeed Rudy, of course) - the dynamic you mentioned cancels itself out.
Wait and see.
Time is on the enemies side, I am afraid. Our border is wide open. They have greater flexibility than we do. We aren't united. etc etc.
Sometimes things get worse before they get better. That's the way I see it. There are more ways they can get us than we can get them.
Like I said, wait and see. I really can't visualize anybody but Hilly as the dem candidate in 2008. She wants it. The brass likes her. She comes from a big state. Etc.
Wait and see.
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.