Posted on 11/08/2004 1:44:46 PM PST by fidelio
I know we have four more years of The Man in The White House, but I am curious as to what other Freepers think of possible 2008 candidates.
Here is my potential staring grid:
Rudy Giulliani (NY)
Sec. Colin Powell (NY)
Sen. Bill Frist (TN)
Gov. Jeb Bush (FL)
Sen. John McCain (AZ)
Gov. Mike Huckabee (AR)
Gov. Mitt Romney (MA)
In my opinion, Giulliani may be the force here. Although he will need someone to balance out the ticket and appeal to the base. My thinking would be Huckabee, a former Baptist minister who has dumped 110 pounds in a year and is also a "Man from Hope."
Thoughts?
For every Rabid Hillary fan, there are 1.5 equally rabid anti-Hillary Republicans. But you are right, the last two elections were too close for comfort.
We need to keep an eye on Barak Obama in 12 years or so... We need to be grooming a conservative young man to counter that threat. There will be conservative military heros coming out of Iraq....we need to find them for the future.
Rudy winning NY plus others could absolutely demoralize and destroy the dims. They would not recover for a long time. No one else could possibly do this.
Yes, but since Rudy is practically a democrat, who really wins?
Until he stepped into the Presidential ring, there were alot of doubters about Bush also.
Allen is already a strong name in the conservative grassroots and the strong grassroots are what brought out the massive turnout for W.
No!! it hardly fits on a bumper sticker..it rolls off your tongue like Mondale/Ferraro...
j/k.
It's that reason that I think Allen already has a upper hand from a grassroots and organization standpoint.
heck, I don't even know if he'd be interested in running but I really like him..
Mitt Romney is pro-choice and supports both the assault weapons ban and the Brady Bill.
Yes, but since Rudy is practically a democrat, who really wins?
Practically a Democrat is better than a full blown Marxist ANY DAY.
Do the Democratic and Republican primaries happen at the same time? i.e., will we get to choose our nominee AFTER the Dems choose theirs? The nominee that is chosen second seems to have the advantage, as he can be chosen with the other in mind.
Jeb's not a rino, it was just my stupid and over the top criticism. The real issue for him is the "d" word. I for one think it would be innapropriate for anyone from that family to run for President any time soon. In a nation of 290 million people there have to be others we can pick from. I doubt I'm alone in my skepticism.
Alright, alright. So my comments were in no way constructive. For that I sort of apologize.
As to whom we could seriously consider, let me say that I am not sure Hillary! will be the Dems choice in 08. How is she supposed to win all of those red states and have a chance? I see her winning NY, MA, ME, VT, CA, CT, RI, DC, maybe NJ, maybe DE, but can she win the midwest? Can she win PA, FL, WI, MI, IN, etc? I'm not so sure. She is a formidable candidate, and she has a formidable machine. I would almost HOPE she doesn't run. Let's hope Rudy G kicks her ass out of the Senate in 06 and we've got someone else to worry about.
Now as far as GOP prospects? There are tons of Gov's, Senators, MC's, or what about fellows like Schwartzkopf or someone else? Those might be good choices too.
I guess we'll have to see.
best regards,
Aren't the odds-makers already on this one?
Edwards has zero chance of the nomination IMO.
He's going to have been out of work for 4 years by the time 08 comes around. He's already a "loser" and he was proven ineffective and a lightweight the last 3 months of this campaign.
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.