Posted on 11/17/2004 7:41:57 PM PST by CollegeConservative.com
Before you ask, I will answer: No, it is not too early to talk about 2008, even though President Bush has yet to be sworn into office for a second term and even though the person who will be our next President has not even been confirmed for her Secretary of State post yet. Besides, I want to be on record early so if I am wrong, no one will have remembered my prediction by 2008, and if I am right, it will prove how wise I am.
But before I get to Dr. Rice, I’ll have to say why the Mainstream Media's Republican darlings will not come out on top. First, the party faithful will not rally around a pro-choice candidate, end of story. Sorry Rudy. Second, John McCain’s popularity relies on moderate Republicans, moderate Democrats, and the liberal press. As a general rule, never trust a Republican who is “respected” and is niftily nicknamed and admired (Oh, it’s Maverick!) by the New York Times.
It is not so much that these candidates would necessarily be bad choices, and in fact both would probably have a good shot at winning the Presidency if given the chance. But Republicans like their Presidential nominees to share their values, be passionate about their issues, and to play hardball when necessary. Rudy G. is a tempting candidate but perhaps too flawed, and McCain refuses to launch off some spitballs when needed and licks the boots of Democrats far too often (that and he sticks us with really bad legislation like Campaign Finance Deform.)
On to Dr. Rice. Historically speaking, after a President is twice elected the next candidate from the incumbent party is generally a major figure from that administration. Most often, the Vice-President is a shoe-in for the nomination. Gore followed Clinton, Bush Sr. followed Reagan, Nixon followed Eisenhower, and so on. Had Kerry been twice elected John Edwards would have been the probable candidate in 2012.
However, it is highly unlikely that VP Cheney will seek the nomination, allowing for somewhat of a break in tradition, and begging the question: now who? Which brings us to the soon-to-be third most influential person in the Bush Administration and, possibly, the United States: Condoleezza Rice. Among members of the administration, Rice has the most face and name recognition, something that will only grow given the stature of the Secretary of State post. Her approval ratings have been among the highest in the Bush administration (59% favorable, 24% unfavorable – CNN/Gallup), generally trailing only outgoing Secretary of State Colin Powell.
In 2008, the focus of the election will likely be foreign policy issues and the battle against global terror. If there is significant progress in the War on Terror and in the Palestine-Israeli conflict, then a strong case will be made for the continuation of Bush’s policy, of which Dr. Rice has been instrumental in shaping and supporting. Given Rice’s expertise and experience in international relations, and given the relationships she will have time to strengthen over the next four years, she will be well prepared for the challenges ahead, and more so than any other Presidential wannabe could be.
If Rice decides to go for the nomination, President Bush will likely support his close friend and adviser. Dr. Rice, a concert pianist and a former Stanford University Provost who earned a Bachelors at 19, a Masters a year later, and then a Doctorate all before turning 30 may even become the first Republican candidate to successfully avoid being called an “idiot” by liberals. Though, I wouldn’t hold my breath.
I remember a couple years back when Dr. Rice was a guest on Oprah. Her passion was unbelievable, her sincerity unquestionable, and her presence overwhelming. It was that day that I knew that what her parents told her growing up could possibly one day come true: that she too could be President of these United States. I for one, think they were on to something.
Check out:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1281099/posts?page=73#73
Post #73
Did he account for Frist, Santorum, and Owens?
Is that like being barely pregnant?
Condi has never been elected to anything. The last two Presidents whose pre-White House careers were entirely appointed offices didn't fare too well, despite their great talents--William Howard Taft and Herbert Hoover. (I'm leaving out Eisenhower because his career was entirely in the military, apart from being President of Columbia University.)
If Condi became pro-life and had some experience in elective office, she might be a good candidate...but we can expect her to be trashed relentlessly by the MSM as long as she is Secretary of State (assuming the 'Rats don't derail the nomination).
Look for more of the same, and another hate based race in '08.
Condi/Tommy Franks. Unbeatable.
I wonder if Rudy would change his position on guns if he was going to run nationally. He had to run anti-gun in NYC to have a chance at winning the mayoral race. It's a given.
A very liberal Republican still has terrible odds against a Dem here. Bloomberg ran as a Republican just so he didn't have to compete in the Dem primary.
My prediction: Rice/??? vs. Clinton/Obama (she'd need Obama to solidify the black vote).
What would be interesting is the public response to Clinton's inevitable statement that "She [Rice] wouldn't be the first African-American President - my husband was."
Unless you count Provost of Stanford University for six years ... budget of $1.4 billion, responsible for day-to-day operations of a campus of 14,000 students. And of course, by '08 she will have 3-4 years managing the DoS under her belt.
"Condi/Tommy Franks. Unbeatable."
I'd expect her running mate would be more likely to be someone who's known for domestic policy to balance the ticket. Her running mate should also be someone from the Midwest (since Rice is from the south and west) and someone who has his own power base - preferrably from a large battleground state. Maybe a midewestern governor (Rendell's replacement if he loses?) or senator (DeWine? Santorum?). Of course, "Rice/DeWine" sounds like dinner, but since when have names mattered much in politics (e.g. "Al [I'll] Gore")?
Just for fun, for now I'll imagine it's Rice/DeWine vs. Clinton/Obama.
Actually, it seems like since a couple years ago, the assumption among both parties' leaders has been that Bush would win re-election and the Republicans have been grooming Rice while the Democrats have been grooming Clinton. Obama seems to be picked as the VP choice, too, perhaps in response to Rice.
It's odd, though, that after centuries of no women presidential candidates or blacks as either presidential or vice-presidential candidates, now both parties are doing it at the same time.
It will be nice if within the next few years, a new Supreme Court returns the question of abortion to the states and takes it out of the debate on the federal level (although I would still support a constitutional amendment).
I hate to say it, but I really don't think the country is ready to elect a black president, man or women. The Republican party is not a racist party, despite the MSM's lies and distortions, but there are many many people in the country who are, Dems and Republicans, who aren't that willing to vote for a woman #1, and a black woman even less. Maybe in 10-20 years, but right now, I don't see it happening. Noone would admit it out loud, but in the voting booth I think many people would not vote for her.
I am amazed by the number of women I've heard say they don't trust a woman, any woman in public life today, as president. They seem even more emphatic about it than men. Do we still need a father-figure? Are we ready for an American Thatcher or Golda Meir or Indira Ghandi?
No one has any idea how Rice would handle a campaign. It's risky cutting your teeth politically on the highest office in the world.
----------------------------------
Yeah, a NYC Italian Catholic who's been divorced, wears dresses in public, moved in with his gay friend while getting the divorce and is ok with abortion and a spinster black woman. That's the red-state dream ticket....
Why not?
Ronald Reagan was divorced.
wears dresses in public, moved in with his gay friend while getting the divorce Vice President Cheney's daughter is gay. I assume they shared living quarters at some point in their lives -- and probably still do, from time to time. And yet, no one has suggested that Cheney has picked up gay cooties.
and is ok with abortion
The first President Bush was pro-choice, right up until the moment he accepted the veep nomination in 1980.
and a spinster black woman. That's the red-state dream ticket....
A presidential candidate's marital status and race are relevant for what reason?
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.