Let’s assume that Sir Walter Scott of Parade Magazine got it right.
Let’s assume George II accepts the resignation of Dick Cheney in September 04 (post-convention, of course) for “health reasons.”
So W. has a relatively free hand. Who will he pick?
Some ideas, with comment:
SEN. ELIZABETH DOLE–sex up the ticket a little, help with the women’s vote; BUT she’s not all that moderate (if that’s bad), and the Bushes don’t get along well with the Doles. Next?
SEN. BILL FRIST–pretty conservative; but he’s a former doctor; BUT the Goppers may need him in the Senate, and he may not be ready for a national ticket until '08.
RUDY GUILLIANI–still well-known nationally. BUT George may find 9-11 is getting stale; and RG is “wrong” on abortion and gays; and a loose cannon with a temper.
JOHN ASHCROFT or DON RUMSFELD–way way WAY too controversial.
COLIN POWELL–may help with black vote, but not enough; reminds people of Bush’s weak areas.
MITT ROMNEY–not a bad choice.
THE SON OF THE SENATOR REAGAN TRIED TO RUN WITH IN 1976 (SCHWEIKER?)–Got good press on the “trapped miners” thing, and he’s modest. Maybe.
JEB BUSH–Don’t you roll your eyes at ME, son. It could happen.
I doubt Dubya’ll find Sept. 11 to be stale, since he’s moving the convention (in New York City, no less) to coincide with the anniversary.
Powell probably wouldn’t run, he’s already said he won’t serve in the second term.
Tom Ridge was deemed a strong possibility in 2000, and now he’s Homeland Security Secretary. If the Dems run Dean, it would be another underscore to Bush’s supposed national security credibility. Of course, if he were going for that, he’d choose a veteran (I don’t know whether or not Ridge served, but I haven’t heard anything about it). Maybe Sen. Chuck Hagel of Nebraska.
Frank Keating of Oklahoma was another choice in 2000, he was an FBI agent before entering politics.
Does it matter? He’s been a carbon copy of his dad, and we all know what happened to him. If nothing changes dramatically in the next few months, I’ll be getting a new boss come November 2004, no matter who his Veep is.
Especially on these boards, people just LOVE to speculate on who’ll replace Cheney. I understand the arguments, but I just don’t think he’s going anywhere. Even people who give Bush more credit for his intelligence than I do probably have to admit that Cheney is the brains of the operation. I don’t mean that he tells Bush what to do; I mean he’s the center of the entire administration. I’m not sure how they’d function without him.
Incidentally, one of the chief arguments toward the “Cheney quits” theory is that he wouldn’t be an electable presidential candidate, which I think is true. But Bush’s re-election is FAR from assured. They don’t have the wiggle room to put anything but their strongest ticket out there next November.
I disagee. Bush the Elder was at least a middle-of-the-road president. Led the whole world in fighting a decisively victorious war, successfully presided over the downfall of the Evil Empire, treaded water on the domestic economy.
It’s going to be Cheney, so the deabate is really mute. Just to play along, though, I think he’d choose Frist. Powell doesn’t want it, has never wanted it and won’t take it (he could have the top of the ticket anytime he wanted, why would he want to play second banana to a little shit like Bush who he clearly doesn’t respect and can’t wait to get away from?)
Rice is pro-choice. The religious right would never allow apro-choice candidate to be on the ticket.
Ashcroft and Rummy have very negative public images.
Frist is a solid conservative who does not have the personality or military credentials to overshadow shrub. He would be an inoffensive lackey and that’s what Bush likes.
My thoughts are that W. will be under pressure to give some exposure to someone who will become nominee-presumptive in '08. Cheney ain’t it. He can still run the show as a nonsalaried advisor.
I was sorta joking about Jeb, though I think I recall speculation that JFK wanted to run with RFK in '64.
Remember that if he makes an appontment of Veep AFTER the convention, he’ll really have a pretty free hand. (Think Ford picking Rockefeller.) I doubt that George’s “Christian convictions” will be the deciding factor: he may well accept a moderately pro-Choicer. But not a controversial one. (Sorry, Condi.)
And I suppose he’ll want someone who makes him look fairly good…I don’t suppose he realized Cheney would come across as the smarter partner in '00.
So we need a sort of nondescript quasi-centrist who’s NOT in the Senate and preferably not in the House.
I keep coming back to Romney.
Or, if we ARE reaching into the Senate, and will accept charges of homophobia as a reasonable price to lock-in Pennsylvania, how about Santorum?
George Pataki?
Bachelor Bob? Is he old enough?
(…which suggests a boomer nostalgia ticket. Sheriff John? Engineer Bill? Captain Kangaroo, for the military appeal? Buffalo Bob is dead, but Howdy Doody is still alive.)
Gray Davis may be looking for a job, and a political party…
[sup]Bush/Schwarzenegger in 2004![/sup][/ul]