McCain would be ideal…he would get democratic voters as well as republican voters…The republican candidate cannot have the aroma of Bush or its a cinch that the democratic candidate will win…
Whoever can convince the voters that he/she is fiscally conservative but believes in separation of church and state…pro choice…environmental protection…a Manhatten project for alternative fuel for starters IMO will win in 2008.
I dunno – I knew some Jewish Republicans who voted for Gore in 2000 just because Lieberman was on the ticket. I don’t think there would be a mass exodus from the Democratic party, but Condi would definitely be given more consideration by blacks and women than she would if she were just another white male. Either that, or you’d see a huge campaign to cast doubt on her “credentials” as an African-American and, to a lesser extent, as a woman. Hell, it’s already underway – how many times have you heard it charged that she’s “not really black”? I guess it’s easier to do that than to accept the fact that not all blacks/women/etc. share the same political views.
I agree that speculation about Rice’s ability to draw black and women votes might be overblown. But the rest of your post is so chock full of unfounded assumptions that I have to respond.
First, you seem to be equating women and black voters with liberals. That certainly isn’t the case, and these groups voting for Democrats in the past doesn’t make it so. Blacks in general, for instance, have a view toward gay rights far more traditional than current Democratic party thinking. And a good many women voters are activists for the Religious Right. That makes sense, given that women are more likely than men to attend church.
You also seem to think that Republican voters will be saddled more than Democratic ones with racist and sexist thoughts, this preventing them from voting for a minority candidate. Again, this is a fact not in evidence. I grew up in Pennsylvania among white union Democrats, and casual racism there was persistent and stubborn. Republicans here in Northern Virginia, where I now live, are models of tolerance and inclusion by contrast.
So a good chunk of your speculation here is pure bunk, about par for your political analysis in general.
I’m from the deep south. Racism is alive and well among southern conservatives. So is sexism (it isn’t liberals who form giant he-man woman hater clubs to force women to “submit” to their husbands).
Over 90% of black voters vote Democrat. That isn’t going to change just because Rice is on the ticket. Liberal women are not going to vote for her either. Sorry to disappoint you. The only thing she’s got going for her as far as moderates and liberals are concerned is that she’s pro-choice. That matters far more than skin color or genitalia.
I suppose you might hope to attract black voters by playing that fag-bashing card but how incongruous would it look for the GOP when it’s trying to feign tolerance by putting a black woman on the ticket while simultaneously campaigning on hatred of homosexuals?
Then kindly enlighten us, O Wise One. I already asked what the attraction is, and you haven’t offered anything I haven’t already guessed.
So tell us, what is there about Rice that makes you think she’d be a good President for the United States? Or is your highest consideration *really * the feeling of sticking it to the Dems, as it would appear?
Re Giuliani, enough time has elapsed since 9/11 that his full record would come back into focus. Not everyone has forgotten just how unpopular he had become as of 9/10. Even if he ran in the primaries, every video clip of him at a firefighter’s funeral would be countered with a clip of Abner Louima or Amadou Diallo. The adultery stories and the health stories would be kept to a whisper, but a loud one in many places. IOW, fuhgeddaboutit.
By the way, there are rumors that Condi is a lesbian. If that’s true, how would that play into the fag-bashing strategy for Republicans?
Not if she thinks of Bush as her husband.
More likely, ISTM, she’s been too devoted to her work for too long to find time for romance. It happens.
Santorum won’t even be reelected in his “own” state.
Then again, he’s not running in Virginia.
I would propose a candidate new to politics. Someone wealthy enough to fund her own campaign. Although wealthy, she’s personable and has much experience living with and among the common folk. She’s already had plenty of media exposure, and it’s safe to say there are no secrets waiting to be revealed with her. And she’s quite a looker, always a good thing in todays’ media campaigns.
Ladies and gentlemen, I give you or next Republcian candidate for President: Paris Hilton.
Please, no money. Your heartfelt thanks are enough.
Come now, if we can try to convince them that Hillary Clinton would be a good choice, we can’t really complain if they amuse themselves by lying to us too, can we?
I don’t like Condi Rice, and wouldn’t vote for her for president because I find her unexceptional, but I don’t get the NY/Shoes/Katrina criticism.
I didn’t understand why she should have cancelled her plans. I GET why Bush and others involved in areas of government related to domestic protection should have done a better job.
But Rice is SECSTATE. I don’t consider her New York trip any more shallow than every other person who shopped in NYC that day and then went to see a show that night.
It’s not like she was shirking duties.
While COndi might be a good VP pick, she’s doesn’t have the campaign experience to win on the naitonal level.
As for McCain… look, the guy is a media-hound, nothing more. Regardless of whatever you feel about anyone else, he’s proven time and again that he doesn’t really believe in anything. And I will never forgive, politically speaking, for the McCain-Feingold Act. McCain can never get elected because he will instantly and immediately drive away the Republican base, and most of the Republican outliers, and pretty much everyone else. He’s not a dark horse; he’s a dead horse.
Isn’t this really a pretty silly discussion?
The GOP anoints its leaders, no matter what the nominating process may look like. What’s this anointing look like? It looks like a guy having raised about a hundred million dollars by the spring of 1999, nearly a year before the first primary, thereby having the clear frontrunner mantle long before a single vote gets cast.
Who’s going to be anointed? A guy who will service the plutocrat class while keeping the Christian right enthusiastic (and supplying the necessary votes), and who has a pleasant enough demeanor so he doesn’t scare off swing voters.
Where can I get a bet down on George Allen? I think Frist had shot himself in the foot, even before the insider-trading allegations. McCain? Even though McCain’s behaved himself admirably since June 2004, from a GOP perspective, that’s not very long; the moneymen won’t trust him. And I can’t see anyone else who can fill the bill. He’s perfect: he’s got all the qualities of Bush, but without having worn out his welcome yet.
More likely it would be the tipping point for millions of former Pub white voters going over to the Dems or staying home. Since Nixon’s “Southern Strategy” in 1968, conservative white Southerners have gradually become the Republican Party’s main base. There’s a lot more residual racism among them than you seem to realize.
If Goldwater were alive today, I think he’d be a Libertarian, not a Republican.
I always liked Kemp, but he’s kinda out of it these days. McCain/Rice has been my prediction for quite some time, and I think that would be an unbeatable team. If only McCain were 5 years younger. Although I hear that 70 is the new 60…
Giuliani-- has anyone gone from mayor to President w/o anuthing inbetween?
Why do you think that?
All that because of McCain-Feingold? Are Pub voters really that thoroughly hostile to the idea of CFR?
I respect McCain’s independence, too, but the way he rallied behind Bush last year lost him a lot of respect in my book. It is hard to believe he hugged Bush out of legitimate affection or agreement as opposed to political cynicism.
Condi vs Hillary in '08? Read all about it…
I would nominate George HW Bush.
But before I go on about why, I’d like to say a few words on some extremely dumbass suggestions.
I’d just like to remind everyone who thinks Giuliani is a good idea that THIS IS THE MAN WHO TRIED TO OUTLAW CABS IN NEW YORK CITY!
Thank you.
As for Bloomberg, HE TRIED TO MAKE A 1 AM BAR CURFEW IN THE CITY THAT NEVER SLEEPS!
Neither is qualified to be mayor of New York let alone President of the United States.
On to more important business.
George HW Bush should be President, because he’s in charge anyway.
The Apocalypse is on December 21, 2012 which would be right at the end of his term as it is, and he can only serve one term. The timing is perfect for him to usher in the New World Order when Christ will return to power and rule humanity for the next thousand years, until Satan returns to Earth.
Who better to run the Great Satan than Satan himself?
According to top UFOlogists he knows what’s up with UFOs. Considering this is the man that told President Carter that the President’s curiousity wasn’t sufficient need to know about classified documents on UFOs, I think they are probably right. So that makes him the world’s foremost expert on interplanetary foreign policy, something that will become important when the invasion begins.
If not him, it will be a Skull and Bones lacky anyway.
He’s the only person I’d trust to abdicate the throne to the King of Kings, and will accept a post offworld where he can be Terra’s ambassador to the alien homeworld.
Democracy is a joke, and so is the idea that America has a government. It’s complete anarchy at best, corporate feudalism at worst.
He’s been in charge since the Ford administration.
If Bill Clinton becomes Secretary General of the UN next year, the New World Order will be complete, and the transition will be smooth and painless.
And last but not least, he has the same connections as his son without the stupidity.
Erek