2008 Contenders- Page 2

[PalJoey]

Posted: 11/9/05 at 6:07pm

I hear PalJoey has even more dirty laundry than Rudy!

[MargoChanning]

Posted: 11/9/05 at 6:11pm

Plum's right. I think the era of the necons and the evangelicals is over with the next election, regardless of which party wins. They've trashed the Treasury and our standing internationally and proven themselves incompetent for all the world to see. If they're smart, the Republicans are going to promote a more moderate mainstream candidate in 2008 -- probably McCain or Hagel -- if they want to win. The evangelicals will stay home and so they'll have to slug it out with the Democratic nominee for the moderate vote. The Reagan Democrats will again decide an election.

[Plum]

Posted: 11/9/05 at 6:20pm

I guess we have different ideas of what constitutes "crazy."

Posted: 11/9/05 at 6:20pm

"He needs to get over it and move on."

Completely unlike the republicans and blow jobs I suppose...

[touchmeinthemorning]

Posted: 11/9/05 at 6:55pm

I wouldn't say Rudy has no shot. I don't kinow what his intentions for 2008 are, but I wouldn't put it past him to run.

I can honestly say, though, that I don't like any of these Dems. Obama would be ideal, but he's a tad young. The rest don't have enough clout to engage a backing from their entire party, let alone another party's moderates. I think Dems really have to start thinking outside the box if they want a Dem president. Cause, I wouldn't vote for any of those Dems.

2008 may prove to be another third party "spoiler" election.

[MargoChanning]

Posted: 11/14/05 at 12:27am

Reuters:

"Florida Gov. Jeb Bush, the brother of U.S. President George W. Bush, ruled out running for president in 2008 but left open the possibility of a subsequent bid in an interview with a German magazine published on Sunday.

Jeb Bush, who is scheduled to visit Germany this week, told Focus weekly he had not thought much about running for the office held by his father and older brother except to rule out the next election at the end of George W. Bush's second term.

"You should never say never. But for the 2008 election, my answer is definitely no," he said, in comments translated into German by the magazine.

Asked whether his answer meant a later challenge was possible, he said: "Let's say there's a vague chance."

Bush, 52, said he spoke frequently with his brother and visited the White House whenever he was in Washington but he said the two mainly discussed family matters or sport."


http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20051113/pl_nm/germany_bush_jeb_dc

Updated On: 11/14/05 at 12:27 AM

[sweetestsiren]

Posted: 11/14/05 at 12:51am

MARK WARNER! At LEAST as a VP candidate. It's pretty impressive to have turned a state's floundering economy totally around, have an 80% approval rating in VIRGINIA, and have gotten a less popular, arguably more liberal successor elected on your coattails. Moderate, southerner, very very likely to carry this strongly Republican state...I don't see how you can go wrong. He is conservative for my tastes, but we NEED moderates if we want to win.

I don't think that the Republican party would ever nominate McCain--he's not loyal enough to the party, he thinks for himself too much. He'd be damn near unbeatable if he was the nominee, though.

[roquat]

Posted: 11/14/05 at 1:04am

Has the Senate Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi expressed any interest? She is EXTREMELY combative and one of the few strong Democratic standard-bearers in these last four trying years; she'd be extremely polarizing, but no more so than Hillary. Maybe someone truly passionate would command respect, rather than yet another "centrist" who tries to please everybody just long enough to get elected. Just a stray thought...

Mitt Romney wouldn't be able to deliver his own state. Even Walter Mondale delivered his own state.

What everyone seems to have forgotten is that Hillary keeps repeating that she has no interest in the Presidency. If this is an act, it's hardly the time for it.

The scenario a lot of people seem to want (for the spectacle, rather than for the good of the country) is Hillary vs. Condoleeza. There are already websites to that effect named "Condi, not the Blondie" and so forth. It would certainly be an interesting dilemma--would the red-state conservative base who hates Hillary be able to stomach making an Afro-American woman President, and would the Democrats be able to avoid exploiting racism for their gain (i.e., would they automatically lose a good deal of the Afro-American voters that traditionally vote Democratic?) Not to mention the shameless entertainment value of a catfight for the Presidency. I myself think this would be a disaster--Condi seems something of an Uncle Tom, and Hillary, while a political "star" to some degree and a perfectly nice woman, is not as qualified as several others.

If the red states must dominate again, I suppose McCain is the sanest choice. He could hardly do worse than Bush. (Oh, when will I learn not to SAY things like that!)

[sweetestsiren]

Posted: 11/14/05 at 1:28am

Haha, I would so love to see two women running against one another. I don't think that it would be any worse for the country than any other candidate choices. Neither party would ever agree to it, though... if one nominates a woman, the other will nominate a man. Actually, the RNC would never nominate Condi in the first place.

[MargoChanning]

Posted: 11/14/05 at 11:24am

From Bloomberg:

"Virginia Democratic Gov. Mark Warner said he plans to wait until his term ends in January to decide whether he will run for president in 2008.

"I have not made any decision," Warner said yesterday on CBS's "Face the Nation." He said, "The first thing I want to do is finish this job strong."

Warner, who is prevented by state law from seeking a second consecutive term as governor, said he wants to be part of the Democratic Party's efforts to appeal to "sensible center" voters.

Sen. John McCain, an Arizona Republican, and New Mexico Gov. Bill Richardson, a Democrat, also refused to rule out possible presidential bids.

Florida Gov. Jeb Bush, a Republican and the brother of President George W. Bush, said in an interview published by the German publication Focus that he was ruling out a presidential run in 2008 though there was a "vague possibility" he would be a candidate in a later election.

McCain, who ran against the president for the Republican nomination in 2000, said he'll decide whether to run again after next year's elections. He said his party should be prepared for the likelihood that Sen. Hillary Clinton will be the Democratic presidential nominee in 2008. "If you underestimate her, you do it at great risk," McCain said on CBS.

Richardson said the Democrats' success in the Nov. 8 election was a referendum on Bush."

Bloomberg

[brdlwyr]

Posted: 11/14/05 at 11:34am

I had hoped the Kerry would have picked Richardson for VP rather than that goofball he picked.

I think that if you cannot deliver your own state - stay off the ballot.

[sweetestsiren]

Posted: 11/14/05 at 11:46am

I think that Warner will run, and that it would be a huge asset to have him on the ticket in some form or other. Charismatic, centrist Southerner, former governor... reminiscent of anyone? Minus the scandal part.

If they decide to go with someone more liberal as the Presidential candidate, he would at least be a good person to balance out the ticket as the VP candidate.

[Garland Grrrl]

Posted: 11/14/05 at 11:48am

could be an interesting bloodbath if it's mccain v jeb.

[lildogs]

Posted: 11/14/05 at 11:53am

I hope Jeb is stupid enough to run--this country is beyond Bush-fatigued. I also think Hillary cannot win a national election either, though the nomination is hers to lose. I'm a huge Biden fan, but I too, think his time has passed. McCain is the Repubs best hope, and Warner is a good selection for the Dems--though I think John Edwards still has a great deal of potential. I personally would rather the Dems focus on the House and Senate. There'll be time for the White House later.

[MargoChanning]

Posted: 11/14/05 at 11:54am

If Dubya's numbers are still in the toilet, Jeb won't jump in the race. They hate him in Florida these days anyway.

Warner seems to have just the right package for the Dems. I hope he has the support of the party. Warner vs. McCain would make for quite an entertaining race.

And though it probably won't happen, I must say that a Condi vs. Hillary fight is fascinating.

[sweetestsiren]

Posted: 11/14/05 at 11:57am

Edwards is so far out of the running it's not even funny. He seemed like a great idea at the time, but he has soooo much liability inherently. I know people who flat-out refused to vote for Kerry-Edwards because Edwards was a tort lawyer. He did nothing for himself in the debates. Even his own state wouldn't vote for him. Boyish good looks do not a presidential candidate make.
Updated On: 11/14/05 at 11:57 AM

[smartpenguin78]

Posted: 11/14/05 at 12:02pm

Brd- Edwards is hardly a goofball, he is a charismatic, intellegent man who was probably too ambitious.
North Carolina was angry with him for "abandoning" them (actually us, I lived there at the time) Many people would not vote for him based on that perceived slight. Not to mention that it was Kerry who doomed any chance of a southern state voting Democrat, the impression of "Massachusetts liberal" was just too strong.

I am not saying the choice of Edwards was a good one, it made no sense then and seems even crazier now. I think Richardson turned the nomination down. (Also there was some Anti-Catholic bias at work.)

I think Warner may be a good fit and might even eek out a victory, but he would hardly be a watershed President. At the moment he probably has the best chance of winning.

Gore, Kerry, and Hillary really don't stand a chance. The rhetoric in most of the country is too vehemently against them.

[brdlwyr]

Posted: 11/14/05 at 12:16pm

SP78 - I did not mean that he literally was a goofball, I found him ineffective and atrocious during the debates. He is a freaking trial lawyer - his performance should have been stellar.

I hope that Byah takes a look see. He gave a great speach in 1996 in Chicago.

[YouWantitWhen????]

Posted: 11/14/05 at 12:19pm

I don't know who is going to run, But:

Jeb - maybe in 2012 if the anti-Bush rhetoric is still strong in another year. I don't see him running and winning if the Dems take back one or two of the houses next year and investigations start.

Frist had goals, but is so inept and under such investigation, he will never make it.

McCain - he may well be gettinga little too old. He has had some health issues of late, and I am not sure he would be the best canidate.

Rudy - lots of dirty laundry - might not survive the primary, but I think could be a good centrist candidate that could get some moderate dems.

Maybe Mrs. Dole would consider a run, though she would be destroyed I am sure.

Christie Tood Whitman? - I would vote for her. A true moderate republican.

The Christian Right and Neocons still has a lot of power - but they do not realize that their 30% has effectively pissed off the remaining 70%

For the Dems - Pelosi to too far to the left, as is Boxer.

Bill Richardson - might be interesting, but I just don't know enough about him.

Gore - well, who knows, if he could get himself some Caffeine and actually speak to rather than at a crowd, it migt be interesting.

Clark - maybe VP, but not as President. Does not have the background.

Kerry - Not for me. He had his chance and blew it big time.

Edwards - I like him, but his experience is limited.

Byah - his name has been around for a while, but no know knows much about him outside his home state. In this climate, and unknown may have a chance - but need to learn more about him.

Hillary - I actually think she is the best of the bunch out there, though I am not sure she would run. She creates such venom in the opponet on principle alone, which is too bad. She is the smartest, has the most experience, and has learned to work with Senators on the other side of the aisle. I kind of like a Hillary/Clark ticket. But, it will never happen.

Obama - 20012 or 2016.

Dunno - just my thoughts.



Updated On: 11/14/05 at 12:19 PM

[smartpenguin78]

Posted: 11/14/05 at 12:21pm

I thought his debate performance was below par as well. It was not the same Edwards who campaigned. I think they focused grouped him to make him "less lawyery" and failed miserbly. The Kerry campaign was also tremendously scared Edwards would upstage the top guy. I was not and am not a huge Edwards fan, but a lot of that was external.

What exactly is a literal goofball? I've always wondered.

Byah has to be thinking about it, he has no name recognition outside of hardcore followers and midwesternersm, I think that may be a big plus.

[Gothampc]

Posted: 11/14/05 at 1:08pm

I wouldn't count out the churchgoers yet.
Who knew California had Evangelicals?

[pndmnd]

Posted: 11/14/05 at 3:24pm

I'm a huge Obama fan--I'm an Illinois girl, and have been following him for several years. I even have an "Obama 2008" t-shirt that I sleep in all the time! Having said that, I think it would be a mistake for him to run in 2008, even as a VP. He won't even be through a full term in the Senate, and the Republicans would tear that down. Give him a chance to get his name on some big committees and bills and such, builed up his experience, and then let him run.

Kerry has NO chance, and I don't really think Boxer does either. If the Democrats put up a woman, it will be Hillary. The republicans won't put up a woman unless it's to combat Hillary, and if they do, it would be Rice. I don't see Elizabeth Dole as having any chance whatsoever.

Even if Jeb waited until 2012 or 2016, I think (or hope, at least) that W's screw ups will have tarnished that family's political ambitions for good.

In all of the comments about Giuliani being too liberal and such, I'm surprised nobody commented on the fact that he also has never been a Governor, in the Senate, or even the House. Yes he was the mayor of a major city during a major disaster, but that's still a pretty big leap to presidency.

If the Republican's are smart they'll put in McCain. I think he'd be the hardest to beat (at this point).

[Plum]

Posted: 11/14/05 at 3:52pm

Agreed that Warner vs. McCain would make a fascinating race.

And I sincerely hope Hillary doesn't go for a nom; that would just get ugly. I disagree with her on policy more than I'd like, but heaven help any self-proclaimed feminist who doesn't automatically make that woman her vote. *sigh*

[sweetestsiren]

Posted: 11/14/05 at 4:57pm

Warner vs. McCain would make a fantastic race. I would prefer that someone less moderate (and popular) than McCain got the Republican nomination, but we'll see how it goes. I know a lot of moderate Dems who would probably jump the fence to vote for McCain...and possibly vice versa with moderate Republicans perhaps siding with Warner. It would truly be a race centered on candidates and issues rather than political parties.

Hillary can't win. I like her, but she can't. She's got too much political baggage leftover from her husband's administration, and (unfortunately) the disadvantage of being a woman. It would be a mistake to nominate her. Maybe she could get by as the VP... but even that's sort of a stretch.

[M J R]

Posted: 11/14/05 at 5:11pm

I for one would LOVE to see Clinton vs Rice. That way, the south would have no choice but to secede from the union.