Which Republican Will Be Elected President in 2008? [Archive]

PhiPsiRuss

11-03-2004, 03:26 PM

A Republican will be elected president in 2008. This will absolutely happen. The economy is on the upswing, and no Republican will be as stupid as Al Gore was and distance himself from the President.

So lets get down to business. I see three major contendors, but no one knows what will really happen in the Republican primaries four years from now. The top three contenders could be three completely different men.

Jeb Bush - His brother will have a sky high approval rating in 3 years, and Jeb will have access to his brother's rolodex. I think that this makes him the top contender.

Rudy Giuliani - He is a sentimental favorite of many, especially for me. I worked for him in 1993 doing opposition research, and he was New York's Winston Churchill during, and after 9-11. He also has great fund raising capability. Working against him is that mayors of New York historically don't rise to higher office. The position is very brutal on a man.

John McCain - I voted Libertarian in 2000 because I was so disgusted that a man like McCain was beat by a man like Bush. He is as close to a perfect candidate that you can find, except for a few fatal flaws. He doesn't have a great fund raising aparatus, and he speaks his mind. I believe that America would be a better place with McCain as president, but I don't know if Republican primary voters believe that. He also has the disadvantage of being a senator without governmental executive experience. Americans like to elect governors and vice presidents.

moe.ron

11-03-2004, 03:28 PM

Originally posted by PhiPsiRuss
A Republican will be elected president in 2008. This will absolutely happen. The economy is on the upswing, and no Republican will be as stupid as Al Gore was and distance himself from the President.

So lets get down to business. I see three major contendors, but no one knows what will really happen in the Republican primaries four years from now. The top three contenders could be three completely different men.

Jeb Bush - His brother will have a sky high approval rating in 3 years, and Jeb will have access to his brother's rolodex. I think that this makes him the top contender.

Rudy Giuliani - He is a sentimental favorite of many, especially for me. I worked for him in 1993 doing opposition research, and he was New York's Winston Churchill during, and after 9-11. He also has great fund raising capability. Working against him is that mayors of New York historically don't rise to higher office. The position is very brutal on a man.

John McCain - I voted Libertarian in 2000 because I was so disgusted that a man like McCain was beat by a man like Bush. He is as close to a perfect candidate that you can find, except for a few fatal flaws. He doesn't have a great fund raising aparatus, and he speaks his mind. I believe that America would be a better place with McCain as president, but I don't know if Republican primary voters believe that. He also has the disadvantage of being a senator without governmental executive experience. Americans like to elect governors and vice presidents.

You think Giuliani will be acceptable to the Christian rights?

As for McCain, I think his age might go against him. Not sure about Jeb Bush. It will depend how well GWB will do in his final four years.

Kevin

11-03-2004, 03:30 PM

Originally posted by moe.ron
You think Giuliani will be acceptable to the Christian rights?

As for McCain, I think his age might go against him. Not sure about Jeb Bush. It will depend how well GWB will do in his final four years.

I'm not sure what % of the Republican party is made up by the Christian right. I think both parties by and large vote for whoever the media tells them the "front runner" is (see: John Kerry).

PhiPsiRuss

11-03-2004, 03:35 PM

Originally posted by moe.ron
You think Giuliani will be acceptable to the Christian rights?

As for McCain, I think his age might go against him. Not sure about Jeb Bush. It will depend how well GWB will do in his final four years. Before 9-11, there would be absolutely no way that Giuliani could get through the Republican primaries. The Religous Right would have destroyed him fast. Right after 9-11, he could have become president easily if other factors were favorable (his party presiding over a good economy or the other party presiding over a bad economy.) In 2008, 9-11 may be too distant of a memory to allow the goodwill of Religous Right to overlook that he is pro-choice and pro-gay rights.

McCain might be too old, but then again, his age may have mellowed him enough to be able to get through a full presidential campaign without repeatedly putting his foot in his mouth.

I think that Jeb will have the goodwill towards his family, and access to an amazing political machine. That's why I think that Jeb cvan do it.

phigamucsb

11-03-2004, 04:14 PM

The Republican Party is a wait your turn party and John McCain is the next in line. Giuliani might possibly move ahead of McCain, but I'm not sure if I see that happening. As for Jeb Bush, he's not quite ready yet.

Sistermadly

11-03-2004, 04:40 PM

Originally posted by phigamucsb
As for Jeb Bush, he's not quite ready yet.

And his brother was? On what merit? Between the two of them, Jeb was far closer to presidential caliber than his brother.

Either way, it doesn't matter to me. I'll either be a full-fledged Canadian or dead by 2008.

moe.ron

11-03-2004, 05:07 PM

Giuliani might push the Republican back to the centre and this might piss off some hard core right winger. If Giuliani gets nominated, will he be able to push his pro-choice, pro-gay policies? This might divide the Republican party between the smaller government/government off people's bedroom fiscal conservatives vs. the Christian rights. Will be interesting to watch.

hottytoddy

11-03-2004, 05:58 PM

What about Majority leader, Bill Frist?

Pike1483

11-03-2004, 06:05 PM

Originally posted by hottytoddy
What about Majority leader, Bill Frist?

My thoughts exactly-- I'm a big fan of the good doctor. Big fan of Giuliani, too, but I'm not sure how I feel about him being President. Jeb would be awesome just because it would piss so many dems off.
I'm hoping Frist, but who knows, that's a long time from now.

IowaStatePhiPsi

11-03-2004, 06:27 PM

hell- I'd vote for Giuliani
He's more liberal on social issues than Kerry was.

kddani

11-03-2004, 06:31 PM

4 years is a long time away. We have no idea what will happen in the next 4. Back in 2000, none of us could've ever imagined 9/11 and how much it changed our lives. While it's fun and interesting to conjecture, nothing will be predictable for awhile yet.

hottytoddy

11-03-2004, 06:38 PM

Anyone think that Arnold might try to find a loophole so he can run?

kddani

11-03-2004, 06:41 PM

Originally posted by hottytoddy
Anyone think that Arnold might try to find a loophole so he can run?

i've heard on the gossip shows that he has these aspirations.

That would be tough. I don't know what kind of loophole could be found. He'd have to change the constitution, and for something like that, that's not going to happen

IowaStatePhiPsi

11-03-2004, 06:54 PM

Originally posted by kddani
He'd have to change the constitution, and for something like that, that's not going to happen

Hatch sponsored an Amendment that would change the Constitution to allow naturalized citizens of X years be able to run. I think his was naturalized citizen for 21 years. I believe it should be naturalized citizen for 14 years, having lived 10 consecutive years in the states or territories of the United States.

There's really no reason to keep the naturally-born requirement these days. And I think it could pass through enough states in time for the next election if it quickly gets out of Congress.

EtaPhiZTA

11-03-2004, 06:59 PM

My vote is for Jeb! Hail to the Chief.

kafromTN

11-03-2004, 07:07 PM

Bill Frist for President and have Rudolph Giuliani as Vice-President. That combination would win in a landslide.

Just my $.013264 worth
Mark

ZTAngel

11-03-2004, 08:12 PM

If Giuliani ran, I would definitely vote for him...this is coming from a social issues standpoint. A lot can change in 4 years and his social issues stance could change but, as of now, I like him.

smiley21

11-03-2004, 08:15 PM

Jeb Bush has said repeatedly that he is not interested in running for President. then again, he does have Bush blood, so he may change his mind. I think that Jeb is a great guy. I like him better than his brother.

i can tell by his interviews lately that Rudy has definitely been thinking about 2008....i think that would be cool...

ASUADPi

11-03-2004, 08:19 PM

I read that Jeb Bush said that he wouldn't run for president in 2008 (something about being the gov. for Florida enough for him).

As someone from AZ I adore John McCain. I was so sad to see him drop out of the election four years ago. I truly hope that he attempts to run again, but as someone mentioned I think his age is what might be against him. But I think he would have an awesome chance.

I definatley think Guilani (sorry I didn't spell that name right) would be an awesome president too.

Rudey

11-03-2004, 08:21 PM

Originally posted by IowaStatePhiPsi
hell- I'd vote for Giuliani
He's more liberal on social issues than Kerry was.

When separated from his evil wife he moved in with his good friend Koeppel and his gay partner. NY'ers will know Koeppel as the guy who owns so many car dealerships in the city and Queens. I don't know if that had anything to do with anything but I thought you might find it interesting.

-Rudey

oncelurked

11-03-2004, 09:01 PM

If Arnold were to get a loophole established so he could run, how many of y'all would be reminded of Demolition Man?

Personally, when someone mentions Arnold for President, it's the first thing that comes to mind.

AlphaSigOU

11-03-2004, 10:10 PM

Originally posted by oncelurked
If Arnold were to get a loophole established so he could run, how many of y'all would be reminded of Demolition Man?

Personally, when someone mentions Arnold for President, it's the first thing that comes to mind.

"The Presidentator" just doesn't sound as good as "Der Governator!" :D

KSigkid

11-03-2004, 10:11 PM

I like Giuliani a lot, same with with my state's Governor, Mitt Romney. A Giuliani/Romney ticket would be great, but we'll see.

I could see McCain giving it another go...Jeb Bush though has said repeatedly he wouldn't run, and I don't see anything changing that.

The1calledTKE

11-03-2004, 10:12 PM

McCain could win over many Democrats. I think him running would be the easiest win if he runs in 2008.

ASUADPi

11-03-2004, 10:19 PM

I have to say I find it pretty funny, yet cool, how many people seem to like McCain.

Sometimes it's just hard for me to realize that he is well known.

But then he is my US senator. I've met the man.

But I know absolutely nothing about my other senator or any other senators. That is why I find it really intersesting how many people like McCain.

(maybe I'm just being "selfish" because he is my senator :) )

AGDee

11-03-2004, 10:28 PM

Republicans that I would seriously consider giving my vote:

McCain
Frist
Giuliani

Some Democrats have thought about wanting to lift the native citizen requirements to get Jennifer Granholm, governor of Michigan in there.. perhaps as a Vice President to start. She was born in Canada. She's very dynamic and appeals to a lot of Republicans as well because she's pretty moderate.

Dee

AlphaSigOU

11-03-2004, 11:00 PM

Besides, ya can't go wrong with the son of a former CINCPAC. (Commander in Chief, Pacific Fleet; his late father was CINCPAC when he was shot down over North Vietnam; a Navy destroyer, the USS John S. McCain (DDG-56) is named after both his father and grandfather, both of whom were admirals.

moe.ron

11-04-2004, 02:26 AM

Originally posted by Pike1483
My thoughts exactly-- I'm a big fan of the good doctor. Big fan of Giuliani, too, but I'm not sure how I feel about him being President. Jeb would be awesome just because it would piss so many dems off.
I'm hoping Frist, but who knows, that's a long time from now.

So, you are hoping for a Presidential candidate that would piss somebody off? very good way to choose your leader there.

cashmoney

11-04-2004, 08:51 AM

I see JEB going at it in 20012 or 2016. I like Rudy G in 2008.

phikappapsiman

11-04-2004, 10:33 AM

I'm hoping Jim DeMint of North Carolina or Coburn of Oklahoma. Maybe even DeLay of Texas. Seriously... This country needs to complete the cycle to the far right, and I think that once this happens, the country will make its final decent into polarization. I feel that by 2008, Roe v. Wade will be overturned, there probably will be a constitutional amendment banning same-sex marriages, and Social Security will have been privatized, so why not get a man who will move the country so far right that there will be no turning back. All they need to campaign on is "God, Guns and Gays", and they will win! Maybe a national law banning homosexuals and unwed mothers from teaching in public schools, school vouchers since it would be too obvious to overturn Brown v. Board of Education (but they could try), laws to get rid of "illegals" (but only the "bad" ones from Mexico or Cuba or Puerto Rico, not the good ones from the European countries), maybe even prayer in schools again. I honestly look forward to the possibilities!!!:)

Pike1483

11-04-2004, 10:55 AM

Originally posted by moe.ron
So, you are hoping for a Presidential candidate that would piss somebody off? very good way to choose your leader there.

I thought so, too

breathesgelatin

11-04-2004, 03:16 PM

I would hope for McCain. I respect his political career and views very much even if I do not agree with them always. He is a very admirable person. He would certainly give the country a vigorous and articulate debate with his opponent and I would love to watch it. However I suspect that he's not interested in running. Who knows though?

I don't like Rudy Giuliani at all. That's a purely gut judgment of mine on just his demeanor. Something about him bothers me. He's fairly moderate however--but that might hurt him in terms of getting the nomination. I'm not that familiar with Republican hierarchy, but he doesn't strike me as someone the party would back for national office.

Jeb Bush: no way. I don't see that there's any way in heck this could happen. Not in terms of what he wants to do, or what the Republicans would go for.

Arnold I find hilarious and he's pretty liberal (HA) but I don't predict or support the Constitution being changed to favor him.

I despise Frist and his views. Please no...

Tom DeLay is obnoxious too. I don't want another Texas-style president.

So in short... McCain or Giuliani.

AznSAE

11-04-2004, 03:22 PM

arnold for vp then

breathesgelatin

11-04-2004, 03:26 PM

Originally posted by AznSAE
arnold for vp then

Someone correct me if I'm wrong, but doesn't the VP have to be eligible to be president to run...?? I'm genuinely curious.

PhiPsiRuss

11-04-2004, 03:30 PM

Frist is an interesting possibility. He is very likable. How good is he at raising money? If he has that apparatus in place, then he is viable.

McCain has tremendous popular appeal, but has he assembled an effective fund raising apparatus? He didn't have it in 2000. If he has the right people working for him, my guess is that he would be the front runner. I don't think that age will be an issue. Republicans nominated Dole in 1996, and he was no spring chicken.

Giuliani has raised a ridiculous ammount of money for Republicans all over America since 1993. A lot of people owe him. Only Jeb Bush has better fund raising potential. The Republican primaries are not all about money, and his social views could kill him. However, if Giuliani is the only credible pro-choice candidate in the field, he could divide and conquer.

If Jeb Bush doesn't want to run, he doesn't want to run. He is allowed to change his mind.

One thing that the 2008 Republicans won't have to worry about is appealing to Democrats. The economy will be so hot that it will be almost impossible for a Democrat to win.

AznSAE

11-04-2004, 03:35 PM

Originally posted by breathesgelatin
Someone correct me if I'm wrong, but doesn't the VP have to be eligible to be president to run...?? I'm genuinely curious.

i believe that anyone can be vp. but, if the president dies or resigns while in office, the vice president will not be president if he was not born in the us. i believe presidency will go to the speaker of the house. i heard it in history class once. i may be wrong.

The1calledTKE

11-04-2004, 06:16 PM

Originally posted by AznSAE
i believe that anyone can be vp. but, if the president dies or resigns while in office, the vice president will not be president if he was not born in the us. i believe presidency will go to the speaker of the house. i heard it in history class once. i may be wrong.

It would go to the Secretary of State before the speaker I think.

AznSAE

11-04-2004, 06:36 PM

arnold is out. he can't be vp or president unless changes are made.

the Vice President must satisfy the same constitutional qualifications as the President; that is, the Vice President must be a natural-born citizen of the United States, at least thirty-five years of age, and a resident of the United States for 14 years.

presidential successions:

1. Vice President
2. Speaker of the House of Representatives
3. President pro tempore of the Senate
4. Secretary of State
5. Secretary of the Treasury
6. Secretary of Defense
7. Attorney General

mrblonde

11-04-2004, 07:40 PM

Take THAT, Al Haig.

cash78mere

11-04-2004, 07:51 PM

Originally posted by Rudey
When separated from his evil wife he moved in with his good friend Koeppel and his gay partner.
-Rudey

and what facts do you have that make his wife so evil? i thought the rule on GC was to not give an opinion unless you have facts written to back it up.

KEYBOARDCOURAGE

11-04-2004, 08:01 PM

Originally posted by cash78mere
and what facts do you have that make his wife so evil? i thought the rule on GC was to not give an opinion unless you have facts written to back it up.

THE RULE ON GC IS TO BE A PUNK AND HIDE BEHIND THE COMPUTER!

JUST LIKE YOU!

I BET YOU WOULDN'T BE FRONTIN LIKE THIS IN REEEEAL LIFE!!!

Rudey

11-04-2004, 08:18 PM

Originally posted by cash78mere
and what facts do you have that make his wife so evil? i thought the rule on GC was to not give an opinion unless you have facts written to back it up.

How she treated him.

Now I believe I had asked you earlier why you liked Eminem and you couldn't respond. It wasn't a fact thing, you just had nothing to say. I guess you really love showing you're not the brightest, huh teacher?

-Rudey

abaici

11-04-2004, 08:37 PM

Originally posted by IowaStatePhiPsi
There's really no reason to keep the naturally-born requirement these days. And I think it could pass through enough states in time for the next election if it quickly gets out of Congress.

Yes, there is. Your first loyalty will always be to your country of origin. If not, there's something wrong with you.

AznSAE

11-04-2004, 11:32 PM

Originally posted by abaici
Yes, there is. Your first loyalty will always be to your country of origin. If not, there's something wrong with you.

we moved to the states when i was 8 months old. i will not support or be loyal to my country of origin. been here 24 years. i am a united states citizen, i vote, and i pay taxes. i dont think there is anything wrong with me if i dont support my birth country. however, i may go back and visit or vacation for a few days to supporty their tourist economy ;)

AGDee

11-05-2004, 12:07 AM

McCain is on Leno... I truly do like this guy and voted for him in the primary in 2000. He didn't have the funding back then because the Republican party was pushing Bush. McCain would have won a landslide because the Dems would have voted for him over Gore.

Dee

cutiepatootie

11-05-2004, 12:11 PM

I like to see Mccain or Guliani....even better yet ... the two on a pres and VP ticket

MSKKG

11-05-2004, 02:00 PM

Originally posted by phikappapsiman
Jim DeMint of North Carolina

Jim DeMint is from South Carolina.

PhiPsiRuss

11-05-2004, 02:57 PM

Originally posted by cutiepatootie
I like to see Mccain or Guliani....even better yet ... the two on a pres and VP ticket Sounds like the biggest landslide for a non-incumbent in American History.

McCain-Giuliani + very strong economy = big time ass whooping

cash78mere

11-06-2004, 03:31 PM

Originally posted by Rudey
How she treated him jackass.

Now I believe I had asked you earlier why you liked Eminem and you couldn't respond. It wasn't a fact thing, you just had nothing to say. I guess you really love showing you're not the brightest, huh teacher?

-Rudey

your language in inappropriate and unacceptable.

for some reason you enjoy making fun of people and thinking you have "one up" on them. you honestly have no clue how "bright" i am and i don't appreciate your comments. grow up and learn the word respect.

i have reported your post.

Rudey

11-06-2004, 03:58 PM

Originally posted by cash78mere
your language in inappropriate and unacceptable.

for some reason you enjoy making fun of people and thinking you have "one up" on them. you honestly have no clue how "bright" i am and i don't appreciate your comments. grow up and learn the word respect.

i have reported your post.

You dare to call me an "asshole" and then say my language is inappropriate and unacceptable?

It must be difficult living a life of hypocrisy.

-Rudey

cash78mere

11-06-2004, 07:16 PM

Originally posted by Rudey
You dare to call me an "asshole" and then say my language is inappropriate and unacceptable?

It must be difficult living a life of hypocrisy.

-Rudey

where have i called you that? what are you talking about? if you can show me a post where i have called you that, i will change it.

Rudey

11-08-2004, 11:21 AM

Originally posted by cash78mere
where have i called you that? what are you talking about? if you can show me a post where i have called you that, i will change it.

I don't want you to change it. It's there on the record and I've quoted it. You have a foul mouth clearly indicating your upbringing and the failures of the education system madam.

-Rudey

cash78mere

11-08-2004, 09:20 PM

Originally posted by Rudey
I don't want you to change it. It's there on the record and I've quoted it. You have a foul mouth clearly indicating your upbringing and the failures of the education system madam.

-Rudey

where have you quoted it? i don't see anything.

ahh...yes the failures of the education system have gotten a hold on me it seems:rolleyes:

Rudey

11-08-2004, 09:23 PM

Originally posted by cash78mere
where have you quoted it? i don't see anything.

ahh...yes the failures of the education system have gotten a hold on me it seems:rolleyes:

Keep denying it.

So do timber companies lobby the US government to go logging in your butt?

-Rudey

cash78mere

11-08-2004, 09:25 PM

Originally posted by Rudey
Keep denying it.

So do timber companies lobby the US government to go logging in your butt?

-Rudey

where have i denied anything? i asked for proof which you claim to have quoted. it is definitely possible that i have said it, but i clearly don't recall because i don't keep tabs on my GC writing.

nothing's in my butt thanks

Rudey

11-08-2004, 09:30 PM

Originally posted by cash78mere
where have i denied anything? i asked for proof which you claim to have quoted. it is definitely possible that i have said it, but i clearly don't recall because i don't keep tabs on my GC writing.

nothing's in my butt thanks

It must have been deleted by a mod now because it's not showing up. You did say it. You have a foul mouth. And oh yes, you do have a redwood tree in your butt. You don't need to thank me...I don't understand what it has to do with me. You can thank whoever shoved the acorn in there when you were young and let it grow into a stick and later a full scale tree.

-Rudey

cash78mere

11-08-2004, 09:36 PM

Originally posted by Rudey
It must have been deleted by a mod now because it's not showing up. You did say it. You have a foul mouth. And oh yes, you do have a redwood tree in your butt. You don't need to thank me...I don't understand what it has to do with me. You can thank whoever shoved the acorn in there when you were young and let it grow into a stick and later a full scale tree.

-Rudey

it really is sad that you believe yourself to be so self-righteous. it must be hard being so cynical and sarcastic all day. i checked days ago and there were no threads with me using the word. i think you're mixing me up with one of the many other people who i know have said things to you. and if i did say it, it was a hell of a long time ago so i don't know why in the world you would still remember it. i guess you don't have much of a life. ohhh maybe i shouldn't say that--that would be assuming too much.

whatever rudey. you're all talk. your insults about my profession and upbringing honestly make me laugh. i couldn't care less what some random person on gc has to say about my upbringing.

have a good night. i'm going to bed because i have a long day ahead of me influencing the tender minds of 8 year olds tomorrow. think of all the damage i may do to their impressionable lives;)

DGqueen17

11-08-2004, 09:37 PM

Originally posted by Rudey
And oh yes, you do have a redwood tree in your butt. You don't need to thank me...I don't understand what it has to do with me. You can thank whoever shoved the acorn in there when you were young and let it grow into a stick and later a full scale tree.

-Rudey

LOL WTF?

Rudey

11-08-2004, 09:41 PM

Originally posted by cash78mere
it really is sad that you believe yourself to be so self-righteous. it must be hard being so cynical and sarcastic all day. i checked days ago and there were no threads with me using the word. i think you're mixing me up with one of the many other people who i know have said things to you. and if i did say it, it was a hell of a long time ago so i don't know why in the world you would still remember it. i guess you don't have much of a life. ohhh maybe i shouldn't say that--that would be assuming too much.

whatever rudey. you're all talk. your insults about my profession and upbringing honestly make me laugh. i couldn't care less what some random person on gc has to say about my upbringing.

have a good night. i'm going to bed because i have a long day ahead of me influencing the tender minds of 8 year olds tomorrow. think of all the damage i may do to their impressionable lives;)

Make love to me.

-Rudey

IowaStatePhiPsi

02-28-2005, 10:46 AM

Sounds like Mass's Romney is considering a run
http://www.boston.com/news/local/massachusetts/articles/2005/02/27/romney_walking_political_tightrope/

He's been in MO, SC & UT degrading Mass's same-sex couples, so he's clearly walking the Republican plank on that issue.

GeekyPenguin

02-28-2005, 10:59 AM

Originally posted by Pike1483
My thoughts exactly-- I'm a big fan of the good doctor. Big fan of Giuliani, too, but I'm not sure how I feel about him being President. Jeb would be awesome just because it would piss so many dems off.
I'm hoping Frist, but who knows, that's a long time from now.

Yes, because we totally should all elect a candidate who will piss the other side off.

kddani

02-28-2005, 11:00 AM

Originally posted by GeekyPenguin
Yes, because we totally should all elect a candidate who will piss the other side off.

man, what kind of civics class in High School/ US poli sci class in college did you have that you didn't learn that??? DUH!!!!

GeekyPenguin

02-28-2005, 11:02 AM

Originally posted by kddani
man, what kind of civics class in High School/ US poli sci class in college did you have that you didn't learn that??? DUH!!!!

One taught by an elitist Northern liberal! D'oh!

PhiPsiRuss

02-28-2005, 03:32 PM

Originally posted by IowaStatePhiPsi
Sounds like Mass's Romney is considering a run
http://www.boston.com/news/local/massachusetts/articles/2005/02/27/romney_walking_political_tightrope/

He's been in MO, SC & UT degrading Mass's same-sex couples, so he's clearly walking the Republican plank on that issue. Can he raise the money? Can he inspire primary voters? I doubt it.

IowaStatePhiPsi

02-28-2005, 03:35 PM

Originally posted by PhiPsiRuss
Can he raise the money? Can he inspire primary voters? I doubt it.

That and the last guy from Massachussetts to run for President lost. :D

mu_agd

02-28-2005, 03:40 PM

Originally posted by PhiPsiRuss
Can he raise the money? Can he inspire primary voters? I doubt it.

i doubt he can in Mass, which may be why he's been travelling to other states. a lot of people have been very unhappy with him the past year or so. I have been wondering if he'd even be able to win a re-election of governer.

Rudey

02-28-2005, 03:42 PM

Originally posted by IowaStatePhiPsi
Sounds like Mass's Romney is considering a run
http://www.boston.com/news/local/massachusetts/articles/2005/02/27/romney_walking_political_tightrope/

He's been in MO, SC & UT degrading Mass's same-sex couples, so he's clearly walking the Republican plank on that issue.

Actually that is an issue that cuts across political parties. Please stop writing lies.

-Rudey

IowaStatePhiPsi

02-28-2005, 03:45 PM

Originally posted by Rudey
Actually that is an issue that cuts across political parties. Please stop writing lies.

-Rudey

Sorry to burst your neocon bubble, Rudith, but the Democratic Party does not have a plank in their platform against same-sex marriage or supporting a federal amendment defining marriage. That's the Republicans.

Rudey

02-28-2005, 03:48 PM

Originally posted by IowaStatePhiPsi
Sorry to burst your neocon bubble, Rudith, but the Democratic Party does not have a plank in their platform against same-sex marriage or supporting a federal amendment defining marriage. That's the Republicans.

Again, each candidate from each party supports different things.

Please stop spreading these lies.

Oh and by the way, neocon has nothing to do with anything so I hate to burst your homosexual-terrorist-kill-American bubbles.

-Rudey

KSigkid

02-28-2005, 04:27 PM

Originally posted by IowaStatePhiPsi
Sorry to burst your neocon bubble, Rudith, but the Democratic Party does not have a plank in their platform against same-sex marriage or supporting a federal amendment defining marriage. That's the Republicans.

Actually, the former DEMOCTRAT speaker of the Massachusetts House, Thomas Finneran, was an outspoken opponent of gay marriage. Robert Traveligini (Senate President - Democrat) and Thomas Reilly (Attorney General - Democrat and likely Democrat candidate for Governor) also came out against gay marriage in the past.

The resistence has been on both sides of the aisle, Democrat and Republican.

Rudey

02-28-2005, 04:32 PM

Originally posted by KSigkid
Actually, the former DEMOCTRAT speaker of the Massachusetts House, Thomas Finneran, was an outspoken opponent of gay marriage. Robert Traveligini (Senate President - Democrat) and Thomas Reilly (Attorney General - Democrat and likely Democrat candidate for Governor) also came out against gay marriage in the past.

The resistence has been on both sides of the aisle, Democrat and Republican.

Did Kerry embrace same-sex marriages? NO!

-Rudey

Shortfuse

02-28-2005, 05:25 PM

How about we wait until at least 2006?

PhiPsiRuss

02-28-2005, 05:27 PM

Originally posted by Shortfuse
How about we wait until at least 2006? There are no presidential elections in 2006.

KSigkid

02-28-2005, 07:31 PM

Originally posted by Rudey
Did Kerry embrace same-sex marriages? NO!

-Rudey

I can't believe I forgot about him. There's another one.

kstar

02-28-2005, 09:49 PM

But the point he is trying ot make is that it is IN THE REPUBLICAN PARTY PLATFORM.

It is not in the Democratic Party platform, some Democrats disapprove of it, but don't believe that it should be a national issue.

Rudey

02-28-2005, 10:07 PM

Originally posted by kstar
But the point he is trying ot make is that it is IN THE REPUBLICAN PARTY PLATFORM.

It is not in the Democratic Party platform, some Democrats disapprove of it, but don't believe that it should be a national issue.

Where in the Democratic Party platform does it say that you accept gay marriages?

Please also point out what the all-encompassing Republican constitution is that states the exact opposite of the Democrat platform.

-Rudey

kstar

02-28-2005, 11:28 PM

It's not, but it isn't in the Democratic Platform at all. The Republican Part Platform does however, outline that they want a Constitutional amendment to Outlaw gay marriages.

<i>Please also point out what the all-encompassing Republican constitution is that states the exact opposite of the Democrat platform.</i>

What the hell are you saying? Republican constitution? Are they claiming that they uphold the constitution now? Even though they pass laws that infringe on our civil liberties?

Or are you saying that the Democratic party platform has to have a section that states that that plank of the Republican platform is wrong? In which case, you're silly, since some Democrats are against it, but most (the party's leaders included) feel that the federal government has no business in it.

And personally, I don't think that there will be a Republican president in 2008. Usually when countries have a "return to conservativeness and religiosity" it only lasts for 5-10 years. And the economy is not doing better, ask any economist, this is a temporary upswing.

Rudey

03-01-2005, 12:00 AM

Originally posted by kstar
It's not, but it isn't in the Democratic Platform at all. The Republican Part Platform does however, outline that they want a Constitutional amendment to Outlaw gay marriages.

Oh I see what you're saying. You can't show me the Democrat's "platform" that says they endorse gay marriages. Ah, I see.

Originally posted by kstar
<i>Please also point out what the all-encompassing Republican constitution is that states the exact opposite of the Democrat platform.</i>

What the hell are you saying? Republican constitution? Are they claiming that they uphold the constitution now? Even though they pass laws that infringe on our civil liberties?

Why in the world do I have to deal with such BS on a consistent basis on this website? It seems that you "special" folks are also rather adamant about placing blame for your faults on us smart folks ("what the hell are you saying") and in quite a rude manner. Read what I said. And if you can't stay on topic (civil liberties), if you can't read (nobody referred to the American constitution or the bill of rights), and if you want to lie (Republicans pass laws that infringe on our civil liberties when laws are passed with Democrats supporting them) then try to keep quiet.

Originally posted by kstar
Or are you saying that the Democratic party platform has to have a section that states that that plank of the Republican platform is wrong? In which case, you're silly, since some Democrats are against it, but most (the party's leaders included) feel that the federal government has no business in it.[/B]

You shouldn't pretend to be educated when you are not.

Originally posted by kstar And personally, I don't think that there will be a Republican president in 2008. Usually when countries have a "return to conservativeness and religiosity" it only lasts for 5-10 years. And the economy is not doing better, ask any economist, this is a temporary upswing. [/B]

Stop making things up. The cycles in political power are 40 year cycles. They are based on identification with policies through different generations. If you actually read instead of making things up, you could look into Robert Fogel's writings.

And please, please don't talk about the economy. Surely if thinking, reading, analyzing are difficult then the other major aspect of economics (quantitative skills) would definitely be lost on you.

-Rudey
--Enjoy.

kstar

03-01-2005, 12:42 AM

Wow, you attack my education and call me "special"?

Yet you can't grasp the simple fact that I was stating that the Democratic party DOESN'T endorse gay marriage. They also DON'T want to outlaw it, they just don't believe that it is something for the federal government to decide.

And the topic of this thread isn't gay marriage, so people have already devolved off topic, including you.

As to making things up, I admit that I didn't check my sources. I'm sorry that I relied on a political analyst that is writing her docorate on the subject, but I did.

And why would thinking, reading, and analyzing be difficult for me? Among the degrees that I've earned, a BA in Economics is one of them.

As for you Rudey, you've certainly lived up to your name. Most of your attacks on me were ad hominim and quite rude, which makes me think that you have no defence to those points.

Rudey

03-01-2005, 01:07 AM

I really tore your arguments apart. Please stop. You post things you don't know, put out false facts, and now also claim that we all took this topic off track so you can hide?

Oh you have an Economics degree from boondock U? Good job. I'm sure you're using it well.

Again, since you can't read and post jibberish:

1) The Democrats do not have a platform embracing gay marriage.
2) If you can find published platforms for both parties that specifically discuss how the party and its members accept or reject gay marriage, please show us.

Keep talking your way into a hole. Oh and by the way special girl, Rudey does not mean rude. Stop insulting me with name calling after you abrasively and rudely posted jibberish to me in your first post ("what the hell").

-Rudey
--Rob tell her that I only get worse

Originally posted by kstar
Wow, you attack my education and call me "special"?

Yet you can't grasp the simple fact that I was stating that the Democratic party DOESN'T endorse gay marriage. They also DON'T want to outlaw it, they just don't believe that it is something for the federal government to decide.

And the topic of this thread isn't gay marriage, so people have already devolved off topic, including you.

As to making things up, I admit that I didn't check my sources. I'm sorry that I relied on a political analyst that is writing her docorate on the subject, but I did.

And why would thinking, reading, and analyzing be difficult for me? Among the degrees that I've earned, a BA in Economics is one of them.

As for you Rudey, you've certainly lived up to your name. Most of your attacks on me were ad hominim and quite rude, which makes me think that you have no defence to those points.

Optimist Prime

03-01-2005, 01:37 AM

Our Constituion is not Republican, it is Federalist. We declared our Federation of Soveriegn States a single republic in order to better perserve our glorious and eternal union.

KSigkid

03-01-2005, 09:00 AM

I honestly don't recall seeing anything in the platform asking for an ammendment. I recall seeing mention of the DOMA, but wasn't that also a bill signed and endorsed by President Clinton?

Shortfuse

03-01-2005, 09:28 AM

Originally posted by PhiPsiRuss
There are no presidential elections in 2006.

No but it'll be alot clearer on who is ACTUALLY running for election.

Shortfuse

03-01-2005, 09:34 AM

Originally posted by Rudey
Oh I see what you're saying. You can't show me the Democrat's "platform" that says they endorse gay marriages. Ah, I see.

.

Here you go Rudey, enjoy.

I glanced over it and I didn't see anything about gay marriages period. But I'll let the board tear it to shreds or big it up. Whatever...

Democratic Party Platform (http://a9.g.akamai.net/7/9/8082/v002/www.democrats.org/pdfs/2004platform.pdf)

Rudey

03-01-2005, 12:23 PM

Originally posted by Shortfuse
Here you go Rudey, enjoy.

I glanced over it and I didn't see anything about gay marriages period. But I'll let the board tear it to shreds or big it up. Whatever...

Democratic Party Platform (http://a9.g.akamai.net/7/9/8082/v002/www.democrats.org/pdfs/2004platform.pdf)

That platform is outdated and refers to Kerry being the best possible president frequently.

Also, this document gives the basic political statement that serves no purpose. It says marriages should be defined through state rights. The Democrats have refused to say they support gay marriage without any attached footnotes. Some say that through a combination of this ambivalence and a push by some Democrat politicians towards being accepting of it, many undecided and non-aligned voters voted for Bush. You can believe it if you want or just reject it.

At the end of the day, people like IowaStatePhiPsi can't say Republicans are against gay marriage and Democrats support gay marriage. Cheney very much support his lesbian daughter who was heavily involved in his campaign and the Log Cabin Republicans are the gay Republican wing. Each political party pulls together different viewpoints.

We can get back to the topic at hand, but it's funny how IowaStatePhiPsi consistently posts this garbage even after the fricking election is over.

-Rudey

Shortfuse

03-01-2005, 12:36 PM

KSig RC

03-01-2005, 12:57 PM

Originally posted by Rudey
That platform is outdated and refers to Kerry being the best possible president frequently.

Also, this document gives the basic political statement that serves no purpose. It says marriages should be defined through state rights. The Democrats have refused to say they support gay marriage without any attached footnotes. Some say that through a combination of this ambivalence and a push by some Democrat politicians towards being accepting of it, many undecided and non-aligned voters voted for Bush. You can believe it if you want or just reject it.

At the end of the day, people like IowaStatePhiPsi can't say Republicans are against gay marriage and Democrats support gay marriage. Cheney very much support his lesbian daughter who was heavily involved in his campaign and the Log Cabin Republicans are the gay Republican wing. Each political party pulls together different viewpoints.

We can get back to the topic at hand, but it's funny how IowaStatePhiPsi consistently posts this garbage even after the fricking election is over.

-Rudey

Let's go a step further, and see if we can get a response . . .

Democrats, I hate to say this, but the Democratic Party pretty much tacitly denied the rights of gays to have marriages by copping out with the "state's rights" angle. They know as well as I do that marriages are not implicitly a states' issue, according to the courts, because of the national need for standardization. Instead, they clung to a quasi-constitutional excuse for not platforming at all.

Even worse, in doing this, they allowed a large number of states to ban gay marriages on election day, a point in which they had zero to negative momentum. They essentially cost homosexual men and women in these states the ability to achieve the rights that straights have.

Now, was this an error of commission or omission? Obviously it was more likely omission, but honestly I think that, in pragmatic terms, if I were a gay man looking for the ability to engage in a civil union, I would be just as heated at the Dems as the GOP.

I'm a Republican, and I'm very much in favor of allowing gay couples to be recognized as legally married. Weird huh.

IowaStatePhiPsi

03-03-2005, 01:46 AM

The April 2005 issue of Runner's World magazine has an article on Arkansas Governor Mike Huckabee (Since March 2003 he has lost over 100 pounds by running and changing his diet). The article has the following:
"Governor Widebody is history, the loser of a hostile takeover by Skinny, as President George W. Bush called Huckabee during a stump speech. The once corpulent public servent, who's been mentioned as a possible 2008 contender, beamed at his new nickname."
I may not agree with his positions on several issues, but reading about how he has changed his health and has gone from barely able to walk a block and on diabetic medications to running marathons and diabetes-free has garnered respect for the man.

IowaStatePhiPsi

03-14-2005, 01:17 PM

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/4347607.stm

Rice 'will not run' for president
Condoleezza Rice has apparently ruled out a 2008 presidential bid, after only two months as US secretary of state.

Ms Rice is seen as the rising star of the Republican Party, and has been touted as successor to George W Bush.

She was repeatedly asked about her future on US TV shows this weekend.

"I have no intention. I don't want to run," she told NBC's Tim Russert on Meet the Press, adding finally: "I won't run."

Condi v Hillary?

Russert showed an unofficial website called Americans for Rice, which is soliciting donations to support a bid for the presidency.

It advertises bumper stickers and a song entitled "Condoleezza will lead us".

Commentators have been speculating on an all-female contest, with Ms Rice going head-to-head with Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton, a possible challenger for the Democratic nomination.

"I won't. How's that? Is that categorical enough?" said Ms Rice after persistent questioning on the ABC channel.

Last month a survey in the US showed 81% of people would vote for a woman for president.

Of those questioned, 42% thought Ms Rice should run for the White House.

That compared to 53% who thought Mrs Clinton should stand.

'Candy fluff'

Many commentators say it is still too early to say whether Ms Rice will be a realistic candidate in 2008.

Larry Sabato, who directs the University of Virginia's Center for Politics, told the AFP news agency that Mrs Clinton is a more solid bet.

"Hillary Clinton is certainly real - she's the most real candidate on the Democratic side so far," he said.

Talk of a Rice campaign, in contrast, "is cotton candy fluff generated by those of us who pine for the intense days of a presidential campaign that is still three years away".

citydogisu

04-21-2005, 05:34 PM

New York Governor George Pataki was in Iowa over the weekend and backed Stop Hillary Now- a PAC to stop Hillary Clinton if she runs for President... rumors over coffee this morning was that he'll throw his hat in the big ring by late September in order to stump speech for mid-cycle elections.

PhiPsiRuss

04-21-2005, 05:40 PM

Originally posted by citydogisu
New York Governor George Pataki was in Iowa over the weekend and backed Stop Hillary Now- a PAC to stop Hillary Clinton if she runs for President... rumors over coffee this morning was that he'll throw his hat in the big ring by late September in order to stump speech for mid-cycle elections. He has no chance of getting the nomination in 2008.

AlphaFrog

09-23-2005, 10:50 AM

Somehow I believe the tables have turned on this in leiu of the latest disasters...

Anyone still think the Republicans have a chance?

Bush is kind of between a rock and a hard place right now because either:

A. Response to Rita is slack again and he's screwed for that

or

B. Response is good, everything is taken care of people get help, etc... and people say "Well, that's just because it's his home state, he would have responded to Katrina faster if he was from LA/NO/MS..."

amanda6035

09-23-2005, 11:26 AM

KSig RC

09-23-2005, 11:35 AM

Originally posted by AlphaFrog
Somehow I believe the tables have turned on this in leiu of the latest disasters...

Anyone still think the Republicans have a chance?

Bush is kind of between a rock and a hard place right now because either:

A. Response to Rita is slack again and he's screwed for that

or

B. Response is good, everything is taken care of people get help, etc... and people say "Well, that's just because it's his home state, he would have responded to Katrina faster if he was from LA/NO/MS..."

Remember that, historically, presidential elections are strongly influenced by economic concerns - in fact, some argue that economic concerns are primary AND secondary, and anything else is tertiary (for the majority of 'undecideds').

While gas prices may suffer from the disasters, there may be other economic boons coming from increased governmental spending to recreate these areas, etc etc. Add to this the fact that campaigning will not begin in earnest until 2007, and I think it's far too early to predict the economic effects (aka 'the topic of this thread').

DeltAlum

09-23-2005, 11:41 AM

Originally posted by amanda6035
They said the same thing in 2001...that the republicans wouldnt make it. But they did.
They also said that unknown governors from states like Georgia and Arkansas had no chance -- but they did.

I think Katrina and Iraq will be thorns in the GOP's side, but it may depend on whether the Democrats can come up with a viable candidate.

I'm not much of an economist, but I just can't see how we continue to prosecute the war and pay for these disasters and rebuilding of New Orleans without at least rolling back some of the upper income tax cuts.

Won't some of the lenders want some of that deficit paid back someday, somehow?

Lindz928

09-23-2005, 11:49 AM

I think the Republicans still have a very good chance in 2008. If Bush were able to run again, he might have trouble. But, I think the fact that it will be new candidates will make a difference.

I do like John McCain. :)

so damn cool

09-23-2005, 11:51 AM

Bush should be granted a third term based on his stellar work so far.

moe.ron

09-23-2005, 12:21 PM

Pataki have very low chance of getting a nomination from the Republicans. New York State version of a Republican is vastly different from those that dominate the party. Pataki is a social liberal and fiscal conservative. No way the bible belt would let a pro-abortion, gay friendly politician represent them.

Rudey

09-23-2005, 12:35 PM

If anyone wants to make a wager on the election, I'm here to take that bet.

The prize: the hamburger of the winner's choice.

I will bet that the next president will be a Republican.

I have nothing to lose barring some sort of ridiculous disaster (like a comet hitting the earth). The Democrats are suffering from 2 large problems: 1) the ability to play the political game and 2) the inability to move away from certain policies and propose better ones. The only person that may accomplish number 2 is Hillary or Lieberman - the only Democrat centrists with any cloud left. There isn't a single person able to take on the first problem.

-Rudey
--If no commet arrives, and I am alive at that point, the hamburger will taste wonderful.

Tom Earp

09-24-2005, 04:38 PM

President, Republican as the Democrates cant hit their asses with both hands and are in such a disaray!

Hillary, Bitch get out!:mad: She is a carpetbagger from the South to The North! When if the hell did she live in NY long enough and get voted in, GAG!:eek: Rice with the experience would be or could be the first Female. Says she wont run. Colon Powell, a Black Man, but very astuite and knowledgeable. Hope He is smart enough to tell them to stick it!

Just watch to see who will emerge from the Hurricans as a Main Man!

Maybe the General of N O or The Admiral of the Coast Guard of N O!

Sorry to say, but watch out for Sam Brownnose oops Brownback! Oh, Ks.:eek:

Snake Oil from the get go! Saw that When I went to His First major campaign!

A little Moustach would work for Him!:mad:

Tom "Fist" of Tenn. is touting a possible run. God if He gets any more black marks against Himself, He ought to resign from Congress. But, You have to admit, He has some stones in his jockey shorts just to keep hanging in.
I want to reprise the Thread and Be President!!!!

First job is to kick out the old shit head boot lickers and get in new ones! Hell, Most of us know more than the dill wads there!