Republican Presidential Nominee

[Colorado4Life]

Who would you like to see get the nomination for the Republican Party for president in 2008?

[Colorado4Life]

One well-known yet controversial figure that is no longer on most lists is Pennsylvania Senator Rick Santorum. He seems to be focusing on his re-election bid and doesn't seem to be expressing interest in running for President although he is a darling of the Social Conservatives.

[Rascal]

I won't vote for Jebb (i might think about it as VP but doubtful), Frist , or guiliani (maybe as VP though for him).

I would love for McCain to run.

[Colorado4Life]

Jeb Bush has claimed numerous times now that he won't be running for President in 2008, but Rascal I never even thought about him as a possible VP, but I think he'll stay out of national politics at least this time around. As for McCain like so many others, age is a huge factor but he has lots of support amongst Independents and Democrats that one wonders if he won't throw his weight around in 08.

[Bronco_Beerslug]

Right now Tancredo, the only one who understands how important America's security problems are.

[Colorado4Life]

You said it brother.

[Colorado4Life]

The important thing to realize about Tancredo is that his grandfather was an immigrant from Italy. He knows the importance of assimilation thats what makes this country great. One of the main problem with immigration right now is that many are avoiding doing just that claiming to try and preserve their own cultural identity. Clearly you can assimiliate into America and maintain a distinct cultural identity thus there should be no excuse for avoiding the assimilation process.

[Rascal]

I am not familiar with Tancredo at all so I can't say.

[W*GS]

How about None of the Above?

[Garcia Bronco]

George Allen vs Wes Clark

[Colorado4Life]

Garcia Bronco is that a solid prediction or which two you would like to see?

[Rascal]

I like Wesley Clark.

[Bronco_Beerslug]

I am not familiar with Tancredo at all so I can't say.
http://www.tancredo.org/

THE COURAGE OF OUR CONVICTIONS -
THE COURAGE TO FIGHT FOR
LOWER TAXES, LESS REGULATION...
MORE EDUCATIONAL CHOICE...
SMALLER, MORE EFFICIENT GOVERNMENT...
IMMIGRATION & BORDER SECURITY REFORM...


If you have questions or comments regarding "official" business, such as problems or issues with various federal agencies, Academy questions or other "official" business, please go to the "official" web site at www.house.gov/tancredo

[Colorado4Life]

W*gs who would you like to see get the nomination? Someone who supports gun rights?

[W*GS]

W*gs who would you like to see get the nomination? Someone who supports gun rights?

In part - and I prefer "the right to keep and bear arms", not "gun rights". I'll warn you ahead of time that I lean strongly libertarian, so very few (if any) Republicans (or Democrats) merit my political support. I view most (if not all) politicians as scum. It's not a matter of holding my nose when I vote - I tend not to vote for either the D or the R candidate.

[Colorado4Life]

W*gs so did you vote for Ron Paul in 1988?

[Rascal]

Tancredo looks like some good stuff....although his comments about bombing a mosque and his comments on rounding up illegal alliens may backlash.

[Colorado4Life]

So you voted for Michael Badnarik in 2004? Harry Browne in 2000 and 1996?

[Colorado4Life]

Maybe its time they realize that we mean business.. If he was president and actually did that, it would be like knocking down a hornets nest it would be a huge mess right away but eventually after the hornets stung everybody in their path the mess would go away as their nest was destroyed. He retracted on his comments and said he was just throwing out ideas. Thats one thing I hate is when people liberal/conservative/independent/libertarian etc... throw out ideas and people jump all over them, freedom of thought and discussion is a great thing. The far left and the far right while definitely the most controversial elements in US politics are sometimes the most interesting as W*gs put it the middle Republicans and Democrats often blur forming the Republicrats.

[Rohirrim]

Once McCain did the "kneel down and kiss Bush's ring" act, I'm guessing the GOP throws its support behind him. Why else did he do it after the way the Bush camp smeared him? The Frist stem cell flip-flop kills him on the Right. Tancredo might pick up the lunatic fringe, but he'll never get the nomination from the party bosses. Rudy's Bush butt kissing will come back to bite him. I'm guessing that by the time the 2008 election rolls around, the closer you are to Bush, the worse off you are (ergo, Frist's flip flop) which means a Rice candidacy is toast. Gingrich, politically speaking, is "sleeping with the fishes." Pataki is a flat liner on the media meter. The rest would need to upgrade their national profiles considerably. I'm betting it's McCain.

[Colorado4Life]

The "maverick" McCain will find it tough to get the nomination if he runs as a Democrat or Independent he might make a stir. Nevertheless bashing the Christian Right and Bob Jones back in 1999 was not smart amongst primary Republican voters and for all those who think Condi Rice might win the presidency one word for you, primary. The South and Midwest will not vote for a black woman to be the Republican nominee at least not in this century.

[Rohirrim]

The "maverick" McCain will find it tough to get the nomination if he runs as a Democrat or Independent he might make a stir. Nevertheless bashing the Christian Right and Bob Jones back in 1999 was not smart amongst primary Republican voters and for all those who think Condi Rice might win the presidency one word for you, primary. The South and Midwest will not vote for a black woman to be the Republican nominee at least not in this century.

Once Bush is done effing things up to the nth degree, I'm predicting that the voice of the religious Right gets muted considerably in the next go 'round. They go back to being the fractured movement they were before Rove helped pull them all together under one banner. IF the Dems want to help this "fracture" along, they'll run hard against the death penalty.

[Colorado4Life]

Rohirrim- I do agree that the Christian Right of 2008 will not be the same as it was in the past. It is being splintered and has been weakened. However, that is not to say it won't have a huge impact on chosing the nominee in the primary. The Democrats might want to go after the NASCAR dads and guys with Confederate flags on their trucks as Dean said in the 2004 primary if they want to win the election in the future.

[Rohirrim]

Rohirrim- I do agree that the Christian Right of 2008 will not be the same as it was in the past. It is being splintered and has been weakened. However, that is not to say it won't have a huge impact on chosing the nominee in the primary. The Democrats might want to go after the NASCAR dads and guys with Confederate flags on their trucks as Dean said in the 2004 primary if they want to win the election in the future.

Also, if they run hard against the death penalty, they'll pull in a lot of Catholics. Hillary has been test ballooning some kind of "nuanced" position on abortion lately, but that's the problem with the Dems over the last few elections; they're too friggin "nuanced." If the Dems have the guts to blow off their left fringe and take an un-nuanced stance against partial-birth abortion, they'll also improve their position. IMO, the American people want a common sense approach to abortion and would accept some kind of compromise on the subject; limited abortion rights under strict guidelines. The hard left and the hard right would squeal like stuck pigs, but I think the majority of Americans would find it sensible.

[clarker]

Also, if they run hard against the death penalty, they'll pull in a lot of Catholics. Hillary has been test ballooning some kind of "nuanced" position on abortion lately, but that's the problem with the Dems over the last few elections; they're too friggin "nuanced." If the Dems have the guts to blow off their left fringe and take an un-nuanced stance against partial-birth abortion, they'll also improve their position. IMO, the American people want a common sense approach to abortion and would accept some kind of compromise on the subject; limited abortion rights under strict guidelines. The hard left and the hard right would squeal like stuck pigs, but I think the majority of Americans would find it sensible.Great post. I would still like to see a vote on abortion though. ;D

I would say I'm pro-choice leaning(It is a hard choice I wouldn't wish on anyone), but partial birth abortion makes me want to puke.

[Colorado4Life]

Rohirrim, yes there will have to be issues that agreement is reached upon. And yes you are right that both the far right and left won't like it but that banning partial-birth will make most Americans more comfortable with limited abortions. There are also economic and other social issues. The Death Penalty is an interesting issue I have in the past given a speech against and in favor of it on two separate occasions. Both times one has to be careful to stick with the facts and statistics however skewed they might be rather than raw emotion.

[Colorado4Life]

Where are all Bill Frist's supporters? LOL

[Montaq]

Where are all Bill Frist's supporters? LOL

I voted for Frist. ;D

[Montaq]

Is Brownback planning on running for president? I hope not.

[Colorado4Life]

There we go, have you heard about Trent Lott's new book yet? He blasts Frist and others for what amounts to taking part in a Senate takeover. I haven't read it yet, but I will soon. I look forward to hearing what all Lott has to say. He is another person that took a lot of heat over thoughtless comments but nevertheless he is coming back strong in the Senate. Frist is deemed "conservative" yet the NRA gives him a C for supporting gun rights. Hardly conservative in their book. Personally I think he's too much of a priss, but he is the only doctor in the Senate and a very intelligent man.

[Colorado4Life]

Sam is definitely considering running. Do you not like Brownback, why not?

[Montaq]

There we go, have you heard about Trent Lott's new book yet? He blasts Frist and others for what amounts to taking part in a Senate takeover. I haven't read it yet, but I will soon. I look forward to hearing what all Lott has to say. He is another person that took a lot of heat over thoughtless comments but nevertheless he is coming back strong in the Senate. Frist is deemed "conservative" yet the NRA gives him a C for supporting gun rights. Hardly conservative in their book. Personally I think he's too much of a priss, but he is the only doctor in the Senate and a very intelligent man.

I voted for him because, with the exception of Brownback, I think he would be the easiest to beat.

[Colorado4Life]

Montaq I thought you might be a Democrat. Can't say that I blame you. I wouldn't vote for Bill Frist unless maybe he was running against Hillary and then I would probably just throw my vote away for the third consecutive election and vote third party.

[Montaq]

Sam is definitely considering running. Do you not like Brownback, why not?

Because I'm against theocracies.

[Colorado4Life]

The Democrats might be able to beat Tancredo although if he picks up Union support for his opposition to NAFTA, CAFTA and other trade bills then he might chip away at the labor vote. Also the anti-internationals will love the man and of course the anti-immigrant people. If he can unite all these groups and others he might make a serious run at the presidency, but that seems tough. Pat Buchanan and Ronald Reagan managed to get what was later called "Reagan Democrats" union/blue collar workers to vote for him as did Buchanan. America needs a populist president in 2008. Whether Republican or Democrat, as far as I am concerened the party isn't as important as the fact that he is a populist. I'm tired of elites running the nation. I vote for Andrew Jackson. :)

[Colorado4Life]

Ok here it is a poll from Quad City Times the following were the results...

Rudy Giuliani 22%
John McCain 22%
Newt Gingrich 14%
Bill Frist 8%
George Pataki 3%
Mitt Romney 2% (I apologize for leaving him off the list but only 10 choices)
George Allen 2%

[Colorado4Life]

Then the Quad City added Condi Rice into the poll and the results change dramatically.

Condi Rice 30%
John McCain 16%
Rudy Giuliani 15%
Newt Gingrich 8%

The remaining guys had less than 4% each..

[Montaq]

I don't think Giuliani will make it out of the primaries. He's too socially liberal.

[Colorado4Life]

I agree totally, unless he runs as an Independent or something he won't win the south or midwest. That is the main obstacle for liberals, minorities and women on the Republican side. Conservative women overwhelmingly tend not to vote for women who are running for political office.

[Rohirrim]

I think the Condi campaign will suffer once people find out she's a robot.

[Montaq]

It's funny that moderate candidates would win a general election hands-down but they can't make it out of primaries. McCain is a great example. He could wipe the floor with almost any Democratic candidate that got nominated, yet he will have a tough time getting out of the primaries. IMO, it's doubtfall he can win the nomination. clarker and other Repubs love Lieberman, as a dem, I would never vote for Joe.

I really want the Dems to put up a governor so that his/her voting record can't be twisted against them in the election.

[Colorado4Life]

Collin Powell was the same way. Many people speculated that there were secrets buried in his closet that came him from running but he could have won the presidency had he gotten the nomination.

[Hogan11]

So you voted for Michael Badnarik in 2004? Harry Browne in 2000 and 1996?

I did........so what?

[Crushaholic]

I think the Condi campaign will suffer once people find out she's a robot.

That never stopped Al Gore...

[Hogan11]

I don't think Giuliani will make it out of the primaries. He's too socially liberal.


Very true....it'd be a minor miracle if he lasted long at all given his past and his socially liberal views.

I have a very hard time voting for any Republican because I disagree with most every stance they have on social issues....but if they could make the move to the very moderate.....then Rudi would stand a great chance at winning the whole thing IMO.

But he'll never get past the Christian aspects of the party now, so the point is moot.

[Colorado4Life]

I voted for Browne in 2000 but didn't like Michael Badnarik much when I met him at various functions. In 2000 I worked on Browne's campaign sending out fundraising and volunteer letters as the state coordinator. So I voted for Michael A. Peroutka this past year. It looks like he is going to be running again in 2008. The Libertarians need to get their act together if they really hope to become a force in national and state politics. On the local level they are having an impact across the country but are practically non-existant at the state and national level.

[Hogan11]

I voted for Browne in 2000 but didn't like Michael Badnarik much when I met him at various functions. In 2000 I worked on Browne's campaign sending out fundraising and volunteer letters as the state coordinator. So I voted for Michael A. Peroutka this past year. It looks like he is going to be running again in 2008. The Libertarians need to get their act together if they really hope to become a force in national and state politics. On the local level they are having an impact across the country but are practically non-existant at the state and national level.


I was disappointed when Harry didn't run again. I think he's brilliant.

[Crushaholic]

I :homer: for Brownback, but I know he doesn't have a realistic shot. Name recognition is important, which would make Newt a front-runner. However, I would like to see Guliani be president. I know he's socially liberal, but I think he can better articulate this war on terror to the American people.

[Colorado4Life]

Harry Browne is a very smart man as you said, but not a very charismatic guy. People look for that so much these days.

[Colorado4Life]

A very good read the following article, I worked for Andy Horning on several campaigns and this he is a brilliant writer and philosopher.

The Two And A Half Party System: A Call To Libertarians

by Mac Johnson

The Libertarian party is a party of principle. This fact is an enormous comfort to the party each election year when its candidates lose every major race. Being free from the burden of mattering, we can all be proud of the purity of our untested principles. OK, it is a little harsh to say that the Party does not matter. After all, occasionally one of its candidates may, in a tight race, siphon off just enough votes from the least abominable candidate to push the more abominable one over the top and on to Washington! Husah!

At some point though, even the purist must wonder just what it might be like to actually put a Libertarian into office and see our principles put into action and law. If you are among the select group for whom principle alone is wearing thin, then please take a moment to indulge me in an immodest proposal to overhaul the movement's playbook just a little.

Traditionally, the Libertarian party has run its campaigns along the following model. A candidate is chosen. A primary is usually not necessary, since the Libertarian living in each district can run unopposed. The candidate is often young and eager to indulge in political debate between jobs or classes, or older and eager to engage in political discussion between jobs or teaching classes. Upon cleaning out his couch cushions, the candidate has a campaign budget and then files the necessary paperwork to appear on the ballot. This is the crux of the campaign strategy, too, since appearing on the ballot will not only allow people to vote for the candidate, but it is also to be the candidate's big announcement of his campaign to most voters. "Huh! There's three people running for this office. Who knew? And what the Hell is the Librarian Party, anyway?" Chunk! One more Republicrat vote is cast.

Now, it's a good game plan -- don't get me wrong -- but as Dr. Phil would say "How's that working for you?" So in lieu of a billion dollars to get the Party rolling as a pure entity, allow me to contribute two observations to our plan for 2004:

1) The two party system is unfairly entrenched in law and habit. It is a self-protecting, self-perpetuating system that has managed to marginalize all third party competition for decades and it just got about 15 times stronger through the McCain/Finegold Incumbent Protection Act.

2) Wah! It doesn't matter. The two party system is an illusion.

It is an illusion because each party, in an effort to win 50% of the population's votes in every election, in every district, in every state, among every race, gender, industry, and income group, has had to turn itself into a big tent coalition consisting of individually self-interested and organized components. In effect, both parties resemble the multi-party parliamentary coalition governments of Europe. The only difference is that the coalitions must be formed up before the election and are very stable for that reason. But other than that, they even function like coalition governments once in office. One interest group is promised trade policy, another gets dibs on civil rights law, a third is given farm policy, and so on. The subparties even threaten to leave the coalitions when ignored or hungry for more power: Reagan Democrats, Southern Dixiecrats, Buchananite Republicans etc.

A further similarity is the way in which a dedicated and organized minority within each party can have a disproportionate influence upon the direction of the coalition as a whole and achieve goals that it could never otherwise. Conservative Christians, Neocon Republicans, Green Leftists, Black Democrats, Economic Socialists, Social Engineers and many, many others have -- at one time or another -- taken disproportionate control of one Party and achieved history altering goals that would have been laughable dreams had the groups organized themselves into independent parties.

Ponder, for a moment, the relative power of a 22-year-old self-declared "Vegan Ecowarrior" wearing a "Free the Cows!" T-shirt at a campus meeting for Ralph Nader, versus that same mental giant in New Hampshire at a Democratic Party Rally wearing an "I'm a Howard Deaniac" T-shirt. One is a cartoon character. The other is a future Washington staffer. It doesn't matter if Dean wins or loses. The kid is in the system.

This same option is open to the proponents of Libertarian ideas. We can continue to be a voice in the wilderness, or we can preach in the Temple and be heard. Consider the following thought experiment with me. A Libertarian candidate does "very well" in a general election and pulls in 6% of the vote. His supporters are educated, dedicated, and idealistic. He performed well in the one debate that he was allowed to attend, and large numbers of voters liked his message but did not want to "throw away their vote" on a third party.

Great job, but the net result is that the message is not advanced. The candidate lost by more than 90 percentage points and five minutes after the election he is back writing software code and trying to find time to write an article for National Review to reject. Hopeless.

Now consider the same candidate and his same level of support in a Republican primary (could be a Democrat primary as well, but in general Republicans are more attracted to Libertarian ideas, since small government is the inevitable result and we will never sell that to the party of The Nanny State). The district is evenly split between registered Republicans and registered Democrats, so his dedicated 6% of the vote has just become 12%. Turnout for primaries is usually under half of that for the general election, so the 12% is now 24%. The Libertarian candidate enters the primary with a larger body of core support than almost any other candidate could hope for. Now he is a viable candidate that can be seriously considered by all those who have found the Libertarian philosophy attractive in the past but could never bring themselves to vote for a Libertarian candidate in a general election and risk putting a Swedish Socialist in charge of the economy. Suddenly the Libertarian "joke" candidate is polling above 30%. Again he does well in the debates, he gets a little luck, his opponents stumble and voile! The Libertarian candidate wins the primary. It is frighteningly doable. The same candidate then goes into the general election with party money, advice, consultants, support, even ADVERTISING. He is still the same man, his belief in liberty is still resolute, but now he could actually be a US Representative. Now people know his name. They hear his message. He makes converts. Undreamable possibilities are still remote, but dreamable at least.

All it will take is for the Libertarians of this country to start thinking of themselves as The Libertarian Party and Caucus, rather than solely as The Libertarian Party. Like the National Rifle Association, the American Civil Liberties Union, Labor Unions, and a gaggle of lobbying interests, the Libertarians of this country can leverage their dedication into an influence well beyond their numbers by forcing the two great coalition parties to begin competing for their votes, campaign work, and donations. The Libertarian Party can still run candidates under its own flag, but it can also begin acknowledging candidates of Libertarian beliefs running under other flags. Think of it as a Two and a Half Party system.

This is not just a mental exercise either. If you agree with this philosophy "that Libertarian ideals are more important than the Libertarian Party" then you can support this experiment in the here and now. Libertarian thinkers have entered into the two party system many times over the years. The response of the Libertarian Party has generally been to declare such people lost sheep or even traitors. That should end. Instead, we should support candidates like Andrew Horning.

Horning has run as a Libertarian candidate in Indiana several times. He has run for Indianapolis Mayor, State Governor and US Representative from the 7th Congressional District. He has been the most effective Libertarian candidate in the state, in my opinion, always generating interest far beyond his means. Andrew Horning is running in the 7th district again, but this time he is running as a Republican. You see, Andrew Horning wants to win and he has a real chance. The 2002 7th district Republican primary was voted in by only 26,000 people. Horning was able to garner 4000 votes in the general election. This was an absolutely remarkable feat given that the race was very tight and the Republicans of the district believed they actually had a chance to unseat the Big Government incumbent, Julia Carson, due to redistricting. Horning's 4000 votes therefore were composed only of his core supporters and I imagine that more than a few of those were peeled off by the prospect of defeating Carson. If only 200-300 of those supporters get involved in his campaign early, Horning has a real shot at being the nominee. If a fraction of Libertarians statewide or nationwide donate even a pittance to his campaign, Horning will be the nominee.

At some point we need to decide to win. Andrew Horning has figured this out and the rest of us should learn from his example.

[Crushaholic]

The Libertarian Party is too idealistic for me. It's great to say that the government will get out of everything except for essential services, but that is unrealistic in today's world. We have too many people dependent on government for Libertarian principles to work in the real world.

[Bronco_Beerslug]

The Libertarian Party reflects a lot of my views but I can't bring myself to vote for someone who isn't going to win (presidential election I'm talking about).

[Colorado4Life]

When Horning bolted in 2004 to the Republicans, I like the author of that article felt he made the right decision. He had been approached by various Democrats to get him to join with them also since he is such a popular independent voice for such a long time in the state. Unless there is someone that I truly believe will deliver big such as Ron Paul etc... I doubt I would vote for another Libertarian for President. If you ever have the opportunity to get involved with them you will see tons of hypocrisy and crap same as the Republicans and Democrats, only difference is the Libertarians claim to be the "Party of Principle"

[Ratboy]

http://www.politicsus.com/Guest%20Columns/allen_flag.jpg

http://prodtn.cafepress.com/6/14497316_F_tn.jpg

[Ratboy]

I don't think Jeb Bush will run for president, But i do believe his son will.

[Hotrod]

Not alot of love for Spiders buddy Newt :~ohyah!:

[Hogan11]

When Horning bolted in 2004 to the Republicans, I like the author of that article felt he made the right decision. He had been approached by various Democrats to get him to join with them also since he is such a popular independent voice for such a long time in the state. Unless there is someone that I truly believe will deliver big such as Ron Paul etc... I doubt I would vote for another Libertarian for President. If you ever have the opportunity to get involved with them you will see tons of hypocrisy and crap same as the Republicans and Democrats, only difference is the Libertarians claim to be the "Party of Principle"

You're gonna get with with any political party......that's a given.

I've seen both Democratic & Republican goverments....FWIW, I wouldn't mind giving another party a crack at it at all....

IMHO, they couldn't do any worse.

[orangeatheist]

The important thing to realize about Tancredo is that his grandfather was an immigrant from Italy.

Hey! So was mine!

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

Hey!

Why isn't my man Tom DeLay on that list?

;)

[Colorado4Life]

Tom DeLay hasn't expressed any serious interest in running for president. He is another speaker that I actually enjoyed listening to in person. One of the worst speakers I've ever heard in my life is Kentucky Senator Mitch McConell. He was so boring that after about 5 minutes I walked out of that conference room and went to listen to someone else. With the recent accusations against DeLay I doubt he will be in any hurry to have the media dig in his closet any deeper.

[bendog]

Rudi can't get past the religious right, and he might even be a practical guy on taxes, deficits and spending, so he won't get the nomination. I don't think McCain will either, even though he brownnosed BushI after the guy dissed his wife as well as his own war record. I think G. Allen can have it if he wants it. Frist's been exposed as an ineffectual leader as well as sort of a charlatan with the braindead lady in Fla. I don't think any of the money people trust him.

funny thing about the gop is that their nomination is really sewn up before the primaries. The last time there was a real charge was when Reagan overcame the party leaders against BushI, but then the RR purged us "conservatives" from the party, so now the candidates go about raising money, and support, by speaking to the RR leaders and chambers of commerce, and get the blessing of the 'no new taxes on the rich' and christianity for the chosen few.

[24champ]

I would vote for Pataki.

[Hogan11]

I would vote for Pataki.

He's a joke.....plus he'll never make it past the religious right either.

He cut and ran because he knows he could never beat Spitzer now that people on the whole are fed up with him for the most part here in NY.

I'd be very surprised to see him try for the Presidency, but if he does, it'll be a very short-lived campaign....you can bank on that.

[SoCalBronco]

Not alot of love for Spiders buddy Newt :~ohyah!:

Former Speaker Gingrich is probably one of the few on that list that I could wholeheartedly support.

[24champ]

He's a joke.....plus he'll never make it past the religious right either.

He cut and ran because he knows he could never beat Spitzer now that people on the whole are fed up with him for the most part here in NY.

I'd be very surprised to see him try for the Presidency, but if he does, it'll be a very short-lived campaign....you can bank on that.

Well your talking about the same state that voted for hillary so im not suprised. One guy not on this list is Rick Santorum of Penn. He pisses off all the liberals so i like that in a nominee. ;D

[Hogan11]

Well your talking about the same state that voted for hillary so im not suprised. One guy not on this list is Rick Santorum of Penn. He pisses off all the liberals so i like that in a nominee. ;D

She wouldn't have won had the GOP not run a total stiff (Lazio) against her.

Santorum? That nutty guy who just wrote the book? If he is then He's a nutcase.....if they ran him, they'd run him to a certain defeat.

[24champ]

She wouldn't have won had the GOP not run a total stiff (Lazio) against her.

Santorum? That nutty guy who just wrote the book? If he is then He's a nutcase.....if they ran him, they'd run him to a certain defeat.

He is a little nutty, im a little nutty which is why i like him. Anyone who pisses off Sillary gets my vote, :giggle:

[Hogan11]

He is a little nutty, im a little nutty which is why i like him. Anyone who pisses off Sillary gets my vote, :giggle:

Well, he certainly would alienate a large portion of the population, that's for sure (and not because of Hillary either).....I see him as the second coming of Buchanon and ultimately ending up just as relevant.....but whatever melts your butter I suppose.

[24champ]

Wheres ZELL MILLER on this list? :giggle:

[bendog]

I think he's gunning for Andrew Jackson and a duel.

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

Former Speaker Gingrich is probably one of the few on that list that I could wholeheartedly support.

Alas, poor Gingrich, I knew him well

All ego and scapegoating, he had no one to blame but himself in the end

http://www.cnn.com/ALLPOLITICS/time/1998/11/09/cover.gif

Newt is not going to miss me, but I'm going to miss him. I'll miss his knowledge of Prussian history, his unerring sense of what the Duke of Wellington would do in any situation, his grandiose sense of walking in the boots of Winston Churchill and Ulysses S. Grant. Like Napoleon, he was tall enough to see a future invisible to lesser mortals. A global visionary, he wrote in a calendar unearthed by Slate magazine that on June 30, 1993, he was going to "articulate the vision of civilizing humanity" and, when that was done, "define, plan and begin to organize the movement...to help people...pursue happiness." A "transformational figure" doesn't just kick back. His off-time to-do list included "diet, exercise and recreational renewal with [wife] Marianne."

The speakership has affected him like a camera: it added 30 lbs. to his girth and 60 lbs. to his ego. After a trip to Asia, he came back and bragged that Mongolians in yurts were devotees of his Republican revolution. At the center of the cosmological charts he doodled was, no surprise, himself. In his books he was a major historical figure, a planetary visionary, often misunderstood. In former Congresswoman Susan Molinari's book he came off as a blubbering though entertaining megalomaniac. At one point, she recalls, he revealed how heavily he bore his mantle: "I get up every morning and say to myself, 'This is the day I shall die.'"

Friday was the day he died a Washington death, stripping himself of power and becoming in that instant just a guy in a suburban tract house in Marietta, Ga., carrying out the trash. We all should have seen his resignation coming when, on Tuesday night, he came out swinging at the media, blaming them for his party's shellacking. With Nixonian petulance, he rejected suggestions that his party tanked because he had put all its eggs in Monica's basket. No, he said, it was the media's All Monica All the Time madness that kept him from getting his message out. He woke up Wednesday morning but still didn't smell the coffee. He told Katie Couric on the Today show, "Look at all the hours that Tim Russert spent...on [Monica] vs. the number of hours on Social Security."

A quick check with Russert reveals that he offered Gingrich the entire hour of Meet the Press the Sunday before the election to discuss--you guessed it--Social Security, along with the space program, tax cuts, the budget and education. Gingrich declined. In truth, Gingrich had no gripe with the media over its Monica obsession, which allowed him to stoke it quietly behind the scenes. What truly concerned him was that the press's eye had wandered since Clinton's Aug. 17 confession. Too many shows were going off-topic, too many talking heads exclaiming over Mark McGwire and showing boredom with Monica Lewinsky. It was fear of increasing scandal fatigue that prompted Gingrich's biggest blunder of the campaign: devising, testing and spending $10 million on TV spots reminding voters of what a snake the President was--a subject the electorate was trying to forget.

Well, the media charge is laughably bogus. Yet what else is there to do but grasp at scapegoats when, in the blink of an eye, the discussion moves from "Can Clinton Survive?" to whether you can? At the time the intern story broke in January, Gingrich was lost in an issue-free wilderness: the balanced budget and welfare reform had been co-opted, and tax cuts were a diminishing dream. Gingrich looked to Monica as his deliverance from having to come up with a new, new Republican revolution. Oh, the eager, summer-in-Washington look of her, the goofy beret, those chubby cheeks. And a presidential embrace was even captured on videotape! At last all that heat he endured for shutting down the government was paying off: interns had to fill in for paid staff, and one of them wore thong underwear.

Only at one moment did Gingrich appear to back off. He suggested it might take more than a "simple human mistake" to incur impeachment. He may have feared the press might revisit the litany of his simple human mistakes of a sexual nature first detailed in Vanity Fair in September 1995. Otherwise, Gingrich went full bore, vowing at one point to "never again, as long as I am Speaker, make a speech without commenting" on the Monica mess and to start calling a crime a crime. Gingrich lieutenant majority whip Tom DeLay set up a Monica war room, the first place for the press to call to confirm when Monica delivered that fateful piece of pizza to the Oval Office or the date the fed-up Secret Service agent kept her waiting at the gate in sweltering heat until she looked "like she went a couple of rounds with Muhammad Ali." It was Gingrich who orchestrated the early stages of the impeachment proceedings and who insisted on maximum dissemination of both the Starr report and the tape of Clinton's grand-jury testimony.

Finally, the Speaker admitted that he had underestimated how "tired people had become" of Monica. If only he had followed the lead of Tim and Sam and Cokie and Wolf as they followed their Nielsens. It's ironic that Clinton had an affair with an intern in the White House and Gingrich lost his job over it--and that those who drew daggers on him now offer eulogies. At least Gingrich will now have time to civilize humanity and organize the movement for the pursuit of happiness.

http://www.cnn.com/ALLPOLITICS/time/1998/11/09/gingrich.carlson.html

[bendog]

Remind me. What is it about Tom Ridge that makes him unpalatable to some wing of the gop? Is he pro-choice or what? I sort of liked the guy. The color codes were ..... painful, but hey, he had a tough job.

[Colorado4Life]

I am beginning to wonder how much longer the "religious right" will remain a factor in politics. The more they open their mouths and then proceed to do the exact opposite of what they say the more supporters and foes alike are realize the hypocrisy they are partaking in, mind you this is coming from someone who to call an ultra-conservative would be an understatement, but I think the moral-majority has outlived its usefulness and I'm beginning to wonder if it had any in the first place and to be honest the answer is NO.

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

I am beginning to wonder how much longer the "religious right" will remain a factor in politics. The more they open their mouths and then proceed to do the exact opposite of what they say the more supporters and foes alike are realize the hypocrisy they are partaking in, mind you this is coming from someone who to call an ultra-conservative would be an understatement, but I think the moral-majority has outlived its usefulness and I'm beginning to wonder if it had any in the first place and to be honest the answer is NO.

Terri Schiavo will be remembered as their shark-jumping moment.