|
Post by NY Hoya on Apr 17, 2005 23:48:39 GMT -5
Does McCain have a base in the GOP? Libertarian leaning GOPers don't like him (McCain-Feingold), the religious right doesn't like him, he's gonna be old in 08, etc....look for an Allen-Pawlenty ticket
|
|
|
Post by jerseyhoya34 on Apr 18, 2005 0:13:50 GMT -5
Does McCain have a base in the GOP? Libertarian leaning GOPers don't like him (McCain-Feingold), the religious right doesn't like him, he's gonna be old in 08, etc....look for an Allen-Pawlenty ticket FWIW... McCain is currently polling about even for argument's sake with Giuliani. The name recognition is clearly there. According to a recent Republican poll on pollingreport.com, he is running stronger against Hillary than Giuliani.
|
|
SDHoya
Golden Hoya (over 1000 posts)
Posts: 2,331
|
Post by SDHoya on Apr 18, 2005 10:05:42 GMT -5
Being a moderate myself, with no ties to either party, i would love to see McCain in the national election. But it plainly ain't happening. The majority to congressional republicans hate the guy, think he's self righteous and too in-your-face. He is one of the most frequent GOP's to cross over to vote with the Dem's on issues. I doubt he runs, as someone is gonna tap him on the should and say, "Hey, John, you really wanna go through South Carolina 1999 all over again?" The rightwing 527 goons with have no problem bloodying him, and don't be surprised if we see another incarnation of Swift Boat Veterans for Partisan Attacks.
If you are a Moderate, looking for such candidate as McCain, I would keep your eyes on Chuck Hagel, who is a lot like McCain, but less in-your-face. But in all honesty, the GOP is becoming increasingly run by the wing, so I would guess we see someone like Santorum, who is young, charismatic, and if I'm not mistaken, a fascist.
As far as Dems, they have about as much collective charisma as a sack of potatoes. No, thats too good for them, because a sack of potatoes might win in Idaho. Honestly, the only Dem who impresses me is Obama. Dems should all hope that this guy has no skeletons, because if he is clean, this guy will beat anyone. His only problem will be experience, but that has never really stopped anyone. He is fairly moderate, so will not alienate too many people, and man can this guy hold a crowd. Clinton was popular because you didn't tune out during his speeches. You didn't care what trouble he was in, because if he was impeacehed, you would have to listen to Gore for two years. Kerry is a worthless candidate as is Hillary, as you can bet that she's got skeletons galore.
In conclusion, pray for Barack in 2008, or join the republican party so that you can vote for Hagel or the like in the primary.
|
|
david
Century (over 100 posts)
Posts: 157
|
Post by david on Apr 18, 2005 21:40:54 GMT -5
moderates should look to Mark Warner. He seems like a great guy.
And if Hillary's skeletons havent hurt her becoming Senator from NY and First Lady and her husband a 2 time president, i doubt they will come up after she has been in the public eye for 20 years.
|
|
EasyEd
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 7,272
|
Post by EasyEd on Apr 19, 2005 17:59:33 GMT -5
I think calling Santorum a fascist is way over the top. Kinda like calling Hillary a Nazi, also way over the top.
|
|
|
Post by jerseyhoya34 on Apr 19, 2005 18:47:27 GMT -5
I think calling Santorum a fascist is way over the top. Kinda like calling Hillary a Nazi, also way over the top. No one has been slinging those labels around in this thread. If we want to talk Santorum, we can do that. Personally, I don't view him as Presidential-caliber. He'll have to win in 2006 before he can convince me of that. Moreover, I think some of his comments on sexual orientation were inappropriate and beneath the level of acceptable discourse for a Senator even if someone agrees with his particular stance on the matter.
|
|
SDHoya
Golden Hoya (over 1000 posts)
Posts: 2,331
|
Post by SDHoya on Apr 20, 2005 16:09:23 GMT -5
Excuse me. I thought it was obvious that it was said toungue-in-cheek, but I can understand that humor does not translate well in text. I do not actually think Santorum is a fascist, and I don't believe I made any mention of Hillary being a Nazi. Maybe a Commie...oh wait, there I go again.
The point is, Santorum is the ideal candidate of the far right interest groups. And at this point in time, it is those factions who have been running the Republican party. Is he presidential quality? I'm not exactly sure what that means. Was Jimmy Carter "presidential quality?" Or for that matter is GW Bush? If you mean electablility, I think he is in the GOP primaries, and as far as general, he could pull Pennsylvania, which would be detrimental to the Dems. Would he alienate other moderate states like Missouri, Florida, Nevada, etc.? I would hope so, but again, I think a lot of that depends on who the Dems nominate. If it is someone center leaning with adequate speaking skills, that might be the case. If the Deaniacs get Dean or someother populist type leftie, then who knows.
|
|
david
Century (over 100 posts)
Posts: 157
|
Post by david on Apr 20, 2005 18:37:08 GMT -5
The thought of President Santorum scares the hell out of me.
|
|
|
Post by TrueHoyaBlue on Apr 21, 2005 7:31:04 GMT -5
Excuse me. I thought it was obvious that it was said toungue-in-cheek, but I can understand that humor does not translate well in text. I do not actually think Santorum is a fascist, and I don't believe I made any mention of Hillary being a Nazi. Maybe a Commie...oh wait, there I go again. The point is, Santorum is the ideal candidate of the far right interest groups. And at this point in time, it is those factions who have been running the Republican party. Is he presidential quality? I'm not exactly sure what that means. Was Jimmy Carter "presidential quality?" Or for that matter is GW Bush? If you mean electablility, I think he is in the GOP primaries, and as far as general, he could pull Pennsylvania, which would be detrimental to the Dems. Would he alienate other moderate states like Missouri, Florida, Nevada, etc.? I would hope so, but again, I think a lot of that depends on who the Dems nominate. If it is someone center leaning with adequate speaking skills, that might be the case. If the Deaniacs get Dean or someother populist type leftie, then who knows. One issue for Santorum is that he might not even get reelected to his Senate seat in 06. Despite his seniority in the Republican party, there appears to be a pretty strong backlash against Santorum, particularly after his giving himself a high profile in the Terri Schiavo situation, and he's running 10-15 points behind prospective opponents in early polling. Granted, it's way too early to judge anything based on polls, but after the moderate Senator Specter's not-too-comfortable win in 04, I'm not sure that right-wing Rick is a shoo-in for reelection, nevermind the GOP Presidential nomination.
|
|
EasyEd
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 7,272
|
Post by EasyEd on Apr 21, 2005 13:13:11 GMT -5
Santorum's opponent for the Senate may very well be Bob Casey, a pro-life Democrat. Would be interesting.
|
|
EasyEd
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 7,272
|
Post by EasyEd on Apr 29, 2005 11:47:24 GMT -5
Just heard of a poll that shows George Allen to be the most likely Republican nominee for '08 and Hillary the most likely Democrat.
|
|
|
Post by jerseyhoya34 on Apr 29, 2005 13:54:33 GMT -5
Just heard of a poll that shows George Allen to be the most likely Republican nominee for '08 and Hillary the most likely Democrat. The poll's sample was Congressional and political insiders, so there is a pro-Congressional bias right there. Nonetheless, I have heard Allen's name, and he seems like a contender.
|
|
hoyarooter
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Posts: 10,212
|
Post by hoyarooter on May 2, 2005 12:48:38 GMT -5
He was one of my all-time favorite football coaches! I would certainly vote for him! Not sure about the son, though. Interesting choice.
|
|
nychoya3
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 2,674
|
Post by nychoya3 on May 2, 2005 17:43:43 GMT -5
Allen didn't help himself this week on Meet the Press. I think the suggestion that people sell their homes to pay for retirement will likely make a nice negative ad for someone along the way. www.sundaymorningtalk.com/smt/2005/05/sen_allen_sell_.htmlIn 2000, the big wigs of the GOP were very successful in essentially christening GWB early on as the nominee. A lot of big names dropped out early, and he was left running against mostly gadflies of the Forbes, Bauer, and Keyes group. McCain nearly through a stick in the spokes, of course, with his revolutionary ideas about honest political discourse, but of course his well-known approval of inter-racial marriage and illegimate black child doomed him (you know what I'm talking about). It'll be interesting to see if such an easy primary can be engineered this time around for some lucky, relatively undistinguished figure. Allen is as good a bet as any, but Rudy's ego is such that I think there's no way he doesn't run. That alone should guarantee an interesting race. Same with McCain, who obviously marches to him own drummer. I don't think this field will clear for anybody. I'm rooting for an ugly, divisive primary that exposes the rather gaping rifts in what we so inaccurately call conservatism nowadays.
|
|
|
Post by jerseyhoya34 on May 7, 2005 14:41:06 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by jerseyhoya34 on May 7, 2005 14:44:17 GMT -5
New Marist College poll out (http://www.pollingreport.com/2008.htm)
Dems 1. Hillary Clinton - 40% 2. John Kerry - 18% 3. John Edwards - 16% 4. Joe Biden - 7% 5. Wes Clark - 4%
Republicans 1. Rudy Giuliani - 27% 2. John McCain - 20% 3. Jeb Bush - 10% 4. Newt Gingrich - 8% 5. Bill Frist/Rick Santorum - 3%
|
|
|
Post by showcase on May 31, 2005 8:14:28 GMT -5
Interesting piece on Hillary in today's Post: I think it's wishful thinking to believe that Hillary would be able to attenuate the polarizing effect of her name, particularly because it is so firmly entrenched after 12+ years, but it will be interesting to see how things unfold after the midterm elections.
|
|