surprise nominees for 2008?

[12th Doctor]

You think this country is ready for a black....none the less woman president?

Yes.  I think she would be an incredibly strong candidate, if she is Pro-Life.

Who could lay a glove on her?  She grew up on the front-lines of the Civil Rights battle.  She can't be beaten in debates.  She is graceful and doesn't pick fights, yet she is tough.

And, her being single is actually a plus - she would not be threatening to male voters since she wouldn't be upstaging her husband.  And we wouldn't have to worry about the role of the "First Gentleman".

She's nothing but business - exactly the type of black that biggots find acceptable.

Southern conservative whites (the base of the Republican party) are not going to vote for a black single woman, especially a pro-choice black single woman.  She has less of a chance of getting past the primaries than Giuliani.  She's black, thats strike 1 against her from Southern Republicans, she's single thats strike 2, she's a woman thats strike 3, she's pro-choice strike 4, & I think she is for more gun control (not sure though) strike 5.  White Southern conservative Republicans simply won't vote for her

The Democrats keep repeating the same mistakes.  They keep misunderestimating their competition.

[phk]

We need to pump out more babies, Santorum is probably producing another Republican right now.

[12th Doctor]

We need to pump out more babies, Santorum is probably producing another Republican right now.

There, don't you feel stupid now for supporting policies that kill off your voter base?


And, yes, I understand that you were attempting to assert that Conservatives just breed like rabbits and are, therefore, intellectually infereior to the sophisticated liberals, I personally don't give a sh**t, because I like big families, I want a big family and I see nothing wrong with having 5,6,7,8 or even 9 kids, so long as you can support them all, and I don't mean in the modern materialistic "me first" way where they all need new cloths and all the new X-Box games. 

Today, we call it "focusing our love on one child".  I call it "spoiled rotten".

[Notre Dame rules!]

The Dems would be wise to run someone like Bredesen.  He has turned out to be a surprisingly good Gov.  I say surprisingly because I voted against him.  He's socially moderate (perhaps too conservative by Dem standards) and fiscally conservative.  Unless the  TN GOP runs a really, really good candidate against him, I'll likely cross the aisle and vote for him next time.  Luckily, he isnt the kind of Democrat who tends to survive the primaries, seeing as how they are front loaded with IA and the northern states..

[ian]

For Democrats, I would say Mark Pryor (AR).  He's a wonderful politician, speaker, person; he's a moderate, he has no scandals, he's from Arkansas (where he is incredibly well-liked).  I can't really think of any downside to his candidacy except for the fact that he's not as experienced as some politicians, and people might accuse him of success b/c of his daddy (although that didn't really hurt Bush too much, did it?).  I also think Bredesen (TN) is a good guess for an underdog, although I don't know much about him (ontheissues.org didn't have anything useful!)
For Republicans, Sununu? Gregg? (NH)  Really conservative human beings that could probably keep the south but could also capture ME, NH, PA, and maybe NJ.  Lamar Alexander (TN) could try it again.  Cornyn (TX)?  Kit Bond (MO)?  All these people are possibilities; I wouldn't count them out.

[RN]

If Condi was pro life and pro gun, then I would certainly vote for her.

[AuH2O]

Mark Sanford! Go Paladins!

[Sibboleth]

I like Pryor, but I doubt he'll run. He can wait as he's got himself a Senate seat for as long as he wants it...

[Vasall des Midas]

Of course, the whole point of a surprise nominee that nobody talks about is that nobody, including us, is talking about him...

[Sibboleth]

Of course, the whole point of a surprise nominee that nobody talks about is that nobody, including us, is talking about him...

Kanjorski for President

;-)

[nick]

Mark Sanford! Go Paladins!

I dont want him running. He seems like he would be pretty tough to beat.

[WalterMitty]

I like Pryor, but I doubt he'll run. He can wait as he's got himself a Senate seat for as long as he wants it...

i like pryor a lot also.  i also liked his dad.  arkansas has pretty decent senate delagation,

believe it or not, i liked dale bumpers.  i dsagreed with a lot of his politics, but i used to love watching him speak.

[skybridge]

The biggest suprise nominee for the Dems in 2008 would by Evan Bayh or Mark Warner.  They simply didn't get their asses kicked badly enough to understand that 2004 was a rejection of their party, not that they simply "didn't get the message out".

I bet at least 59,028,548 people would disagree with you!

[Akno21]

Governor Kathleen Sebelius of Kansas.

[AuH2O]

Mark Sanford! Go Paladins!

I dont want him running. He seems like he would be pretty tough to beat.

What a tough primary choice it would be for me if Allen and Sanford ran. Allen, a Virginian, versus an alum of my college!!! I think I would have to go Sanford.

[PBrunsel]

Just came to me, former Vice President James Danforth Quale. This may already be stated, but the idea is worth stating twice.

[Smash255]

Just came to me, former Vice President James Danforth Quale. This may already be stated, but the idea is worth stating twice.

That would be great

[PBrunsel]

Just came to me, former Vice President James Danforth Quale. This may already be stated, but the idea is worth stating twice.

That would be great

His nomination would boost the potatoe industry, no doubt!

[nini2287]

PA State Treasurer/Future Seantor Bob Casey Jr!!!

[George W. Bush]

George Voinovich

[12th Doctor]

*roll eyes*

a 2.5% loss is hardly an ass kicking, and it's kind of difficult for such a narrow victory to show that a country is rejecting an entire party.

Ummmm... that was my point.  I said they didn't get their asses kicked badly enough.

I think BRTD's point was that losing by 2.5 is not a direct refusal of Democratic ideas.

Thus, my reasoning that they will go farther Left.

[So the Heroes Fall]

*roll eyes*

a 2.5% loss is hardly an ass kicking, and it's kind of difficult for such a narrow victory to show that a country is rejecting an entire party.

Ummmm... that was my point.  I said they didn't get their asses kicked badly enough.

I think BRTD's point was that losing by 2.5 is not a direct refusal of Democratic ideas.

Thus, my reasoning that they will go farther Left.

who the hell do you think we're going to nominate, Kucinich? There aren't very many viable candidates further left than Kerry. The fact that Kerry only lost by about 2.5 is proof that it wouldn't take that much more of a moderate candidate to win.

I still don't see this "rejection of the party" nonsense. Was 1996 a rejection of the Republican party? It's pretty tough to argue 2004 was American say " YOU DEMOCRATS" while 1996 wasn't the same for the Republicans.

[J.R. Brown]

It wasn't a rejection of the Democratic party. People don't vote for parties as much as they used to. Most people vote split ticket. That's what I did. I voted Democrat for President and Chuck Grassley, the Republican, for Senate. My point is that it was a rejection of John Kerry not the Democratic party as a whole.

[NHPolitico]

sen. lamar alexander

Too old. 68 in 2008-- and he looks 78.  I've seen him up close.

[skybridge]

i think that at least one party, maybe both, will nominate someone for president in 2008 that not many people are talking about today.

Like I've been preaching for so long.

who are the most likely surprise nominees from each party?

Isn't that a bit of an oxymoron?