Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
October 24, 2014, 03:33:20 am
HomePredMockPollEVCalcAFEWIKIHelpLogin Register
News: Don't forget to get your 2013 Gubernatorial Endorsements and Predictions in!

+  Atlas Forum
|-+  Election Archive
| |-+  2008 Elections
| | |-+  2008 Predications
« previous next »
Pages: [1] 2 3 4 Print
Author Topic: 2008 Predications  (Read 9002 times)
Clay
GWBFan
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 3617


Political Matrix
E: 1.03, S: -6.61

P

View Profile
« on: November 16, 2003, 11:49:52 am »
Ignore

Yea, that's right: 2008.  I know, this is mainly for 2004-related material, but I thought it'd be interesting to see what everybody thought about the election after next.

Such as, who will be in the Republican primary?  Who will be in the Democratic primary?  And who do you think will win both elections (primary and general)?

This is really early, I know.  But open elections where there's no incumbent seem more fun to play with, don't they?
Logged

Clay
GWBFan
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 3617


Political Matrix
E: 1.03, S: -6.61

P

View Profile
« Reply #1 on: November 16, 2003, 11:54:18 am »
Ignore

Here's what I predict:

Republican Primary (possible):
Jeb Bush (FL)
Bill Frist (TN)
Rudolph W. Giuliani -or, not both- George E. Pataki (NY)
Condoleezza Rice (CA)

Democratic Primary:
Hillary Rodham Clinton (NY)

I think, if this is the way it is, Giuliani or Bush would win (although my vote would go to Frist).

Giuliani v. Clinton=Giuliani win.
Bush v. Clinton=Toss up.
Logged

Sibboleth
Realpolitik
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 56829
Saint Helena


View Profile WWW
« Reply #2 on: November 16, 2003, 12:11:18 pm »
Ignore

First off it depends who wins the 2004 election.

Secondly it depends on the results of the 2006 elections.
Logged

"I have become entangled in my own data, and my conclusion stands in direct contradiction to the initial idea from which I started. Proceeding from unlimited freedom, I end with unlimited despotism. I will add, however, that there can be no solution of the social formula except mine."
Clay
GWBFan
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 3617


Political Matrix
E: 1.03, S: -6.61

P

View Profile
« Reply #3 on: November 16, 2003, 12:26:58 pm »
Ignore

First off it depends who wins the 2004 election.

Secondly it depends on the results of the 2006 elections.

Well, of course.  It also depends on every other event leading up to November 2008.  I'm not asking for some scholarly answer here or some factual response.  But as things stand right now, what could happen then?  Assuming that Bush is reelected (as it stands right now, there's a good chance he would be), who might the players in 2008 be?  There are plenty of predictions already going around about 2008, in the news, on the Internet, etc., I just thought I'd bring the hypothesizing to this board, because...well...it's fun.  :-)
Logged

Nym90
nym90
Modadmin
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 15200
United States


Political Matrix
E: -5.55, S: -2.96

P P P

View Profile
« Reply #4 on: November 16, 2003, 01:33:28 pm »
Ignore

Obviously very early to say. If the Dems win in 2004, then obviously the incumbent president will be the Dem nominee. If Bush wins, then both races are wide open. Certainly the ruminating about the Republican nominee can at least begin, since no matter what happens in 2004 the GOP nomination will be open. Is there much of any chance that Cheney would run if Bush wins in 2004? It seems as though most people think he won't run, that he'd be too old, and that his health would be a problem. But, if Bush is the incumbent, it would be very hard to deny Cheney the nomination if he decides that he wants to run.
I agree that Jeb Bush and Frist would likely be the frontrunners for the GOP nomination if they chose to run (and assuming Cheney didn't run, or that GW Bush lost). As for the Dems, if the Dem nomination is available, then yes, Hillary Clinton would be a frontrunner, along with Al Gore if he wants to make another run. Also, if any of this year's Dem candidates put in what is considered a solid performance but don't win the nomination, they could still come back in 2008 (I'm thinking someone like Edwards).
I doubt either Pataki or Giuliani could win the GOP nomination. How would you conservatives on this board feel personally about Pataki or Giuliani as the nominee, given their liberal views on social issues? I'm curious as to what the GOP base would think about this.
Logged
Clay
GWBFan
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 3617


Political Matrix
E: 1.03, S: -6.61

P

View Profile
« Reply #5 on: November 16, 2003, 01:46:34 pm »
Ignore

Obviously very early to say. If the Dems win in 2004, then obviously the incumbent president will be the Dem nominee. If Bush wins, then both races are wide open. Certainly the ruminating about the Republican nominee can at least begin, since no matter what happens in 2004 the GOP nomination will be open. Is there much of any chance that Cheney would run if Bush wins in 2004? It seems as though most people think he won't run, that he'd be too old, and that his health would be a problem. But, if Bush is the incumbent, it would be very hard to deny Cheney the nomination if he decides that he wants to run.
I agree that Jeb Bush and Frist would likely be the frontrunners for the GOP nomination if they chose to run (and assuming Cheney didn't run, or that GW Bush lost). As for the Dems, if the Dem nomination is available, then yes, Hillary Clinton would be a frontrunner, along with Al Gore if he wants to make another run. Also, if any of this year's Dem candidates put in what is considered a solid performance but don't win the nomination, they could still come back in 2008 (I'm thinking someone like Edwards).
I doubt either Pataki or Giuliani could win the GOP nomination. How would you conservatives on this board feel personally about Pataki or Giuliani as the nominee, given their liberal views on social issues? I'm curious as to what the GOP base would think about this.

I don't think Cheney would run.  If he did, I think he'd lose to either Jeb Bush or Frist.  But that opens up something else: say both Cheney and Jeb ran--who would G.W. Bush endorse, his brother or his vice president?  Hm.

I think Edwards would be an ideal V.P., but he just doesn't strike me as presidential material (this looking at it from a non-partisan view).

Pataki couldn't win the nomination, but I think Giuliani could.  He's a liberal Republican, but even so.  If he did win the nom, he'd be a lock for the presidency, in my view.  Eventually, the Republican party will move closer to the middle/left, while the Democrats will move even more left.  This is evident with Schwarzenegger, Giuliani, Howard Dean, etc being the big names of their respective parties.  So, I would have no problem with a President Giuliani, but he probably wouldn't get my primary vote.
Logged

Ryan
ryanmasc
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 332


View Profile
« Reply #6 on: November 16, 2003, 02:04:35 pm »
Ignore

Here's what I predict:

Republican Primary (possible):
Jeb Bush (FL)
Bill Frist (TN)
Rudolph W. Giuliani -or, not both- George E. Pataki (NY)
Condoleezza Rice (CA)

Democratic Primary:
Hillary Rodham Clinton (NY)

I think, if this is the way it is, Giuliani or Bush would win (although my vote would go to Frist).

Giuliani v. Clinton=Giuliani win.
Bush v. Clinton=Toss up.

Well as to who COULD  run, the list is endless on both sides.
The conventional wisdom right now is that either Hillary Clinton or Al Gore or both would run and that one of them would be the eventual nominee.
As to the others I really dont know where to start and end. Basically just go through the list of the well known and reasonably ambitious  Governors like Bill Richardson (also Hispanic), Senators like Evan Bayh etc etc. And of course of you get into the "Al Sharpton" category it just goes on and on.

On the GOP side as you said Frist and Bush are the well-known names who are considered near-certain to run. Others could include Sen. Allen of Va., Gov. Bill Owens of Colorado, hell if a little constitutional amendment occurs it may even be Gov. Swarzenegger of California Cheesy

Basically its a truly huge list but as U say GWB, no harm and a lot of fun in speculating.

Cheers,
Ryan.

Logged

Quote
zorkpolitics
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 1036
United States


View Profile
« Reply #7 on: November 16, 2003, 02:10:06 pm »
Ignore

I don't think Cheney will run.
Republicans:
I agree Guliani, Pataki, Frist, and Rice.  I don't see J. Bush running so soon after GW, too much like a dynasty.
I'd add in Powell as well.
As a NE Republican (a vanishing breed), Guliani is sharper and would be a much better campaigner than Pataki.
Bet for Nominee: Powell or Guliani
Democrats:
If a Democrat wins in 2004, then he'll be the obvious nominee with no significant challenge.
If Bush wins then Hillary is the obvious front runner.  I don’t see any of this year's brood of Democrats building a base for another run.  Except perhaps Edwards, but only if he finds some way to win his Senate seat in 2004 or the governorship in 2006.  From the Senate Daschle seems to be the likeliest competitor for Hillary, though NJ's own Corzine might be a surprise.  Corzine has about $400 Million, and this year he is leading the Senate reelection campaign, giving him national contacts.   His problem (asset?) is he is ranked the 3rd most liberal senator, while Hillary is only 22nd and Daschle 31st.
From the Governors, maybe Richardson in NM?
Logged

"Scientists are treacherous allies on committees, for they are apt to change their minds in response to arguments" C.M. Bowra
Ryan
ryanmasc
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 332


View Profile
« Reply #8 on: November 16, 2003, 02:11:56 pm »
Ignore

I doubt either Pataki or Giuliani could win the GOP nomination. How would you conservatives on this board feel personally about Pataki or Giuliani as the nominee, given their liberal views on social issues? I'm curious as to what the GOP base would think about this.

Well for starters I admit I may be a bit more moderate than a majority of GOP voters but I would definitely jump for Guiliani.
Even speaking as a neutral observer, his tough-guy image could go a long way to neutralizing his socially liberal attitude as regards GOP primary voters. In any event if he starts considering a run, he is smart enough to shift right; enough to take the primary.

Pataki is out nationally and he knows it! He may consider a vice-presidency but most probably I feel he would want to round up his career in the Senate.

Among all the names so far mentioned I would go for Guiliani in the primary.
Logged

Quote
WIRepub
Newbie
*
Posts: 5


View Profile
« Reply #9 on: November 16, 2003, 02:41:03 pm »
Ignore

Rep. Candidates

Bill Frist (TN)
Kay Bailey Hutchison (TX)
Liz Dole (NC)
Thad Cochran (MS)
Condi Rice (CA)
Roy Moore (AL)
Jeb Bush (FL)
Tommy Thompson (WI)
Rudy Guiliani (NY)
George Pataki (NY)
John Kasich (OH)

Dem

Hillary CLinton (NY)
Al GOre (TN)
Al Sharpton (NY)
John Edwards (NC)
Harry Reid (NV)
Bill Bradley (NJ)
Al Franken (MN)

Green
Ralph Nader
Winona LaDuke
Micheal Moore
Logged

Recall Doyle
Michael Z
Mike
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4335
Political Matrix
E: -5.88, S: -4.72

View Profile
« Reply #10 on: November 16, 2003, 04:40:08 pm »
Ignore

REP
Jeb Bush
Rudolph Giuliani
Elizabeth Dole
Ben Nighthorse Campbell
Chuck Hagel

DEM
Hillary Rodham Clinton
Joe Biden
John Edwards
Harry Reid

Most likely: Rudolph Giuliani vs Hillary Rodham Clinton. This is assuming GWB wins two terms.
« Last Edit: November 16, 2003, 04:40:44 pm by Michael Zeigermann »Logged
NorthernDog
Full Member
***
Posts: 167


View Profile
« Reply #11 on: November 16, 2003, 06:16:39 pm »
Ignore

Rep. Candidates

Bill Frist (TN)
Kay Bailey Hutchison (TX)
Liz Dole (NC)
Thad Cochran (MS)
Condi Rice (CA)
Roy Moore (AL)
Jeb Bush (FL)
Tommy Thompson (WI)
Rudy Guiliani (NY)
George Pataki (NY)
John Kasich (OH)
Wow-quite a list WI. I'd just add Owen (CO) and as a dark horse Senator Norm Coleman (MN). Coleman is moderately conservative, very ambitious and very comfortable in the spotlight.  I assume that his approval rating is high because the local newspapers never say otherwise(If he were unpopular it'd be a front page story for weeks on end).
Logged
Clay
GWBFan
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 3617


Political Matrix
E: 1.03, S: -6.61

P

View Profile
« Reply #12 on: November 16, 2003, 07:14:47 pm »
Ignore

Well for starters I admit I may be a bit more moderate than a majority of GOP voters but I would definitely jump for Guiliani.
Even speaking as a neutral observer, his tough-guy image could go a long way to neutralizing his socially liberal attitude as regards GOP primary voters. In any event if he starts considering a run, he is smart enough to shift right; enough to take the primary.

Pataki is out nationally and he knows it! He may consider a vice-presidency but most probably I feel he would want to round up his career in the Senate.

Among all the names so far mentioned I would go for Guiliani in the primary.

I think only one of the two (Pataki, Giuliani) would run, not both.  If Pataki gets Giuliani to run for governor in 2006, as some say he's trying to do, then Pataki will go on to run for president.  If not, then Giuliani is free to run for the presidency and Pataki won't challenge him.  Whatever happens, I don't think they'll both run in the primary.  I wouldn't be to keen on a Pataki run...I just don't see him as good as the others...but I'd love to see Giuliani.  He'd beat the Democrat easily, and that's always fun to watch.

Someone mentioned Bill Owens (CO) as a possibility.  I've heard rumblings about him before.  At first it was for possible replacements for Cheney in Bush's reelection campaign.  But since Cheney's staying (much to my dismay), we'll see if Owens makes a run in 2008.  I can't wait!  This kind of stuff makes me salivate at the mouth from excitement; I'm just a geek like that.  :-)
Logged

Clay
GWBFan
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 3617


Political Matrix
E: 1.03, S: -6.61

P

View Profile
« Reply #13 on: November 16, 2003, 07:29:47 pm »
Ignore

Well, we all seem to agree about the potential frontrunners for the Republican and Democratic nominations.  Now here's something else fun to disucss.  Who might win in possible match-ups?  Obviously, if Hillary runs, she gets the nomination.  So let's assume she's the Democratic candidate.  Who would have the best chance against her?  Here are my predictions:

Bill Frist v. Hillary=Toss-up.
Pataki v. Hillary=Hillary
Condoleezza Rice v. Hillary=Hillary
Jeb Bush v. Hillary=Toss-up; leans Hillary
Giuliani v. Hillary=Giuliani
Powell v. Hillary=Toss-up; leans Hillary
Bill Owens v. Hillary=Toss-up; leans Hillary
Cheney v. Hillary=Hillary
Elizabeth Dole v. Hillary=Toss-up; leans Hillary

I know, I know.  In the end, all that we're discussing here doesn't matter.  But what the heck?  It's fun!
Logged

Ryan
ryanmasc
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 332


View Profile
« Reply #14 on: November 17, 2003, 03:27:17 am »
Ignore

Well for starters I admit I may be a bit more moderate than a majority of GOP voters but I would definitely jump for Guiliani.
Even speaking as a neutral observer, his tough-guy image could go a long way to neutralizing his socially liberal attitude as regards GOP primary voters. In any event if he starts considering a run, he is smart enough to shift right; enough to take the primary.

Pataki is out nationally and he knows it! He may consider a vice-presidency but most probably I feel he would want to round up his career in the Senate.

Among all the names so far mentioned I would go for Guiliani in the primary.

I think only one of the two (Pataki, Giuliani) would run, not both.  If Pataki gets Giuliani to run for governor in 2006, as some say he's trying to do, then Pataki will go on to run for president.  If not, then Giuliani is free to run for the presidency and Pataki won't challenge him.  Whatever happens, I don't think they'll both run in the primary.  I wouldn't be to keen on a Pataki run...I just don't see him as good as the others...but I'd love to see Giuliani.  He'd beat the Democrat easily, and that's always fun to watch.


Pataki couldnt win a national republican primary season! not in a million years! Rockefeller stood a better chance in his day than Pataki does not.

Rudy is a different story. There are factors to overcome conservatives distaste for his social liberalism- strong factors Smiley

Yes if he were to get the nomination I just dont see a democratic scenario for winning Cheesy YAY Smiley

Logged

Quote
Ryan
ryanmasc
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 332


View Profile
« Reply #15 on: November 17, 2003, 03:30:30 am »
Ignore

Someone mentioned Bill Owens (CO) as a possibility.  I've heard rumblings about him before.  At first it was for possible replacements for Cheney in Bush's reelection campaign.  But since Cheney's staying (much to my dismay), we'll see if Owens makes a run in 2008.  I can't wait!  

I too wish Cheney were not on the ticket! No disrespect but now that conservatives have no qualms about GWB his usefulness is ended.

However my nominee would have been Tom Ridge. He appeals to independent moderates and they are the danger group in 2004 not eh base.

Also he would bring Pennslyavannia along and thats half the electoral battle won as far as 2004 goes Smiley
Logged

Quote
Ryan
ryanmasc
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 332


View Profile
« Reply #16 on: November 17, 2003, 03:37:36 am »
Ignore

Well, we all seem to agree about the potential frontrunners for the Republican and Democratic nominations.  Now here's something else fun to disucss.  Who might win in possible match-ups?  Obviously, if Hillary runs, she gets the nomination.  So let's assume she's the Democratic candidate.  Who would have the best chance against her?  Here are my predictions:

Bill Frist v. Hillary=Toss-up.
Pataki v. Hillary=Hillary
Condoleezza Rice v. Hillary=Hillary
Jeb Bush v. Hillary=Toss-up; leans Hillary
Giuliani v. Hillary=Giuliani
Powell v. Hillary=Toss-up; leans Hillary
Bill Owens v. Hillary=Toss-up; leans Hillary
Cheney v. Hillary=Hillary
Elizabeth Dole v. Hillary=Toss-up; leans Hillary

I know, I know.  In the end, all that we're discussing here doesn't matter.  But what the heck?  It's fun!

WHERE would all these winning electoral votes for Hillary come from??? She would be wiped out in the South, Mountain West and much of the midwest just cause she is seen as too liberal. You would need a VERY conservative republican opponent like Cheney to balance that off. \Otherwise any decent moderate would win against her.
Logged

Quote
Clay
GWBFan
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 3617


Political Matrix
E: 1.03, S: -6.61

P

View Profile
« Reply #17 on: November 17, 2003, 10:23:38 am »
Ignore

Hey Ryan!

Yea, Cheney shouldn't be on the ticket anymore.  Tom Ridge would be a good pick for V.P., you're right about that.  And having Pennsylvania's electoral votes would be a big plus.  Bush has got the south (unless Clark is the Democrat nominee), so he should concentrate on those other big states to the north and west.

The Hillary question.  First, I think it depends really on who the Republican nominee would be.  Frist v. Hillary would be a toss-up, probably leaning toward Frist.  He'd get the south, she'd get the north and some western states.  But Frist just doesn't seem like as tough presidential material as G.W. Bush.

Pataki seems a little weak to me, and I don't think he'd even win his home state (N.Y. would go to Hillary).

Rice, as much as I love and admire the woman, is a black woman.  Hillary is a white woman.  Voters would look down on both of them for these reasons (I wouldn't, but a lot would).  The "lesser of two evils," so to speak...especially to southern voters...would be the white woman.

Jeb Bush, as someone said earlier in this thread, would be too much like a dynasty and some might look down on this.  Who knows?

Giuliani would win New York, a few other northern states, most of the south, a lot of western states, and Hillary would lose the election.

Powell.  Again, the race factor.  A lot of southern white voters just wouldn't go for him, regardless of politics.

Bill Owens...maybe I was too easy to call it a Hillary-leaner.  He actually might be able to beat her.

Cheney just wouldn't win.  Period.

Elizabeth Dole v. Hillary.  Woman v. Woman.  Hillary has the bigger name.  While Dole might be able to win the south, she might lose key states like Florida, Arkansas, and others.  She also wouldn't be able to win some western and northern states that have a lot of electoral points.  She'd lose.
Logged

Ryan
ryanmasc
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 332


View Profile
« Reply #18 on: November 17, 2003, 11:15:24 am »
Ignore

Well, I do agree with you that (some) southern voters, as also others are not too keen to elect a black man/woman to the White House. They are plenty here in Louisiana as I know there are in your home state of Ga.. However I would disagree with you that they would automatically elect his/her white opponent.

We just had a Governor's race where an Indian-American was standing and for White supremacists that's the same as black. He lost by only 48-52%. He took 60% of the white vote and this is inspite of the fact that his white opponent was nearly as conservative as him and he could make no inroads into the black vote. (only 9%-standard fare for a GOP candidate)

A black GOP candidate nationally would be running against a Much more liberal opponent (so even if he wouldn't get certain white voters they might choose to abstain from voting rather than vote for the liberal) and could be expected to draw at least 20% of the black vote to make up for losses in the white vote. So don't count a black GOP candidate out in the south. Smiley


Logged

Quote
Ryan
ryanmasc
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 332


View Profile
« Reply #19 on: November 17, 2003, 11:22:34 am »
Ignore

As for Hillary don't underestimate her unpopularity among right-of-center voters of all stripes. Those voters are quite likely to be solidly GOP if she was the opponent. And if the GOP candidate was moderate enough he could technically win enough votes from people who may not hate Hillary but may not want to vote for such a liberal candidate anyway!! (remember she has such a liberal senate record she wont be able to hide it)

Of course if we were stupid enough to put up someone like Cheney (again I don't dislike the man, but he is not electable nationally) then those moderate voters could go to either of the extremes- whichever runs a better campaign and yes that would be likely to be Hillary. Sad
Still I just don't think we are that stupid Smiley
Logged

Quote
© tweed
Miamiu1027
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 35677
United States


Political Matrix
E: -8.52, S: -8.00

View Profile
« Reply #20 on: November 17, 2003, 05:15:48 pm »
Ignore

Democrats:
Hillary clinton (NY)
John edwards (NC)
Evan Bayh (IN)
al Sharpton (NY)
al Gore?Huh

Republicans:
Bill Frist (TN)
Rudy Giuliani (NY)
Jeb Bush (FL)

Hillary would beat Frist, Giuliani would sweep, Jeb would have a tough time beating everyone but could probably take hillary.  evan Bayh is a strong Candidate.
Logged

in a mirror, dimly lit
Nym90
nym90
Modadmin
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 15200
United States


Political Matrix
E: -5.55, S: -2.96

P P P

View Profile
« Reply #21 on: November 17, 2003, 05:20:17 pm »
Ignore

As for the GOP nomination in 2008, it all depends on who the establishment determines is their favored candidate. It seems like the GOP establishment always coalesces around one candidate early,  and they always win the nomination. The Dems, on the other hand, have much more wide open races for their nomination, it seems. Democratic primary voters aren't as likely to listen to party leaders when determining who to vote for as are GOP primary voters.
I still don't think Giuliani could win the nomination, but I might be wrong. There would be a large amount of opposition to his liberal positions on social issues. Yes, his "tough guy" image would help, but I can't see that being enough to convince the Christian Coalition to go along with him. For them, his position on abortion would be a litmus test, I think. A pro-life candidate would probably threaten to run in the general election as a 3rd party candidate. Unfortunately, abortion seems to be a real litmus test for people on both sides, and I think that the base vote in both parties would demand that both people on the ticket adhere to the party platform on that issue. There was even talk of a huge backlash against Bush if he had put Ridge on the ticket, because Ridge was pro-choice. A pro-choice GOP running mate wouldn't be as objectionable to the religious right, but I still think they would be threatening to walk out of the convention.
Logged
Demrepdan
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 1320


View Profile
« Reply #22 on: November 17, 2003, 10:35:54 pm »
Ignore

      If Giuliani were to run for President, I think he will attempt to take Hillary Clinton's Senate seat in the 2006 election first. I heard him say on a talk show one time, when questioned on if he would run for President  in 2008, he said, "That's too far ahead to make plans for. Right now I am completely dedicated to help President Bush get re-elected." Then when he was asked if he would ever try to run for politics again he said (with a grin on his face), "Not right now, but maybe in a few years."
      That leaves me with the impression that he wants to run against Hillary. And he would most likely win. But do you think he would serve just 2 years in the Senate, and then want to try to run for President?

     Al Gore may run again, if Bush is re-elected in 2004. If Bush is defeated by a Democrat, then Gore wouldn't have a fair chance to run again until 2012. I don't know if a 64 year old Gore could remind people who he is, after not being really heard from for 12 years. If Bush loses in 2004, Gore’s political life is dead, or more dead than it is already.
       Someone else who might run for the Republicans if Bush loses in 2004, is Jeb Bush. If his brother George wins in 2004, I don't think he will make a run, JUST after his brother comes out. The country would see that’s just too many Bush's in the White House. However, if Bush is defeated in 2004, his brother Jeb may come back for revenge in 2008. Someone else who may run for the Republicans in 2008 might be Senator Norm Coleman from Minnesota. He ran for Governor in 1998 but was defeated by Jesse Ventura, but won the 2002 Senatorial election 4 years later. This mid-western Senator seems to want to aspire to the top. So who knows, he may run for President in 2008.

        But anyway, here are my predictions for people who will possibly run for President in 2008.

Democrats
-John Edwards (NC)
-John Kerry (MA)
-Hillary Clinton (NY)
-Al Gore (TN)  (if Bush wins in 2004)

Republicans
-Jeb Bush (FL) (if his brother is defeated in 2004)
-George Pataki (NY)
-Rudy Giuliani (NY)
-Bill Frist (TN)
-Norm Coleman (MN)
-Arnold Schwarzenegger (CA) (Just a Constitutional amendment or two and we’re all set Wink)
Logged

Moderately-Liberal Progressive Populist Libertarian Democrat.
Ryan
ryanmasc
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 332


View Profile
« Reply #23 on: November 18, 2003, 03:29:14 am »
Ignore

Demrep I agree with you that Jeb Bush's chances of being elected in 2008 and whether he will even run would depend on his brother losing in 2004. Ironic isnt it?? Cheesy
Logged

Quote
Michael Z
Mike
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4335
Political Matrix
E: -5.88, S: -4.72

View Profile
« Reply #24 on: November 19, 2003, 11:07:51 am »
Ignore

If Giuliani were to run for President, I think he will attempt to take Hillary Clinton's Senate seat in the 2006 election first.

Interesting. A victory here would be an absolute masterstroke for Giuliani since his biggest rival for 2008 would immediately fall by the wayside. Very interesting.

Quote
But do you think he would serve just 2 years in the Senate, and then want to try to run for President?

I think so. A Senate run would merely be a springboard for a Presidential campaign and he's popular enough to make an impact in 2008. Whether Giuliani will beat Hillary for the Senate in 2006 is another matter, but it's safe to say it would be an extremely close race if it did occur.

Btw, just wondering, but what are people's opinions on Chuck Hagel and Ben N Campbell? Have Hagel's views on Cuba made him too many enemies in the party, or is it realistic to see him as a future President?
« Last Edit: November 19, 2003, 12:37:20 pm by Michael Zeigermann »Logged
Pages: [1] 2 3 4 Print 
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Logout

Powered by SMF 1.1.20 | SMF © 2013, Simple Machines