Poll: If Cheney is dropped, who.....

[Reaganfan]

Very true, their slogan: Bush- McCain with a BANG!

[© tweed]

Very true, their slogan: Bush- McCain with a BANG!

That would be a good ticket, solidifies the southwest.  But it still may get the right angry.

[NHPolitico]

Very true, their slogan: Bush- McCain with a BANG!

That would be a good ticket, solidifies the southwest.  But it still may get the right angry.

You gain two independents for every outraged conservative lost.

[NHPolitico]

Bush-McCain is the ideal ticket that would sweep Dems

It would suck up all the oxygen for the Dems for weeks, if not longer.  It would be hilarious to announce it right before the Boston convention.

[© tweed]

I still think Bush is sticking with Cheney.

[NHPolitico]

The following is from Dick Morris on this subject and I'm trying to figure out why Bush apparently gets no credit for guarding "the conservative torch."  He could presumably be much more moderate than he is if no one gives him credit for the moderate stands he does have.  This makes me think that maybe he'd be viewed by conservative voters as a real conservative if the contrast were stronger-- with a McCain or other moderate in the VP spot.   I think that now Cheney really doesn't offer anything positive to Bush. What does he bring to the table that can't be better taken care of in some other way?

Finally, and perhaps most importantly over at the White House, a CNN/Time poll found that 42 percent thought Cheney should be yanked from the ticket.

Cheney is a full-fledged evildoer to many Democrats and Bush-haters. He is problematic for Republican strategists. But he is deeply supported by many Republicans who see him as the most reliable and influential guardian of the conservative torch. And he is very important to the Hobbesians: generally conservative intellectuals who believe that Democrats, liberals and internationalists profoundly underestimate how dangerous and belligerent the world is, especially the Islamic world today.

[Gustaf]

The following is from Dick Morris on this subject and I'm trying to figure out why Bush apparently gets no credit for guarding "the conservative torch."  He could presumably be much more moderate than he is if no one gives him credit for the moderate stands he does have.  This makes me think that maybe he'd be viewed by conservative voters as a real conservative if the contrast were stronger-- with a McCain or other moderate in the VP spot.   I think that now Cheney really doesn't offer anything positive to Bush. What does he bring to the table that can't be better taken care of in some other way?

Finally, and perhaps most importantly over at the White House, a CNN/Time poll found that 42 percent thought Cheney should be yanked from the ticket.

Cheney is a full-fledged evildoer to many Democrats and Bush-haters. He is problematic for Republican strategists. But he is deeply supported by many Republicans who see him as the most reliable and influential guardian of the conservative torch. And he is very important to the Hobbesians: generally conservative intellectuals who believe that Democrats, liberals and internationalists profoundly underestimate how dangerous and belligerent the world is, especially the Islamic world today.

'The Hobbesians'? How many of those are around, other than Opebo?

[Ben.]

According to Republican sources and the Economist Magazine where Cheney to be dropped (which I think (and yeah hope) is really unlikely) then Gov Bill Owens of Colorado would be the most likely replacement…. Owens is seen by many as the brightest star in the republican party with a solid record in Colorado and broad support there, he would probably help put the breaks on any Democratic strategy in the South West and he would be a much stronger contender in 2008 for the Republican nomination (which Cheney would almost certainly not run for anyway) and this could avoid a divisive primary season in 2008 with no clear heir to Bush…. Add to this getting rid of Cheney gets rid of the embodiment of the “darker side” of this administration it replaces him with the far more sunny and personable Owens…

In the end I just really hope that Bush sticks with Cheney….        

[Gustaf]

According to Republican sources and the Economist Magazine where Cheney to be dropped (which I think (and yeah hope) is really unlikely) then Gov Bill Owens of Colorado would be the most likely replacement…. Owens is seen by many as the brightest star in the republican party with a solid record in Colorado and broad support there, he would probably help put the breaks on any Democratic strategy in the South West and he would be a much stronger contender in 2008 for the Republican nomination (which Cheney would almost certainly not run for anyway) and this could avoid a divisive primary season in 2008 with no clear heir to Bush…. Add to this getting rid of Cheney gets rid of the embodiment of the “darker side” of this administration it replaces him with the far more sunny and personable Owens…

In the end I just really hope that Bush sticks with Cheney….        

Yeah, if that happens Kerry would have to go for the mid-west, it'd make Bush task easier I reckon.

[© tweed]

People are pretty well split in this poll.

[Gustaf]

There are 5 votes for Rumsfeld, but I don't think anyone actually have spoken up for him in the thread. I think dropping Cheney this late would be a little too obvious, so I wouldn't expect it to happen.

[opebo]

There are 5 votes for Rumsfeld, but I don't think anyone actually have spoken up for him in the thread. I think dropping Cheney this late would be a little too obvious, so I wouldn't expect it to happen.

I voted for Rumsfeld for two reasons - he's relably conservative, probably to the right of the others on the list, and he keeps the field open in 2008 for Jeb.  I doubt he'd run for Pres.

[Gustaf]

There are 5 votes for Rumsfeld, but I don't think anyone actually have spoken up for him in the thread. I think dropping Cheney this late would be a little too obvious, so I wouldn't expect it to happen.

I voted for Rumsfeld for two reasons - he's relably conservative, probably to the right of the others on the list, and he keeps the field open in 2008 for Jeb.  I doubt he'd run for Pres.

I should have guessed...

[minionofmidas]

The following article is lifted without permission from the pages of the "Economist"

TIME FOR HIM TO GO?
Why Dick Cheney should watch whom he travels with

A year ago, with the invasion of Iraq imminent, George Bush delighted guests at the American Enterprise Institute's annual dinner by unveiling his plans to democratise the Middle East. A year later, conservative Washington once again massed in the Washington Hilton ballroom to enjoy the AEI's hospitality and hear from the administration - this time from Dick Cheney.
You might have thought that the faithful would be feeling a little chastened by recent events. Not a bit of it. Mr Cheney looked as cocksure as ever. Charles Krauthammer treated the guests to an interminable celebration of American power. The chatter after dinner was surprisingly upbeat. Those missing weapons of mass destruction? Much ado about nothing. Of course, these conservatives were prepared to admit the odd setback - Mr Bush's flaccid state of the union speech, for instance, or the fact that Howard Dean was no longer the likely Democratic nominee - but nobody seemed to be taking seriously the idea that John Kerry might actually be elected president in November. "This country won't elect a Massachusetts liberal," declared oe senior journalist flatly.
This sound strangely like the pride that goes before a fall. Mr Bush certainly stands a good chance of hanging on to the White House - but not if he underestimates Mr Kerry as his father did his philandering Southern rival. The Republicans had expected the first quarter of the year to be dominated by Democratic squabbling; instead, the pounding coming from American television screens has been that of relentless Bush-bashing. For all his liberal traits, Mr Kerry looks a formidable presidential candidate, and even if he slips up in the run-in he will be replaced by John Edwards - the southerner whom Mr Bush's people feared most at the beginning of the contest. If nothing else, the Democratic Party has shown that it is obsessed by the idea of getting Mr Bush out of the White House.
The Bush campaign needs a jolt, not just to wake up the ideologues at the AEI but also to improve the president's standing among independent voters. And what bigger jolt could he give it than to start at the top - or rather second from the top - with the vice-president? In 1992, Mr Bush tried to persuade his father to ditch Dan Quayle. The idea that Mr Cheney might also be a "drag on the ticket" was unthinkable a year ago. Now it has begun to seep into the more hard-headed, vote-scrounging parts of the Republican Party, and become common chatter among political operatives from both parties. It is, indeed, the current cover story of the [i\National Journal], the inside-the-Beltway bible.
This is partly Mr Cheney's own doing. Four years ago, he looked the perfect complement to young George, possessing everything the callow Texan lacked - gravitas, eloquece and experience. Nowadays, he is seen less as the sober pragmatist and more as the dangerouslyrevolutionary zealot. Look at economic management, where he supposedly told Paul O'Neill, his former friend and the former treasury secretary, that "Reagan proved deficits don't matter." Or look at Iraq, where the vice-president went further than anybody else in exaggerating Saddam's "reconstituted" nuclear-weapons programme and the idea that he provided a "geographic base" for terrorism against America.
Another reason to ditch Mr Cheney is that he has come to epitomise the administration's darker side. Take corporate cronyism. The vice-president made $44m during his time as head of Halliburton, a company that ahs snaffled up a large number of lucrative contracts in Iraq and has been accused of overcharging the Pentagon into the bargain (see page 60). He also stuffed his energy task-force with friends from the energy industry. Or take bureaucratic secrecy: he has created a semi-official parallel administration within the White House and has fought like a tiger to keep his doings private. His recent decision (just after the Supreme Court had said it would review whether he could continue to keep secret the deliberations of his energy task-force) to use a government jet to take Justice Antonin Scalia and a bunch of Mr Cheney's oil-business buddies duck-shooting only reinforces the impression that he has a tin ear for politics.
There are also positive reasons for dumping Mr Cheney. Bringing in a fresh face as vice-president would suggest that the second Bush term will be more than just a re-run of the first. It would allow Mr Bush to add someone to the ticket who has a better chance of attracting swing voeters than a retired CEO from a solid Republican state.
Who might that be? Rudy Giuliani might burnish Mr Bush's reputation for fighting terrorism, though he is not known for his ability to play second fiddle. Condoleezza Rice might do something to neutralise the Democrats' traditional advantage among blacks and women. But some Republicans would rather turn to Bill Owens, the governor of Colorado. There are signs that Mr Kerry is planning to write off the South in order to concentrate on loosening the Republicans' hold on the south-west. What better way to check this threat than to add the Republican Party's brightest western star to the ticket?
It hardly needs saying that replacing Mr Cheney would have to be done with the utmost finesse. Otherwise, it might seem that the Bush White House was falling apart. Mr Cheney would have to retire gracefully, blaming his dodgy heart (he has already had four heart attacks) and no doubt accepting a post as senior counsellor from a grief-stricken president. Persuading such a powerful vice-president to step aside will be no easy thing, of course. But the Bushes don't have a reputation as the Corleone family of the Republican party for nothing. The nex time Mr Cheny takes that jet to go duck-shooting, he may well find James Baker slipping into the seat behind him, with "a litl'proposal tp discuss for the good of the party".

The article on page 60 is titled:
Halliburton - WHAT WE KNOW
A scandal-hit fiem fights back

[Reaganfan]

Cheney would be a great President if anything ever were to happen to Bush. He would probably win too if he ever ran, which he won't.

[Ben.]

Reaganfan no way could Cheney ever win a presidential election… As I’ve said further up the thread Cheney is associated in the publics mind with all the shadier facets and dealings of this administration added to this his record of underhand dealings and very conservative record while he was in congress and also in this administration makes him too much out of the mainstream and to much of a “bolted copy book” to be elected…. He’d probably get about 40% of the vote to any reasonably moderate Dem…

In 2000 Cheney brought experience of government and congress to the effectively rookie Bush (remember the job of the Texan governor isn’t exactly a heavy work load) his shady past and conservative record where tolerated as he added some gravitas to the ticket and at any rate his last experience in government had been eight years ago so these indiscretions where largely out of the publics mind… since then Bush has become a far more statesmanlike figure in many voters minds and no longer needs Cheney to add “gravitas” while at the same time Cheney has been linked with a whole host of corporate scandals and cases of conflicts of interest…. If I where Bush I’d ditch him and replace him with Gov Bill Owens (R-CO)… thankfully I’m not a republican strategist so I’d expect Bush to keep Cheney in 2004 if for no other reason than he is so powerful within the administration (the most powerful VP in history in most peoples opinions) and he is relied upon by Bush so much that it would seem unwise to forcibly eject him from the ticket … so really if Cheney wants to stay he will stay… however it seems many republicans from Bush’s fathers administration are urging George to move Cheney off the ticket and into a cabinet post (Defence if Rummy goes in 05? Or State with Powel scheduled to go in 05?) I doubt any thing will come of this however the power of these more socially moderate and fiscally conservative republicans is very limited at the moment and the section of the party that Bush is most concerned with placating is the “Christian Right” so again I doubt these old administration hands’ pleas will have any effect…  

[© tweed]

Cheney would be a great President if anything ever were to happen to Bush. He would probably win too if he ever ran, which he won't.

No, I doubt he would win, he would lose in Dole-fashion, as old boring conservatives do.  And, I have alot more respect for Dole than I do for Cheney.

[Reaganfan]

Giuliani could win even if only running as former mayor.

[Reaganfan]

Rummy would make a good VP.

[NHPolitico]

1. Do Americans Have a Favorable View of Dick Cheney?

The American public's opinion of Cheney is slightly more positive than negative, according to the latest CNN/USA Today/Gallup poll, and his current favorable rating marks the lowest of his term. The Feb. 16-17 poll finds 45% of Americans say they have a favorable opinion of Cheney, while 42% have an unfavorable opinion and the rest have no opinion. The same poll found President George W. Bush's favorable ratings significantly higher than Cheney's, at 56%.

Cheney's favorable ratings have been higher than they are now for much of his term. Cheney's favorable ratings averaged 63% in both 2001 and 2002, but fell to 56% for 2003. Cheney's highest favorability rating was measured in January 2002, at a time when the president and other government officials were receiving high marks because of the general rally effect that followed the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks.

Republicans, not surprisingly, have a much more positive view of Cheney than Democrats or independents do. Roughly three in four Republicans in the February poll have a favorable opinion of Cheney, compared with just about a quarter of Democrats and fewer than 4 in 10 independents.

2. How Does the Public Rate Cheney's Performance as Vice President?

Fifty-six percent of Americans approve of the way Cheney is handling his job as vice president, according to a mid-January Gallup Poll. Cheney's approval ratings were higher in the early days of the Bush administration (an average of 62% in the first four months) and in the months following the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks (68% in January 2002).

Compared with other vice presidents, Cheney's term average is quite similar to Al Gore's (62% for Cheney and 63% for Gore), but is much higher than Dan Quayle's, who averaged only 47% during George H.W. Bush's administration. Gore's highest measure was 71% in August 2000, and his lowest was 59% in March 1997. Quayle's highest approval rating was 50% in May 1991, and his lowest was 43% in November 1989. Cheney's highest job approval rating so far was 68% in January 2002. His lowest was the current 56% rating.

3. Should President Bush Keep Cheney as His Running Mate?

Last fall, Gallup asked Americans whether Bush should keep Cheney as his vice-presidential running mate in the 2004 presidential election or whether Bush should get someone new. A slight majority of Americans, 51%, said Bush should keep Cheney, while 42% said he should get someone new. This question is particularly important for Republicans, among whom 69% said that Cheney should be retained, while 28% said he should be removed. Gallup has asked this question twice about Cheney, and the percentage of Republicans who want Cheney replaced has averaged 26%.

Gallup asked the same question about Quayle several times before the 1992 election, at a time when there was significant speculation about the possibility of George H.W. Bush replacing his running mate. In all but one instance, more Americans said Bush should get rid of Quayle and put someone new on the ballot than said Bush should keep Quayle. An average of 52% of Republicans told Gallup that Bush should keep Quayle as his running mate during the 1992 presidential race.