Republicans Rally Around Cheney as Rumors Swirl

Yahoooo via Reuters ^ | 2/25/04

[areafiftyone]

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - President Bush (news - web sites) and other Republicans are rallying around Vice President Dick Cheney (news - web sites) as they seek to quash rumors that Bush might ultimately replace Cheney on his re-election ticket.

Some pundits believe that if Bush is struggling in the polls a few months from now as the 2004 campaign moves into high gear, he might boost his chances for re-election by picking a running mate other than Cheney.

Helping to spur an already active Washington rumor mill was the Feb. 14 cover story in the National Journal which depicted a stern-faced Cheney standing next Bush.

"Just the ticket?" queried the headline. "Does having Dick Cheney as his running mate help or hurt George W. Bush in 2004?"

The article mentioned potential successors to Cheney such as former New York Mayor Rudolph Giuliani (news - web sites) and Bush national security adviser Condoleezza Rice (news - web sites).

At a Republican governors fund-raiser that marked the kickoff of his 2004 campaign, Bush gave a ringing endorsement of Cheney and in a joking way, alluded obliquely to rumors he might be mulling a change.

He quipped that he had put Cheney in charge of his vice presidential search committee, as he had originally done in the 2000 campaign.

"He tells me he's reviewed all the candidates, and he's come back with the same recommendation as last time," Bush said. "In fact, I made the choice myself, and I have taken the measure of this man. They don't come any better, and I am proud to have Dick Cheney by my side."

The National Journal article said there were "grumblings" among some Republicans who felt that removing Cheney from the ticket might be helpful to Bush because the vice president has been a key target of Democratic attacks for such issues as his past role as head of energy company Halliburton Co., the energy firm that contracts in post-war Iraq (news - web sites).

Cheney's negative ratings in public opinion polls regularly are the worst of anyone in the Bush administration.

DEMOCRATS MORE LIKELY TO BELIEVE RUMORS

There seem to be far more Democrats than Republicans, however, who buy into the rumors that Cheney might end up off of the Bush re-election ticket.

The scenario envisioned by some political analysts is that Cheney might bow out of the Bush-Cheney re-election race sometime before the Republican convention begins in late August.

The vice president, who has a history of heart trouble, could cite his health as a way to take himself out of the race without it appearing that he was pushed out, said Douglas Brinkley, a historian and author of a book at the front-runner for the Democratic nomination, Massachusetts Sen. John Kerry (news - web sites)..

"If there's a feeling that if Democrats have momentum (ahead of the Republican convention), a shake-up will be in order and Cheney will, due to health reasons, resign," Brinkley said.

While opposition to Cheney may help energize the Democratic base, the flip-side is that he also spurs the base of his own party.

"There is a better likelihood that I will be abducted by aliens than that Cheney will get dumped from the ticket," said one Republican official, who called Cheney "indispensable" to the Bush administration.

Cheney, considered by many historians to be one of the most influential vice presidents in modern times, has had crucial roles in everything from helping to shape and sell Bush's tax cuts to advocating action in advance of the Iraq war.

He is frequently the White House's key liaison to Capitol Hill when sensitive issues arise, such as a deadlock during the fall over Bush's proposals to overhaul energy policy and decisions over whether to appoint a commission to investigate flaws in prewar intelligence on Iraq regarding weapons of mass destruction.

"I don't think he's an impediment in any way to President Bush's re-election prospects," said Gary Bauer (news - web sites), head of American Values, a group that advocates conservative social positions

[leadpenny]

Maybe we should have in 96. We might not have had Clinton for two terms.

[bondjamesbond]

If Cheney is to be on the ticket, Bush must back him to the hilt at this time, to eliminate speculation that he will be dropped and give an incentive to the liberal flying monkeys of the media to keep baying for his blood.

If Cheney is to be dropped from the tickey, Bush must back him to the hilt a this time, or the ticket will appear weak and indecisive. Cheney dropping out under fire would be the worst possible scenario.

So regardless of what the long-term plan is, Bush's task right now is exactly the same. Stand by Cheney and state boldy that he has your absolute confidence and loyalty.

[MEG33]

He would be a great governor!

[azcap]

"What lesson would that be? You do realize that sitting vice-presidents have lost 3 out of 4 elections in the past 50 years?"

"Yeah, haven't we learned the lessons of President Humphrey, President Mondale, and President Gore?"

 

The lesson to be learned there is not that sitting VPs don't win. Drawing that conclusion from a sample of just 4 elections is not something I would bet on. The lesson I learned from  Humphrey, Mondale, and Gore is that Liberal Democrats and their message of  "I will raise your taxes, grow your government, and gut your defense" are not appealing. Dumping Cheney before the election might be sign of fear or weakness. Replacing him after the election next year would be wise. I am a conservative and I don't want to see a Giuliani or Rice presidency. I would prefer to see Bush appoint and groom a conservative VP in 2005/06. If Cheney stays until 2008 you will see an extremely ugly and damaging GOP primary. The GOP primary favors conservatives but a Giuliani with vast populist support or a Rice with a huge media phenomena (black and female) would be strong contenders. The primary would be bloody and divisive and big chunk of voters will be disaffected no matter who wins. Give me a sitting  Bill Owens or Bill Frist and leave the bloddletting to the Rat primaries.

[BlackRazor]

The lesson I learned from Humphrey, Mondale, and Gore is that Liberal Democrats and their message of "I will raise your taxes, grow your government, and gut your defense" are not appealing.

I'm not sure why you're brining up Mondale. He wasn't a sitting VP when he ran for president. Nixon and GHW Bush were, in addition to Gore and Humphrey. I believe GHW Bush would have lost, too, had he not been facing probably the most inept major party nominee since Goldwater.

[azcap]

Commercecomet brought up Mondale as an example not me. I was just pointing out that Mondale losing had a lot more to do with his message than his ever being VP. It is not the fact that a candidate is or was the VP that helps or hurts his candidacy. What being the VP does is give you free media and name recognition for 4 or 8 years. If you are a fool to begin with free publicity isn't necessarily your friend (AL GORE.) If you are a decent man free publicity and name recognition help you (GHW Bush.) Does anyone think GHW Bush would ever have become president in 1988 if weren't the VP. He proved in 1980 that he didn't have the appeal within his own party. If Bush replaced Cheney with dud or a loose cannon then the publicity he gets in the next 4 years would help the rats defeat him in 2008. If Bush installs a good man then the VP spotlight will help him.

[BlackRazor]

Does anyone think GHW Bush would ever have become president in 1988 if weren't the VP.

No, certainly not. But he was also helped considerably by Reagan's popularity and the inherent weakness of Dukakis. If Reagan had only been as popular as Bush currently is, or if the Democrats had fielded a strong candidate, I think there's a pretty good chance GHW Bush would have lost in 1988.

After 8 years of having one party in office, I think it's only natural that people are going to consider making a change, rather than continuing on with the status quo. For a sitting VP to counter that inclination, the current president must either be very popular, or the VP must be extremely charismatic. I don't think Bush will ever have the widespread popularity necessary to carry a designated successor across the finish line in 2008, the way Reagan effected the first Bush.

I think the better way for the GOP to counter the "it's time to make a change" argument would be to run another outsider candidate, preferably a governor, perhaps someone like Bill Owens. Someone new, someone not involved in what will always be perceived as a polarizing administration, especially if it's another nailbiter election in '04. It will be a way for the Republicans to make the case for a fresh start in the same way the Democrats will be doing.

[rocky88]

"It's hard to believe that President Bush will get his base all fired up to campaign for him if he picks a New York gun-grabbing, pro-abortion guy as his apparent successor."

Well as I see it, the President has not done much lately to want to make his base turn out in record numbers with his stances on Immigration, Medicare and other costly programs. So why not look more appealing to the center "swing" voter? Throw them some meat in the form of Guiliani and I beleive it could work.

Don't get me wrong - I am not happy with Guiliani and his stance on guns and abortion, but I do know he appeals across party lines. I also have trouble conjuring up any idea of what Cheney has done to please the base that Guiliani wouldn't do himself.

Guiliani can be a draw to those to the right of center and in the center itself, and make up for the fact that President Bush has been spending like a drunken sailor. Also, he's perceived as tough on terrorism, and he is the only possible key (as I see it) to turning NY State RED on November 7. I'll do anything to defeat a Kerry presidency.

[teletech]

Maybe we should have in 96. We might not have had Clinton for two terms.

If Kerry trails in the polls come late Summer, watch for the old DemocRAT Switcheroo!

[sirshackleton]

But consider Zell Miller's seat, which almost a shoe-in for a Republican. Also Hollings in South Carolina. Those could be considered de-facto replacements....

[CommerceComet]

I brought up Walter Mondale because his primary qualification when he ran for President was his stint as Carter's VP. There have not been many sitting VPs who won election as President. Before GHW Bush, you have to go back to Buchanan (or some other trivia-answer President from the early to mid 1800s).

[BlackRazor]

But consider Zell Miller's seat, which almost a shoe-in for a Republican. Also Hollings in South Carolina. Those could be considered de-facto replacements....

Counting chickens before they hatch is never a good reason to just give away a Senate seat, IMO. Especially for what I would consider such a minimal return. And especially when the GOP could very well lose the seats in AK and IL. Or who knows, maybe someone like John Warner (77 years old) dies in office and a Dem governor gets to replace him. The balance of power is just too close to be taking unnecessary chances.

[BlueNgold]

Wow, it took 6 posts for someone to suggest Rice. I had assumed 3 or 4 would do the trick.

Rice is not a viable candidate. She has no elected experience and no qualifications beyond her current job. Get over it.

[Sloth]

Democratic attacks for such issues as his past role as head of energy company Halliburton Co., the energy firm that contracts in post-war Iraq

I still don't "get" the Halliburton thing, I guess. I mean, I know leftists hate capitalism in general & a fossil-fuel industry conglomerate is even worse, but what exactly is the alleged impropriety? It's as though the name "Halliburton" is supposed to convey a vague sense of evil without any particular claims made.

[blackie]

Hey clueless ~ get a grip!

We are winning ~ the bad guys are losing ~ trolls, terrorists and the democrats are sad ~ very sad!

~~ Bush/Cheney 2004 ~~

[CyberAnt]

Exactly!!

"Cheney's negative ratings in public opinion polls" are being manufactured by the media .. who went gaga over Cheney and said in the beginning he should be the president instead of Bush.

I think what's happening is the media is trying to downplay Cheney's capability now, JUST IN CASE CHENEY IS PLANNING ON RUNNING FOR PRESIDENT IN 2008. It's just another personal destruction plan by the liberals. Hillary's getting nervous!

[sirshackleton]

I'm not saying it's the right thing to do....I'm just telling you what I think's gonna happen (And try to shed some light on the possible thinking of the administration for making such a choice).

[hershey]

Exactly. The RATS and their henchmen, the liberal press, would do anything to get Cheney off the ticket. They're terrified of him, and with good reason. Every time he opens his mouth he chews them up and spits them out.

[itsahoot]

Rice is untested.

Hardly, she took on Rummy and got shot down, took Colon with her.