Posted on 09/26/2004 1:54:16 PM PDT by JLS
Bill First 5/2 John McCain 7/2 Rudolph Guiliani 7/2 George Pataki 9/2 Chuck Hagel 6 Mitt Romney 6 Bill Owens 8 Tom Ridge 8 George Allen 12 Norm Coleman 12 Lindsey Graham 14 Sam Brownback 14 Arnold Schwarzenegger 66 Dick Cheney 66 Jeb Bush 66 Laura Bush 100
Rudy is popular now. The election is way off.
You're also discounting the anti-Catholic bias in the South and in the Republican party. Not to mention the anti Italian American bias.
Being a Catholic, a Conservative Republican and an Italian American it hurts to say that but it's true.
Combine that with Rudy moving his mistress into Gracie mansion while he was still married and his social issue problems and you have a loser.
You can't cherry pick the good stuff when you're running for President.
It will all hang out the minute Rudy says he would run.
As an ex New Yorker,I like Rudy, but he is a liberal Republican New Yorker and that won't fly nationally in the Republican party.
And that's the way it should be.
Giuliani/Rice is the only ticket that can handle Clinton/Obama in 08.
Jeb will NEVER run for president,let alone in 08! The "dynasty" thing and all that...the Dems would make such a stink,that there'd be NO stopping them and even some GOPers/Conservatives wouldn't stand for a run by Jeb!
Frist hasn't a chance in hell;as proved by his horrible turn at the GOP Convention and the same is true,if not more so,of Pataki.
McCain won't run.
Whoever made this up is politically stupid.And those who post comments on these threads,pushing ridiculous assertions and candidates,should by more than a couple of clues.;^)
No, I think you're going to have to get it through your head that if my brethren and I are forced to choose between God and Mammon then the Republican Party will be stripped of its footsoldiers and all the $20 donors who financed the Republican Revolution. If you think any RINO fiscal conservative, social libertarian will be able to get through the primaries and the national election you're dreaming. In 2008 you can go back to being the permanent minority party.
Jacvin, the odds were set by a I suspect British bookie. But if you really care follow the links. The first one goes to the site that lists odds from several books on this issue. Only one book has put up odds on this so far and you can click on the name to see if you think they are reputable.
curmudgeonII, I don't post very often. I was a bit surprise not to be given a preview and even more surprised that the list was not tablular when I posted it.
JohnnyZ, They are bookies. They do not claim to know anything about anything. They post odds and pointspread to get equal action on bothside. At laying odds, I bet they are quite good. These are very very early odds and they will change over time. Spelling the name of every US GOP politico is likely not a big deal to them. Equal action on both sides and making a profit likely is.
You may be right but we don't have separation of state and Christ in my church.
When you choose a presidential nominee, that candidate should be acceptable to all major elements of the party. Choosing a social conservative this time, then a social liberal next time, doesn't work.
To re-phrase, When you pick a candidate who is unacceptable to one faction of the party, our chances of winning become zilch!
Keyes is unelectable, so there's no way he'll be in the race at the end. I think it will be Jeb. His family has the organization and the contributors. It will be Jeb all the way, with Rice a "Maybe" for Veep.
The scuttlebutt I heard is that Powell might be interested but his wife won't let him run because she is concerned about the effect on their family life. I do not say "his wife won't let him run" badly or with derision, it is just what I hear. How many have thought of running for public office these days but have been put off because of the huge cicus it has all become? This is usually much more of a problem for Republicans, almost all of whom (greater than 97.3% to be exact) have a life outside of politics compared with almost all Democrats for whom politics is their religion and only "god".
Giuliani/Rice is the only ticket that can handle Clinton/Obama in 08.
_____________________________________________________
Sure lets run two people neither of which have ever won a statewide election or even competed in a statewide election.</sarcasm> Seriously look at history. When parties are dumb enough to nominate a Mondale or G.H.W. Bush both of whom were VPs but never won a statewide election, they struggle. Politics particularly presidential politics is a game for the pros. It is not a game for people like Rice or Powell who have never won an office.
Clinton/Obama might be a strong ticket in 2008 and it might be a losing ticket too. Let's see how Clinton does in her reelection campaign. She is hardly a seasoned politician herself.
The GOP will have to make a decision. It will either write off the next eight years to Hillary/Barack, or run Giuliani against them; he's the only candidate out there with a chance of beating the Clinton/Obama ticket.
The nomination would not ride on the VP, would it?
I asked Mayor Giuliani personally a very direct question earlier this year at a function attended by the both of us:
"Whose name in on your short list for the VP spot in the presidential ticket in 2008?"
He smiled and said "let's get President Bush re-elected first."
WOW. Talk about a faulty premise.
I refuse to take seriously ANY set of odds that lists Arnold Schwarzeneggar as a presidential candidate.
Proves they don't know $%@#.
People do it all the time. Some are just better at it than others. Shall we review the record?
In 2000, the GOP nominated an admitted alcoholic, who had probably also abused illegal substances earlier in life. His wife killed someone in a traffic accident when she was a teenager. His VP nominee had a record of multiple DUIs, and had had four heart attacks.
Yet each of these people had many positive qualities, and the GOP successfully presented them to the American people as positive roll models who you could be proud to vote for.
So, losing to Hillary would be a better option I guess.
What state is Tancredo?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.