- This topic has 126 replies, 38 voices, and was last updated 12 years, 1 month ago by farrocks.
-
AuthorPosts
-
December 12, 2010 7:54 pm at 7:54 pm #593442Dave HirschParticipant
Obama looks weaker than ever. He first lost the center by passing spending bills and mega-legislation and then lost his base by negotiating with terrorists and then making deals with the enemy who took America hostage (aka Republicans). Eyes are on 2012 and I’d like to hear from you who you’d like to see on the ticket (Democrat-Independent-Republican) in 2012. Who would you like to see as our next president and vice president?
Examples:
Democrat: Clinton-Rendell; Feingold-Kaine
Independent: Bloomberg-Crist;
Republican: Huckabee-Christie; Palin-McDonell; Romney-Pawlenty
Use your imagination, I’ll chime in with my pick later.
December 12, 2010 8:28 pm at 8:28 pm #903288Trying my bestMemberLimbaugh-Romney.
Slightly more realistically, Romney-Christie.
December 12, 2010 8:38 pm at 8:38 pm #903289anon for thisParticipantI’ve heard some advocate for Palin-Bachmann. That would be interesting.
December 12, 2010 8:48 pm at 8:48 pm #903290Trying my bestMemberanon: Yuck. That would be the worst of the worst.
December 12, 2010 9:01 pm at 9:01 pm #903291popa_bar_abbaParticipantLets talk about something else.
Would any of you vote for Palin in the primary? I wouldn’t.
December 12, 2010 9:03 pm at 9:03 pm #903292A23ParticipantObama-Biden. No need to shake things up.
December 12, 2010 9:24 pm at 9:24 pm #903293jhcvivgwryParticipantCHRISTIE!!!
December 12, 2010 10:17 pm at 10:17 pm #903294Dave HirschParticipantTrying my best, charliehall would love that first combination along with anonforthis‘s selection.
As to a Romney-Christie ticket. It sounds good. They are both moderates that will appeal to the center while Christie has the Tea Party activists on board. Romney has a long resume and with the economy being the prime issue in 2012, a businessman in his stature has nothing to lose. However, I doubt Christie can sit backstage; he needs to sit at the driver’s seat. Additionally, both are northeastern politicians and they would rather want to balance the ticket. Romney also has the issue of Romneycare he’d have to defend.
A23, many Republicans wish they stay on the ticket as is. It would probably be their best chance to take the White House back.
December 13, 2010 12:05 am at 12:05 am #903295Dave HirschParticipantJoseph Farah’s (WND) dream ticket is similar to that of anonforthis’s pick: Demint-Bachman.
Talking about Limbaugh on a ticket, Palin didn’t rule out running with Glenn Beck.
I believe that most Democrats wish Obama drops Biden and takes Hillary as his running mate. The Democrats don’t want a primary; it’s a definite loss. A Clinton win would anger much of the Democratic base, most notably the minorities. If Obama squeezes a victory, he will head into the general election quite damaged. This would probably also be the first time an incumbent president would be challenged by his base and not by the extremists in his base.
December 13, 2010 12:50 am at 12:50 am #903296anon for thisParticipantJust to clarify: I don’t think Palin-Bachmann would be a suitable ticket to run the country. But I do think it would be entertaining to watch them run.
December 13, 2010 12:56 am at 12:56 am #903297charliehallParticipantObama-Biden will easily win.
Prof. Alan Lichtman of American University has a method of predicting the popular vote winner in Presidential elections. It has a 100% success record in every election from 1860 to 2008. Only the Harlem Globetrotters and the University of Connecticut women’s basketball team have similar streaks going right now.
The method identifies 13 keys. If six favor the party out of power, it wins. However, only four favor the Republicans right now and it isn’t clear how two of them are going to change, especially since the tax deal will have the effect of stimulating the economy.
December 13, 2010 2:02 am at 2:02 am #903298tzippiMemberPalin Bachman Overdrive would be an excellent name for a rock band.
December 13, 2010 2:11 am at 2:11 am #903299Dave HirschParticipantCharlie, who would you like to see on the Republican ticket?
December 13, 2010 3:06 am at 3:06 am #903300ronrsrMemberDukakis/H. Clinton
December 13, 2010 3:07 am at 3:07 am #903301EnderParticipantMarco Rubio and Mike Pence.
I have a follow up question, who would a Bloomberg run as an Independant hurt more, the Dems or Reps?
December 13, 2010 3:38 am at 3:38 am #903302charliehallParticipantDave Hirsch,
As I’m not a Republican, I don’t think I should be telling Republicans what they should be doing for their nomination.
Ender,
A serious third party candidacy would clearly hurt the Democrats more. It is actually one of the Lichtman keys. The Republicans would need one additional and they would win.
December 13, 2010 3:57 am at 3:57 am #903303charliehallParticipantDave Hirsch,
I guess I should add that I hope that the Republicans nominate the people they truly think will be the best President and Vice President. (And remember that the qualification for Vice President is that you can be a good President.)
December 13, 2010 4:02 am at 4:02 am #903304Dave HirschParticipantronrsr, are you serious? Why would America elect an 80 year old to be president? And why would the Democrats nominate a looser as their candidate? It’s as if someone would suggest McCain on the GOP ticket!
Additionally, why would Hillary agree to be VP? If she has presidential aspirations she would seek the nomination (and would very likely win it), why would she be a back-seater with no political future (except if he dies in office)?
Ender, that’s actually an interesting choice. Marco Rubio, the upcoming star of the Republican Party, has the advantage of carrying Florida as well as getting much Hispanic support. He’s articulate, well-spoken and has a passionate story. A tough and effective speaker in the Florida House, Rubio would have more experience in 2012 than Obama had when he was elected president. Mike Pence, also a Tea-Party favorite, is one of the leaders in the Republican Congress and has been mentioned as a possible presidential contender. Pence also has the advantage of carrying Ohio, another important swing-state, given that his district borders the state.
The question here is: would the Americans want to do this celebrity thing over again? Would they be ready to elect another inexperienced leader and have a ticket with no executive experience? Additionally, although Rubio would probably be able to win the Republican nomination, does he have a good message and achieves high-marks in the Senate, he would probably opt for a more traditional candidate. Obama will likely try to paint him as a Tea-Party extremist and Pence as the veep would probably give Obama more fuel to his claims. I also think that Rubio, a freshman, would try to pick someone with more name-recognition than a Representative (as Obama did with Biden). Otherwise, I’m all for it. I just think I’d like my pick (to be disclosed soon) somewhat better.
As to your follow-up question: It really depends who the candidates are. If the independent is center-right, he’ll ruin it for the Republicans, and if he’s center-left, he will take more Democratic votes. If the Republican is a moderate and the Democrat is a liberal, the Democrat will most probably lose votes to the independent and vice-versa. I believe that in 2012 (with Obama on the Democratic ticket) and the election about the economy and anti-Obama, the Democrats will benefit from an independent (especially one like Bloomberg or Crist).
December 13, 2010 4:07 am at 4:07 am #903305☕️coffee addictParticipantProf. Alan Lichtman of American University has a method of predicting the popular vote winner in Presidential elections. It has a 100% success record in every election from 1860 to 2008. Only the Harlem Globetrotters and the University of Connecticut women’s basketball team have similar streaks going right now.
The method identifies 13 keys. If six favor the party out of power, it wins. However, only four favor the Republicans right now and it isn’t clear how two of them are going to change, especially since the tax deal will have the effect of stimulating the economy
you realize this is as it stands.
A lot can happen in two years so wake up and smell the coffee (actually stay asleep thinking Obama will win, gives you less motivation to vote)
December 14, 2010 4:57 am at 4:57 am #903306Dave HirschParticipantIs this all you’ve got? I myself have many dream-tickets I’d like to see. I’m about to disclose the one I’d really like to see, but I’d really like to see even one other member mentioning my candidate before.
December 14, 2010 5:13 am at 5:13 am #903307ronrsrMemberMichael Bloomberg / Sandy Koufax.
December 14, 2010 5:29 am at 5:29 am #903308Dave HirschParticipantronsr, you’re getting better by the minute. Why would America elect a Jew-boy from Boro Park just because he refused to pitch on Yom Kippur? Are you a comedian?
December 14, 2010 5:31 am at 5:31 am #903309Trying my bestMemberVery worthy candidates:
Jeb Bush
Bobby Jindal
John Bolton
David Petraeus
Rick Perry
December 14, 2010 5:50 am at 5:50 am #903310ronrsrMemberdear Dave Hirsch, I can dream, can’t I.
In the documentary film about that other great Jewish ballshpieler,, Hank Greenberg (who also did not play on Yom Kippur), Alan Dershowitz states that when he was a young boy (and baseball fan) in the late 1930s, he believed that Hank Greenberg would be the first Jewish president. Greenberg was handsome, well-spoken, determined, famous, free from scandal, and an all-around great guy. When Hitler, Goebbels and Father Coughlin were ranting about the athletic inferiority of Jews, here was a Jewish man you could reasonably argue was the best baseball player of his time.
Well, Hank Greenberg is no longer alive, but Sandy Koufax is, and he is handsome, well-spoken, determined, and an all-around great guy. You could make an argument that he pitched better than anyone else ever pitched, and instilled pride in another generation of Jewish boys, specifically mine.
Maybe I should have nominated Koufax/Bloomberg.
Contrary to what my mother told me, Koufax did not refuse to pitch on Yom Kippur. He was spared that since Don Drysdale would have normally pitched in the rotation that day. This doesn’t lessen my admiration for Koufax.
His accomplishments on the field were not limited to not pitching on YK.
“I can see how he (Sandy Koufax) won twenty-five games. What I don’t understand is how he lost five.” – Yogi Berra on Sandy Koufax’s 1963 record, after he faced Koufax in the World Series.
December 14, 2010 6:04 am at 6:04 am #903311ronrsrMemberI also thought Elliot Spitzer would be the first Jewish president. He was the best attorney-general that New York had seen in many years. He really was cleaning up Wall Street, until he made too many enemies who exploited his weakness to cause a scandal.
December 14, 2010 6:05 am at 6:05 am #903312Trying my bestMemberSpitzer was never any good. His Wall Street forays were to make a name for himself, at anyone’s expense. His biggest case on Wall Street was thrown out of court.
December 14, 2010 6:11 am at 6:11 am #903313ronrsrMemberhe was far more successful at recovering money for duped investors and putting the perpetrators behind bars than any other attorney-general in another state, such as mine. Not even close.
December 14, 2010 6:17 am at 6:17 am #903314ronrsrMemberOn the downside, Spitzer didn’t pitch nearly as well as Koufax.
December 14, 2010 9:00 pm at 9:00 pm #903315Dave HirschParticipantTrying my best, some of them would indeed make good presidents, but let’s review their issues one-by-one:
Jeb Bush
Had his last name been Smith, he’d probably be the front-runner for the GOP nomination and most probably our next president. Jeb, a former governor from Florida, a vital swing-state, is competent, intelligent and few in the nation understand politics as he does. He attracts the Tea Partyers as well as the moderates and can unify them to rally behind him. A former businessman , Jeb would bring business experience as well as executive experience to the Oval Office. The years he worked for his father as well as running his own campaigns, gave him the political experience needed to run a good and disciplined campaign (something an Obama opponent should have). This is in addition to managing Ileana Ros-Lehtinen’s campaign and serving as chairman of the Republican Party of Dade County. Bush’s education policies and legislation received high-marks throughout the nation (education might become an issue in the decade to come) and he has foreign policy credentials as well. Charismatic and an eloquent speaker, Jeb has the advantage of courting the Hispanic vote (because of his Hispanic wife) and is popular among Blacks (although it won’t do much against Obama’s popularity among them – talk about racists!). Jeb is an amazing fundraiser and is a sought-after speaker for policy. He also has high-approval ratings and strong name recognition. In other words: he’s just perfect to be president.
However, his name is Bush and that’s the problem. Although Obama might overshadow George W. Bush and improve his ratings (as he already did) many will still refrain from voting for “Bush.” Conservatives are still angry at “Bush” (41 & 43) for betraying their principles and although Jeb has more conservative credentials, he will have to make a strong case to overcome their suspicions. Liberals are also angry at “Bush” for ‘stealing the elections’ in 2000 with many liberals claiming Jeb actually orchestrated it. Additionally, people don’t want political dynasties any longer. Many claimed that Hillary lost the nomination because of her “Clinton” surname and Bushes hail from even a more prominent family. Many voters would rather vote for someone with a passionate story (like Obama’s) than someone that was born with a silver spoon in his mouth.
Bobby Jindal
Bobby is another fabulous candidate.
A Governor with sky-high approval ratings, Bobby would be the youngest president in history, if elected (in 2012). His youth is also more attractive than Obama’s (in 2008) because Bobby has a whole lot of political and executive experience (serving as a Representative before becoming Governor of Louisiana as well as administration positions).
He would also be the first Indian-American to become president of the US and will most likely attract minorities. He will also attract both conservatives and moderates. Bobby will have a strong say on Healthcare (which will definitely be an issue in 2012) given that he has served as the DHH in Louisiana and did a great job increasing health services while cutting costs of Medicaid and was then nominated to be the assistant Secretary of Health under President Bush. Jindal has also shown leadership capabilities at the Hurricane Gustav and gulf spill disasters.
Perhaps Jindal’s main liability is his charisma and speech performance. Although he doesn’t lack name recognition, he isn’t very popular around the country and his lackluster appearances won’t help. He needs to perform well at the debates to capture the nomination and it might prove bad for him when debating Obama. Additionally, although Bobby has a business background and was effective in creating a surplus out of a deficit in Medicaid in Louisiana, some will rather have one with more economic experience. But, I agree, he’s definitely one to look at.
John Bolton
David Petraeus
Rick Perry
December 14, 2010 9:03 pm at 9:03 pm #903316Dave HirschParticipantronsr, don’t get me started on Spitzer. We’re lucky he went down before getting into the Oval Office, he would’ve discredited all of us Jews.
December 14, 2010 9:46 pm at 9:46 pm #903317cleverjewishpunMemberMy dream ticket would be Pat Buchanan/Ron Paul
In no time flat the country would be headed down a more moral path along with fiscal policy that would put this country back on top.
I know its in our nature to scream “anti semitism” just because a political candidate looks at us funny, but it’s time for us to realize that America is a malchus shel chesed and if we want it to stay that way we need to let the needs and interests of America to come first before Israel.
For a long time I’ve believed that U.S. aid should be cut because as long as Israel is taking money from the U.S. they have a say in how Israel runs their country.
The truth is that the “Yeshiva” world has a lot in common with the viewpoints of Buchanan and Paul. Might be time to realize it and mobilize against our hellenist brethern who are responsible for the downfall of decency in this country.
December 14, 2010 9:55 pm at 9:55 pm #903318A Woman Outside BrooklynParticipantVery interesting analysis, Dave Hirsch!
What’s needed is another Ronald Reagan, but there’s no one on the horizon that comes close to the combo of popularity, personality, conservative credentials and viability. While another campaign with Palin would inspire tons of great videos on youtube by Tina Fey, she’s no more ready for the big show now then she was in 2008. Romney? He’s high in the current polls, but incredibily uninspiring. Christie? That could be a possibilty, stay tuned.
Dream team for Dems – Obama & Biden because they’re beatable.
December 15, 2010 3:13 pm at 3:13 pm #903319gavra_at_workParticipantRon Paul – Heath Shuler
December 15, 2010 3:13 pm at 3:13 pm #903320Dave HirschParticipantA Woman outside bklyn, Thank You!
We all miss the “Dutch.” We would definitely appreciate his inspiration and heartfelt message in such tough times. He is truly missed and will be missed forever. I agree that it’s not that easy to fing another Gipper and Obama definitely isn’t one. Sarah Palin isn’t Reagan either, she has a lot to learn before she becomes one. However, I’d just like to remind you that in 1978 people around the country also searched for a Reagan. Ronny had just lost the Republican nomination and went into retirement. He was too old to run for the Oval Office and George Bush was perhaps the front-runner. Fortunately, Ronald Reagan jumped into the race, overcame the age issue and got to become the best president in modern history. We can also look back at the Great Society years after the defeat of Barry Goldwater and many Republicans. The Conservatives were devastated. They were declared dead forever. Nixon’s win was largely attributed to the bickering and infighting within the Democratic party. They needed someone that would make it “cool” to be Republican and initiate conservative policies. The retired two-term governor did just that after his political career was deemed over. I believe that just like Barry Goldwater’s conservative movement got us a Reagan, so too will the Tea Party movement generate a Reagan. It might be Marco Rubio or Chris Christie and it could even be someone that’s still under radar – but it will come.
Chris Christie
I don’t know why I didn’t give my take on Christie before. To put it frankly: I’m a huge fan of the Governor. The guts that he has to take on those corrupt government worker is remarkable. The courage he has to stop the spending-spree and get government working again is admiring. He understands that the cuts are painful and people feel it, he knows that it places his political capital at stake; yet, he knows that this is right and does it regardless. He also attracts moderates and Tea Partyers in addition to hailing from a blue state. He’s my man. But, I have my reservations.
First and foremost, and I’ll be quite frank and honest, he gotta lose weight! Now, I’m also overweight, but I’m not running for president. Yes, you heard it – the Americans will elect a black man for President rather than a fat man. You can figure that if Jon Corzine went for that cheap shot – it works. Now, I don’t know if others will make it an issue (and stoop down so low) but people, in an age of TV, will have an issue. The American public opinion (although obese) and the general styles today is to be ultra-skinny – obesity can and will turn off many.
Additionally, Chris might indeed be the Republican darling right now and his domination on YouTube proves it. However, things will change especially if he enters a primary. The attacks will begin coming in his direction and many will question his conservative credentials. He is a fiscal conservative (which should be the issue in 2012) but I’m sure many of his fans (including Rush Limbaugh etc.) will fail his litmus test on his social views. Don’t forget: He’s a northeasterner and he’s a moderate. Did all of you forget his primary against Steve Lonegan?!
Chris Christie is famous for his tough-talk and being blunt. That’s what the viral videos on YouTube are all about as he exemplifies the frustration throughout the country. However, in a national race it might not be so much of an asset. In rural America people aren’t used to New Jersey tough-talk. Some people might interpret his style for anger and an angry man can’t get elected (Paladino?!). It might play out well for him but it is a risk.
We must not forget that in 2012 Christie won’t have much to show the public. Of course people like me, who believe in fiscal conservatism, see his accomplishments but those skeptical will want to see the numbers. New Jersey was in such a bad state when Christie took office so it may take years to see his accomplishments. Christie knows it and that’s why he says he isn’t ready yet. New Jersey still needs alot of work. You can’t buitres Rome overnight and you definitely cannot fix a bankrupt state in four years. Even if everything would already be alright, the changes don’t happen overnight; it takes some time to see the results. This may be something he will have to address in the general.
I’m quite disappointed that no one mentioned my top-of-the-ticket yet. I know that he lacks name recognition, but so little?!
December 15, 2010 8:51 pm at 8:51 pm #903321A Woman Outside BrooklynParticipantIf the economy remains the main issue, that plays to Christie’s favor. If it’s back to national security, that will tilt the tables to someone with that experience.
Loved the point about Jeb needing a name change in order to be considered.
December 17, 2010 4:47 am at 4:47 am #903322Dave HirschParticipantA Woman outside bklyn , I don’t see why Chris Christie should have more chances than, say, Mitt Romney (or even Paul Ryan) if the economy is the main issue. If you were referring to Bolton, I believe that anyone and everyone would win Bolton on domestic issues.
If there are clowns in the room you laugh; if there is an elephant in the room – you shut up!
Originally, I was planning to ignore suggestions such as Ron Paul and Pat Buchanan. They’re nothing more than laughingstocks and have no chance in winning the nomination. Their ages and philosophies will prevent that. However, I decided that it should be addressed. They are indeed the elephants in the room; nevertheless, I opted to make my position clear.
I’m a life-long registered Republican (born to Democrats though) and identify myself as conservative (politically). The reason for that is, because (aside from sharing philosophies) the Republican Party is home to the centrists. The Democratic Party includes mant extreme individuals that support radical socialism etc. while the GOP is more mainstream. A radical conservative will rather be part of the Libertarian, Reform or Conservative parties. The fact is that the Democrats nominated someone like George McGovern and the Republicans didn’t (and don’t tell me Barry Goldwater). Now, I know that Charlie Hall and other liberals will dispute my claims – the bi-partisan voting record websites support my claims. “Moderate” Democrats such as Barack Obama are more extreme than “radical” Republicans such as Sarah Palin and Michele Bachman. Take a look at their voting records. I believe that the GOP should stay on the middle path – the same path that Thomas Jefferson, Abraham Lincoln and Ronald Reagan trotted down . Ron Paul and Pat Buchanan don’t fit this description and that’s why I don’t support them. Caring for the poor is important as well as the Government; we just have to know its limits and draw the line and not abolish it completely.
While I agree with them on some issues, I disagree with more. Fiscal policy is important, but with consideration. I’m also in support for a government that enforces morality and ethics. While I believe that the US should reduce its interference in foreign countries and stop sending our taxes abroad, I don’t think isolationism is the way to go. We ought to protect our allies in order to protect ourselves. Israel is our only ally in that region and should be well protected for our own good. I’d also vote for a pro-American president over a pro-Israel president, but I wouldn’t vote for an anti-Israeli president because that means anti-America. However, I do agree that we should refrain from using the term anti-Semite all too often.
I will talk about Palin in a thread for herself.
December 18, 2010 8:19 pm at 8:19 pm #903323haifagirlParticipantRon Paul and I’ll trust his judgment for VP.
December 19, 2010 4:06 am at 4:06 am #903324Midwest2ParticipantDream-tickets….
Back in 1994 the Republicans were ecstatic that they took back Congress. The result? They got blamed for everything. Clinton got a free pass for a second term. Google “Pyrrhic victory.”
Yep, it’s the economy this time around too, and the same people that were mad at Pres. Obama because he didn’t wave a magic wand and make everybody prosperous again are now going to be mad at the Tea Party and the Republicans because *they* forgot their miraculous powers.
We will once again have a Democratic administration and a divided Congress. Maybe we all ought to start learning about this weird thing called “bipartisanship” like in “Work for what’s good for the country, not what’s good for your ego.”
March 2, 2011 3:23 pm at 3:23 pm #903326Dave HirschParticipantIt seems like Newt Gingrich will be the first official entrant in the 2012 election cycle, so I thought that it would be proper to profile him.
Newt Gingrich
Gingrich is an eloquent speaker who can mop the floors with the other candidates at the debates. He is perhaps the only leading contender that will probably beat Obama in the presidential debates. He understands the economy, how to balance the budget (which he did for the first time since 1969!) and national security. The author (or co-author) of close to 30 books is often referred to as the Republican Clinton, given his shrewdness, slyness, and smartness. He is also one that will be able to unite the Republican Party – the establishment (although he would have to mend some fences) and the Tea Party.
Sometimes seen as a maverick on some issues (immigration and energy), Gingrich has sparred with President Bush and the GOP for the increased spending under their watch. Although he warned that the GOP must broaden its base, he is considered a hard-core conservative. The 67 year old is considered a top contender for the nomination.
On a side note: Two great candidates, Mike Pence and John Thune, have declined to run for the nomination (look out for the VP slot) while Chris Christie has begun doing things that signals preparation for a run (did he commit suicide yet?!).
March 2, 2011 5:17 pm at 5:17 pm #903327AinOhdMilvadoParticipantcleverjewishpun…
i DO hope you are kidding!!!
Pat Buchanan is a true anti-Semite bli shum safek.
How anyone can listen to him speak and not realize that, is truly incredible to me.
On the other hand, the good side of him getting elected would be that shortly thereafter, – we’d see a HUGE increase in American aliya!
March 2, 2011 5:25 pm at 5:25 pm #903328popa_bar_abbaParticipantOn the other hand, the good side of him getting elected would be that shortly thereafter, – we’d see a HUGE increase in American aliya!
That is a pretty horrible thing to say. You should ask the mods to take that down. And this as well.
It sounds like you are happy when there is antisemitism because it leads to aliya.
March 2, 2011 6:01 pm at 6:01 pm #903329cleverjewishpunMember@AinOhd,
You kind of proved my point with your comment about how Buchanan feels about Jews.
Any political candidate that does not bow at the alter of AIPAC or the ADL gets hit with the anti semite label.
Buchanans opposition to aid to Israel is within his right as an elected representative of the people.
Personally I would rather have someone in office who is openly hostile rather than a fast talker who says all the right things and then stabs you in the back.
March 2, 2011 7:36 pm at 7:36 pm #903330A23ParticipantI’m a little surprised nobody mentioned Cantor.
March 3, 2011 2:43 am at 2:43 am #903331Dave HirschParticipantCleverjewishpun,
March 3, 2011 8:28 pm at 8:28 pm #903332Dave HirschParticipantUpdate on Gingrich:
Oops. Newt Gingrich did not announce. He once again did what he knows best – generating much noise about his presidential ambitions (you might recall that Gingrich ruffled feathers in 2000 and 2008 about a run). Now he simply lost his job at Fox News for the announcement of his website. Nevertheless, he did more this time around to be seen as a viable candidate.
In Other News:
Former Louisiana Gov. Buddy Roemer is planning a run. The former Governor and Congressman hasn’t won an election since 1987 and is seen as eccentric of some sort – he has virtually no chance. He was a lifelong Democrat who switched parties in his first term as Governor only to lose re-election.
March 7, 2011 7:35 pm at 7:35 pm #903333rebdonielMemberRon Paul can never be president. He is too principled and too grandfatherly (some say milquetoast) to be president.
I would love a President Ron Paul and a VP John Bolton. RP has the domestic and fiscal issues perfected. Bolton would be in charge of foreign policy and diplomatic affairs.
Will this ever happen? Maybe when cows fly.
March 7, 2011 9:02 pm at 9:02 pm #903334Dave HirschParticipantrebdoniel,
Your “dream” ticket is highly unlikely for obvious reasons. Yet, the most obvious reason is: the top and bottom of the prospective ticket clash immensely – Paul is an isolationist while Bolton is a neoconservative. Their joint-ticket would be far more bi-partisan (to the extreme) than, say, a McCain/Lieberman ticket. We must remember that libertarians meet the extreme liberal left in many ways .
March 7, 2011 10:50 pm at 10:50 pm #903335ronrsrMemberRahm Emanuel / Sandy Koufax
March 8, 2011 8:37 am at 8:37 am #903336fabieMemberI’ll run with Wolf!
March 8, 2011 5:46 pm at 5:46 pm #903337tzippiMemberA23, doesn’t he need to ripen a bit?
-
AuthorPosts
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.