Woodward Predicts: Cheney "Highly Likely" to Run '08

Please, please, please let it be true!

Woodward: Cheney to run in '08
DenverPost.com
By Troy Hooper
Special to The Denver Post

Aspen - Renowned journalist Bob Woodward predicts Dick Cheney will be the Republican Party's presidential nominee in 2008 and that the vice president could face Democratic Sen. Hillary Clinton in a dramatic partisan showdown.

Speaking in the Paepcke Auditorium as part of the Aspen Institute's McCloskey Speaker Series, Woodward on Tuesday listed a number of reasons it is "highly likely" President Bush might implore Cheney to seek the Oval Office.

"He would be 67 if he ran and was elected. Reagan was 69. Republicans always like the old warhorse. ... Nixon was 68," said Woodward, best known for exposing the Watergate scandal that led to Richard Nixon's resignation in 1974. "Both parties like to nominate vice presidents. ... Cheney would do it, and I think it's highly likely, so stay tuned."

Especially if it's Hillary versus Dick, then that's just a clash of TITANS!

It actually makes sense. The powers that pull the RNC strings are looking at relative implosions of late for Jeb, Ahnold, Frist and Santorum and watching all their plums turn to jelly.

Dick is insanely and unapologetically unmoderate, but plays one on TV. If this is the play, it's to save the GOP for next time. Another "sacrifice" like Dole. But it's always possible he could have more diebold votes where it matters at the end of the day.

Interesting, at least in a "how much worse could things possibly get" sort of way.

Great we're for sure going to hell in a handbasket now, first class seats on a jet plane...

This is poopy news.

u know cheney's going to win....elections are rigged and we can't prove it because diebold machines can only be accessed by the elite few.

Woodward is a smart man and I surely don't know everything that he does, obviously, but so far he must be the only person in America predicting that Cheney will run. Most of the analysts are saying that the next election will be a humdinger precisely because the Republicans will not have an encumbant Vice-President to run.

The word throughout the last 5+ years has been that Cheney's health is good, but everyone knows about the pacemaker and the implications of the device. Beside that, Cheney is the most qualified person in the world to take the helm in 2009. Maybe if he got elected, all the liberals really would move to Canada. That'd be really nice.



[edit on 2005/8/12 by GradyPhilpott]

Originally posted by TrueLies
u know cheney's going to win....elections are rigged and we can't prove it because diebold machines can only be accessed by the elite few.

Oh God, I hope you're not being serious. If so, you're using that same mentality that little children use when they're playing a game or racing or something like that. "If he wins, he cheated!!!" "Well what if you win?" "Well..then all's fair!" "Well isn't what you're saying a bit unfair?" "No, cause he's a jerk!".

Sorry, TL, but I know you to be a pretty open-minded individual, and this is a very close-minded mentality. It's the kind that they use to suck people over to the "extreme" left. You can be racist, sexist, or prejudiced just as long as you're directing it towards conservatives, then it's all fair cause they're evil.

But I dunno, Cheney might not be so bad. He's a really smart guy, although his health is pretty shakey.

Originally posted by GradyPhilpott
Maybe if he got elected, all the liberals really would move to Canada. That'd be really nice.

[edit on 2005/8/12 by GradyPhilpott]

Oh man, do you know how BAD that would piss of the left!? I almost hope he gets elected JUST for the sake of sitting back and watching the fireworks. Hilarity.... But Hell, Cheney to the left is like Clinton to the right... So if these two are running, everyone will REALLY hate each other. Just what we need...more division...

Originally posted by Herman

Oh God, I hope you're not being serious. If so, you're using that same mentality that little children use when they're playing a game or racing or something like that. "If he wins, he cheated!!!" "Well what if you win?" "Well..then all's fair!" "Well isn't what you're saying a bit unfair?" "No, cause he's a jerk!".

Nice, Herman. You just summed up the Democrats in one paragraph. Congratulations.

Originally posted by GradyPhilpott
Nice, Herman. You just summed up the Democrats in one paragraph. Congratulations.

Haha, thanks Grady. The sad thing is that there are people who make that true. Not all liberals, but some of the ones who just seem to think they're so "enlightened" that they're above the rest of us... It just drives me mad.

I think Cheney will sit back and see who has the momentum. If McCain or Guilliani gain momentum and there is no conservative challenge, I could see Cheney jumping in and winning the nomination.

Cheney's already the president for all intents and purposes.

And yes, if he runs, he will win. That is, if there hasn't been election reform by then, and it's doesn't seem that that is going to happen. In fact, if there's no election reform, the republicans are going to win. I'd bet a large amount of money on that.

So, regardless of who sits in the big chair, I'm pretty sure Cheney will be the meat behind the presidency for another 8 years. If his 'heart' holds out.

May we live in interesting times...

Woodward is simply delusional.
This is coming from the same journalist who claimed that Bush had struck a super-secret pre-election deal with Saudi Arabia to keep oil prices low? Yeah....okie dokie.

He is basing such speculation off the fact that VPs normally run for president.

I cannot see Cheney running for President in 2008 for a number of reasons, but if he does,some better hope that he does not pull Rice in as VP....







seekerof

Is there anybody here that would cast their vote towards cheney? Meaning no offense to you but I'm curious. If you would like to give a reason I would hear it.

It would depend very much on who he was running against, but I would definitely vote for Cheney. He has just the personality and the experience to run this country during these difficult times.

Originally posted by GradyPhilpott
It would depend very much on who he was running against, but I would definitely vote for Cheney. He has just the personality and the experience to run this country during these difficult times.

I second that. Despite stupid rumors of him being "evil", from what I've seen he seems to be a pretty reasonable guy. It was funny seeing him hand John Edwards' ass to him too in those debates haha.

Cheney can't win.

He simply doesn't have the numbers. Cheney loses moderates, the middle class, women voters, black voters, hispanic voters, 18-24 voters, and every other demographic but white christian men.

He has no shot at New York or California, or the Great Lake States. He loses Ohio and Pennsylvania. Florida goes either way. He carries Texas, Arizona, the west, and the south, but could very well lose key swing states like New Mexico and Iowa.

And that's simply not enough to win a Presidential Election

He's not charismatic, and he's not percieved as being empathetic. He has 8 years of "words" around his neck that him politically vulnerable. I have no doubt that Cheney truly inspires neo-conservative voters, I know that he does.

But, Cheney can't win

Remember, his campaign would have to do equal to or better than George Bush. If he loses one single state, he's done.

I really doubt that Chaney will run, he has expressed in the past that he has no desire to seek public office and didn't really want the VP post 5 years ago. A Giuliani-McCain, or McCain-Giuliani, ticket would win -- probably by a landslide, or a ~60% vote at worst. The Democrats don't have anyone moderate enough to bring the party back to where it belongs (democrats have gone way too far left and have alienated too many of their supporters) and they simply could not compete against that ticket (in either order).

The Democrats have lost their way and a lot of respect taking the path they've chosen in the past 8 years. I know of quite a few staunch Democrat supporters who have been disenfranchised since the middle of the Clinton era. Historically, the Democrats have been moderates, only in the past 10 years have they swung so far left. I don't know if they'll be able to rejuvinate their party in 3 years, and I trule doubt they could compete against MaCain & Giuliani on the same ticket.

The USA really needs a 3rd party to make things interesting and to give voters a real choice in setting national policy. The way Washington currently works, there are no real checks and balances with a 2 party system.

Hillary,Cheney,McCain,Giuliani,PeeWee, Democrat, Republican:who cares!

Presidents are chosen in corperate board rooms not political conventions.

Elections are just entertainment for the masses and programed with commercials just like the super bowl.

These liberal/conservative pissing matches serve no purpose. Schools out.

It's a brave new world, welcome to the monkey house.

[edit on 14-8-2005 by whaaa]

Aside from the fact it is way to soon to predict who will run in 2008.
Americans face a decison based on a government who will provide the best means of helping them get ahead in life.
How many Americans have benfited from Bush & co spoon feeding the likes of hailburton?
That is something Americans will have decide for themselvs.
I wouldnt be surpised if the Republican vote is split with the "old guard" voting Libertarian. Any such occurance would hand the election to the dems on a platter.
I will watch with great interest.


[edit on 14-8-2005 by xpert11]

I don't like it.

Cheney is not the man to run for president. I love him as a policy maker, I just don't think he would win UNLESS it was against Clinton. I don't think Clinton can beat anyone, and thats the truth. She is even more unlikeable then Cheney.

As it turns out though, Cheney has personally told a few people I know that he would not run. Take that for what it's worth.

Originally posted by CatHerder
A Giuliani-McCain, or McCain-Giuliani, ticket would win -- probably by a landslide, or a ~60% vote at worst.

Probably, but who would the Republicans vote for?

I realize based on your post you think a moderate like Hillary is the most radical thing to ever wear pants in the White House and Kerry's proposed tax refund to go to the private health insurance provider of your choice is uh communism (while the Republican Party is just the most sane, rational and moderate it's ever been)... but uh, have you gotten a whiff of the Republican base lately?

I don't have a problem with any sane person in the White House (no matter what letter follows their name), but neither "sane" or "moderate" is on the GOP checklist lately. And I don't think it's a simple matter of those that hate "traitor McCain" as much as they seemingly do anyone that actually went to war or those that think a pro-gay, abortionist yankee RINO like Giuliani will be the end of morality on the North American continent simply holding their nose while voting to keep Hillary out. I think their heads will explode. Literally.

But I'm all for an RNC 180 and radical right implosion. Please do. The White House is yours. Just dismantle your party, admit you were wrong and tell the Religious Right to go to hell.

[edit on 15-8-2005 by RANT]

Speaking of insane and partisan politics....

Originally posted by RANT tell the Religious Right to go to hell.

Damn. I think a lot of people would vote for a Guiliani/McCain ticket. Actually, if the other choice was someone like Hillary, I'd bet my money that nearly all Republicans would vote for Guiliani/McCain over her. What I'm afraid of, actually what I know will happen is the whole "She's a woman!" thing. And no, that won't be counted against her, it could easily get a lot of people to vote for her. Can you imagine? Inevitably, the campaign ads would come out. "The Republicans don't want a Woman in office. In Fact, Guiliani doesn't even want women to be able to vote! Vote for Hillary, and we'll have the first woman in office in History."




[edit on 15-8-2005 by Herman]