It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by duster
Personally I think that the best thing the Dems. could do for the GOP is to nominate Hillary as the Dem candidate. I could be wrong but I just don't see her as electable. I think a lot of people already have her number.
posted by grover
If the Dems are fool enough to go with Hillary they will have to accept responsibility for what will happen. She will win if she survives because Bush Minor has so eviscerated the Republican party I don't think that there is a GOP candidate who can win, certainly not clueless Giuliani or fading McCain. Thompson won't get the nod, its obvious he doesn't want it bad enough and (1) Romney, we won't elect a Mormon anytime soon. A Jew or a black will get the presidency before a Mormon. If the GOP had any brains left they would draft (2) Colin Powell, just like if the Dems had any brains left they would draft (3) Al Gore. We would as a nation would benefit far more from having those two running against each other as opposed to the current crop of midgets running. What will happen if Hillary gets the nomination? It will (4) split us liberals while uniting the right wing; it will be a bloodbath that will make the (5) Swift boating of John Kerry seem like a small razor nick. Every right wing whacko will come out of the woodwork to take pot shots at her and perhaps (6) a real shot as well. If Hillary gets the nod, it would not surprise me one bit if there was an assassination attempt against her. No matter it is not going to be a pretty election season and for the good of the country the (7) last thing we need is another Clinton or another Bush.
Originally posted by donwhite
(1) I disagree. I believe that Romney should do what JFK did when he ran for president. He confronted the anti-Catholic issue in WVa and in TX. He faced down the complainers. They accepted his statements and we have had no more debating whether the president or the pope would run the country. People are unfamiliar with Mormonism. Romney must do the same thing. The Mormon Church has its Twelve Apostles and one of them is the designated leader. Romney needs to make clear that in religious matters he will defer to the Church leaders but in all other matters, he will be his own man.
(2) Powell has made 2 mistakes. The first was to be snookered by Scooter Libby and VP Cheney on February 5, 2003, when he made the infamous Niger yellow cake uranium speech before the UN. The Joe Wilson and Valerie Plame debacle. The second mistake was to apologize to the American people for being snookered. Successful politicians cannot admit to being snookered.
(3) Although Al Gore won the popular vote by 500,000 in 2000, he has since changed to a Green man and environmentalist. That baggage is too heavy to carry into a presidential race. It is too narrow a constituency to be of much help. Ralph Nader polled 3,000,000 votes in 2000 but only a small fraction of that in 2004. Green has lost its traction.
(4) Like African Americans - the Dems base - the liberals have no place to go if they don’t go Democratic. They can pretty much be taken for granted in the 2008 election. They will vote, however reluctantly, for the Dems. Or they will stay home.
(5) From the moment Bill Clinton announced for the presidency in 1992, he and Hillary have been under a microscope. The GOP fought her big time in NY in 2000 and outspent her about 2.5 to 1, but failed to derail her. They made only a puny effort in 2006, running a lackluster candidate, but if they had any bad news about her, they would have used it. I’m saying she is squeaky clean.
Yes, our reactionary anti-American Supreme Court has given the go-ahead to any vilifying, slanderous lie the GOP can conjure in the 2008 race. But Hillary unlike Kerry will be ready to come back! Hillary will be America’s response to England’s “Iron Lady” Margaret Thatcher now Lady Thatcher.
(6) I don’t know about America. Beginning with Abraham Lincoln we have had Presidents Garfield, McKinley, and Kennedy assassinated. Theodore Roosevelt was shot in 1912, but continued on to finish his speech and became known as the “Bull Moose.” FDR was nearly killed in Miami after wining the 1932 election but before he was sworn in. A guard was killed when assassins tried to kill Harry Truman. Gerald Ford escaped unharmed 2 times and Ronald Reagan was shot in his first year in office. Is it any wonder we ordinary citizens cannot get in 1000 meters of our president now?
(7) I’d say 2008 looks like a Giuliani and Romney ticket for the GOP against a Chiton and Obama ticket for the Dems. I see the ‘04 vote reversed, this time the Dems carrying Ohio and wining the Big Apple. The Dems should post a net gain of 4-5 seats in the Senate and about 5-10 additional seats in the House. Still not enough to stop a filibuster in the Senate, that requiring 60 votes.
[edit on 7/27/2007 by donwhite]
posted by grover
We always disagree donwhite but that’s OK. point by point.
Originally posted by donwhite
(a), Romney and Mormons. We had very few Mormons in Ky or in FL. I may not know them well or much about them. Within the Rules of ATS, can you elaborate on why you have reservations the public would not accept a Mormon as president?
(b) Powell. I like him. He is the only African American who could run a credible race for the presidency today. Yet, for various reason, he could not gain the nomination of any party. PLUS, he does not have the “Fire in the Belly” a genuine candidate must have to win.
(c) Ron Paul. He is a Libertarian turned GOP as a political expedient. Adherents to Libertarianism are in denial. And I don’t mean skinny-dipping in Egypt. IMO, the only valid issue is whether the Federal government needs 1.5 million, 2.5 million or 3.5 million employees. Aside: the “flat tax” favors the rich. The “fair tax” is a value-added tax which also favors the rich. Let’s face it, the graduated income tax is the only FAIR tax!
(d) Hillary.Lincoln’s assassin was an egotistical patriot of a lost cause. Garfield’s and McKinley’s were both disgruntled office seekers. JFK’s assassin was a leftist. I’m not sure what motivated him. I’d guess it was the Bay of Pigs or Oswald’s admiration for Fidel.
[e]On Voting. Ky has used the opti-scan system for decades. I like it because it is fast, accurate and the actual ballot is preserved indefinitely for re-counts and fraud investigations. Today OTOH, I lean strongly towards voting on the internet. That would require a national identity card. A lot of people oppose that idea in principle. Maybe we could make it optional.
On Conventions.[f] I’m reading the ‘05 best seller, “Team of Rivals: The Political Genius of Abraham Lincoln” by Doris Kearns Goodwin. In 1860 the 4 years old Republican Party’s convention was held in Chicago, chosen by the committee over St. Louis by 1 vote. Many people agree that if the convention had been held in St. Louis, Lincoln would not have won the nomination.
The leading candidate, William Seward of NY, brought in 2,000 supporters to PACK the convention hall. While they were in the streets celebrating prematurely what they regarded as the inevitable outcoime, Lincoln who had also brought in over 1,000 of his own supporters, had tickets of admission to the convention hall counterfeited so his people were seated before Seward’s people arrived to find it nearly full!
On Primaries.[g] We tried that one time, back in the 1960s, when California complained the people failed to vote when the projection from the East indicated one or the other candidate had already won. A mis-call by Dan Rather contributed greatly to the Florida debacle of 2000. With every person carrying a camera equipped cell phone, there is NO WAY we can prevent the immediate transmission of any newsworthy event. In seconds!
The Grover Amendment #28. “Family dynasties, whether by blood or marriage, being disharmonious to the health of the Republic, it is forthwith forbidden that any person of closer kin by blood or marriage than the 3rd degree of consanguinity, shall not be eligible to serve as president or in the line of succession thereto for fifty years.”
[edit on 7/28/2007 by donwhite]
posted by xpert11
The question for me is when is Obama going to make his move ? Now I understand that the race for nomination is a long distance race but same point Obama is going to have to make his move. IF Obama was to come from behind and win the nomination things could get interesting in terms of his choice of an running mate.
Originally posted by xpert11
The question for me is when is Obama going to make his move ?
Now I understand that the race for nomination is a long distance race but same point Obama is going to have to make his move. IF Obama was to come from behind and win the nomination things could get interesting in terms of his choice of an running mate.
posted by xpert11
Maybe I have approached Obama campaign from the wrong angle. Obama problem could well be with the fact that he is a new face and I'm not referring to populism well not directly anyway. The problem is that Obama is using his campaign to define himself and his vision of the USA. I think that a candidate needs to define themselves as well as crafting there vision of the future before they make a bid for there party nomination. Reagan is a good example of someone defining themselves before they making there bid for the highest office. Don I know your no fan of Reagan but it would be argue against my point in this case.