US Mid-Term Elections - a very bad day for the republicans. A good day for the world?
- Thread starter MarkB
- Start date
Not my words, naturally. I wont cite the source 'cause it doesn't matter. Written by a patriotic American:
The press reports say that Saddam appeared in court on Tuesday, looking
remarkably composed. There was a trace of a smile on his face, something
you wouldn't expect from a man who had just been sentenced to hang.
Why the smile? We don't know, but we have a guess; Saddam believes he is winning. He was condemned for killing 148 people. But 148 people is
beginning to seem like small change in that part of the world. "Well worth
it," a statesman might say of Saddam's murders...if that's what it takes
to maintain order in that godforsaken place. "A bargain," a tactician
could figure, if it helps control the spread of terrorists in that part of
the world. "Indispensable," a strategist might conclude, if it provides a
counterweight to Iran's ambitions.
Some thoughts:
Sadam has a truckload of other charges pending...so will they execute him before or after he faces trial for them?
What's wrong with a woman president? Thatcher was pretty competent!
Colin Powell will not stand. He's already said he wouldn't. Mores the pity...I think he would be superb.
Sadam has a truckload of other charges pending...so will they execute him before or after he faces trial for them?
What's wrong with a woman president? Thatcher was pretty competent!
Colin Powell will not stand. He's already said he wouldn't. Mores the pity...I think he would be superb.
Actually, the consistent thing for the dems to do in support of their argument that the Iraqi war was a mistake, is to ensure the release of Saddam Hussein, and let the UN deal with him, all in their own good time, with their resources.
Sorry Mark, somehow completely missed this post.
McCain is probably the frontrunner for the GOP at the moment. A little too liberal for the hard-line conservatives (read: fundamentalist nutcases) like Jerry Falwell and Pat Robertson, but then I think the Republican Party in general knows the days of persuading voters with fire and brimstone are well and truly over. Though, he is 70 years old.. even Ronald Reagan (the oldest President in history) was younger when he was elected.
There are rumblings Rudy Guiliani may be testing the waters – seems like a great guy, and has a huge (and well deserved profile) after September 11, but I think he is way too liberal for the Conservative Republican base. Pro choice, pro gun control… he isn’t giving those mid-Western rednecks much to think about
I think he would have a great chance in the General Election against whoever the Dems run (he OWNS New York, which is where Hillary would be trying to gain votes), but I just can’t see his own party electing him as nominee. If only he believed in giving everyone access to a gun and no one access to an abortion, he would be the next Republican nominee
Apparently Newt Gingrich is considering running, and while he is definitely conservative enough for Republican voters, I think he is tainted goods after losing the speaker’s job in the mid 90’s. So at the moment, I’d go with McCain as the Republican nominee, though there is definitely room for some competition.
Now, for the Dems… I can’t see Kerry running again. He might test the waters, but with Hilary’s power base in pretty much the same states, he has next to no chance of getting the nod from his own party, let alone winning a General.
Hillary would be the presumptive nominee for the Dems at the moment, though Im hoping there is at least some lively competition entering the Democratic Convention. She certainly polarizes people – in the General Election, she could end up sweeping the north eastern electoral college votes (New York, Pennsylvania, Illinois, Michigan etc), then not get a single nod across the southern sweep (Florida, Texas, California). Maybe in the General if she got a good head of steam up and swept the north east, she could go into Super Tuesday with a good lead and weather the conservative storm. Though her husband certainly came back from the dead during the southern swing, so you just never know.
So, if the election was held next week, I’d say it would be Hillary Clinton (D) and John McCain (R).
But I think there is a huge chance that Barak Obama is going to get a groundswell of support as the time draws nearer… Hugely popular in his home state (70%+ votes in last election), brilliant, charismatic, articulate, dedicated, a bipartisan bridge builder without compromising his views.
From my point of view, he certainly sits where a large number of American voters do on a lot of issues. Im really looking forward to the next 18 months or so to see what sort of support he can drum up – because from where I sit, he has “Leader” written all over him.
I think the Dems have got 2008 sewn up – the entire country seems to have moved to the left after the mid terms, and the only thing stopping a Dem taking the White House might be infighting prior to the Democratic Convention. The only issue is who will run on the bottom of the ticket - a liberal north eastern Democrat need a Vice President who can win votes in the South.
If McCain was to get the Republican nod, and Guiliani agreed to be VP, they would be hard to stop - McCain would sweep the South, while Rudy would steal votes off the Dems in the north east.
The Dems don't really have anyone on the radar at the moment who can win votes in the South as a VP (or Presidential) candidate. Two years is a long time in politics though....
Jamie.
Last edited:
I'm from IL (Obama's state) - and even when he was running for senate 2 years ago, everyone was talking about him running for Pres. He has massive, massive support in IL and for very good reasons. My Dad used to actually work with him - before he got into politics - and can't say enough good about him.
I hope he does!
Cheers,
Jen
Thanks Jamie
Left-field question here, could there be another (but different) Clinton / Gore pairing? (Clinton / Gore, or Gore / Clinton)
Gore's from Tennessee, Clinton's ex Arkansas and now NY. It would appear to be a fairly potent combination.
As I understand it Al Gore isn't talking about another tilt at the top-job again (and I doubt he wants to be VP again) but who knows?
As you say, 2 yrs is a long time in politics.
M
Left-field question here, could there be another (but different) Clinton / Gore pairing? (Clinton / Gore, or Gore / Clinton)
Gore's from Tennessee, Clinton's ex Arkansas and now NY. It would appear to be a fairly potent combination.
As I understand it Al Gore isn't talking about another tilt at the top-job again (and I doubt he wants to be VP again) but who knows?
As you say, 2 yrs is a long time in politics.
M
Thanks Jamie
Left-field question here, could there be another (but different) Clinton / Gore pairing? (Clinton / Gore, or Gore / Clinton)
Gore's from Tennessee, Clinton's ex Arkansas and now NY. It would appear to be a fairly potent combination.
As I understand it Al Gore isn't talking about another tilt at the top-job again (and I doubt he wants to be VP again) but who knows?
As you say, 2 yrs is a long time in politics.
M
Hi Mark
I am a huge, huge fan of Gore. If he ran for President (and I lived in the US
) he would unequivocally have my vote. Tremendous voting record on important issues, hugely popular in states most Dems aren't, great foreign policy knowledge, and untouchable when it comes to the environment (which I think is one of the two or three single issues which will decide the next election).
Being from Tennessee, I'd love to see him on the bottom of the ticket - but I can't see him being interested in that (and rightly so). I think when he says he isnt interested in running, he actually means it - though he has all the qualities of a great President.
In a perfect world, Id have Gore running for President in 2008, and Obama content to play second fiddle until 2012. But I dont think Gore will run.
So heres my tip - Obama / John Edwards. Edwards definitely isnt Presidential material, but he is serviceable as VP, and can win States a northern liberal VP can't. If he runs for the Dem nomination, he will get crushed in the early primaries - hopefully he will then come on board as VP nominee to either Hillary Clinton or Barak Obama.
Hillary's appeal is too narrow for most voters.. she will play well in New England and surrounds, but Iowa, Wisconsin, Illinois? (let alone the South)
I'd love to see Obama get the nod as the Dem nominee. I guess we just have to see if the world's only superpower is ready to elect someone other than a rich, white middle aged man to lead them.
Jamie.
