Newt Gingrich.

Is he electable? I'm not sure. But he has my vote in the primaries, unless I need to vote for a democrat instead. One of the joys of being an independent...

Anyway, the man is a genius, and d@mn fine leader, as everyone knows from his time as Speaker of the House. The man gets stuff done. How do I know he is what this country needs the most? The democrats LOATH him. In their eyes, the only thing worse than a dumb republican (to them: Bush), is a smart republican.

He had his new book out, and it did farley well. Also, no one is seriously considering him. This keeps the democrats from attacking him in favor of other targets. He is very smart, and is currently shielded from attacks.

Have I blown his cover?!?!

I kind of doubt he is electable. He is simply too awful as a human being (cheating on his wife while she died of cancer?) Too really garner popular support.

In ancient history, Newt would have been the prefect High Priest, but not the King.

Newt, 2008? Yeah, I would dearly love seeing that! Go ahead.

Newt is pretty much the only guy who could actually ###### things up badly enough to possibly lose to Hillary 08.

Thankfully for us Republicans, Hillary is who is most likely to get the Democratic Nomination, and it would be a big shocker if Newt got the Republican nod.

The GOP is would have to try to lose a Presidential election, when the opponent is Hillary Clinton.

Got to agree with that one... Bush has built his support primarily along religious grounds. Newt just wouldn't fit in.

YUP Newt Gingrich is part of the Bohemian Grove, Bilderberg (skull and bones?) etc. clique so I think your probably hitting the nail square on the head there.

sorry, but for GOP 'o8, your pretty much stuck with McCain the Pain...

I'm for Condoleeza.

good god, why?!!?

you fall in love with the first minority skirt in high office?

nigga please!

i cant vote for anyone, no matter how smart or brilliant or sexy in thigh highs, unless they actively speak their opinion.

i would rahter see Rummy run than Condi...

She could put Hillary in her place of ignominy which she deserves.

She also would send a very powerful message of what America really is around the world.
We need to show the world how we can get off any racist nonsense which we are accused of.

She is strong and smart. Which also sends the right signals. She would be a leader not a poll taker.

there is absolutely no evidence that she wouldnt ride the polls...

and she must first win the GOP primaries.

she will not run, i think.


and Hilary would eat her for breakfast.

The more I think about it the more I like the idea of Condoleeza as prez.
But I'm a little nuts anyway!

my dream ticket is Tommy Franks and Rumsfeld...

you think your crazy??

Not really. But some of my family think so because I live in Thailand.

hahahaha .... same here.

Anyway, Condi will probably run sooner or later, Interestingly, when Rove was prepping Bush for his Governers race agianst Ann Richards he brought in Condi to tutor Bush in the ways of the world....


I'm not real sure about her prospects, though ... the clips of her towing the BushCo line, such as at the FCC commission and the somewhat famous "OBL Determined to Strike Within The US" clip might really create a lot of doubt about her if used properly

Also, Bush's support is coming mainly from white southern Chiristians, and a lot of defranchised ones, too. While she would most certainly pick up a lot of 'race' votes, she'd lose a lot of them as well, perhaps a lot as well - maybe too many ...

I'm with you BobOhBoy! Condi would be absolutely fantabulous as a president. I'm afraid I am going to have to disagree with ghouillo (who BTW I'm glad to see back ), but Condi would eat Hill for breakfast..................Condi would win hands down, because she'd take the black vote away from the Hildebeast. Those uppity Democrats would have a hard time explaining their bias against her without sounding racist. (Thinking of that, ghouillo, shame on you! )

Just playing Devil's Advocate, why do you think she would be an "absolutely fantabulous" president? Surely beating one's opponent does not make them a winning President. Does anyone know what she stands for? What is her philosophy? And doesn't one REALLY have to want the job?

As far as her philosophy, she was picked by Bush to be his right-hand man whose judgment I trust. Her history speaks for itself.

1)She's a poised/ intelligent person with great insight who has brought common sense and solutions to the problems she's addressed on her tours with the various foreign dignataries in her recent tours, and as I remember has won some surprising concessions from these hardened folk. This has been underplayed in the media.

2)She is an expert on Soviet and German culture and history, which I'm sure is the reason she was served in some of her positions in the past. She has received various honors, including 4-5 honorary doctrates,as well as receiving awards for her teaching in her area of expertise of political science. She also has a PhD in International Studies, and has served in various governmental positions with great success: National Security Advisor to President Bush; Director, and then Senior Director, of Soviet and East European Affairs in the National Security Council under the first Bush; served as Special Assistant to the Director of Joint Chiefs of Staff in 1968.


3)She speaks several foreign languages which has helped her talk directly to those she visited which I'm sure has helped her win the arguments in which she has been involved.

4) Bush has given her his blessing through Laura.

Here's a link: http://www.whitehouse.gov/nsc/ricebio.html

Dr. Condoleezza Rice became the Assistant to the President for National Security Affairs, commonly referred to as the National Security Advisor, on January 22, 2001.

In June 1999, she completed a six year tenure as Stanford University 's Provost, during which she was the institution's chief budget and academic officer. As Provost she was responsible for a $1.5 billion annual budget and the academic program involving 1,400 faculty members and 14,000 students.

As professor of political science, Dr. Rice has been on the Stanford faculty since 1981 and has won two of the highest teaching honors -- the 1984 Walter J. Gores Award for Excellence in Teaching and the 1993 School of Humanities and Sciences Dean's Award for Distinguished Teaching.

At Stanford, she has been a member of the Center for International Security and Arms Control, a Senior Fellow of the Institute for International Studies, and a Fellow (by courtesy) of the Hoover Institution. Her books include Germany Unified and Europe Transformed (1995) with Philip Zelikow, The Gorbachev Era (1986) with Alexander Dallin, and Uncertain Allegiance: The Soviet Union and the Czechoslovak Army (1984). She also has written numerous articles on Soviet and East European foreign and defense policy, and has addressed audiences in settings ranging from the U.S. Ambassador's Residence in Moscow to the Commonwealth Club to the 1992 and 2000 Republican National Conventions.

From 1989 through March 1991, the period of German reunification and the final days of the Soviet Union, she served in the Bush Administration as Director, and then Senior Director, of Soviet and East European Affairs in the National Security Council, and a Special Assistant to the President for National Security Affairs. In 1986, while an international affairs fellow of the Council on Foreign Relations, she served as Special Assistant to the Director of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. In 1997, she served on the Federal Advisory Committee on Gender -- Integrated Training in the Military.

She was a member of the boards of directors for the Chevron Corporation, the Charles Schwab Corporation, the William and Flora Hewlett Foundation, and many others.

Born November 14, 1954 in Birmingham, Alabama, she earned her bachelor's degree in political science, cum laude and Phi Beta Kappa, from the University of Denver in 1974; her master's from the University of Notre Dame in 1975; and her Ph.D. from the Graduate School of International Studies at the University of Denver in 1981. She is a Fellow of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences and has been awarded honorary doctorates from Morehouse College in 1991, the University of Alabama in 1994, the University of Notre Dame in 1995, the National Defense University in 2002, the Mississippi College School of Law in 2003, the University of Louisville and Michigan State University in 2004. She resides in Washington, D.C.

I am well aware of these things Solo, however where does she stand on Issues? That is what I am interested in learning. What does she think about Federalism? What is her opinion of the "so called" Seperation of Church and State"? And many other things as well.

Do you know where she stands on policy?

No. Do you? I don't put as much emphasis upon the Federalist-thing as you do. The Fedralist viewpoint is certainly important, but from what I can tell there are precious few that hold to this in the manner you would like for them to. Tell me...........what are some of the possibles for 08 and what are their stance on Federalism? And, church & State?

And, from that viewpoint, whom would you recommend because of their stances on these issues? I really would like to know.

You make my point here. I do not know what she stands for, and neither do you. So why is everyone so hopped up for her? I can take a guess though. I suspect that it is all about Hillary Rodham and the prospect of her becoming president.

Am I correct?

You've ignored my questions. I've answered yours.

In answer to your questions: no; don't know; again, don't know.



I have no recommendations for the Republicans. That is why I will most likely vote for the Libertarian candidate.

The totally surprising thing is that I really like Gulianni, although he is a bit too much fo a Federalist for me. But I do like him for his honesty, and forthright convictions.

Thanks.

I see yu are having the same problem with quotes that I am, still.

To answer your question about Condi, part of the attraction is that she could face off Hill, but I also think she could do it better than any man that I know of. She has class, intelligence, and I have the same gut feeling for her that I had for Bush. Yes, he has run up the budget, but he's also had 2 hurricanes of national disaster proportions, plus the war in Iraq and Afgannie, plus the $$ put out to spy with. Surely, this wasn't in the budget prior to 2000.

Rice's qualification is that Bush chose her, and Bush has good judgement?????

Face it, republictrons, you don't have ANYBODY who is an ANYBODY for 2008. Auntie Ricey is a cipher compared to the POLITICAL GIANT that is the NEXT PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES, THE FIRST PRESIDENT WITH A KNOWN VAGINA:

PRESIDENT HILLARY CLINTON
Yipppeeee!!!!!

Actually I think Kerry or Gore will be the Democratic nominee. I'm kind of depressed that these political consultants would think the American people are so vacuous that they'd vote for Hillary because she's a woman or Condi because she's a black woman.

Gore isn't even running!

Yes, he is. He's been making provocative speeches lately, and putting his old financial network back together. Remember all those speeches he made where he was yelling and criticizing and Bush and Republicans thought he had gone crazy? Why do you think he was making those speeches?

NO! No he is NOT running. OK????

http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/wireStory?i...TC-RSSFeeds0312

When a potential presidential candidate says they don't want to run, what they really mean is "Let's wait and see and if in a year I think I have a chance then I'll run.

Uh huh. Yes, in some cases. NOT in Gore's case. He is TOTALLY OVER!

Certainly not in his mind. He is of the grandest of illusions, thinking that he is all that important. What a Jerk, this Algore fellow.

Gore has been keeping a high profile. He's doing this because he intends to run again. He realizes that Hillary and others made a mistake by supporting the Iraq War(because its become so unpopular), so now he figures he can appeal to the core Left, which is getting more numerous because of Bush's polarizing effect. The number of centrist Democrats are decreasing, which is good news for Gore, considering his extreme criticisms of Bush and the Iraq War.

Kerry might run.
Feingold is running.
They are both to the left of Hillary.
Gore is smarter than you think. He knows a run for him now is hopeless. He is history. His chance was stolen and that is the end of it.

First of all, Kerry is definitely running. I know this because I have been getting almost bi-weekly emails from his website since his defeat. He's kept all the information he got from people who registered at his website and is aggresively using that info to continue campaigning. Besides that he kept a great deal of the money from his campaign.

Second, Kerry may be left of Hillary, but his support of the war is going to be a problem for him. He tried to have it both ways this last election, and now that the Democrat electorate largely believes the war to be a failure(not to mention a majority of Americans), his past assertions that there was *some* value in the war are going to hurt him.

Third, never underestimate people's ability to hope. I think Gore thinks he has another chance - and he does.

Yes, I agree, Kerry is probably running.
However, I can't even imagine how anyone in their right mind could get excited about a Gore run. I think you are delusional.

Well, you think wrong.

Gore's defeat has been vindicated in the eyes of Democrats because of Bush's huge unpopularity. He has large name recognition with most Americans. He's in the strange position where he can campaign as both a Leftist and a centrist: a Leftist because of his recent and scathing attacks on Bush, a centrist because he has a centrist Congressional record. Plus, I've read that his financial network is a lot better than Hillary's.

I would prefer him to Hillary. And I think a lot of Democrats would. Don't think Hillary is going to win because she's a woman.

We will have to agree to disagree. I can assure you that you are in the minority being excited about a warmed over Gore run. I think a candidate to the left of Hillary might have a shot for the nomination, but not Kerry, Feingold, or Gore, so who would this be?
Hillary has the strongest lock on the nomination EVER. She has everything going for her to get nominated.

Except for one little thing: she doesn't have a charismatic personality. Wait, that's not such a little thing, is it? Like I said, her only 'lock' is that she's a woman and the wife of a former president. These things aren't enough to take her all the way.

Prior to Iowa 2004, who would have thought Kerry would be #1 and Edwards #2? Very few people. So being in the minority about who's going to win the candidacy isn't proof of inaccuracy.

Hillary has MEGABUCKS and the ability to keep raising MEGABUCKS. She blows away all demos and republicans too in that department.

The most important thing to winning a political race is the indefinable thing called 'charisma'. Hillary doesn't have it.... all the money in the world can't make up for its lack.

Keep telling yourself that. And she isn't that bad charisma wise anyway.

Hillary is far too powerful within the DNC to have the nomination denied to her. She will get it.

However, when it comes to the General Election, a McCain/Romney ticket, which is the most likely GOP ticket, would steamroll her.

Why is Hillary powerful within the DNC? As George Stephanopoulos once quoted, and this is a paraphrase, but it was something like "There is no central Democratic party, whoever can raise money from special interests can run." I don't see why Hillary can do that better than any of the other prominent candidates.

I think right now Kerry or Gore have the best shot. Tom Vilsack may have a shot too.

So, you are discounting Gov. Bill Richardson?

Well, he might have a shot, isn't he the one that recently got caught lying about playing pro-baseball? Doesn't seem like he has good political judgement. Evan Bayh may have a shot too.

You got me on the 'baseball' part. Since pro baseball also includes Class A, AA, and AAA league, he may have been there, I don't know.