If Obama Ran in 08

[Aimster]

I'd vote for him

 

[slash196]

Yes and yes. He'd beat the tar out of any other candidate. MAKE THAT MAN RUN. I DON'T WANT THE DEMOCRATS SHOOTING THEMSELVES IN THE FOOT AGAIN.

edit: whoa, i forgot that this board is censored, so the f-word got deleted...and just happened to have the same number of letters as the n-word. changed it to something more appropriate

 

[johnnobts]

uhm, the freshman senator? what's he done? executive/legislative experience? oh wait, he's black and a democrat, so clearly a winner.

would i vote for him? not at the moment.

 

[eits]

i'd vote for him if he could convince me that he'd be a better uniter than john mccain, which is a hard thing to do.

as it stands right now, i'd vote mccain over everyone else.

 

[Aimster]

Do you think his race will play against him?

 

[eits]

only in red states

 

[Don Vito Corleone]

He might get my vote (though I don't really think he's adequately seasoned to be President), but he's not electable at this point. I think he's a brilliant man and he looks like the brighest light on the horizon for the Democratic party.

 

[Lemon law]

He has some certain appeal---A politician who can acually think--and does not have to rely on scripted slogans---but more likely to be a VP canididate first. 08 is a long way away.
But if the dems get senate control in 06---Obama may shape some important legislation--get national recognition---and get tested on a national stage.

Right now Obama is just with the backup band---and no one listens.---but on foreign trips---Obama seems to have some major league charisma.

 

[her209]

He seems like a bright young guy.

 

[slash196]

Originally posted by: johnnobts
uhm, the freshman senator? what's he done? executive/legislative experience? oh wait, he's black and a democrat, so clearly a winner.

would i vote for him? not at the moment.

It's really not hard to learn the job if you're not a complete idiot. Obama is smart, he's fresh in Washington so he's not greasy with corruption.

VP? Eliot Spitzer. PLEASE. PLEASE.

 

[Strk]

Originally posted by: johnnobts
uhm, the freshman senator? what's he done? executive/legislative experience? oh wait, he's black and a democrat, so clearly a winner.

would i vote for him? not at the moment.

As opposed to a brief stint as governor of Texas? Honestly, as a senator, he's probably had more experience than a lot of our presidents who were originally governors in matters of the federal government.

 

[imported_Lothar]

He's not electable.

 

[Craig234]

I think he's weak as a candidate for president compared to other democrats.

If he got the nomination, I'd vote for him over the republican.

As for John McCain, I'm not impressed. I think there's not a little bit of phoniness to his act.

 

[ProfJohn]

Looking at history the last President to be elected and not be a governor or a VP?

Was it JFK? Since then
Nixon,-Cali. Carter-Georgia. Reagan-Cali. Bush-Nada, but he was VP, Clinton-Arkansas. Bush-Texas.

That means it looks bad for Obama, Clinton, McCain etc.

BTW: How many Senators have lost the election lately? Kerry, Gore (was a senator then VP) Dole, Mondale... see a pattern? Being a senator is almost a death sentence on desire to be President. Wasn?t LBJ last senator to be President?

 

[ProfJohn]

Anybody else read Giuliani's book? I think he would make a good President. Great leadership skills, I like his "style" of leadership. He was really good at putting accountability into New York City where there hadn't been any.

 

[Don Vito Corleone]

Originally posted by: ProfJohn
Looking at history the last President to be elected and not be a governor or a VP?

Was it JFK? Since then
Nixon,-Cali. Carter-Georgia. Reagan-Cali. Bush-Nada, but he was VP, Clinton-Arkansas. Bush-Texas.

That means it looks bad for Obama, Clinton, McCain etc.

BTW: How many Senators have lost the election lately? Kerry, Gore (was a senator then VP) Dole, Mondale... see a pattern? Being a senator is almost a death sentence on desire to be President. Wasn?t LBJ last senator to be President?

This is true as a historical matter, but I wonder whether correlation = causation as to this issue. Obviously Gore was in fact an incumbent VP, and I think Kerry, Dole, Gore and Mondale all suffered from problems as candidates that had nothing to do with their political backgrounds (specifically, Dole was ancient and running against a popular incumbent, and Kerry, Gore and Mondale were perceived (largely correctly IMO) as charmless technocrats). I think the larger problems with Obama as a Presidential candidate are his ethnicity (which will make him electable in some otherwise-winnable districts) and his relative inexperience (though I share the view of a prior poster that President Bush's service in what is, as a matter of administrative law, the weakest gubernatorial post in the United States is a fairly thin qualification for President as well).

 

[Don Vito Corleone]

Originally posted by: ProfJohn
Anybody else read Giuliani's book? I think he would make a good President. Great leadership skills, I like his "style" of leadership. He was really good at putting accountability into New York City where there hadn't been any.

Giuliani would be a perfectly decent President IMO, but he's not nominatible by today's Republican party. He is pro-choice and has a rather chequered personal past that will not survive the scrutiny of the religious right.

 

[slash196]

Originally posted by: Lothar
He's not electable.

Self-fulfilling prophecy.

We can't elect a person because he's unelectable. See the circular logic?

 

[ProfJohn]

Originally posted by: DonVito

Originally posted by: ProfJohn
Anybody else read Giuliani's book? I think he would make a good President. Great leadership skills, I like his "style" of leadership. He was really good at putting accountability into New York City where there hadn't been any.

Giuliani would be a perfectly decent President IMO, but he's not nominatible by today's Republican party. He is pro-choice and has a rather chequered personal past that will not survive the scrutiny of the religious right.

You may be right, but it will be very hard to tell how things shake out if it is McCain and Giuliani fighting it out, who does the right take?
Newt is VERY popular on the right, but he has weaknesses and would be better for his presence in the race as he will help to define issues, I could see him in a cabinet position. No one can deny his ability as a speaker and he ability to "frame" issues.
Mitt Romney seems to pop up a lot in conservative circles as well, could be a good candidate, governor, will place the North East into play, not sure if he is popular enough to win Mass though... Imagine a Giuliani/Romney ticket, would give the Dems huge fits having to defend New York and Mass... hmmmm need to send an e-mail to uncle Karl

 

[Don Vito Corleone]

Originally posted by: ProfJohn

You may be right, but it will be very hard to tell how things shake out if it is McCain and Giuliani fighting it out, who does the right take?
Newt is VERY popular on the right, but he has weaknesses and would be better for his presence in the race as he will help to define issues, I could see him in a cabinet position. No one can deny his ability as a speaker and he ability to "frame" issues.
Mitt Romney seems to pop up a lot in conservative circles as well, could be a good candidate, governor, will place the North East into play, not sure if he is popular enough to win Mass though... Imagine a Giuliani/Romney ticket, would give the Dems huge fits having to defend New York and Mass... hmmmm need to send an e-mail to uncle Karl

They'd take McCain and not be 100% happy about it. I still think the real candidate will be someone we may not yet have thought of. Romney is certainly a possibility, but I still wouldn't rule out someone much more conservative (a la Jeb Bush or Bill Frist). At this moment my sense is that a Frist-type candidate would struggle against a moderate Democrat, but the Republicans have shown they can get even the most radical candidates elected. McCain is more conservative than most people really understand, but the Republicans seem to want candidates who wear their heart on their sleeve when it comes to "family values," not someone with a sense of irony like McCain.

Contrary to your logic, I don't know that a Guiliani/Romney ticket would work well. They would still DEFINITELY lose New York (which would elect Mark Foley, running as a Democrat, for President before it would vote for a Republican) and likely Massachusetts as well, and all of a sudden the Southern states wouldn't seem so obviously winnable, particularly if the Democratic ticket included a Southerner.

 

[imported_Lothar]

Originally posted by: slash196

Originally posted by: Lothar
He's not electable.

Self-fulfilling prophecy.

We can't elect a person because he's unelectable. See the circular logic?

I never said I wouldn't vote for him, I said he's not electable.

Originally posted by: ProfJohn
a Giuliani/Romney ticket, would give the Dems huge fits having to defend New York and Mass... hmmmm need to send an e-mail to uncle Karl

Romney won't win in Mass.

 

[ProfJohn]

Originally posted by: DonVito

Originally posted by: ProfJohn

You may be right, but it will be very hard to tell how things shake out if it is McCain and Giuliani fighting it out, who does the right take?
Newt is VERY popular on the right, but he has weaknesses and would be better for his presence in the race as he will help to define issues, I could see him in a cabinet position. No one can deny his ability as a speaker and he ability to "frame" issues.
Mitt Romney seems to pop up a lot in conservative circles as well, could be a good candidate, governor, will place the North East into play, not sure if he is popular enough to win Mass though... Imagine a Giuliani/Romney ticket, would give the Dems huge fits having to defend New York and Mass... hmmmm need to send an e-mail to uncle Karl

They'd take McCain and not be 100% happy about it. I still think the real candidate will be someone we may not yet have thought of. Romney is certainly a possibility, but I still wouldn't rule out someone much more conservative (a la Jeb Bush or Bill Frist). At this moment my sense is that a Frist-type candidate would struggle against a moderate Democrat, but the Republicans have shown they can get even the most radical candidates elected. McCain is more conservative than most people really understand, but the Republicans seem to want candidates who wear their heart on their sleeve when it comes to "family values," not someone with a sense of irony like McCain.

Contrary to your logic, I don't know that a Guiliani/Romney ticket would work well. They would still DEFINITELY lose New York (which would elect Mark Foley, running as a Democrat, for President before it would vote for a Republican) and likely Massachusetts as well, and all of a sudden the Southern states wouldn't seem so obviously winnable, particularly if the Democratic ticket included a Southerner.

I like Jeb, he is everything his brother is not and a great speaker, but he is still a Bush, if he can change his name then he could win. Make a good cabinet member though since he can't run for much down here, unless he wants to be in congress.

 

[LunarRay]

Originally posted by: ProfJohn
Looking at history the last President to be elected and not be a governor or a VP?

Was it JFK? Since then
Nixon,-Cali. Carter-Georgia. Reagan-Cali. Bush-Nada, but he was VP, Clinton-Arkansas. Bush-Texas.

That means it looks bad for Obama, Clinton, McCain etc.

BTW: How many Senators have lost the election lately? Kerry, Gore (was a senator then VP) Dole, Mondale... see a pattern? Being a senator is almost a death sentence on desire to be President. Wasn?t LBJ last senator to be President?

Don't recall Nixon being governor of Cal... he was Senator and VP
Johnson was Senator and VP
But the substance of your post I sorta agree with... but mainly for the amount of high negs that one can attain in the Senate... Especially Clinton.. She can be double neg'd on some issues.. like health care... imagine the fodder that would give... Sure increase that taxpayer's burden more, Ms. Clinton... hehehhe

 

[LunarRay]

There are two that I think have great shots from both sides voter wise.. One is Kerrey of Nebraska.. MoH winner and astute businessman.. And Clinton's Sec of Def... Senator ... dang .. forgot his name.. heheheheh but him...

It seems everyone else in the Senate or in the Governor's seat have too low positives except for Arnold .... but he can't run... Married to Shriver... a Kennedy ... Dang.. I'd vote for him... I rather like his politics.. even if he is a bit more right than I would want...

Edit: John McCain is not going to win his primary if he runs... the Keating issue is STILL around his neck.. on a national vista

 

[BoberFett]

I think we're due for either a black or female president, if for nothing more than breaking the status quo.