Dismiss Notice
Join Physics Forums Today!
The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

After Bush's term

  1. Nov 3, 2004 #1
    Who do you think will most likely be the next Republican running for president and why?

    Who do you think will most likely be the next Democrat running for president and why?
     
  2. jcsd
  3. Nov 3, 2004 #2
    Jeb Bush for Republican party not sure about the Democratic Party.
     
  4. Nov 3, 2004 #3

    Gokul43201

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    Unless the Dems find a messiah, or there's a disaster in the next 4 yrs, Guiliani (or McCain??) will win.
     
  5. Nov 3, 2004 #4
    Giuliani vs. Hillary could be interesting
     
  6. Nov 3, 2004 #5

    Gokul43201

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    Interesting, but a whitewash, IMO.
     
  7. Nov 3, 2004 #6
    The only reason I see Hillary possibly winning is the country is ready for a female pres.

    The reason I see Giuliani possibly winning is he has strong leadership

    Realistically, people would vote for the second...
     
  8. Nov 3, 2004 #7

    russ_watters

    User Avatar

    Staff: Mentor

    I despise Hillary, but I think many others who despise her also underrate her. The Republicans need to avoid making the mistake with her that the Dems made with Bush this year: voting based on who you despise will only get you just under a plurality. The fact that a lot of people despise her isn't enough to defeat her.

    This is the reason I predicted the outcome of this election. "Anybody but ___" just doesn't work. You need a real candidate for some people to vote for.
     
  9. Nov 3, 2004 #8
    Giuliani would crush any opponent. Rudy in '08!
     
  10. Nov 3, 2004 #9

    BobG

    User Avatar
    Science Advisor
    Homework Helper

    Republican for 2008 depends on Bush's next four years. Right now, his victory is as much a mandate for the religous right as it is that any war against an Islamic country is a war against terrorism.

    Most likely candidates:

    Bill Frist - would have some appeal to the religous right, fiscal conservatives, and reasonable enough not to alienate the moderates. If Bush's second term goes well, Frist could ride the momentum to a 2008 victory.

    Chuck Hagel - mainstream conservative, enough of an independent streak to take over John McCain's role. He may overdo the independent bit, though. While Lugar pretty much did his job and stated his honest opinion of the state of things in Iraq, Hagel did a pretty enthusiastic dance about how bad things were.

    Rudy Giuliani or George Pataki - very moderate Republicans. A lot of appeal to the general public if Bush's foreign policies aren't successful (the far right wing of the Republican party follows Bush right down the tubes). Additional advantage is avoiding the detailed history that senators have to lug around. Problem is, if they have to distance themselves from the president in power then things aren't going very well for Republicans in general.

    Others:

    Jeb Bush - I think we'd need a reality check for this one. However, if one of Bush's sons had to make a run for president, I wish it would have been this one. At least he accomplished a little on his own.

    McCain's big chance was 2000 - he'll be to old in 2008 to make a serious run.

    Powell has shown no willingness to run and I don't see that changing.

    Democrats have to rethink and regroup. Can any non-southern democrat win the election?

    John Edwards - main disadvantage was the perception he might be a little too shallow to weather a year long campaign; that repeating the same message over and over isn't enough to win an election. Dems may rethink that idea and decide a shallow southern Democrat may be the perfect candidate. The funny thing is that while being a southern Democrat may give the idea that he's at least a moderate, he's actually liberal enough to appeal even to the Dean fans.

    Beyond Edwards, the dems need someone drastically new. Bringing out the old gang of Kerry, Hillary, Gore, Gephardt, Dean or Lieberman just won't do.
    - Hillary might actually be the most conservative of the lot, but carries a lot of baggage from her hubby. Plus, NY Democratic Senator just gives an overwhelming feeling of a very left wing liberal.
    - Lieberman is the least hated (and maybe the most respected), but his likableness is somewhat due to not being able to generate much passion in anyone.
    - Gore. Get real.
    - Gephardt. Could appeal to mainstream dems, but if Frist is the Republican nominee, I'd think they'd want someone to fill the middle.
    - Kerry. If you lose to the Republican that Democrats hate most, can they forgive him?
    - Dean made his run. I don't see him carrying enough respect to make a repeat performance.
    Wesley Clark was a one-time fling and never a very realistic one at that.

    Possible new blood:

    Barack Obama - 2008 is probably too soon for him to make a serious run.

    Anyone else? I don't normally follow Democrats that much in spite of my anti-Bush sentiments.
     
  11. Nov 3, 2004 #10

    GENIERE

    User Avatar
    Science Advisor

    Condi! Condi! Condi!
     
  12. Nov 3, 2004 #11

    BobG

    User Avatar
    Science Advisor
    Homework Helper

    Well, I think Edwards just made his first campaign speech for 2008. Either that or the strangest concession speech I've ever heard.
     
  13. Nov 3, 2004 #12
    Secularism is dying in this country

    Rudy Giuliani, nope will never happen...being from New York he's pro-choice, pro-gay rights and has a scandalous background with women. He wouldn't sell well with the bible belt

    Hmm Jeb Bush, don't see many democrats crossing over to vote for anymore Bushs in 08. They choose him it will be another close race and who wiil be there in Florida for him?

    Hillary is too polarizing figure, people either hate her or like her. Seems like the republicans want her to run more then the democrats.

    Republicans pretty much have a monopoly on power now they will be formidible in 08.

    Democrats need to run a centrist candid plus be from the south preferably a governer to have a chance.
     
  14. Nov 3, 2004 #13

    Gokul43201

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    Credentials please ?
     
  15. Nov 3, 2004 #14
    Giuliani a playboy? I have my doubts. You know when he was suffering from prostate cancer his ex-wife would get up in the morning to run on the treadmill, with the noise waking him up. When he needed something such as medicine he would fetch it himself and clean up after himself as well. And he never said anything about this

    Does this sound like a caring, supportive wife to you?

    Part of the reason he left his wife is she wasn't there for him and the woman he's dating now, a former nurse took care of him during the time he needed it the most.
     
    Last edited: Nov 3, 2004
  16. Nov 4, 2004 #15
     
  17. Nov 4, 2004 #16

    russ_watters

    User Avatar

    Staff: Mentor

    http://www.whitehouse.gov/nsc/ricebio.html

    Much more qualified than Hillary.

    Regarding Rudy, if people didn't care that Clinton was a playboy at best and a rapist at worst, why would they care about Rudy being a playboy? Also, Rudy may be to the left, but he has something that most Democrats don't realize Republicans really care about (because they don't care about it): leadership. I would vote for a Democrat if he was a good leader.

    That said, the religious right is certainly a force to be reconed with.
     
    Last edited: Nov 4, 2004
  18. Nov 4, 2004 #17

    BobG

    User Avatar
    Science Advisor
    Homework Helper

    That was the religous right making racial slurs against McCain's adopted daughter? Whichever group, their attacks on McCain's family went beyond 'taking him down'. They were disgusting and a comment from Bush acknowledging that fact should have been a no-brainer.
     
  19. Nov 4, 2004 #18

    Gokul43201

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    Let me rephrase, since I wasn't clear the first time.

    How is Condi qualified to become President ? And what are some of her successes ?
     
  20. Nov 4, 2004 #19
    "The actual responsibility for it really would be for the troops that were there," Giuliani said on NBC's "Today" show. "Did they search carefully enough?

    Scapegoating the military, yeap great leadership.
     
  21. Nov 4, 2004 #20

    russ_watters

    User Avatar

    Staff: Mentor

    Context?
    If you want to be technical, the only qualification is that you be a 35 year old natural-born citizen. But for actual qualifications, I consider being a pHd in Poly Sci and holding the 2nd highest cabinet position to be some pretty good qualifications. Certainly better than Hillary's qualification: 'I was married to a guy who was President.' (I didn't bring the topic up).
     
Know someone interested in this topic? Share this thread via Reddit, Google+, Twitter, or Facebook

Have something to add?



Similar Discussions: After Bush's term
  1. Bush Bush Bush (Replies: 6)

  2. The Bush Effect (Replies: 12)

  3. Bush loosing it (Replies: 39)

  4. Bush Doctrine. (Replies: 10)

Loading...