# Presidential Candidates 2008

• News

Our government is held hostage by an entrenched 2-party system that is corrupt and is dedicated to preserving the status quo for their wealthy backers. The difference between the Republican and Democratic parties is no greater than the difference between Coke and Pepsi, or Time and Newsweek. This system guarantees that real independent-thinking, caring leaders are marginalized. We need some progressive populist leaders in this country to turn things around, improve access to health care and education and reverse the ever-widening gap between the wealthy the wage-earners. It will not happen until we force election reforms and reduce the influence of the two major parties by drying up their flow of donations.

I am so in agreement here, how I yearn for a more parliamentary form of gov't! BTW i stopped donating to DNC precisely for this reason and give these monies to Common Cause, Move On, etc.
J

BobG
Homework Helper
Have Republicans hit on the magic recipe for winning the '08 election? Nominate a former actor. Worked for Reagan. Worked for Schwarzenagger. Why couldn't it work for Fred Thompson?

Well, for one thing, Thompson's not a Christian - at least according to James Dobson http://www.usnews.com/usnews/news/articles/070328/28dobson.htm. Protestant and Catholics don't qualify as true Christians. That probably applies to Mormons, as well. That makes Gingrich a much more viable threat to McCain-Giuliani than any of the other Republican candidates.

Either that, or Dobson's just managed to top his 'Squarepants Bob' comment for stupidity.

Last edited by a moderator:
Staff Emeritus
I hope Fred Thompson runs!

Re: James Dobson Focus on Family Founder Snubs Thompson - :rofl:

That is a great endorsement as far as I'm concerned!

BobG
Homework Helper

At least there was no doubt that Reagan knew why he wanted to be President. Obama made a mistake by showing up at a conference specifically about health care and had nothing more substantial than the excuse that his campaign was still young. That seems more of an attitude that he wants to be President and will decide why he wants to be President later on.

At least Edwards seemed to learn from his 2004 campaign when critics wondered what he'd do once he had to go beyond his "Two Americas" speech.

Staff Emeritus
[Fred] Thompson Announces He Has Lymphoma
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=9521083
by Don Gonyea
All Things Considered, April 11, 2007 · Fred Thompson, television actor and former senator, announced today he has a form of lymphoma, but that his cancer is in remission.

The 64-year-old from Tennessee left the door open for a possible presidential bid in 2008. He is already among the leading candidates in polls of Republican voters.
Get Well, Fred! I hope you are around for a few more decades.

Staff Emeritus
Pining for Another Presidential Candidate
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=9552395

NPR.org, April 12, 2007 · The political community has a history of surveying the field of presidential candidates and wishing someone else would get in the race. We've seen this time and again; usually it happens when voters of a particular party are dissatisfied with their choices and pessimistic about their chances in the next election. . . . .

That leads us to 2008. Democrats, it seems, are happy with their choices. That may not be the case with many Republicans. An unpopular war and an unpopular president have a way of dampening enthusiasm among a party's core base, and that seems to be what's happening now in the GOP. Plus, for a party that prides itself on conservative principles, the three leading contenders for '08 — Arizona Sen. John McCain, former NYC Mayor Rudy Giuliani and ex-Gov. Mitt Romney of Massachusetts — leave much to be desired.

That may explain the appeal of former Sen. Fred Thompson (R-TN) and ex-House Speaker Newt Gingrich of Georgia, two non-candidates (so far) who are drawing double-digit support in most national polls.

. . . .
It will be interesting to see where things are one year from now - and then 18 months from now, just weeks before the national election - Tuesday, November 4, 2008. I am sure Iraq and Afghanistan will still be an issue. Bush will still be president for the following 11 weeks until Jan 20, 2009.

Staff Emeritus
Obama placed under Secret Service protection
http://www.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/05/03/obama.protection/index.html

Story Highlights
• NEW: No specific, credible threat known, sources say
• NEW: Protection comes at request of Obama campaign
• Homeland security secretary authorizes protection detail

(CNN) -- Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama, a U.S. senator from Illinois, has been placed under the protection of the Secret Service, the agency said Thursday.

The government is not aware of any specific, credible threat against Obama, according to a law enforcement source familiar with the decision. But the campaign has received hate mail, calls and other "threatening materials" in the past and during his campaign, the source said.

Three Obama campaign officials who discussed the issue on condition of anonymity said there was no specific threat against the candidate.
Hmmm. Not a good sign.

BobG
Homework Helper
Good debate last night. After listening to that debate, I'm definitely voting for Reagan in '08. :rofl:

Huckabee looked like the big winner, followed by Gilmore. Both needed exposure and both came across very well. Hunter's performance would have been very good for a front runner, but I don't think he did anything to lift himself out of second (or third) tier status.

Among the big three, Romney probably came across the best. I don't think the debate decided anything between the big three.

Still, an interesting contrast between how McCain, Giuliani, and Romney handled issues that they knew would be problems for them. McCain confronted them straight up while Giuliani tried to massage his answers to take off some of the edge. I didn't think Giuliani did a very good job of what he was trying to do. Romney just blew off the problem issues and answered more desirable (unasked) questions. He projected a better image than McCain and Giuliani and I wonder how many viewers saw through some of his tactics to avoid problem issues.

Thompson did badly and was the big loser. Too bad. If the quiz on On the Issues is to be believed, he's probably best match for my own views (followed by Gilmore, Biden, Richardson, McCain, and Clinton?!).

Paul was an interesting phenomenon. The internet was flooded with Paul supporters after the debate. I just have my doubts that was a spontaneous reaction to Paul's performance in the debate. He pretty much confirmed that he ranks with Brownback and Tancredo as candidates I definitely won't vote for (strangely, on the quiz, Obama and Paul came out with identical ratings when compared to my views).

Brian Williams did a lot better job as moderator in the Dem debate than Matthews did with the Rep debate. Matthews was very noticeable and still failed to control the flow very well.

Last edited:
Staff Emeritus
Romney just blew off the problem issues and answered more desirable (unasked) questions.
I don't like politicians who avoid answer questions, and then try to change the topic.

If I was are reporter, I'd then ask "Please answer the ***** question," which is why I am not a reporter.

Frankly I'm mystified by the Reagan thing--replete with voodoo economics, huge deficits, insane military spending, a man so completely misinformed an embarrassment, cut backs for all forms of social funding, and at least three invasions. Kind of what we have been doing for the past 6 plus years.

Staff Emeritus
Good debate last night. After listening to that debate, I'm definitely voting for Reagan in '08. :rofl:

Huckabee looked like the big winner, followed by Gilmore. Both needed exposure and both came across very well. Hunter's performance would have been very good for a front runner, but I don't think he did anything to lift himself out of second (or third) tier status.

GOP starts to chart its post-Bush course

Story Highlights
• First debate marks look ahead to life after Bush presidency
• Some yearn for return to heyday of Reagan "morning in America"
• Others say Reagan was unique personality for a unique era
We certainly did not have fiscal discipline under Reagen who run up huge deficits.

Again we have collective delusional thinking! Unbelieveable.

Paul was an interesting phenomenon. The internet was flooded with Paul supporters after the debate. I just have my doubts that was a spontaneous reaction to Paul's performance in the debate. He pretty much confirmed that he ranks with Brownback and Tancredo as candidates I definitely won't vote for (strangely, on the quiz, Obama and Paul came out with identical ratings when compared to my views).

I am not a big fan of Brownback or Tancredo either, but Senator Paul stood out in my eyes more than those two. He ran as a Libertarian in '98 and came in 3rd. There also seems to be a Libertarian movement beginning to catch on. I think he'll turn out to be much more successful than was expected.

vanesch
Staff Emeritus
Gold Member
Hey, if you're really without inspiration, in France there's Chirac who's looking soon for a job...
:rofl: :rofl:

Staff Emeritus
Nebraska's Hagel Faces Political War at Home
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=10464131

All Things Considered, May 26, 2007 · Senator Chuck Hagel, the Nebraska Republican, has made the anti-war community pay attention to his repeated criticism of how President Bush has handled the war in Iraq.

He's also spoken of his disappointment with the GOP and hinted about an independent presidential candidacy.

His comments have angered some of his fellow Republicans in the Cornhusker State. Nebraska Attorney General Jon Bruning says he plans to challenge Hagel in next year's GOP primary for U.S. Senate.

It would be interesting if he ran as an independent. But is that likely?

phoenixy
Ron Paul has replaced McCain the fallen angel as that special candidate in my heart. He and I disagree on a lot of issue, yet he commands my respect. His integrity, boldness, credential, and fond use of logic in his reasoning is a rare sight and sound in the mud puddle we call American politics this day.

He is the voice. If he speaks loud enough he just might turn some deaf ear.

BobG
Homework Helper
Nebraska's Hagel Faces Political War at Home
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=10464131

It would be interesting if he ran as an independent. But is that likely?

If he runs, it guarantees defeat for the Republican candidate.

To be honest, Hagel would be the perfect Republican candidate. He would be acceptable to social conservatives. He'd be acceptable to fiscal conservatives. The only Republicans that would be upset by him would be the neo-cons. He opposes the war in Iraq pretty strongly and opposes the wiretapping provisions in the Patriot Act.

Of course, barring a drastic change in momentum in Iraq, the top 3 Republican candidates might be doomed in a general election even without Hagel in the mix. Support for the Iraq war only exists among Republicans and it's down to 54% even among them. Democrats and Independents overwhelmingly disapprove of how Bush has conducted the war.

Take Iraq off the table as an issue and things probably get a lot dicier for Democrats. Both parties are pulled by the extremes in their party and neither really capture the desires of the majority of voters. Take Iraq off the table, and you'd have the same problem with a choice of Hagel or a Democrat - he's definitely a strong conservative on most issues.

He could do better than Perot did in spite of that, since he could pick up quite a few disenchanted Republicans and he'd pick up quite a few Dems that won't vote for either Clinton or Obama. I wonder if he could actually win a few red states, throwing the election into a decision by Congress.

Staff Emeritus
Election 2008
Republican Fundraising Slips
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=11043081
by Steve Inskeep and Juan Williams

Morning Edition, June 14, 2007 · Republican donors don't seem to be shelling out as much money as they have in the past at this point in the presidential race. Republicans haven't been able to persuade donors that the Republicans are on the way to the White House given no heir apparent, nor definitive frontrunner.

Huckabee's Appeal Doesn't Help Presidential Bid
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=11043084
by David Greene

Morning Edition, June 14, 2007 · Republican presidential candidate Mike Huckabee is an ordained Baptist minister, former governor of Arkansas, and has conservative credentials. Still, his poll results hover in low single-digit range.

McCain Continues to Lag Behind in Fundraising
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=11086530

All Things Considered, June 14, 2007 · Sen. John McCain (R-AZ) was supposed to be the inevitable front-runner for the GOP presidential nomination in 2008.

But Mike Allen, chief political correspondent for the Politico Web site, reports this week that McCain's advisers anticipate the receipt of "journalistic last rites" when the end-of-June fundraising numbers come out. McCain will likely cash in, again, behind the other two leading candidates.

Republicans certainly seem divided if not uninspired.

Let's put in some Gore in the thread:

http://www.plenglish.com/article.asp?ID=%7B2E4604BD-F68B-4B44-99CB-F72CF7D8EDE0%7D&language=EN [Broken]

Bill Clinton: Al Gore to Enter Presidential Race

Washington, Jun 13 (Prensa Latina) Former US President Bill Clinton said that his friend and running mate, Al Gore, will enter the Democratic race for the White House, The New York Post reported on Wednesday.

According to the newspaper, Clinton warned his wife, Hillary, that she is likely to face stiff competition from a yet unannounced source - Al Gore.

The New York senator is the front-runner in the polls, followed by Illinois Congressman Barack Obama and former North Caroline Senator John Edwards.

The ex president said that Gore is preparing a good effect to enter the presidential race unexpectedly.

"Someone's got to fizzle," Clinton said. "If someone fizzles, then yeah, he could enter the race. He's got plenty of money, his own money, to do it."

The New York Post quoted analyst Andy Ostroy, who said that Gore plans to enlist Obama as a vice presidential candidate.

"Gore will toss his hat into the ring and enlist the junior senator from Illinois as his running mate. An unbeatable ticket," he said.

Last edited by a moderator:
Staff Emeritus
Let's put in some Gore in the thread:
:yuck: You had to spoil it, didn't you? :rofl:

Well, I had a prediction running. Always nice to see your predictions coming true.

But the new dark ages are still well on schedule.

Staff Emeritus
Running for President? Are You Rich Enough?
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=11103519
Morning Edition, June 15, 2007 · With $50 million in the bank, Bill and Hillary Clinton are pretty well off, new findings show. But Sen. Clinton is far from the wealthiest candidate in the 2008 presidential race. Former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney is worth at least$190 million.

Anyone born in the US can be president. Anyone can be a millionaire. Just not everyone.

Ivan Seeking
Staff Emeritus
Gold Member
:rofl::rofl::rofl:

I hope this isn't the beginning of a new genre of music.

Last edited by a moderator:
Staff Emeritus