Can You Say 'Rove For President" In 2008

Karl Rove, the architect of the 2004 Bush victory seems to be taking on a much more public role as of late. Given the fact that Cheney is not really a viable candidate nor any of the GOP house leadership seems to have much of a chance, is Rove positioning himself for a run? His recent remarks about liberals et al is clearly designed to reach out to his core base. The very same base he tapped in 2004. Its an interesting development and perhaps he is meerly doing so to focus attention away from other issues. However, Rove's popularity among his core group is pretty darned high. It would make for quite an interesting campaign to say the least.

Rove Taking a More Public Role

He has risen to the highest ranks of the White House, carries the title of deputy chief of staff and presides over a broad portfolio of domestic and foreign issues. But even as he has morphed from political operative to policy adviser, Karl Rove retains the instincts of the direct-mail specialist he once was in Texas.

The verbal strike he aimed at liberals and liberalism during a speech to the New York Conservative Party on Wednesday night came straight out of the direct-mail manual: pithy, provocative and designed to energize one side by torching the other.
Rove

[edit on 6/26/05 by FredT]

Rove's antics in politics have been covered in the documentary "Bush's Brain"
If he tries to run for President, all that dirt will resurface.
He may not run, but he will be the dark hand behind the next republican puppet for sure.
Lets hope he has a big fat heart attack before then, in his bed, alone, where
no defibiliator's can be found.

No. They'll run Rudy Guliani. He has the whole "I was mayor when some arabs blew up my city's landmark and then told their country's leader I didn't need the rebuilding money he offered me" going for him.

Unfortunately, he did cheat on his wife with a younger woman, which could be used against him, though I doubt it would change anything.

If the Republicans run anyone, it will be Rudy Guliani. It has been talked about before. Since he has no real experience and is, at best, nothing more then a figurehead, it fits in well with the GOP's strategy as of late.

Perosnally, I would prefer to see McCain get it. He would be a true "uniter", and someone I'd probably vote for.

.
Lets hope they get the 15 y/o boys out of the bed before they discover Rove dead of a heart attack.

Wasn't Rudi blaming the troops for the failure in Iraq? Diverting responsibility away from fearless leader? [or is that mindless leader? well, whatever]
Doesn't that kind of go against supporting the troops,
If Rudi runs that will certainly bite him in the backside.

edit: language scrubing

[edit on 27-6-2005 by slank]

Originally posted by slank
Wasn't Rudi blaming the troops for the failure in Iraq? Diverting responsibility away from fearless leader? [or is that mindless leader? well, whatever]
Doesn't that kind of go against supporting the troops,
If Rudi runs that will certainly bite him in the backside.

Forgot about that one.

It wouldn't hurt him that much, if at all. The majority of American voters prefer their leaders (or potential leaders in this case) to be as crass and egotistical as humanly possible.

I say he has a leg up on the competition.

Originally posted by Kai-Raega
If the Republicans run anyone, it will be Rudy Guliani. It has been talked about before. Since he has no real experience and is, at best, nothing more then a figurehead, it fits in well with the GOP's strategy as of late.

He'll never win the GOP nomination, because he's pro-choice and pro-gay rights. McCain is simply too old, and the Christian Right has already turned on him. Condi's still too contaminated by 9/11 and and Darth Cheney eats human souls.

I see tremendous pressure on Jeb Bush to run, or more likely, the inevitable full throttled support of a failed Mitt Romney or Bill Frist candidacy. Regardless, Bush handicapped the GOP with Iraq and Social Security, while Bill Frist and Tom Delay did the same with Terri Schiavo. It'll be interesting how they navigate around these incredibly unpopular issues.

Hillary takes the Democratic nomination and either nominates Barak Obama, Bill Richardson, or John Edwards for VP. Unless McCain is somehow forgiven by the Moonie crowd, Hillary is our first female president.

brimstone735, that was top to bottom an excellent analysis of the situation (as far as we know).

I've said it myself, just not as succinctly.

Though the GOP has a crazy dark horse in every corner, like Brownback from Kansas. The GOP can be expected to pull just about anything out of their butt and run it as a plum, so you never know.

I know who it will be on 2012. George P. Bush, Jeb's son. He's a Bush, and half Mexican.

Although I would support Rove 100% and think he would be a good choice. I think Newt Gingrich or George Allen (with the help of Rove) would be better choices.

McCain has no chance. I'm 100% Republican and I don't like this guy. He is too wishy-washy, but hey, isn't that the definition of a moderate?

I'm actively rooting for Sam Brownback of Kansas now. He's wide open nuts, thinks Bush is too liberal and is the Religious Right's favorite. He recently converted to Catholicism just for the crazy. He thinks the earth is 6,000 years old, and he's never seen any convincing evidence it isn't flat.

God, that would be a fun campaign.

Please nominate a real fundie this time. Oh man, where do I send money?

Originally posted by RANT
brimstone735, that was top to bottom an excellent analysis of the situation (as far as we know).

I've said it myself, just not as succinctly.

Excellent Analysis?

Pseudo intellectualism will only get you so far. Anyone who has followed politics for the past decade knows how easy (And worthwhile) it has become to change your positions on key issues. Who is to say Rudy can't toe-the-line as well?

Originally posted by Kai-Raega

Originally posted by RANT
brimstone735, that was top to bottom an excellent analysis of the situation (as far as we know).

I've said it myself, just not as succinctly.

Excellent Analysis?

Pseudo intellectualism will only get you so far. Anyone who has followed politics for the past decade knows how easy (And worthwhile) it has become to change your positions on key issues. Who is to say Rudy can't toe-the-line as well?

Rudy can't win, because other Republicans will hammer him on abortion and gay rights in the south and the west. They'll taint the waters and muddy his political rep. If Rudy is nominated, that gives Hillary a chance to poach these states, because conservative christians in swing states simply won't come out and vote for a "pseudo" New York conservative.

Hillary carries minority voters, both black and hispanic. She carries women voters, and Democratic men. Rudy only key demographics are economic conservatives and men, ages 18-36. Christians stay home, no matter what Rudy says during the race.

The GOP easily loses Arizona, New Mexico, Florida, Missouri, and Iowa to Hillary. And that's the whole ballgame, right there. Rudy carries the southern and plain states, but loses the southwest and swing states.

Simply put, Rudy won't be nominated, and he can't possibly win, because he's too vulnerable within his own party. Not to mention the quickly evolving "stigma" of 9/11 - people are getting tired of mourning and being at war. Rudy is a living reminder of that, and people will vote for a change.

Although I am ready for a female president candidate I would not like Hillary, and she will not stand any chance against our mostly dominated male society.

Rove has some skeletons he will never run, I like McCain but the religious fundamentalist will nail him.

Rudy is ok but you forgot to mention his scandal between his mistress and wife in the same house.

Condi would not consider presidential position because she is an oilswoman and a nice position is waiting for her when she is finished with her job.

Actually I don't really see any good candidates in either parties as now.

[edit on 27-6-2005 by marg6043]

brimstone735, your assessment and personal prediction pertaining to a hypothetical Hillary and Rice showdown?

As I see it, you will probably side with Hillary again, making you a Hillary supporter and liberal democrat in 2008?





seekerof

Originally posted by Seekerof
brimstone735, your assessment and personal prediction pertaining to a hypothetical Hillary and Rice showdown?

As I see it, you will probably side with Hillary again, making you a Hillary supporter and liberal democrat in 2008?
seekerof

Condi running could pose pose a serious threat to Hillary. The major downside for Democrats, is that it splits the African American vote. Certainly enough to tip, but not enough to make any clear cut winner.

The upside for the Democrats, is that anyone from this current administration will have 8 years of an albatross around their necks. IF she cured cancer tomorrow, Condi would still have a difficult road ahead of her.

They'll endlessly replay Condi Rice stammering in front of the 9/11 panel - fare or not, she didn't come across as very presidential - and that would hurt her with with the meat eating crowd - who, while not voting for Hillary, probably wouldn't feel obligated to vote for Condi either.

The wild card is still abortion rights, which Condi has spoken out for, which again, really hurts her standing among prominent social conservatives.
And that's the clincher, even though Condi picks up 10-15% more African American votes in states where it won't matter - like Illinois, New York, California, and one that it does, Florida...she still loses 2-3 million social conservatives in key states like Missouri, Ohio, and Iowa.

The issue will be Iraq, and which FEMALE candidate would best lead us through it. The many years of conservative punditry has turned Hillary in an almost Margaret Thatcher like warhorse - a cold, merciless machine. She's immune to all forms of attacks and charges, because after being called a killer and a man hating, liberal lesbian pinko - nothing else can possibly stick.

It's the Cheney/Edwards effect, but in reverse. People don't like Cheney, I mean at all, but if we're under attack, you want the meanest guy in the world guarding the back door. And, I think given the circumstances of the world, that's who men, 18-36, would break for.

Rehardless, the Condi effect is immediatly negated if Hillary nominates Barak Obama. However, I think Bill Richardson is still the most likely VP candidate, because he can open the door for New Mexico and Arizona, and one state is all it takes.

Although, the race would certainly be a lot closer, maybe even a toss up, in a Hillary/Rice match up, I could honestly see it going either way. Flip a coin, because the odds would be really close.

There are only two men that can probably beat Hillary right now, Jeb Bush and John McCain. John McCain poaches enough liberal democrat voters to overcompensate for losing the social conservatives, and he soundly beats Hillary in the head to head match up - unless something crazy happens, and the social conservatives run a third party candidate.

Jeb Bush is the only one who can truly unite the Social and Economic conservatives under one banner again, and even he's vulnerable, because of Terri Schiavo. But, all he has to do is carry the exact same states - and party line - that George Bush jr. did, and it's over for Hillary.

I might be a liberal democrat and a Hillary supporter, but I'm still a critical thinker.