posted
The Vice President may be a hinderance to getting President Bush re-elected.
Its Cheney who has the Haliburton connections. Its in Cheney's office that the leak about the CIA agent may have come from. Its Cheney who took a Supreme Court Justice out duck hunting when he had a court case before him at that time. It was Cheney who held the infamous "Energy Experts Meeting" and who has refused to tell congress who was present (all Oil people it is rumored). I even remember Cheney pushing to connect Iraq with Al-Queda and 9/11 when there is/was no proof to support it and President Bush had to come out and correct him.
President Bush is the social conservative.
Mr. Cheney has the appearance of being the economic conservative, insider, croni-ist, big business puppet.
The election may be closer than President Bush was hoping for. To gather some extra votes, do you think Mr. Cheney may retire due to age and health, and a more popular running mate may be found?
Would Cheney allow this?
Would President Bush, the very loyal man, force his running-mate and possible friend to step down?
Would it hurt President Bush's fundraising?
Would it make a difference to any of you voters?
Posts: 11895 | Registered: Apr 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
Cheney would have to have an actual heart attack or something. If there were any perception at all that it was being done to court votes, they would actually lose ground with their base. I may be projecting my own feelings, but loyalty is generally important to conservatives- even when misplaced. On the other hand, if John Kerry picks him, who are we to object?
(Thinking of Kerry's mantra "I believe what VP Cheney believes" on civil unions) This is a good example of why I can't believe Kerry would get elected. Just on a personal level and leaving the issues aside.
Posts: 11017 | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Bush could insure the future of republican dominance in federal government by dropping Cheney and getting McCain to stand in. Then in '08 McCain would be set up pretty well to win.
Posts: 859 | Registered: Oct 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
McCain would never run as Bush's running mate unless Bush gave some big concessions on the budget and tax cuts, which I rather suspect Bush will never do.
Posts: 15770 | Registered: Dec 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
Also, I think Bush has made it pretty clear he doesn't care for carrying forward the republicans as a part. More and more of what he does is complained about by the conservatives in congress as just not being what republicans are about.
Posts: 15770 | Registered: Dec 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
I don't know if Giuliani would accept the nomination.
I do think that Bush would have a surprise coming if he assumed Giuliani would stick to his talking points.
Posts: 15770 | Registered: Dec 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
Besides, most of Bush's policies need to come due/be paid for in 2009 time frame (Hydrogen Car due, Taxcuts end, Deficit should end, Mars plans due, promises promises due). What Republican would want to have to clean all that up?
Posts: 11895 | Registered: Apr 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
Well, if Bush dropped Cheney, it would be a step in the right direction. However, that wouldn't take care of the problem. Maybe if he would also drop Ashcroft, Rumsfeld, and Karl Rove I might think he meant it.
Posts: 2454 | Registered: Jan 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
I think only about 10% of the voters or so are swing voters in the sense that anything short of a live boy or a dead girl will sway their vote this coming election.
Posts: 13123 | Registered: Feb 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
Also, I think Ashcroft may be a bigger drag on Bush than Cheney. I'm suprised Bush didn't fill that office with a 'minority' in order to mute criticism and pull an Estrada on critics.
posted
Ashcroft is a minority? You mean his religion? I had the thought about Giuliani a couple years ago, but presidential politics doesn't always make a lot of sense, to me anyway.
Thanks to Ferris Bueller's day off, I remember that GW I called supply side economics "Voodoo Economics". GW I was also moderate on abortion.
It would be ironic of Bush II gets defeated on his choice of veep the way dad did.
Posts: 11017 | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Okay, well I don't think Cheney would get ousted, but he is even more of a mystery to the average naive conservative than he was in 2000.
Posts: 11017 | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Well, I don't want Cheney ousted, simply because the campaign is bound to be a lot less fun to watch without him in the mix.
A free and open society is an ongoing conflict, interrupted periodically by compromises. -- Saul Alinsky
Posts: 4344 | Registered: Mar 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
The only reason I have to vote for Bush is that I happen to like a few of his appointees in Federal agencies I work with and regime change in those agencies would be disruptive.
But even with that strong self-interest. I won't vote for him.
I don't care who he has as VEEP.
Now, if he came out and said that he was getting rid of Ashcroft, I'd consider voting for him.
but still, I won't vote for him.
Posts: 22497 | Registered: Sep 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
I read that with small number of swing voters, Bush is going to concentrate on solidifying his base instead of attempting to energize swing votes. Finally! A good old fashioned clearly partisan race!
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
