Chet Lemon Posted November 10, 2007 Share Posted November 10, 2007 Who do you think will win the nominations for both parties? Not necessarily who you want, but what you see happening. How about their veeps? Maybe cabinet positions? We can have some fun w/ this and go back when the nominations are sealed and see who got it most right. Republicans: Nominee: Mitt Romney (R-MA) (money is not a problem, better organized than most people realize, doing very well in iowa+new hampshire, economic conservatism is solid) Running Mate: Mike Huckabee (R-AR) (southern gov, most well-liked nationally of all social conservatives, brings energy to those who see Romney as a dry pol) Democrats: Nominee: Hillary Clinton (D-NY) (polling cannot be ignored, husband is adored by all core dem primary voters, none of her rivals seem to be doing any damage) Running Mate: Evan Bayh (D-IN) (ultra popular in a state that hasn't backed a dem pres since LBJ, most fiscally coservative of all dem sens., voted against gonzales, roberts, alito nominations, so he has street cred w/ liberal dems) That is how I see it going down a little less than two months before Iowa. It looks boring, but that has been standard protocol for past Presidential elections. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NorthSideSox72 Posted November 10, 2007 Share Posted November 10, 2007 The GOP field is being led by two candidates with fatal flaws in that party's view (Romney and Giuliani), and the Dems are being led by a candidate with higher negatives than any serious candidate ever. The nearest contender to Clinton is black, and the nearest contender to those to GOP'ers has the misfortune of being named Huckabee. From a purely political point of view, these candidates have some major flaws that normally would put them in the "can't possibly win the nomination" category. I think its still wide open at this point. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rex Kickass Posted November 10, 2007 Share Posted November 10, 2007 Predicitions: After flirtations with Ron Paul, making big inroads particularly in NH and SC, the Republicans will answer their nod the same way the Democrats will in 2004, voting Guiliani to the standard bearer spot. His VP? Up in the air, but I see it being someone who would never steal the spotlight away from him. Probably Mike Huckabee. Or maybe, Hailey Barbour. Like most Democratic Party Primary seasons, the frontrunner crumbles just before the first vote is cast. Richardson finishes a strong second to Obama in Iowa, with Clinton at third and Edwards in oblivion. After a narrow victory for Clinton in NH, but continued strong showings for the governor of NH and the junior senator from IL, Obama finally distances himself during Sooper Dooper Tuesday and nominates Richardson as his Vice Presidential partner... or perhaps a certain Senator Tester from Montana, hoping to capitalize on the Blue Trend in the Mountain West. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mr_genius Posted November 10, 2007 Share Posted November 10, 2007 (edited) GOP : Rudy Guiliani, with the VP nod going to Florida Gov. Charlie Christ Dems: Hillary Clinton, with the VP nod going to Ohio Gov. Ted Strickland. edit: haha, had wrong name in as Florida gov Edited November 10, 2007 by mr_genius Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Texsox Posted November 10, 2007 Share Posted November 10, 2007 I predict that less than one in five Americans will choose the nominees. McCain v. Obama Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chet Lemon Posted November 10, 2007 Author Share Posted November 10, 2007 QUOTE(mr_genius @ Nov 10, 2007 -> 03:35 PM) GOP : Rudy Guiliani, with the VP nod going to Florida Gov. Bob Martinez. For VP, do you mean Florida's Sen. Mel Martinez or their Gov. Charlie Christ? Martinez would be an interesting pick for that combination b/c of the appeal to hispanics, but if Rudy left office during that term Martinez would not become Pres. b/c he was born in Cuba. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NorthSideSox72 Posted November 10, 2007 Share Posted November 10, 2007 QUOTE(Chet Lemon @ Nov 10, 2007 -> 04:06 PM) For VP, do you mean Florida's Sen. Mel Martinez or their Gov. Charlie Christ? Martinez would be an interesting pick for that combination b/c of the appeal to hispanics, but if Rudy left office during that term Martinez would not become Pres. b/c he was born in Cuba. That's actually an interesting point. But, is it that he can't be President, or that he can't be voted President? If someone is in the line of succession, does the exemption still apply? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NorthSideSox72 Posted November 10, 2007 Share Posted November 10, 2007 QUOTE(mr_genius @ Nov 10, 2007 -> 03:35 PM) GOP : Rudy Guiliani, with the VP nod going to Florida Gov. Bob Martinez. Dems: Hillary Clinton, with the VP nod going to Ohio Gov. Ted Strickland. I'm fairly certain that Clinton already hand-picked Evan Bayh for her VP. On that topic, I'm willing to be Obama's pick for VP would be Richardson. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mr_genius Posted November 10, 2007 Share Posted November 10, 2007 QUOTE(Chet Lemon @ Nov 10, 2007 -> 04:06 PM) For VP, do you mean Florida's Sen. Mel Martinez or their Gov. Charlie Christ? Martinez would be an interesting pick for that combination b/c of the appeal to hispanics, but if Rudy left office during that term Martinez would not become Pres. b/c he was born in Cuba. my bad. Gov Charlie Christ. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balta1701 Posted November 10, 2007 Share Posted November 10, 2007 QUOTE(Texsox @ Nov 10, 2007 -> 01:37 PM) I predict that less than one in five Americans will choose the nominees. McCain v. Obama I predict that less than 1 in 1000 Americans will choose the nominees. The 200-300,000 people who attend the Iowa caucuses on Jan 3. I think Romney's Iowa lead is big enough that it will take a major slip up to beat him there, despite what the national polls say. The trend keeps being; the more folks see of Rudy, the less they like him. The Republican Caucus is tired of McCain, and Huckabee can't compete with Romney's money. On the Dem side...I thought it was still close in Iowa before Hillarity's recent downturn nationwide after the last debate. I really don't have a clue which one is going to take it, and am not even going to try calling a winner. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mplssoxfan Posted November 11, 2007 Share Posted November 11, 2007 QUOTE(NorthSideSox72 @ Nov 10, 2007 -> 04:12 PM) That's actually an interesting point. But, is it that he can't be President, or that he can't be voted President? If someone is in the line of succession, does the exemption still apply? There is no exception. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Texsox Posted November 11, 2007 Share Posted November 11, 2007 At your service † Non-natural-born citizens are ineligible It has been a subject of controversy whether cabinet officers who are not natural-born citizens, such as Carlos Gutierrez (born in Cuba) or Elaine Chao (born in Taiwan), are constitutionally ineligible to be Acting President, because Article Two establishes only eligibility requirements for the office of President. The same question exists for officers in the line of succession who are not at least 35 years old or have not resided in the United States for 14 years. To avoid a needless constitutional dispute at what would likely be a time of great crisis, the statute (3 U.S.C. § 19(e)) specifies that even the Acting President must meet the constitutional requirements for the office of President. Thus, Secretary Gutierrez and Secretary Chao are ineligible to serve as Acting President since they are not "natural-born citizens" of the United States. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted November 13, 2007 Share Posted November 13, 2007 QUOTE(NorthSideSox72 @ Nov 10, 2007 -> 04:13 PM) I'm fairly certain that Clinton already hand-picked Evan Bayh for her VP. On that topic, I'm willing to be Obama's pick for VP would be Richardson. I agree with that. One of two things is going on there... Either they are putting out fake signals to hide who they really want, or this thing has been a done deal since the day that Bayh dropped out. I think if Romney wins the nomination, he needs an older established guy, with a long list of credentials to make up for his flip-floppingness. A John McCain could be a great fit here. If Guiliani wins the nomination, judging by the Robertson endorsement, I think a deal has already been done to get a right-wing religious guy on the ballot with him. I could see a few guys being out there, but a Huckabee or Brownback makes good sense, as does a Sonny Perdue. I am also going to go out and say that the Unity Party snags either Bloomberg or Paul to run as their nominee. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NorthSideSox72 Posted November 13, 2007 Share Posted November 13, 2007 QUOTE(southsider2k5 @ Nov 13, 2007 -> 10:28 AM) I agree with that. One of two things is going on there... Either they are putting out fake signals to hide who they really want, or this thing has been a done deal since the day that Bayh dropped out. I think if Romney wins the nomination, he needs an older established guy, with a long list of credentials to make up for his flip-floppingness. A John McCain could be a great fit here. If Guiliani wins the nomination, judging by the Robertson endorsement, I think a deal has already been done to get a right-wing religious guy on the ballot with him. I could see a few guys being out there, but a Huckabee or Brownback makes good sense, as does a Sonny Perdue. I am also going to go out and say that the Unity Party snags either Bloomberg or Paul to run as their nominee. Those make sense. Definitely agree on Giuliani, and Romney/McCain is interesting. Didn't someone say Paul announced he wouldn't run as an independent? Bloomberg could cause a load of trouble for both parties. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted November 13, 2007 Share Posted November 13, 2007 QUOTE(NorthSideSox72 @ Nov 13, 2007 -> 09:30 AM) Those make sense. Definitely agree on Giuliani, and Romney/McCain is interesting. Didn't someone say Paul announced he wouldn't run as an independent? Bloomberg could cause a load of trouble for both parties. Romney needs someone with a long resume to counterbalance the flip-flop stuff he is going to encounter as the nominee. McCain was the first name that came to mind. Someone with deep south or midwest roots would be nice too. Both Bloomberg and Paul have said they won't run, but they have both made similar runs in the past. They both have pretty much had to say those things to stay where they are in the respective spots. If Paul said he would consider going indy, his fundraising would dry up. If Bloomberg said it, NYC would throw a fit over divided loyalties. I think one of them will be convinced because at least one of the parties is going to have a significant base mad about who their nominee is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rex Kickass Posted November 13, 2007 Share Posted November 13, 2007 I don't really think Bloomberg will run. I think he wants Spitzer's job first. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts