Damn, Bush wins, but the entire cabinet will see an overhaul that is just bizzare. I know that they all resign at the end of the year, but can he really afford to lose Powell?
It's not bizarre. It's very common for a cabinet overhaul; certainly common for several cabinet secretaries to not serve the full eight years. Remember: only Janet Reno, Donna Shalala, and Bruce Babitt served a full eight years in the Clinton years. Only one secretary lasted Reagan's eight years, and there was a turnover of seven secretaries in 1985.
I see Rice getting the Sect of State spot if Powell leaves, and I also see her as the front runner for the Republican nomination in 08. I do not think Powell would run, and if he does, I think he wouldnt get total republican support.
How odd would a Rice/Powell ticket be? A Black woman and Black man, running against (perhaps) a White woman and a Black man.
Guiliani would be a good Sec. of State. I don't know if he should run for President though. He has some skeletons in closet in New York. I don't even know if he would carry New York to be honest. I think he needs to be a symbol for America and thats the job of Sec. of State. I do wish he would cut the terrorist rhetoric down a bit makes him look like their behind every curtain and playing off the Sept. 11th tragedy.
I think Rice will leave. I don't think she will run for President either, but I doubt Powell find any friends after fighting with Bush for most of his term. I wouldn't be surprised to see him join a John McCain revolt if things get bad in Iraqi. I am curious to see if the Republicans can handle the pressure of having everything on their shoulders.
I would find it interesting for a black woman to run for the Republican nomination. However, at the end of the day, its still a boys' club. Jeb Bush is the one they want, what I find interesting is that after Bush, there is going to be a dog fight in the Republican campaign.
If there is one thing I don't get, it is all the Jeb Bush talk. I certainly don't want him - I mean, he isn't on my top five list. I would much rather see Rice take a crack at it.
Just because he is a Bush doesn't mean he will run - and I think running right AFTER his brother would almost guarantee his defeat. Bush running 8 years after his father looked close enough to nepotism - this would be too close.
Rudy - I don't think he would make it on a ballot. I do think it would be a good move for Bush to find a place for him in the cabinet.
Originally posted by StaggerLeeIt would be interesting if Mccain/Powell ran as a reform party ticket. THAT would cause a hell of a headache for the Dems and Republicans.
I think Rice is elequent enough to be able to run for President and have a good shot at getting the nomination, at the very least.
Originally posted by A FanI would find it interesting for a black woman to run for the Republican nomination. However, at the end of the day, its still a boys' club. Jeb Bush is the one they want, what I find interesting is that after Bush, there is going to be a dog fight in the Republican campaign.
So...are you two competing to see who's further detached from reality?
CRZ, I dont see a McCain/Powell ticket as that far fetched. Niether is so engrained in the FAR right that leaving would cause a great deal of trouble for them. McCain seems to be more against a lot of the Republican Party's philosophies than he supports. Powell has had an interesting term as Sect of State to say the least. Bush cut him off at the knees a few times, and he obviously doesnt toe the party line 100% of the time. I am sure a re-energized Reform Party would welcome the two of them over Pat Buchanan again.
Originally posted by StaggerLeeCRZ, I dont see a McCain/Powell ticket as that far fetched.
Your first kooky statement in this thread was "Condoleezza Rice is the frontrunner for 2008, check out that Rice/Powell ticket" or words to that effect.
Originally posted by A FanNo, we are just discussing possibilities. I mean who do you think the Republicans will get to run in 2008?
Here's a novel idea - ask me in 2007.
Seriously, you two are once again #1 and #2 on the "who's posted the most" list and I'm getting tired of all the yak yak yak yak yak yak yak we get it already. Go start your own chatroom and talk amongst yourselves there. I'd really like to hear from the 500 or so others who visit the board but I already know most of them don't want to wade through this forum because eight people write 30% of the posts.
I dont know how anyone could be impressed with Rice. I personally believe shes just a figurehead with no real input on security issues. Even still, she totally blew 9/11 in my opinion. If nothing else both she and Rumsfield should be shown the door for fucking up the Iraq operation. Somebody has to get fired for that. And her as a potential Presidential candidate? Please. Not a chance in holy hell.
I think Powell is gone. Why should he stay? Doesnt seem like anyone listens to him. So how does Bush "need" him? Whatever credibilty Powell once had was severely damaged by his UN speech. I think he quits.
"I could be wrong, but I doubt it"---Charles Barkley
As long as Ashcroft leaves I will be happy. He is far to right wing in his anti pornography and anti drug stances. I just hope his successor is more grounded in common sense.
Unfortunately this election was won on morality issues even more than politics. Too much of the country is too morally conservative for my personal tastes.
Just look at the Gay Marriage issue which to me is about freedom of religion, freedom of speech, and equal protection under the law. That so many Americans are opposed to giving civil rights to a group based on their beliefs is almost sickening. But I think it goes to show how much of mainstream America are swayed to interject their personal beliefs into civil law. Not always a bad thing obviously, but on an issue that doesn't cause harm to anyone, I just lose more faith in my fellow man.
There have been rumblings for a while that Powell would leave if Bush won re-election, preferring to simply disapear if he lost. I really think he realizes how this adminsitrationhas basically used him (and used up a lot of his credibility) to very agenda-driven ends. I will be shocked if he does not quit.
Catch The Thrill on "Pick of the Week": taped Tuesdays at Planet Magic in Denmark, WI; on the air Sundays @ 1 am on WB-14!
There's also talk around here that Health and Human Services Sec. Tommy Thompson may resign his post. I'm told he was asked about returning to Wisconsin to run against Democrat Gov. Jim Doyle for his old job...and Tommy said, "It's a possibility."
That would be one helluva race...but not 'till 2006. Says so somewhere in here.(Wisconsin state website...requires Adobe Acrobat Reader)
Star wipe, and...we're out. Thrillin' ain't easy.
THE THRILL ACW-NWA Wisconsin Home Video Technical Director...& A2NWO 4 Life! (Click the big G or here to hear the Packers Fight Song in RealAudio...or try .AU, .WAV or .MIDI!)
Originally posted by GrimisIt's not bizarre. It's very common for a cabinet overhaul; certainly common for several cabinet secretaries to not serve the full eight years. Remember: only Janet Reno, Donna Shalala, and Bruce Babitt served a full eight years in the Clinton years. Only one secretary lasted Reagan's eight years, and there was a turnover of seven secretaries in 1985.
And, there's a perfectly rational reason for the cabinet to turn over; there's not much benefit to being Secretary of X for 8 years rather than 4. It doesn't change the fact that you served on the cabinet and leaving gives them free reign to position themself for the future or simply make a ton more money doing something else and then reemerging whenever they feel is best.
As an aside, a colleague of mine worked on the President's Council of Economic Advisors. They wanted him to remain on the Council for a longer time. He declined because (in his words) the marginal benefit was almost zero because the added prestige or importance of serving an extra term on the Council is pretty close to zero. And, the cost is high because you could make a lot more money doing other things, your time is not your own, and you sacrifice some professional freedom. My guess is that cabinet member is similar.
In fact, if you look at Citi's public filings, you can see the salary difference between Secretary of the Treasury and working in the private sector. It's not trivial.
Originally posted by OndaGrandeAs long as Ashcroft leaves I will be happy. He is far to right wing in his anti pornography and anti drug stances. I just hope his successor is more grounded in common sense.
Smile. He's going. First good news I've heard all week.
(Second good news I've heard all week - the realization that I'll never have to sit through another Test match still is pretty nice.)
"Four more years of American soldiers being used as cannon fodder. Four more years of scientific decisions being made by people who believe in a ghost in the clouds. Four more years of debt that our children and grandchildren will have to pay off. Four more years of racists and lunatics for judicial appointments. Four more years of looting the treasury and squandering it on corporate cronies. Four more years of making enemies faster than we can kill them. Four more years of fear and darkness and racism and hatred and stupidity and guns and bad country music.
I look at the big map and all of the red in flyover country and I feel like I've been locked in a room with the slow learners. We have become the country that pulls a dry cleaning bag over its head to play astronaut." -----TBogg
I'm with you; it's a total joke. At the same time, I'm a little surprised he managed to keep it going as long as he did, *especially* given how high a profile it had received around the Web in the past few weeks.