SwiftVets.com

[volosong]

First of all, I have no problem with Mr. Cheney serving as vice president nor, heaven forbid, he is called upon to serve as our president because of some unspeakable tragedy.

That said, I have been wondering about something and if the GOP is approaching the "problem" the right way.

Mr. Cheney has stated that he has no desire to run for president after Mr. Bush's two terms come to an end. He also has a well documented medical history which may be the prime reason for his decision. As such, he will not be a GOP presidental candidate in 2008. Good enough, his choice.

Since, quite often, the VP slot is usually one of the "front runners" in an election when the sitting president cannot run again, is the Republican party making a mistake in not having a Bush running mate who would be in a strong running position come 2008? As I see it now, when Bush and Cheney step down, there is nobody waiting in the wings (at this moment). No "heir apparent", so to speak. However runs will be up against Senator Clinton. Shouldn't the GOP be grooming someone now?

Just wondering . . . as I have not seen this addressed anywhere before.

- - - - -

edited to correct spelling of Mr. Cheney's name.

[RobD]

Rudi, Rudi, Rludi.
_________________
6 Year Navy

[JCJR]

Rudy might be pretty electable. But unless he does a rather convincing about-face on gun control and some other Republican-in-Name-Only issues, IMO he wouldn't be a very beneficial president.

I'm Libertarian rather than Republican, but Rudy would exacerbate my misgivings about voting Republican.

As it is, Republicans are slightly closer to Libertarian views than Democrats, but the closer Republicans get to Democrats, the bigger inclination to 'protest vote' Libertarian.

I usually vote Libertarian, but this time am siding with Bush. However, if the Republicrats become even more identical to the Demopublicans, there won't be any reason NOT to vote Libertarian.

[Guest]

[BuffaloJack]

Rudi is perhaps the most electable Republican candidate.
Arnold would be more electable is the Constitution didn't have the natural born citizen clause.
So I guess Rudi is it.
I'd vote for Rudi in a heartbeat.

[Jim T.]

No offense, but by my count, only one VP has been elected president at the end of his running mates term for at least 40 years (I will let you figure out who that was. Hint: He has the last name as out current President). That said, I think the fact that W has stayed with Dick Cheney (yes that is how we spell it) shows that he is more interested in getting the job done than whith what is considered (mistakenly, in my opinion) politically expedient. In short (since my blood pressure is way to high) Dick Cheney is a man of great wisdom and intelect (this is clearly shown in no better way than his choice of marital mate). He has served in and out of government for the past 50 years with great distinction (don't forget he was the Sec. of Defense during the Gulf War in 1991, I think that was the war Kerry voted against but supports today). I for one can think of no better person to serve in that post for the next 4 years (PERIOD).
_________________
"And we will tell the terrorists, we will win and you will lose" and hope to hell they believe me.-John Kerry

[Navy_Navy_Navy]

With you all the way, Jim T!

Dick Cheney is extremely smart, steady, courageous, honorable, supportive of the President, some of the best counsel possible and a fine representative of our country.

He has also worked tirelessly even though he has had serious health problems. I want someone that good on our team.

I'm confident that a few viable candidates will emerge over the next four years. But, right now, the most important thing is to get rid of the possibility that the Traitor Kerry can ever be elected.

For every time the moonbats have uttered the word "Halliburton," we need to say "Colliers International" and "Sold out POW/MIA's" The difference is that there'll actually be something to it when we mention company connections.
_________________
~ Echo Juliet ~
Altering course to starboard - On Fire, Keep Clear
Navy woman, Navy wife, Navy mother

[rb325th]

Cheney staying on as VP is a no brainer in my opinion. Sure their are other people who could come in and do the jon, but how well could they replace Cheney?
Concern over 2008 is a minor and almost irrelevant point right now. A lot can change in 4 years. As far as who is being "groomed", there seems to be pretty good list of names mentioned right now, not many of wich need much in the way of grooming.
Let's worry about seeing that Kerry loses and loses big!
_________________
U.S. Army 1983-1995, 11C1P/11H2P NBTDT

[JCJR]

[volosong]

As I said from the outset, I have no problem with Cheney serving honorably as he has done in the past. And yes, we need to take care of the current situration first. I'm feeling pretty confident at the daily self-implosion going on with one of the political parties these days.

I also don't think that Rudy will unite the party as much as someone a little further to the right. He may be the best choice, however. Nobody, on either end of the political spectrum has a realistic chance of being elected in this country. Just look at the examples of Goldwater, and most likly Mrs. Clinton. Both are just too far out from the center to be a consensus candidate acceptable to moderates. BTW, Arnold is a RINO also. How else could he get elected in an increasingly Demo state? (despite the incompetency of "Gumby" as we called the prev gov.) Best things that Arnold has done for the state is get the budget under control (somewhat) and put his foot down on giving illegals a driver's licence.

I would just love to see the GOP put Dr. Rice up. The party of Lincoln and the party that got civil rights pushed through congress in the '60s would sure show the world something by having a presidential candidate who was not only the first woman to run for the office but also the first black. She would do a great job too! Now, if we can only get her to run.