| Submit your comments on this article | |
| Home Front: Politix | |
| Giuliani to replace Cheney on ticket? | |
| 2004-06-09 | |
| WND, so perhaps a little salt; as a non-US citizen I’m not really concerned, but I’d prefer Condy Rice There are whispers among high-level political advisers to President Bush suggesting the possibility of replacing Dick Cheney with former New York Mayor Rudolph Giuliani as the vice presidential running mate prior to the Republican National Convention in New York beginning Aug. 30. Cheney, who has no aspirations to run for president in 2008 and has had well-publicized heart problems, has been involved in the discussions and is open to the idea if it strengthens the ticket and helps position a viable Republican candidate to succeed Bush, sources tell WND. Giuliani, as well as New York Gov. George Pataki, has been expected to play a starring role at the convention. Both are also considered possible presidential candidates in 2008. Securing the vice presidential nomination, however, would instantly make Giuliani the front-runner among all potential Republican candidates. "There is some thinking at the very highest political levels that this move could add some late sizzle to the campaign, steal any thunder generated by the Democrats in Boston and even potentially put the state of New York in play for the president," said one source close to both Giuliani and the White House. No one is talking on the record, and the plan is not yet set in stone.
Giuliani has said he may return to elective politics as early as 2006 by running either for governor, should Pataki call it quits after three terms, or for U.S. Senate against Democratic incumbent Hillary Rodham Clinton. In the face of prostate cancer, Giuliani withdrew from the 2000 Senate race won by Clinton. By beating Clinton in 2006, Giuliani would not only position himself as a leading candidate for president in 2008, he would have eliminated the Democrats’ No. 1 contender. But it’s a risky proposition for Giuliani. If he can’t topple the popular Democratic incumbent, his chances of becoming president, or even winning the nomination in 2008, would be slim indeed. There is little love lost between Pataki and Giuliani. Giuliani angered many Republicans in 1994 when he crossed party lines to endorse Cuomo’s bid for a fourth term. Pataki beat Cuomo in that election. The only potential political danger in replacing Cheney with Giuliani, said a source close to Bush, is that it would create problems with the president’s right flank. Giuliani is widely perceived as less conservative than Cheney, and by elevating him to front-runner in 2008, Bush could anger many conservatives. Giuliani is also being considered as a replacement for George Tenet as director of the Central Intelligence Agency. However, Bush appears to be in no rush to fill that slot. It’s possible, one source said, it could be held open for Cheney. The GOP convention is being held Aug. 30-Sept. 2. Democrats are holding their convention in Boston at the end of July. | |
| Posted by:The Anonymous5089 formerly known as 4134 (depending on my browse |
| #20 Big Ed , you think National Security Advisor is LESS STRESSFUL than VP?? Wow, not my take on things .... |
| Posted by: rkb 2004-06-09 8:53:28 PM |
| #19 In a surprise move, Clinton will be invited to join the cabinet. He will get command of The Love Boat. Gore will get command of The Romper Room. |
| Posted by: Zpaz 2004-06-09 8:03:36 PM |
| #18 Crap. I'm mixing up my 70's references. Make that Death Star Commander. Condi can have the Battle Star Gallactica thingy. |
| Posted by: Zpaz 2004-06-09 6:33:05 PM |
| #17 Cheney for Battle Star Commander. |
| Posted by: Zpaz 2004-06-09 6:26:53 PM |
| #16 Perhaps Rudy's methods weren't as hated in the other boroughs, but much of Manhattan despised him. Anyways, Rudy lost his first campaign for mayor to David Dinkins. After suffering under that incompetent, useless mayor, it was easy for Rudy to win against him in '93. In '97 Rudy ran against Ruth Messinger. This is from an old Slate piece on her: "The problem with this is that Messinger has a history of beliefs that look rather embarrassing in retrospect. In 1979, while a member of the City Council, she hosted a coming-out-of-jail cocktail party for John R. Hill, who had murdered a corrections officer on the first day of the Attica riots. In 1984, she returned from a trip to Sandinista-led Nicaragua to assert that women there "participated in everything" and were "ready to die for this freedom." In the City Council, Messinger was generally considered a staunch voice for tenants, for children, for the homeless and the poor. In the mid-1980s, she proposed extending rent control from individuals to businesses, a suggestion very few real-estate developers have forgotten. In 1981, she endorsed Frank Barbaro, about the closest thing the city has recently had to a Democratic Socialist candidate for mayor. She consistently argued for more spending, even as it was becoming clear that the Wall Street boom of the '80s was flattening out.... Crime, and a broad sense of civic disorder, probably had more to do with Dinkins' defeat than spending did. But Messinger, like Dinkins, cannot find a way of sounding convincing when she deplores crime--she has spent too many years thinking about it as a civil-rights and civil-liberties issue. Nor can she bring herself to say that Giuliani was right about the merits of arresting low-level offenders and cracking down on "quality-of-life" violations." If you lived in NYC anywhere from the '70s to the '80s, you would've been sick to death of the tax-and-spend Democrats who let crime run rampant. Rudy was seen as a reformer who cleaned up the streets. No way was NYC going to elect a far-left Dem. over him, esp. if it would be the first woman mayor of NYC. Also, voter turnout that year was about 38%. Everyone figured Rudy would win, or they didn't care, so they stayed home. |
| Posted by: growler 2004-06-09 4:50:13 PM |
| #15 I like the idea of Keyes in State. And Growler, you might be right, I'm on the wrong coast to really know but Mitch H makes a good point and Guiliani was very popular after 9/11. Very popular. My guess is Bloomberg has managed to make Guiliani look better and better. |
| Posted by: Ruprecht 2004-06-09 4:37:45 PM |
| #14 They hated him so much they elected him mayor twice, eh, growler? Bah. Anything Mario Cuomo is sure of is bound to be wrong. |
| Posted by: Mitch H. 2004-06-09 2:21:49 PM |
| #13 Rudy would not win New York for the Republicans. People here in NYC pretty much hated him until after Sept. 11, and people upstate hated him because they hate NYC. Also, it's NYC, Long Island and Westchester County that carry the most weight because that's where most of the population of the state is. And they almost always vote Democrat. |
| Posted by: growler 2004-06-09 2:15:31 PM |
| #12 Alan Keys, Secy of State? ... is so articulate and direct on so many issues, he would befuddle the shit out of those lifetime bureaucrats at the State Dept. I am a pro-choice Republican, so I disagree there, but his clear mind in the foreign policy venue would certainly be interesting to watch. |
| Posted by: BigEd 2004-06-09 2:11:48 PM |
| #11 I can see Hill tearing her hair out already. Her plan is to start in '08 with more national exposure than her non-incumbent opponent... And while social conservatives would be hard-pressed to take Rudy in a normal election, if it's a matter of keeping the Clintons out, well then... |
| Posted by: someone 2004-06-09 1:07:47 PM |
| #10 A little off the lineup--but Alan Keyes for SECSTATE. Can't imagine a more articulate defender of American principles, and a greater horror for all those State Dept buro-weenies. |
| Posted by: longtime lurker 2004-06-09 1:07:22 PM |
| #9 I would go with Condi, she has more balls then all the Democrats combined. But Rudi would do as well. Plus she is a lot tougher then Shrillary for '08. |
| Posted by: CrazyFool 2004-06-09 12:59:30 PM |
| #8 Condi has never served elected office. Rudi would capture NY and the center and provide a landslide for the Bush team. I think Powell would be a huge Vice President choice if he wanted the job. Hell, Mayor Kotch has been a huge Bush supporter since 9/11, I'd be willing to give him a plum assignment. Same with Liberman, at least regarding the War on Terror. Either one would be nice replacements if Powell walks away from State. |
| Posted by: Ruprecht 2004-06-09 12:44:16 PM |
| #7 2004 RWV has the idea - Have Condi and Cheney switch jobs. Cheney's health less stressed, while utilizing his knowledge and experience. Would rather have somebody 20-yrs younger without health probs a "heartbeat away". Rudi to CIA-clean out the sludge of inefficency! Then between Condi and Rudi, who ever does the best job, gets the 2008 nod. Even though it's cool personally to now have distant cousin Cheney as Veep, the switch would be a good idea. |
| Posted by: BigEd 2004-06-09 12:33:42 PM |
| #6 Condoleeza Rice gets my vote. Cheney for Homeland Security so we can finally secure our borders. |
| Posted by: RWV 2004-06-09 12:13:24 PM |
| #5 Ditto to what Jules said. Either one would be a HUGE boost to the ticket. I like Cheney but I think he comes off a bit like your principle in High School. |
| Posted by: Cyber Sarge (VRWC CA Chapter) 2004-06-09 11:52:40 AM |
| #4 Conde or Giuliani--YES YES YES PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE! |
| Posted by: jules 187 2004-06-09 11:42:28 AM |
| #3 I like Guliani well enough, but . . . gimmie Condi! |
| Posted by: Mike 2004-06-09 11:39:57 AM |
| #2 ha! you realy are think chainey is give up him empire that easy? |
| Posted by: muck4doo 2004-06-09 11:22:21 AM |
| #1 as a non-US citizen I’m not really concerned, but I’d prefer Condy Rice While I wouldn't mind Dr. Rice being VP, I wonder: between being a NSA, Secretary of State, or VP, which would best utilize Dr. Rice's talents and knowledge and put her in a good position for a later run for the top job? |
| Posted by: Bomb-a-rama 2004-06-09 11:22:14 AM |