November 8, 2004
50 in '08:
Candidates in the wings (MATTHEW COOPER, November 8, 2004, CNN)
The G.O.P. race for 2008 starts now, and many of the contenders are already working hard for the right to inherit the Bush mantle.Rule No. 1 for any Republican who wants to succeed George W. Bush in 2008 is now clear: stay on the President's good side.
It's his party, and from fund raising to endorsements, a sitting President can do a lot to determine who the next G.O.P. nominee will be. So if Senator John McCain decides to run for President in 2008, it won't hurt that he and Bush have cooled the infamous ire that developed between them during the pungent 2000 primary season.
Campaigning together frequently this fall, the former rivals became, if not bosom buddies, closer than either ever expected, according to friends of both. Bush was impressed that McCain never wavered in his support for the war in Iraq, even as the security situation there deteriorated.
And McCain was impressed with Bush's empathy when they visited relatives of soldiers killed in Iraq.
The ticket that is both unbeatable and makes all kinds of sense for all concerned is John McCain running with Jeb Bush. It gives McCain, who already appeals to moderates of both parties, the credibility he needs with the religious Right. It puts a Catholic on the ticket, who's married to a Latina. It gives McCain the Bush fund-raising machine and connections, plus guarantees help from W. It gives him a vp who has run one of America's biggest swtates and can step in and govern if Mr. McCain becomes ill and easily succeed him if the Senator feels too old to serve a second term (he'd be 80 by 2016).
Meanwhile, it keeps Jeb in the national spotlight and gives him a foot up on the presidency without smacking of nepotism or dynasty.
It's worth noting too that no Democrat has achieved 50% in any of the 13 presidential elections since 1952 that featured a Nixon, a Dole or a Bush.
Posted by Orrin Judd at November 8, 2004 7:28 PMMcCain doesn't have the temperment.
And CFR should negate him out of the box. Soros was behind that little gem.
We don't need "moderates" messing w/freedom of speech.
Posted by: Sandy P at November 8, 2004 8:08 PMNow that he's decided to be a Party Man again, I could support McCain even without a Jeb. He's only a moderate in peripheral issues--my two core issues are the War on Terror and abortion, and he's generally solid on both of them. He's not my first choice, though, by any stretch, mainly because he's got no executive experience, he'll be Bob Dole-old by then, and he's really not that good of a speaker.
Posted by: Timothy at November 8, 2004 8:08 PMHow about Giuliani with Jeb?
Posted by: pj at November 8, 2004 8:28 PM1. Unless by '08 abortion is not a national political issue.
2. The payoff for the President working so hard in '02 and this year to elect Republicans to Congress is his ability to discipline Congress if he needs to. This duck ain't lame, yet.
Posted by: David Cohen at November 8, 2004 8:38 PMNo, the duck won't go lame unless the 2006 midterms disappoint badly.
As stated in earlier posts, W is well positioned to be a kingmaker in 2008 since he is such a party builder.
I've had my doubts at times from my armchair, but this guy and his team know what they're doing politically as well as in the policy arena, where W is every bit the radical he's accused of being (and only this blog seemed to comprehend). A 51% victory with a major headwind is evidence he pushed the envelope just as far as he could. Now, after such perfect optimization, he'll spend the political capital wisely.
As for 2008, Rudy, Ridge, Rice, Jeb, Thompson, McCain, Pataki, Romney, Ehrlich, Powell, etc. will all be in the Nominee/VP mix. I'm not 100% positive that the nominee needs to be strictly pro life, but agree it cannot be a pro-choice Catholic (I think this eliminates Ridge). However, W will make sure the nominee 'gets it' so he or she probably will be. Look at Ehrlich and Romney.
Posted by: JAB at November 8, 2004 9:58 PMI think McCain is a flake and the CFR is a disaster. Guliani has a lot of baggage, his divorce was a high profile mess in New York, wait until it gets replayed in 50 primairies.
I am in favor of embargoing this topic for at least 3 years.
Posted by: Robert Schwartz at November 8, 2004 10:36 PMTo heck with embargoing the topic. Sqaush McCain now. A Sanford or Owens are the best bet.
Jeb would be great except for the nepotism angle. W should make him a Supreme Ct judge.
Much as I enjoy OJ's ra-ra republicanism, I don't think 2008 bodes well if we pick a bad candidate. McCain is a bad candidate. His Media whores will turn on him 20 minutes after the nomination.
All they have to do is run shows highlighting his use of the word "gook", and he's below 48% for the duration.
Posted by: BB at November 9, 2004 12:13 AMThe McCain haters are always good for a laugh. CFR was ill-conceived and obviously had holes in it you can fly a fully-loaded C-130 through. However, even a cursory review of his voting record will show that he's been right a lot more than he's been wrong.
Who's going to be the Religious Right standard bearer if not McCain? Jeb Bush starts out 10 down because of nepotism and there is no serious figure out there. Bill Owens has trouble in Colorado, the GOP has been losing ground since he got in. Mark Sanford, whom I also like, is even more of a maverick than McCain.
Giuliani and Pataki are at about the national center and would win a 50 state sweep over the Hildebeest, but neither will have a chance to win the nomination as they are anathema to the religious conservatives.
Posted by: Bart at November 9, 2004 6:56 AMI think McCain is a nut whom I would not vote for but I love Jeb. I have commented before that Jeb is the perfect VP candidate. While I would prefer Rudy/Jeb, I'd support this ticket. The chances of McCain living out his term are slim, so Jeb would become President.
Posted by: Bob at November 9, 2004 9:17 AMMcCain stands no chance with Repub primary voters. He got drubbed in 2000 and would do even worse as a very old and not very healthy-looking man in 2008.
Jeb is making noises about not wanting to run, but I don't take them seriously. I also don't understand the "dynasty" argument against him. After all, his likely opponent in the general would be the standard-bearer for the Clinton dynasty. What would the Dems' argument be? Our dynasty is better? I think the whole dynasty hoohah is a complete non-issue.
My guess is that Jeb will somehow overcome his "reluctance" and win the nomination. The race against Hillary will depend on - guess what! - the economy in 2008.
No predictions there.
Posted by: Casey Abell at November 9, 2004 9:33 AMLets embargo the topic for two years.
Posted by: genecis at November 9, 2004 12:30 PMDynasty is non-issue. RFK didn't worry about in 1968, Hillary won't in 2008, and Jeb shouldn't either.
Posted by: Dave at November 9, 2004 2:15 PM