The Next President

  • Thread starter Thread starter mjdonnelly
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
TO the best of my knowlege, there has only been 2 maybe 3 people elected President after serving in a cabinet position, without any prior experience as a Governor or Senator…Governors already have an idea how the executive branch is run, and they are usually the stronger candidates…but I know one thing for sure…whoever the Republicans nominate better be Pro-life, or they are not getting my vote…I would never vote democrat anyway…and I think the Republicans know their base is staunchly pro-life and they would be committing political suicide by nominating a pro-choice candidate
40.png
mjdonnelly:
I was wondering what everyone would think if the Republican nominee was Condi Rice, and the Democratic nominee was Hillary Clinton?

Aside from not liking the opposite parties nomination for whatever reason. But based on the 2 main parties both putting up women for office, and Condi being a minority.

It would kind of twist the arms of those who think someone can’t do a job based on their color, sex, etc.
Click to expand...
 
40.png
dumspirospero:
I would never vote democrat anyway…
Click to expand...
Not even for a pro-lifer?
I think the Republicans know their base is staunchly pro-life and they would be committing political suicide by nominating a pro-choice candidate
Click to expand...
The Republicans showed that they offered a bigger tent to the electorate in the last election - they had no litmus test for pro-life, and as a result, they rejected neither pro-life nor pro-choice Republican candidates. I think the Republicans would not reject a pro-choice candidate if he or she was right on the other Republican issues.
 
40.png
Richardols:
The Republicans showed that they offered a bigger tent to the electorate in the last election - they had no litmus test for pro-life, and as a result, they rejected neither pro-life nor pro-choice Republican candidates. I think the Republicans would not reject a pro-choice candidate if he or she was right on the other Republican issues.
Click to expand...
The evangelical (and other conservative) voters in the Republican primary are tough to win over if you are pro-abortion. Rice, Giuliani, and all other Security Republicans might be able to win them over by focusing on patriotism and security/defense. The Republicans never nominated an openly pro-abortion presidential candidate. It would be tough for Rice if she wanted to run.
 
40.png
Hildebrand:
The evangelical (and other conservative) voters in the Republican primary are tough to win over if you are pro-abortion.
Click to expand...
I think that whoever the Republicans nominate, he or she will be more moderate than Bush and the right-wing evangelical vote won’tbe such a factor. IMO.
Rice, Giuliani, and all other Security Republicans might be able to win them over by focusing on patriotism and security/defense.
Click to expand...
Yes, I agree.
The Republicans never nominated an openly pro-abortion presidential candidate. It would be tough for Rice if she wanted to run.
Click to expand...
But, they have pro-choicers in the Senate and House.
 
I’d vote for Joe Schriner.

voteforjoe.com
40.png
mjdonnelly:
I was wondering what everyone would think if the Republican nominee was Condi Rice, and the Democratic nominee was Hillary Clinton?

Aside from not liking the opposite parties nomination for whatever reason. But based on the 2 main parties both putting up women for office, and Condi being a minority.

It would kind of twist the arms of those who think someone can’t do a job based on their color, sex, etc.
Click to expand...
 
40.png
Norwich:
I suspect that if you used this argument with your daughter she may show how and where to put the sanitary towel.

Sexist? Jeeeez…
Click to expand...
If you means sexist in that GOd designed men and women for different roles, and that I respect that distinction, then yes, I am a sexist and proud of it.
 
I know several women- in particular several african-american women- who think that Condi Rice is a sell out. With all of the power and influence she has, she still submits to the conservative white man’s agenda (or perhaps she has gotten her power b/c of her willingness to sell out?)

On the other hand, Hillary would be as divicive a president as dub-ya. Both George and Hillary are people you either love or you hate. Does America really need another divider as president? As much as I may personally like Hillary, I would have to say she isn’t what America needs (much as I used to personally like Bush but now see him as a divider)

The original question is interesting, but i have to say I hope that neither of these women become president- for the sake of our country!
 
40.png
Scott_Lafrance:
While I am not intrinsically opposed to having a woman as President, the part I think that most people have a problem with is having a female Commander in Chief of the most powerful military force on the planet. Since all combat troops are men, I think there is some resentment at having to take orders from someone who could never function in a capacity that they would have the power to lead. In a simple analogy, it would be like me showing my daughter how to use sanitary napkins. Aside from the generally eerieness of that situation, I don’t know how to use one, and will never NEED to use one. The country doesn’t NEED a female President to show the world how egalitarian and enlightened we are as a culture.
Click to expand...
You frighten me. I would guess from the above that you feel Condi is already over her head in her current post, much less as President. Funny how our current Commander in Chief places so much confidence in her abilities.

And for anyone who suggests Guiliani as an option…have you forgotten so soon what it’s like having someone in the Oval Office with the morals of an alleycat?
 
Island Oak:
You frighten me. I would guess from the above that you feel Condi is already over her head in her current post, much less as President. Funny how our current Commander in Chief places so much confidence in her abilities.

And for anyone who suggests Guiliani as an option…have you forgotten so soon what it’s like having someone in the Oval Office with the morals of an alleycat?
Click to expand...
I frighten you because I have a well-formed opinion? You must be a democrat, because conformance is key in that party. President Bush has confidence in Secretary Rice’s abilities as a diplomat, not as a military strategist. Additionally, I have never supported Guiliani as an option for President. He is more Liberal than anything. I have no need for CINO’s in public office. If you’re a Catholic, be a Catholic, don’t just use it as voter bait.
 
40.png
Steph700:
On the other hand, Hillary would be as divisive a president as dub-ya. Both George and Hillary are people you either love or you hate.
Click to expand...
Amen.
As much as I may personally like Hillary, I would have to say she isn’t what America needs
Click to expand...
I’d like her as President, but, as you say…

I hope, for the sake of our country, that both parties nominate more centrist candidates. We don’t need the polarization that we have now.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top