| rdfs:comment
| - by user Mjhasley Rumors have circulated about 4 possible candidates: NYC Mayor Michael Bloomberg, former Senator and TV "lawyer" Fred Thompson, Newt Gingrich, and Al Gore. Will one of them announce, and if so, will it be too late? Let's look at each: Newt Gingrich: Smart, organized. But not electable. Again, maybe if he can stop his own scandals for 4 years, he might be a name in 2012. Again, he might benefit from people wishing he had run when the Republicans lose in 2008. But in 2012, he'll be nearly 70 himself. Image:Gore.jpg __NOEDITSECTION__
|
| abstract
| - by user Mjhasley Rumors have circulated about 4 possible candidates: NYC Mayor Michael Bloomberg, former Senator and TV "lawyer" Fred Thompson, Newt Gingrich, and Al Gore. Will one of them announce, and if so, will it be too late? Let's look at each: Mike Bloomberg, what is he? Democrat? Republican? In the primaries, it's not good to be in the middle of the road. During the primaries, you attract the die hards, and who is Bloomberg attracting? I'd say: no one. If he has any political instinct at all, he'll realize a primary run is useless. Does that mean he'll run as an independent? He'd probably have a better chance just because he'll get attention in the press with all the people begging him to get out. He doesn't stand a chance, so he should just bail out. Especially since he doesn't have anything to hang his hat on like Giuliani does. How can you run as NYC Mayor with Giuliani in the race? It's about as good of a position to be in like being the next quarterback in Green Bay. Fred Thompson: If he doesn't get in soon, he won't. But, with McCain, his best buddy, picking up steam, I bet he stays out. I think he was going to pick up the pieces of a failed McCain campaign. But McCain has improved and Thompson's speech didn't attract a lot of attention. He's better off being on TV and having people wish he ran, so he'll look strong in 2012, if he's still viable. He'll be 70 in 2012. Newt Gingrich: Smart, organized. But not electable. Again, maybe if he can stop his own scandals for 4 years, he might be a name in 2012. Again, he might benefit from people wishing he had run when the Republicans lose in 2008. But in 2012, he'll be nearly 70 himself. Image:Gore.jpg Al Gore: depends if he has the guts to go against the Clinton machine. I cannot see how waiting is a benefit unless if many of the other candidates drop out before Iowa and New Hampshire. They say summer is the optimal time, but with more debates happening and the good will he has now, I would think sooner is better. He's on a roll and would probably do well, unless if the Democratic machine is begging him not to run. Of the 4, I think Gore is the most likely to run, and the most likely to be successful at it. With Hillary's numbers dropping, a vote on the war that might make the Left angry with Obama and Clinton, Al Gore may feel like he can ride in on his horse and steal the election, and he just might. Especially since he could easily replace Edwards as the "left's" darling. www.votein2008.blogspot.com __NOEDITSECTION__ From The Opinion Wiki, a Wikia wiki. From The Opinion Wiki, a Wikia wiki.
|
![[RDF Data]](/fct/images/sw-rdf-blue.png)