View Full Version : Condoleezza Rice Is Pursuing the VP Spot
ABCNews’ Mary Bruce Reports: Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice is actively courting the vice presidential nomination, Republican strategist Dan Senor said.
“Condi Rice has been actively, actually in recent weeks, campaigning for this,” Senor said this morning on “This Week with George Stephanopoulos.”
According to Senor, Rice has been cozying up to the Republican elite.
“There's this ritual in Washington: The Americans for Tax Reform, which is headed by Grover Norquist, he holds a weekly meeting of conservative leaders -- about 100, 150 people, sort of inside, chattering, class types,” Senor said. “They all typically get briefings from political conservative leaders. Ten days ago, they had an interesting visit -- Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice -- the first time a secretary of state has visited the Wednesday meeting.”
Senor explained that Rice’s history in public office would make her a prime candidate, especially in light of presumptive Republican presidential nominee Sen. John McCain’s emphasis on experience throughout his campaign.
“What the McCain campaign has to consider is whether or not they want to pick a total outsider, a fresh face, someone a lot younger than him, a governor who people aren't that familiar with," Senor said. "The challenge they're realizing is that they'll have to have to spend 30 to 45 days, which they won't have at that point, educating the American public about who this person is.
“The other category is someone who people instantly say, the second they see that announcement, 'I get it, that person could be president tomorrow,'" Senor added. "Condi Rice is an option.”
http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalradar/2008/04/dan-senor-condo.html
__________________________________________________ _____
Interesting indeed. And yes, I mentioned this very possibility earlier on in the year.
NocturnalRob
04-07-2008, 09:05 AM
"Condi Rice is an option.”
please god, no.
TheEschaton
04-07-2008, 09:09 AM
I think her connection to the Bush administration would be a negative thing for most people, even many Republicans, but who knows.
Clove
04-07-2008, 11:31 AM
I think her connection to the Bush administration would be a negative thing for most people, even many Republicans, but who knows.Somebody splash water on the -E-. He's daydreaming again.
TheEschaton
04-07-2008, 11:36 AM
Bush's administration is mocked by even Republicans who are seeking re-election. Why would his former NSA/current Sec State be a good running mate? Not to mention she's been grossly incompetent in both posts.
-TheE-
NocturnalRob
04-07-2008, 11:42 AM
Not to mention she's been grossly incompetent in both posts.
shockingly enough, i completely agree with E on this point
Clove
04-07-2008, 11:45 AM
Bush's administration is mocked by even Republicans who are seeking re-election. Why would his former NSA/current Sec State be a good running mate? Not to mention she's been grossly incompetent in both posts.
-TheE-I don't know, why would Powell make a good running mate?
Khariz
04-07-2008, 11:59 AM
shockingly enough, i completely agree with E on this point
I blame affirmative action. Oh...wait...hmm.
I still blame it.
ClydeR
04-07-2008, 12:08 PM
Dr. Rice was the head of The Vulcans (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Vulcans). A lot of you will disagree with me on this, but I think the proof is in the pudding that she would be an excellent Vice President.
Clove
04-07-2008, 12:27 PM
Dr. Rice was the head of The Vulcans (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Vulcans). A lot of you will disagree with me on this, but I think the proof is in the pudding that she would be an excellent Vice President.Well she has foreign policy experience.
Well she has foreign policy experience.
And she's got the minority edge... and the vajayjay edge.
She's a one stop shop for those who wish to vote purely on gender or race. ;)
Clove
04-07-2008, 02:27 PM
And she's got the minority edge... and the vajayjay edge.
She's a one stop shop for those who wish to vote purely on gender or race. ;)You're forgetting http://pointsbypritt.files.wordpress.com/2007/09/mckinney.jpg
Warriorbird
04-07-2008, 02:28 PM
I'm not sure the anti-woman anti-black contingent would be in favor of her being on the ballot... even though it'd be a genius move. It seems a bit me too-ish but I think it'd be genius. Maybe they can mollify the troglodytes by reassuring them she'd never be President.
You're forgetting http://pointsbypritt.files.wordpress.com/2007/09/mckinney.jpg
LOL
Touche.
Parkbandit
04-07-2008, 02:45 PM
I think her connection to the Bush administration would be a negative thing for most people, even many Republicans, but who knows.
I agree. If she really has higher political aspirations.. she's better off waiting 4-8 years.
Clove
04-07-2008, 03:01 PM
I agree. If she really has higher political aspirations.. she's better off waiting 4-8 years.What are you talking about, after McCain dies she can has Presidency.
What are you talking about, after McCain dies she can has Presidency.
I would not be all that uncomfortable with that to be honest...
It could be argued that her, and Powell’s, ineffectualness from 2000 - 2004 could have been a result of the power-plays between Rumsfeld, Tenet, and Cheney.
With McCain pretty much espousing the Bush line on Iraq she might add greatly to his viability. In other words, she might sway some of the Bushie’s who feel McCain is a RINO.
This raises many questions though... with Condi on the ticket is it a grand-slam for the Republicans vs. Hillary? Or Obama? If not who could McCain pick that it would be? Is their a pairing on the Republican ticket that would be?
As a democrat supporting Obama, a McCain/Rice ticket seems formidable.
Daniel
04-07-2008, 05:00 PM
I guess it depends on who McCain needs more: Moderates or Far-Right Wingers.
If it's moderates..this is the most retarded move ever. It takes his biggest weakness (Closeness with Bush policies) and shoves a fucking sword into it.
If it's Far-Right wingers..he's going to have a problem with the fact that she's a black woman.
I don't really see this happening.
Kembal
04-07-2008, 05:35 PM
Gotta remember, with McCain's age being an issue, whoever he picks as VP will have added importance. Outside of her incompetence and the fact she's so closely tied to Bush, she also has zero domestic policy experience. She'd get destroyed in the VP debate, and would become a drag on the ticket.
I guess it depends on who McCain needs more: Moderates or Far-Right Wingers.
McCain is a moderate. The guy is a Democrat in Republican's clothing.
TheEschaton
04-07-2008, 06:04 PM
Backlash, again you seem to have no grasp of politics. It's not that she was ineffectual, but that she was far too effectual, yet grossly incompetent.
-TheE-
LMingrone
04-07-2008, 06:06 PM
http://img210.imageshack.us/img210/1775/condoleezarice2wp9.jpg
I'd like to see General Franks as VP.
Daniel
04-07-2008, 06:15 PM
McCain is a moderate. The guy is a Democrat in Republican's clothing.
Hence my point.
McCain will rely a lot more on swing votes than George Bush did.
Parkbandit
04-07-2008, 06:21 PM
I guess it depends on who McCain needs more: Moderates or Far-Right Wingers.
If it's moderates..this is the most retarded move ever. It takes his biggest weakness (Closeness with Bush policies) and shoves a fucking sword into it.
If it's Far-Right wingers..he's going to have a problem with the fact that she's a black woman.
I don't really see this happening.
:rofl: @ you implying far right wingers are sexists and racists.
Parkbandit
04-07-2008, 06:31 PM
Backlash, again you seem to have no grasp of politics. It's not that she was ineffectual, but that she was far too effectual, yet grossly incompetent.
-TheE-
At the very least, Backlash is able to view Rice in a semi-objective manner... something you have always been incapable of doing.
It's funny.. I always thought Backlash was the biggest idiot liberal on the boards.
Clove
04-07-2008, 06:45 PM
Hence my point.
McCain will rely a lot more on swing votes than George Bush did.Who else are Republicans going to vote for? Nader?
Daniel
04-07-2008, 06:47 PM
:rofl: @ you implying far right wingers are sexists and racists.
Don't forget homophobic.
Daniel
04-07-2008, 06:48 PM
Who else are Republicans going to vote for? Nader?
Who else are democrats going to vote for? You seem to think that this battle between Obama and Hillary will somehow cost them the election. It's the same principle.
Clove
04-07-2008, 06:53 PM
Who else are democrats going to vote for? You seem to think that this battle between Obama and Hillary will somehow cost them the election. It's the same principle.Because historically long, bitter candidacy races have the cost their party the general election. And not because party members didn't vote for their party. If general elections were about parties, the party with the majority members would win every time.
While the Democrats fight, McCain is out making undecideds, decideds.
Daniel
04-07-2008, 06:57 PM
You think Obama and Hillary *aren't * doing those things?
Obama took in twice as much as McCain last month. I don't see him having a clear advantage here. Both are campaigning hard across the board and I'd suggest that the democrats have the advantage for planning debates as they know who they have to contend with, whereas McCain has no idea.
Clove
04-07-2008, 07:03 PM
You think Obama and Hillary *aren't * doing those things?No, I don't.
Daniel
04-07-2008, 07:07 PM
*Nice edit
I think your whole hypothesis is nothing more than wishful thinking, but I guess we'll see.
LMingrone
04-07-2008, 07:08 PM
No one bit on my Tommy Franks bait before. I don't think he ever wants to be a politician. That's one dude I'd trust though.
Anyone have an arguement against him?
Daniel
04-07-2008, 07:10 PM
Um..His orders to prepare for a 90 day exit of Iraq?
LMingrone
04-07-2008, 07:14 PM
I just think it might actually be possible to trust (I use the word loosely) the guy with the American War Machine.
It would be an improvement over High Lord Cheney, you can't deny that.
Backlash, again you seem to have no grasp of politics. It's not that she was ineffectual, but that she was far too effectual, yet grossly incompetent.
-TheE-
No grasp? Ok.
I said she was ineffectual because of who she worked with. You say she was ineffectual because she’s incompetent?
Parkbandit
04-07-2008, 07:47 PM
Don't forget homophobic.
That one is fine.. because most of the far religious right believe that being gay is a sin against man or some such nonsense.
But they aren't racists or sexists for the most part. Nice try though.
Keller
04-07-2008, 08:22 PM
At the very least, Backlash is able to view Rice in a semi-objective manner... something you have always been incapable of doing.
It's funny.. I always thought Backlash was the biggest idiot liberal on the boards.
As a former semi-conservative, wouldn't you be the last person with the right to criticise someone's ability to view a politician in a "semi-objective" manner?
Jesus man. I just laughed outloud in class when I read that. Really, ParkTroll criticising someone elses subjectivity? I've seen it all at this point.
Keller
04-07-2008, 08:25 PM
I'd have to agree that she's a pretty poor choice at this point because of her ties with Bush. Maybe in 4-8 years, as PB said -- but not now.
Further -- please don't compare Powell to Rice. Powell got hood-winked into following the party line. Once he realized the error in his ways he didn't write a best-selling book or go on national television declaring the error in his ways. He was a consumate professional. He did his job and quietly left the administration at the most opportune moment. He has both distanced himself from the administrations policies and maintained his own professional image.
Snapp
04-07-2008, 08:46 PM
QUESTION: And would you consider vice president?
SECRETARY RICE: Not interested.
http://www.state.gov/secretary/rm/2008/03/102757.htm
I doubt she'll run.
And also,
http://www.reuters.com/article/politicsNews/idUSN2262518020080222?feedType=RSS&feedName=politicsNews&rpc=22&sp=true
Kembal
04-07-2008, 08:46 PM
No grasp? Ok.
I said she was ineffectual because of who she worked with. You say she was ineffectual because she’s incompetent?
No, she was effectual. It's just that the effects of her actions backfired on the U.S. spectacularly. And that was due to her incompetence.
No, she was effectual. It's just that the effects of her actions backfired on the U.S. spectacularly. And that was due to her incompetence.
I disagree. She could have been effectual. Too bad they did not let her be.
Miscast
04-07-2008, 09:34 PM
:laugh loud:
Daniel
04-07-2008, 10:56 PM
She sucked. Period.
TheEschaton
04-08-2008, 01:28 AM
"let her be"? Believe me, Condi was everything she wanted to be, it just turned out it blew chunks.
Parkbandit
04-08-2008, 07:12 AM
"let her be"? Believe me, Condi was everything she wanted to be, it just turned out it blew chunks.
Let's also keep in mind you also consider Bill Clinton the greatest US President of all time... and still consider Hillary Clinton the best candidate.
Forgive me if I think your opinion blows chunks.. and isn't really based in reality.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2025 vBulletin Solutions Inc. All rights reserved.