allen was a Gov! eight years in Virginia, I think.

Cheney is looking better and better.

Dunno. I'd have a difficult time voting for the guy, partly because I'd like to go a few years without hearing 'Halliburton', and partly because I question his judgement- IMO, a significant factor in why the case for deposing Saddam was based on WMDs was because a bunch of Iraqi National Congress* types came to Cheney with a load of BS, and he and Tenet fell for it.

How big of a f'up do you get to make before you disqualify yourself?

*http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iraqi_National_Congress

I'm writing in the kid from Life Goes On... Corky in '08!
He's also got more on the ball then the other clowns listed.

How's Barbour too corrupt?

Romney DID carry his home state...he got elected to office!
States like to have "their" guy sitting in the White House figuring they'll have a little more pull.

He has a better shot at carrying it than any other Republican except for Guiliani...but would Guiliani carry Mississippi?

The link in the post won't work for counting votes from blog readers. The link you should use to vote is:

http://www.patrickruffini.com/archives/2005/09/september_straw.php

The only logical choice is Cheney. And as for Romney- could a Mormon win?

Mike Huckabee... bad name.. Hey! :-)

x2 Stephen. The field listed leaves me cold. I'd rather see Hilary (ugh!!) gridlocked with a hostile Congress than any of these assclowns.

I'd seriously consider Rice, based on what I've seen, but the caveat is we haven't really seen a wide spectrum of her views.

Rice is my choice. She has no baggage that would prevent her from shellacking the carpetbagger from New York.

Allen was governor for four years, Virgina law limits governors to one four-year term.

Pawlenty's better than his current reputation shows, he had a really rough session this year with the legislature, but he'll get reelected easily next fall, in Minnesota that's an accomplishment for a republican.

And as for carrying his home state, he gives better odds than Romney.

Allen's not responding to pork-buster questions.

Allen's not responding to pork-buster questions.

Pork-buster questions DID just start, though. Give the guy some time.

Ditto the others' comments about Allen having been Governor; that cancels out the Senate curse. ;-)

But too young?? That didn't stop Clinton or Bush. He's just aged well.

Anyway, how 'bout them Bushes? Jeb's looking pretty good now in the poll! I've already formulated a few campaign slogans:

"Institutionalize a Moonbat: Vote Jeb Bush"

"Kill a Commie: Vote Jeb Bush"

"Vote BDS: Jeb Bush 2008"

muahahahahahhaaaaaa

rudy can get the nomination, depending on the perceived security and threat level in the US. If R voters feel secure, his gay roommates will doom him, along with his anti-gun stand. But in a danger close situation... he's got a much better chance.

But yeah, this just makes Draft Rice a much, much better option.

Huckabee uninspiring? The guy's lost 100 pounds and wrote a book about it. It is great to hear him talk. I bet you don't even know who he is!

All these polls leave out a very obvious candidate. Since our country was served by a "selected" president from 00-04, it would seem that the 22nd amendment does not apply to "W". Sure, the Dems will fight this all the way to the Supreme Court. But We all know who the "Supremes" sing back up for.

"W" 08

Rudy will have a hell of a scrap getting out of the primaries, but from the comments I have read so far, it seems as if people are a little too quick to dismiss his chances.

I think Rudy would make the best President out of the bunch. Unlike any of the candidates on either side, he has proven himself to be an outstanding executive not only driving his agenda through, but even more-so as a leader in crisis. The man is a great communicator, completely contrasting with our current President, whom I greatly support on the war, but cringe everytime he steps up to the mic (when and if he does).

The next step in the war is going to need a leader who can take PR battle head on. Militarily the war is going really, really well. At home, the war is being lost and we desperately need someone who can step up with solid credentials to lead. Bush has failed to do this and it has been my most frustrating criticsm of someone who I know clearly understands the enemies we face and how to deal with them.

Sorry, Rudy's credentials in this arena surpass everyone's by leaps and bounds...and that includes Condi.

I have to point out that nearly every right-thinking blogger who dismisses Rudy does so on the basis of how they feel he is percieved Down South. I believe you guys overestimate the impact of social issues and underestimate competence.

Crackers don't need to love the guy--and the gay roommates is really taking this too far--as long as they trust him. Rudy is nothing if not trustworthy.

I'm telling you, he can win. And I think maybe he should.

If a Guiliani/Rice ticket can't beat anything the Dems put up, then by all means, let Gore/Kerry/Hillary be prez, imho.

I would like to see Newt step up. I would say he is a black horse in this race that if he could get by the Primaries would have a real strong shot at the People's vote. Everyone else just cries about the other side and blames with no answers that can make sence to the common guy (every common middle class citizen knows and understands cuttin back tighting the old belt to get by, most of us cant just borrow unlimited money or go to the boss and Demand a raise to pay for our useless crap and irresponsibility). The debt and economy gas prices china imigration ect... are going to be bigger and bigger towards 08' I have heard some of his ideas and cut cut cut the gov, make what gov is left private enterprice with gov contracts, and vouchers for schools, lock down the border and make guest worker pass looser, shrink regulation, let the free market work freely quit bailing out with coorporate welfare the huge mismanaged companies like the big airlines and let them crash so the small new upcoming fresh blood that if better could take over, could be big sellers in 08' these type ideas is what got the Repubs were they are today. Even though the current big gov Repub porkers have gotten greedy and short memories. The Repub majority today is the above mentioned base Middle Class, more libertatian economic mix with some repub morals. The Moral Issue thing is a secondary idea the current big gov porkers grabbed onto to keep thier lard flowith.
The Dems have been preaching these ideas limited but thier base have major major issues with these type ideas.
I think he is a little soft on the International stage but with the right advisors that could be corrected. We dont need the world to love us (that us a utopian drean anyway) just Respect or if nessecary Fear US.

Guiliani/Rice

Saying that Romney can't win his home state is an obvious red herring. He wouldn't have to, nor would he be expected to. He knows it and is already managing expectations on that one.

I'll grant he's not the obvious favorite, but don't count him out.

Geena Davis should run. She'll be out of work after they cancel her new show next week.

I don't know, I think Romney has a chance. I would prefer a Romney/Rice, or Guliani/Rice. Romney and Guliani have proven that they can manage things, at least, even if we don't agree with them at all time. Rice is too much of an unknown quantity, but I like her as VP, that we might learn a bit more about her for 4-8 years. Then she can run for Pres.

I'll repeat the question - How is Haley too corrupt?

You could complain that he is too much of an insider - but maybe after Katrina and the debacle of Homeland Security thats what we needed. But, what has he ever done that you would label CORRUPT????

Re: George Allen - the Senate Rule is out there, but it applies mostly because they lack executive experience. Allen was a VERY popular Governor here in Virginia.

As for the list - its far from complete or exhaustive.

Where is Mike Leavitt? He is positining himself quite nicely for run right now showering NH and Iowa with tons of $$$ and making regular trips out there. Plenty of business leaders looking at jumping in too.

Condi, damn it.

Okay, okay, if I have to pick from that list, I'd pick Allen--the "senators don't win" rule wouldn't apply if the other candidate is also a senator (and come to think of it, if McCain got into enough of a snit, that might make three senators on the November ballot--God help us).

Rudy is Hillary in drag. Given the choice, I'll hold my nose and vote for the real Hillary over the ersatz Hillary.

" Rudy Giuliani (too liberal to nominate, a fantasy choice)"

Except that he keeps winning straw polls by a wide margin, even from social conservatives. It's the same priciple by which many liberals voted for Bush: being smart about national security and terrorism trumps their usual domestic concerns.

I think he can win if nominated.

I don't believe that the two best known GOP candidates (Giuliani and McCain) can get the nomination- which throws it into the ranks of the dwarves. My money's still on George Allen as being the most likely GOP 08 candidate- in spite of the fact that he's virtually unknown nationally.

Both Leavitt and Romney's campaigns are nonstarters. A Mormon will not win a national campaign in the next 20 years, at least. If he could even survive the Republican primaries.

Haley Barbour - Too much drawl, too fat, too whatever. But too corrupt? He was a high profile target when he was in DC and the Dems would have had him a long time ago if this was so.

I think that Giuliani has a better chance than people think. I agree with whomever said that the idea that he can't win is based on speculation about how acceptable he'd be to the bible belt. Part of it, yes, will depend on how secure we all feel a couple of years from now, and I don't think he could win without a socially conservative running mate. I just think that everyone is underestimating the social conservatives. Will they be enthusiastic to get out and vote for Rudy? Well, that depends on who the democrats have on the ballot. The most strongly conservative sorts really *really* don't like Hillary.

I *like* Condi, I really really do. I just think she's got better things to do than stroke the electorate.

I really don't understand the logic in backing Romney. He's more conservative than Rudy, and he doesn't have Rudy's messy personal life, but he's still pro-choice on abortion, which will make him ultimately unacceptable to the very voters people are afraid Rudy will alienate. If you're going to alienate the die hard pro-life voters anyway, at least nominate the the more charismatic pro-choice candidate and the one with the strongest record in executive leadership -- and Rudy wins on both counts hands down.

It's three years before the freaking primaries even start. A lot can happen in that time. This online poll ain't worth the paper it's printed on.

True, but it's fun. :-)

Giuliani/Rice.

I might prefer Rice/Giuliani, but realistically we need to see Condi serve a term or two as VP first.

Two points:

1) In the Sci.military.naval newsgroup the McCain vs Hillary vs Cthulu choice was polled: Cthulu won.

2) Re: Condi, unfortunately she's now demonstrated that she's an old State Department hand, read: willing to suck up to the Saudis and sell the Israelis and the rest of the US citizenry down the river.

Lost my vote, which she had until then.

I don't believe that the two best known GOP candidates (Giuliani and McCain) can get the nomination- which throws it into the ranks of the dwarves.

McCain won't get it- he's pissed off too many people too many times.

Guiliani will have to persuade the social conservatives that he's not going to try to turn the country into NYC. If he can do that, he's got a chance.

I don't believe a Pro-Choice Republican will survive the primary. That hurts both Rudy and Condi. There are simply too many people in this country who couldn't support a pro-choice candidate under any circumstances to allow a Republican one to win a major national election.

I have a feeling Cheney will end up running, and if he does, he'll be the logical choice to succeed Bush. Whether or not he wins is another story- perhaps it depends on whether his boss improves his approval ratings in the next three years.

Of course, Condi has plenty of time to change her position on abortion. After all, President Bush 41 did so and I once read that our current POTUS was a pro-choice man around the time he first ran for Congress. Could be wrong, though.

My choices are:
1. Rice
2. Giuliani
3. Gingrich

A Rice-Giuliani or Giuliani-Rice ticket would be ideal. Then put Newt at State or Health or some other cabinet position where he can knock heads.

Steve, I realize that you may be busy, but I'll like to know why you say that Barbour is too corrupt.

I can give a reason why Barbour should not be chosen though it has nothing to do with corruption.

I'm in Mississippi and he has a tin ear. He made the Medicaid cuts into a fiasco when he could have avoided it entirely by waiting a year for the prescription drug benefit in Medicare to kick in. Then he could have cut Medicaid -- because Medicare would have covered what he wanted removed -- but he couldn't wait one year.

Remember--you heard it here first...

Rummy/Rice '08

Rice/Romney '12

Sorry all above, it's Trump for P and Tancredo for VP. I am tired of hearing about all the others. We need new leaders who recognize our enemies in the ME and those ensconced here and who may do something serious to get rid of them besides holding their hands and giving them money.

Oh, please, not with the Newt suggestions again! Gingrich's problem, it seems to me [warning--armchair psychologizing ahead], is that somewhere, way back in high school perhaps, he realized he was smarter than some folks he knew, and made the unfortunate extrapolation that he was really smart in absolute terms. For just one piece of evidence that he's not, just look as his ongoing fascination with the Tofflers. Do you really want somebody like that occupying the White House? I sure don't. Or look at how he did fine as a back-bench/insurgent/bomb-thrower in Congress, but once he helped engineer the R victory in '94* had no real idea how to behave or what to do next.

*(And I do give him credit for that; it's just too bad there wasn't somebody competent to take over at that point.)

1st, 2nd & 3rd choice - Jeb Bush
Next - Condi
I would consider - Pawlenty

I move to draft JC Watts

He's good looking, conservative, church-going, a family man. Has served time in DC, and shown enough character to bow-out for a breather before becoming corrupted.

And, at least last time I saw him on TV, is sharp and articulate in a way we don't often see in our politicos.

I like Erlich from MD. He's an interesting guy. His LT Gov is Steele who I also like.
They both are driving the Dems in MD crazy. Erlich hasn't accomplished getting slots at the race tracks, but he's accomplished quite a bit. EDS is almost as bad as BDS in MD. Just read any Wash Post on Erlich. They're barely short of frothing.
Erlich/Rice would be cool, Erlich/Benito Giuliani would also be cool.
Erlich/Steele would be cool too.
Especially since with Rice or Steele, we would get to see the NY Times and Wash Post tell us that Rice/Steele aren't real minorities.

I'm with Patrick and Rob. Haley may not be a great candidate for President, but he's not corrupt.

Here's the ticket, though: Giuliani/Barbour. Giuliani will be a strong force up north, Barbour will help them sweep the south and show strong in the west. Giuliani brings the 9/11 patriot mystique; Barbour brings social conservatism to counterbalance Rudy's moderateness. Giuliani's a big-picture guy, very charismatic; Barbour's an operator with unmatched fund-raising and organization skills. I've got an interview with Larry Sabato about this coming up over at MIssissippiPolitics.Com.