Back to Where We Started
We've circled "Back to the Future." Once again we're talking about a general election race between John McCain and Hillary Clinton, just like we were at the beginning of this campaign, two years ago (or was it longer than that?).
Since that first flurry of pundit speculation, McCain's campaign has experienced what can only be described as a resurrection that would do Pastor Mike Huckabee proud.
Actually, let's make that a rise from the ashes, since Senator McCain does live near Phoenix. But whatever silly way I describe it, John McCain was considered a goner just a short time back, by those of us who make the big bucks telling everyone what's going on.
Well, we were wrong. Just like we've been wrong predicting each and every up and down for Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama.
Having said that, let's pretend that McCain and Clinton are the nominees. Now it's time to talk about running mates.
Let's begin with the GOP standard bearer: Would it be a McCain-Huckabee ticket? That would certainly appeal to the flock of religious conservatives who consider John McCain a relative of Satan. McCain could continue to regard journalists as his "base" (that's how he described us), and Huckabee could make sure the fundamentalists' fervor for the party would be born still again.
Or McCain might insist on his old buddy Fred Thompson. In his few presidential campaigns, Thompson presented himself as a conservative and those who have been off-put by Dick Cheney's aggressive activism might be assured by a potential Vice President who probably wouldn't want to work very hard.
I doubt seriously that Mitt Romney would get the nod, even though he might be willing to embrace whatever position McCain wanted him to. As for Giuliani, no way in hell. He's probably just going to stay in Florida.
Now let's talk about the Democrats. Forget it: Bill will not be Hillary's running mate. Not officially anyway.
I seriously doubt whether Obama would be willing to be Number 2, and it would probably not be a good idea because a ticket like that would rally every racist and misogynist who would then vote as a huge "Bigot Bloc" for the white guy Republicans.
In spite of the fact that Dennis Kucinich would probably file a lawsuit demanding to be included on the ticket, one can only assume the best bet would be Bill Richardson.
He's a nice guy and has the same claim to experience that Joe Biden and Chris Dodd have but he would be less likely to overshadow numero una, Hillary.
This assumes that Obama doesn't win the big prize (Would Hillary take second billing? I doubt it). And we haven't even talked about a scenario that includes an independent candidacy of Mike Bloomberg (I don't think he's going to run, but if he did, would be refer to his VP as a "C.O.O."?).
At some point soon, we can look at what a McCain-Clinton race would be like. Of course, we probably should hurry before that assumption is in tatters.
This is idle speculation, obviously, and it's riddled with shaky premises. But no shakier than what we've been putting out as insider perspective for a long time. About all we know is that somebody will be a new president and vice president next January 20th, assuming the current ones don't pull some sort of fast one to override the Constitution. That next administration will then get to work restoring the other parts of the Constitution that have been so badly damaged.
Follow Bob Franken on Twitter: www.twitter.com/frankenb
Loading comments…
Want to reply to a comment? Hint: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to
'John Edwards is the best candidate, but unlikely to get the nomination
The more a would-be candidate comes across as a Populist, the worse his chances, apparently. There has *never* been a Populist elected President, although FDR (arguably) became one after taking office. Reason being, probably, that they are 'scary', not only to the Wealthy & the Corporations, but also to those Who Just Want To Keep Their Jobs, which is most of us. It takes courage or a certain kind of recklessness to choose such a candidate. Let's see what happens at the Convention. Let's get him there. (It happens I'm an Edwards supporter.
And I will echo what a lot of Democrats are already saying...I
'Would it be a McCain-Huckabee ticket? That would certainly appeal to the flock of religious conservatives who consider John McCain a relative of Satan. ...
Or McCain might insist on his old buddy Fred Thompson.'
McCain-Huckabee would be a formidable pairing, at least among Repos, if they can get over their animosity.
'Frederick of Hollywood' for VP? The *really* Old Couple? Very unlikely.
Romney will need to run without a VP, most likely, unless one of his sons is available.
Bob, I think that unless some serious work is done right now to ENFORCE the Constitution with regards to the past behavior of a great many "civil officers" (not just the President and his cronies), there will be no change at all next year.
Why should there be?
With only a few hundred million dollars' worth of media spending, the populace will have obediently tolerated and accepted every thing that was done to them ... and will have obediently chased after every media non-story that was ever sent to distract them. Literally trillions(!) of dollars will have been siphoned from the public's treasury, even to the point of causing financial collapse that was only offset by the sell-off.
No, Bob, this is business. A multi-trillion dollar criminal business and not one thing more. Don't engage in the wistful illusion that lawbreakers will ever stop what they are doing as long as they know that impeachment is not possible: without impeachment, prosecution is not possible and prison is not possible.
If the American people actually want their country back ... remember that the criminals are "multi-national" ... they must start with true law-enforcement, and to get that they must FORCE their lawmakers to actually do it.
The propaganda will not stop; don't expect it to stop. But the system set forth in our Constitution still works as intended, however only-if the people of this country force it (peacably but relentlessly) to do so.
No candidate will ever achieve anything, unless many harsh impeachments have preceded them.
Ya... Let's talk about the parts of the Constitution that have been trashed or are about to be by the next President whoever they are shall we?
If you think Bushco worked over the Constitution and the Bill of Rights wait 'til you see what any possible Democrat or John McCain will do to the Second Amendment and all it protects! And don't get your hopes up that ANY candidate from EITHER party will repair the damages done to rights and freedom by the current administration. Just look at the voting records of any or all of the possible winners of the next election. Add to that the fact that many of those running for lesser office will receive little scrutiny because of the dust up over the Presidential race, and you will get a whole new dose of more of the same and devolving rights all around. As long as the government is a wholey owned subsidiary of the coporate media and its advertisers "we the people" will have little to look forward to except a form of slavery. Oh... and good luck with getting reform of the voting machine thing too!
Howzabout McCain and Ann Coulter? That would fix the "I'm a woman" problem, and it would get all the rabid drooling haters on board - no need for an independent 3rd party candidate. It would also bring in all the pseudo-christians as well as the rest of the Faux News audience.
talk about idle speculation, what's the point of even writing it, I hope you don't get paid much for that, if anything.
Very nice to hear what you think, but what about edwards? don't you think he warrents more mention than kuccinich or richardson. The story that richardson was running for VP is very nice but was mostly a media construction. It seems pretty clear now that Edwards is betting on being the Kingmaker, preferably for Obama, to be his VP or attorney general.
pay attention.
"John Edwards is the best candidate, but unlikely to get the nomination because he's too qualified to be president and the corporations wouldn't approve."
--
Voters have nothing to do with it.
"This is idle speculation, obviously, and it's riddled with shaky premises."
--
Thanks for sharing.
I don't know who will end up being the winner of the general election and, quite frankly, it doesn't much matter now.
But I can damn sure guarantee you that the national media and blogosphere, generally speaking, are the big losers as they have been exposed for their complete ineptitude and incompetence by their vacuous and self-important "coverage" of this campaign.
There appears to be no reason for hope that even some of them will acknowledge the role they have played in the dismal failure to adequately inform and enlighten the electorate about any of the issues that matter. It is doubtful that any of them are even aware of how they have collectively corrupted the democratic process.
While running mate predictions are interesting, and, dare I say it, fun, I am appalled by your classification of the so-called "Bigot Bloc" when you don't mention how it works in reverse. Put Hillary in the front seat, and watch people pull for her "because she's a woman." That's certainly bigotry. Put in Obama, and watch people say "pull for the minority." It happens. It's not overt, just as the so-called "Bigot Bloc" would not be overt. But it's there, and deserves mention.
Shame. I really loved the article otherwise.
Clearly, Fred Thompson split the ticket and allowed McCain to win as Ross Perot split the ticket on H Bush allowing Billy C. to win in South Carolina.
Due to what I now call the “Fred Thompson chicken block” on Huckabee, Thompson allowed McCain to win S.C. with an otherwise 2nd place vote count. By McCain’s win, Huckabee’s supporters were given a greater national responsibility than before to also correct the Fred Thompson “Vote Block” mayhem in South Carolina and go forward to win Florida. Everyone knows that the GOP has started eating their own for sport and the most electable candidates are defending themselves from the otherwise “no plan” “no accomplishment” competitors where the last one standing may be the weakest GOP candidates.
Remember, Bob Dole and George H. Bush got hamburgered because the young voters would not or could not relate or associate with them and the same goes for McCain, not to mention the other bones in his closet. That means the democrats will win if Huckabee refuses to get in on the cock fight!
Demos would probably go with Hillary Clinton
and Bill Richardson, although Wes Clark could also be VP.
Repos will go for John McCain with Lindsey Graham, to add the feminine touch, or Chick Norris, for something completely different. Outside chance for Joe Lieberman.
Then everyone else will make the final choice.
You're hoping it will boil down to two Iraq war supporters?
Some choice.
None of the above would be my choice and who cares about VP's then.
I'm a Kucinich fan, but I'd take any combination of the Big Three Dems, or any of the other potential VPs suggested here. The problem with that, of course, is that I wouldn't really LIKE any of them - but they'd be better than the other side.
As for McCain - Schmuckabee: between the two of 'em, they might be able to pander their way through. OR... the majority of Americans might remember that there's a Constitution to be upheld, and it does not mention Jesus anywhere in it. And it should stay that way.
You must be logged in to comment. Log in or connect with
