Guest Cerebus Report post Posted January 27, 2004 While I don't put MSNBC's gossip column high on my reliable sources list, I found this article too interesting to ignore... Will Giuliani replace Cheney in ’04? Does Rudy Giuliani have his sights set on the vice-presidency? By Jeannette Walls with Ashley Pearson MSNBC A well-placed source says that the president will “most likely” drop Dick Cheney from his re-election ticket and his first choice for a replacement is former New York City mayor Rudy Giuliani. “The issue of Cheney’s health will probably be given as the reason,” says the insider. “There’s a short list of possible replacements, and Rudy is at the top of the list.” The source adds that the selection of the former New York mayor may be overridden by Bush advisors from the far right. “Giuliani has been pro-choice, pro-gay rights, and is pretty liberal on some other social issues, but the thinking is that he might broaden Bush’s appeal.” If, however, Giuliani gets bumped from the ticket, says the source, “expect him to get a prime assignment in Washington as an consolation prize.” Bush’s rep didn’t return calls, and a spokeswoman for Giuliani said, “Rudy Giuliani has been out in Iowa and New Hampshire talking about the incredible accomplishments of Vice President Dick Cheney with George Bush and working very hard to get them both re-elected.” Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Justice 0 Report post Posted January 27, 2004 Good choice, though Powell is the best choice here. Even most Dems respect him if they don't agree with him, he's got the experience, and he definitely deserves a shot. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Vern Gagne 0 Report post Posted January 27, 2004 Powell has said numerous times he has no interest in being President or Vice President. I wouldn't mind seeing Condolezza Rice run has Vice President. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kkktookmybabyaway 0 Report post Posted January 27, 2004 As much as I like Rudy G., I don't think he'd become a veep on the Reppublican side -- way too liberal on the social side of things for the GOP... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
CanadianChris 0 Report post Posted January 27, 2004 As much as I like Rudy G., I don't think he'd become a veep on the Reppublican side -- way too liberal on the social side of things for the GOP... Depends on how they play it. He could get the swing voters over to the GOP side, while the Republican faithful would still vote for them knowing that Bush still holds all the power. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kkktookmybabyaway 0 Report post Posted January 27, 2004 We're not going to see a GOP veep anytime soon that supports partial-birth abortions. End of story... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Vern Gagne 0 Report post Posted January 27, 2004 The GOP wants Rudy to take on Hilary Clinton. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
2GOLD 0 Report post Posted January 27, 2004 Bush and Rudy? Well, time for the dems to prepare that 2008 campaign. Man, who is the independent? If it's still Nadar, then I'm voting....for Bush. God, my mouth filled with bile having to say that. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
C Dubya 04 0 Report post Posted January 27, 2004 I really always thought that Rudy had one good month as Mayor of NYC. The rest of the time was just swill. He did an incredible job after 9/11, which is what people now remember him for, but I don't know any New Yorkers who liked him before then. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Cerebus Report post Posted January 27, 2004 I really always thought that Rudy had one good month as Mayor of NYC. The rest of the time was just swill. He did an incredible job after 9/11, which is what people now remember him for, but I don't know any New Yorkers who liked him before then. Don't know about that Dubya, he was a decisive figure to be sure, but when I walked around Manhattan when I was in NYU during Guliani's time it was a different world than when my dad went there in the early 80s under Koch or even when we went there for vacation in the early 90s (when it was under Denkins) for that matter. And that was all before 9/11. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Bottled Black Report post Posted January 27, 2004 As a Staten Islander I can tell you almost everyone here loved Rudy G. Before him with Dinkins, SI was looking to seceeding from the city. Dinkins didn't give a crap about SI. Guiliani did, He actually *gasp* treated us as a part of NYC which is good because we are 1 of the 5 boroughs and all. Plus the way he cleaned up NYC, Times Square is about 150 billion times better now than it was under Dinkins and Koch, Crime was down substantially, and he got rid of all the annoying squeegee men (not Sid). Add on to that the way he rallied the city in the wake of Sept 11, I think we were lucky to have him as Mayor. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
C Dubya 04 0 Report post Posted January 27, 2004 Well, I stand corrected. Now it seems that I know of at least 2 people who liked him as a mayor. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kkktookmybabyaway 0 Report post Posted January 27, 2004 Make that three. One "good" month? In what, some alien calendar that measures days in years?... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Anglesault Report post Posted January 27, 2004 Anyone who can do what he did with Times Square has had more than one good month. I'm outside of the city (LI) but I'm in it enough. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Vyce 0 Report post Posted January 28, 2004 I am SO fucking down with Guiliani as VP. He's my choice for Republican candidate in 2008, anyway, if Powell can't be persuaded. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Jobber of the Week 0 Report post Posted January 28, 2004 As much as I like Rudy G., I don't think he'd become a veep on the Reppublican side -- way too liberal on the social side of things for the GOP... I don't think a vast majority of GOP voters are more socially conservative than Rudy is. At this point, I think it's mostly the power base and the big money investors, as well as the individual fundie organizations. I don't think this is true. But if it, it would almost make me cry. Not for the electoral impact but because I think Rudy is a great man and a powerful speaker, and Bush is an idiot who gets a "deer in the headlights" look when using words with over five syllables. He could always run for the big seat in 08, but I think his Veep run will kill him. If you've enjoyed the past four years of uncontrolled spending and all the perks going to the rich and powerful, buckle up if Bush wins because the next four will be a goddamn blast. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
MrRant 0 Report post Posted January 28, 2004 ^^^^^^ *cough*Bitter*cough* Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Jobber of the Week 0 Report post Posted January 28, 2004 ^^^^^^ *cough*Bitter*cough* Huh? I've always made no bones that I was a big Rudy fan. I've always made no bones that I think Bush has been pretty awful. I'd vote Rudy over any of the eight Democrats out there or anyone considering running next time (i.e. Hillary.) I'm a self-professed mark. But I wouldn't vote Rudy if it meant having to put up with the lunkhead who's been nosediving us into the ground recently. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
MrRant 0 Report post Posted January 28, 2004 I meant about Bush being Prez 'o dent. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest JMA Report post Posted January 28, 2004 Guliani doesn't need to become VP. He should wait until '08 to run for President himself. He could win easily. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
NoCalMike 0 Report post Posted January 28, 2004 Bush and Rudy? Well, time for the dems to prepare that 2008 campaign. Man, who is the independent? If it's still Nadar, then I'm voting....for Bush. God, my mouth filled with bile having to say that. Nader is just one of the third party candidiates. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kkktookmybabyaway 0 Report post Posted January 28, 2004 If you've enjoyed the past four years of uncontrolled spending and all the perks going to the rich and powerful, buckle up if Bush wins because the next four will be a goddamn blast. And I'm sure a Democrat presidency from one of this current crop will really tighten that belt up. I gave up on the thought of Washington controlling its spending back in the mid-'90s when the "Republican Revolution" went from talk about eliminating the National Endowment for the Arts to giving it MORE MONEY. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
The Czech Republic 0 Report post Posted January 28, 2004 As a Staten Islander I can tell you almost everyone here loved Rudy G. Before him with Dinkins, SI was looking to seceeding from the city. Dinkins didn't give a crap about SI. Guiliani did, He actually *gasp* treated us as a part of NYC which is good because we are 1 of the 5 boroughs and all. Yeah just keep telling yorself that. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Jobber of the Week 0 Report post Posted January 28, 2004 And I'm sure a Democrat presidency from one of this current crop will really tighten that belt up. Why.. Yes, yes it will. You really don't think Congress will approve the all that money for Howie Dean's universal healthcare, do you? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kkktookmybabyaway 0 Report post Posted January 28, 2004 No. They'll just waste it on other crap... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
2GOLD 0 Report post Posted January 28, 2004 Bush and Rudy? Well, time for the dems to prepare that 2008 campaign. Man, who is the independent? If it's still Nadar, then I'm voting....for Bush. God, my mouth filled with bile having to say that. Nader is just one of the third party candidiates. Who are the others? Cause at this point.... Oh screw it, I'm writing in a vote for George Carlin. Screw all of these jokers, my vote doesn't count worth a damn so I'm going to show my sickness for them all by voting but NOT voting for them. That way, I can still complain! HA HA! A LOOPHOLE! And maybe this is just to keep Rudy in the spotlight and set him up as Presidental candiate in 2008...which someone already said. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Anglesault Report post Posted January 28, 2004 As a Staten Islander I can tell you almost everyone here loved Rudy G. Before him with Dinkins, SI was looking to seceeding from the city. Dinkins didn't give a crap about SI. Guiliani did, He actually *gasp* treated us as a part of NYC which is good because we are 1 of the 5 boroughs and all. Yeah just keep telling yorself that. Hush. No harm in humoring them. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Mole 0 Report post Posted January 28, 2004 I think it is a pretty smart move by Bush if this is true. Rudy will get lots of votes because of the post 9/11 events. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
BX 0 Report post Posted January 28, 2004 You know, this might mean trouble for the Democrats in November. So much in fact, that they may have to respond in kind in November. The man for the job, you ask? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
2GOLD 0 Report post Posted January 28, 2004 Bill for what? What are we talking about here? Bill as Vice to Kerry? Be like a tag match for WRESTLEMANIA. Kerry rides a harley....Clinton plays a sax.....hmmmm Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
