• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every persons position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

2008: "I Accept Your Nomination . . ."

Who is going to be the political upset of 2008?

  • Sen. George Allen, R-VA

    Votes: 3 42.9%
  • Sen. Chuck Hagel, R-IA

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Sen. Sam Brownback, R-KS

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Speaker Newt Gingrich, R-GA

    Votes: 2 28.6%
  • Gov. Mitt Romney, R-MA

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Sen. Joseph Biden, D-DE

    Votes: 2 28.6%
  • Gov. Janet Napolitano, D-AZ

    Votes: 1 14.3%
  • Gov. Bill Richardson, D-NM

    Votes: 1 14.3%
  • Gov. Mark Warner, D-VA

    Votes: 1 14.3%
  • Gov. Tom Vilsack, D-IA

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Total voters
    7

flip2

Active member
Joined
May 24, 2005
Messages
338
Reaction score
0
Location
Texan by Choice
So, this has been done before, I'm sure. I'm a newbie. Sorry y'all. But, there's a twist to this poll. Who would be the political surprise of 2008 and be his or her party's nominee for President of the U.S.?

*BY THE WAY, CHOOSE ONE FROM EACH PARTY!!*
 
Last edited:

ShamMol

Only Way Round is Through
DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 24, 2005
Messages
1,988
Reaction score
10
Location
Pasadena, California
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Liberal
I only chose one. Gov. Warner. I see him as the next Bill Clinton, able to garner support from both sides and tackle tough issues without loosing much standing in the polls.
 

Schweddy

Benevolent Dictator
Administrator
DP Veteran
Joined
May 19, 2004
Messages
12,176
Reaction score
6,279
Location
Plano, TX
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Right
A real shocker would be Clinton and Gingrich as VP.

They have been running around together recently.

But, Richardson would be no "shocker" - he was advancing toward that last election but stayed in the background.

Richardson & Gingrich were my choices.
 

LaMidRighter

Klattu Verata Nicto
DP Veteran
Joined
May 19, 2005
Messages
30,534
Reaction score
10,682
Location
Louisiana
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Right
I went with Allen simply because I think he is going to be well known very quickly and is on top of things. However, I believe Newt would be the biggest upset, did not vote for him in the poll because he has not decided whether or not to run. I do believe though that if Newt runs, he wins.
 

flip2

Active member
Joined
May 24, 2005
Messages
338
Reaction score
0
Location
Texan by Choice
ShamMol said:
I only chose one. Gov. Warner. I see him as the next Bill Clinton, able to garner support from both sides and tackle tough issues without loosing much standing in the polls.
You think Chairman Dean would out and out support him? Or do you suppose there would be an underground movement within the Democratic Party to find a 3rd-party candidate that the far-left of the party would support?
 

ShamMol

Only Way Round is Through
DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 24, 2005
Messages
1,988
Reaction score
10
Location
Pasadena, California
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Liberal
flip2 said:
You think Chairman Dean would out and out support him? Or do you suppose there would be an underground movement within the Democratic Party to find a 3rd-party candidate that the far-left of the party would support?
The far left gave tacit support to Clinton, and I think that if he could get through the primaries, they would lend that support to Warner.
 

flip2

Active member
Joined
May 24, 2005
Messages
338
Reaction score
0
Location
Texan by Choice
That is an interesting read.

The last paragraph defines the whole dream matchup scenario perfectly: If Bush is the nominee, the dems have no ground to tout a dynasty if Clinton is their choice.

And that columnist is right . . . Feinstein and Boxer have as much the same playing field as Clinton, only that their last names aren't Clinton. If Hillary's name was Smith, there would be no hype and hoopla over her running for President in '08.

I admit, I myself would like to see a continuation of a Bush administration in Jeb Bush, but I think he is very well aware 2008 is not the time for him...at least under the capacity as the top dog for the reps.
 
Top Bottom