|
|
|||
Cheney: Step aside Now is the winter of our discontent, the White House may be thinking these days. The president's favorability polls are at their lowest point yet, he had a mediocre-at-best showing on Meet the Press on Sunday, and John Kerry, war hero and relatively mainstream Democrat, is looking to take over the nomination, as opposed to the professionally angry Howard Dean that Karl Rove would have preferred. With many of its key players tarnished to various degrees (a natural occurrence in politics), it's time to make some changes to the administration before the election in November. The White House needs some fresh blood, a new face with some new ideas. Way back when, back in the olden days, pre-Iraq War, pre-Afghanistan, pre-September 11, back during the last election, Dick Cheney got the VP nod to add gravitas to the inexperienced Bush. It was a smart call and most people realized it during the vice presidential debates as Cheney and Lieberman each outshone their respective ticket-heads. A fundraising master who was popular with the conservative base, Cheney did well for the President, but now his luster is fading and the benefits he offers to a President with two and a half years of war-time experience is less than it used to be. He needs to step aside. Though no doubt a strong addition to the administration in terms of policies and politics, he just hurts a bit too much when it comes to the election in November. Even outside the glue-sniffers who blame him and Halliburton for anything from single-handedly causing global warming to being the 20th hijacker, he still doesn't sit well with many moderates bombarded with Enron guilt-by-association jibes and minimal public appearances due to time in secret and secure locations. And, he's not going to run for president. The VP slot has historically meant little in terms of succession (outside resignation and death) and Cheney was never seen as a Bush successor. Back in the day, the vice presidency went to the second place vote getter. Imagine a Bush/Gore White House. The popular vote/electoral vote tension alone would necessitate the return of dueling, pistols-at-dawn style, or at least a no-holds barred rasslin' match in the Rose Garden. But that said, it wouldn't hurt the GOP to throw out a few names for the electorate to get comfortable with, whether or not Bush pulls out the 2004 win. Governors, with their executive experience and lack of voting record, make popular presidents. Four of our last five presidents have been governors. The added benefit of choosing a governor as a running mate is that it doesn't take away a vote from what will likely still be a closely divided Senate or House. Bill Owens, from Colorado, has been a popular Republican governor but he's term limited in 2006. A principled conservative and smart politician, he's as popular with the base as Cheney, but without the baggage. Another possibility would be Rudy Giuliani. He already has national name recognition and respect, although he tends towards the socially liberal on non-crime related issues. He's also ambitious, which, while good for him, would be a problem for President Bush, who prefers the good soldier to the career politician. Condoleeza Rice in the VP slot would be the equivalent of a pre-emptive strike on Hillary in 2008, turning that election into a game of "top-this." Problems with her candidacy include the fact that she's unmarried and her personal opinions on policies are largely unknown. Oh yeah, and she would have to turn history on its head by storming an office never held by anyone other than a white man. Bill Frist, Senate Majority Leader, is of course a strong possibility, as is Senator John McCain for 2008, although there's no reason to think McCain would take Bush's VP slot after the animosity that arose out of 2000. McCain actually might challenge Bush to a duel, and he's one of the few people I can think of in politics who could win. Secretary of State Colin Powell won't run and the party base won't give him the VP slot either. The prospect of Jeb Bush, governor of Florida, running in 2008 is too dynastic, even for my tastes. There was a slogan Kerry adopted as the Iowa caucus drew near to attract voters who had hitherto supported Dean because of his vehemently anti-war stance, but may have been worried about his electability; "Dated Dean, married Kerry." When it comes to their candidates, Republican's don't play the field as much, but rather rally and hold formation. This applies to elections (think 2000 GOP primary-Bush vs. McCain with few other serious candidates as compared to the 2004 cycle with four or more legitimate Democrats, depending on how you count them) as well as during times of turbulence (Bush's approval ratings remain surprisingly high among Republicans even as the bottom falls out from beneath the Democrats). Incumbents often have the advantage when the other candidate has been dragged through a violent primary. It would do well for the GOP to put forth a good candidate on the President's re-election ticket to earn name recognition and hopefully avoid a Dean-like usurper to the 2008 nomination. And if it helps with 2004, all the better. Who knows-dated Dean, married Kerry, woke up with Bush?
For information on sending a letter to the editor, please click here.
|
|||