2006-07-31 09:56:35 · 17 answers · asked by WORD UP G 1 in Politics & Government ➔ Government
Slim to none: The only way they are going to win the presidency in 2008, is if Colin Powell would run and he has said he would not do it, And I don't blame him.
If you would like to know why, take a look at about 8 - 10 minutes of this interview with Professor Steven Jones ? It's a 45 minute video and well worth looking at, to its end. At the very least, pass it on to those you care about.
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-2842384983834100001
2006-07-31 09:59:44 · answer #1 · answered by Joe_Pardy 5 · 1⤊ 1⤋
Depending on the specific candidates, the Republicans will probably hold the Presidency but lose one house of Congress. Or hold both houses and lose the Presidency, but I think that is unlikely.
Bush cannot run again. Jeb won't. Too much name baggage. But a SOUTHERN governor or congressman, with a Western VP, will win in 2008. The Democrats have nobody with enough name and power. Hillary alienates too many. Obama sounds too much like Osama. Kerry is dead weight. Gore is a dinosaur.
Unfortunately, the Libertarian Party will nominate an unknown with an un-electable agenda.
2006-07-31 10:07:23 · answer #2 · answered by Thorbjorn 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
It really does depend on who ends up being the party's choice. There are unelectable hopefuls in both major parties.
I do think the chances now are higher than ever for a third party victory; AND I think the chances are higher than ever for a woman President next.
2006-07-31 10:55:06 · answer #3 · answered by me 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
70/30 unless the Democrats can come up with a candidate that is credible on national defense. It puts them in a paradox: if they support the war, they are credible on defense, but their base will not vote for them. If they oppose the war, their base votes for them, but they are seen as weak on defense. Unless they can figure a way out of this paradox, all they can hope for is a very bad candidate from the Republicans.
2006-07-31 10:02:45 · answer #4 · answered by Aegis of Freedom 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I'll say 50/50. It definitelly depends on who runs. If Republicans come out with a strong candidate they have a good chance.
2006-07-31 10:01:39 · answer #5 · answered by Sylvie 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
i think of myriad issues will harm the republicans in 2008. besides the undeniable fact that, i do no longer think the present Israel-Lebanon conflict would be addressed as the two political events help Israel.
2016-11-03 09:48:46 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
It depends on who they nominate and who the Democrats nominate.
It is a fact only southern Democrats have been elected president since WWII. (Clinton, Arkansas, Carter, Georgia, etc.)
It will largely depend on how they play the game and WHO they choose to play it.
If Demos pick Hillary, they're dead.
2006-07-31 10:00:54 · answer #7 · answered by Kats 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
"50/50/90 Rule" - If there is ever a 50/50 percent chance of getting something right, there will always be a 90% change of getting it wrong.
2006-07-31 10:01:58 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
100% if Tom Tancredo runs...which he won't. Also, I have little faith in Mit Romney on account of his conveniantly newly turning pro-life in the last year so he could run on the Republican ticket. Looks like I'll be voting third-party...AGAIN!
2006-07-31 10:01:54 · answer #9 · answered by jbhafford 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Alot, because I'm going to vote for one if no Democrat comes out for major troop reductions. I'm not going to vote for a repuke masquerading as a Democrat. Hell, I'll just vote for the real thing. Atleast he/she would have enough courage to state their conviction even if I didn't agree with them.
2006-07-31 10:00:47 · answer #10 · answered by consigliere 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋