Pages: 1

 

2007-06-05 20:36:38
Harmor
Error_Name_Not_Found
+605|6583|San Diego, CA, USA
Rumors have said that Hillary Clinton will most likely choose either Barrak Obama or Bill Richardson (already a thread about that).  She'll choose Barrak to garner the Black vote (eventhough Black activists say Barrack is as "black as circumstances allow"), or Bill to garner the Hispanic vote.

So I put forth this notion, should whomever is the Republican nominee, should they choose Condoleezza Rice as their V.P.?

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/6/65/Condoleezza_Rice.jpg/200px-Condoleezza_Rice.jpg

Should Republicans have to have a woman or Black person to 'counter' the Democrat's nominee?

Is it necessary?

Would it be benificial?

Could she be a viable V.P. and potential Presidential candidate in 8 years?
2007-06-05 20:43:50
iamangry
Member
+59|6680|The United States of America
It shouldn't be necessary, except that black people vote for other black people over white people even when the black candidate has allowed their metropolis sink under 20 feet of water.
That said, I don't think it would be very beneficial either because 90 percent of black people vote democrat even if the democratic candidate is a felon or dead. 
She could be a viable VP or Presidential candidate at some point in the future, but 8 years is too long to reasonably project.

I'd prefer it if they convinced Colin Powell to be a VP or even a Presidential candidate.  That guy was a good politician (reason he's no longer in power) because he stuck to his guns and didn't play some political game or anything.
2007-06-05 20:53:53
Fen321
Member
+54|6532|Singularity
Segregated minds accomplish nothing, especially when attempting to create a "democratic" experience.
2007-06-05 21:11:13
Stingray24
Proud member of the vast right-wing conspiracy
+1,060|6480|The Land of Scott Walker
She should be nominated for VP.  Not to counter any stupid Dem strategy, but because I'd rather have her 2nd in line to be president over most of the Rep men. 

Necessary to win?  No.

Beneficial?  Possibly.

Yes she's a viable V.P. and potential candidate in 4 years.
2007-06-05 21:20:19
ATG
Banned
+5,233|6563|Global Command
I  think she needs to find her self a man and run for the top job.

Her I like. Pity she is single and therefor considered a liability.
2007-06-05 22:21:03
Spearhead
Gulf coast redneck hippy
+731|6724|Tampa Bay Florida

iamangry wrote:

It shouldn't be necessary, except that black people vote for other black people over white people even when the black candidate has allowed their metropolis sink under 20 feet of water.
Believe it or not, black people exist outside New Orleans, and, get THIS, LOL, SOME OF THEM ARENT JACKASSES!!!!!!!  I couldnt believe it either!! rofl
2007-06-05 22:25:03
Turquoise
O Canada
+1,596|6439|North Carolina

Harmor wrote:

Rumors have said that Hillary Clinton will most likely choose either Barrak Obama or Bill Richardson (already a thread about that).  She'll choose Barrak to garner the Black vote (eventhough Black activists say Barrack is as "black as circumstances allow"), or Bill to garner the Hispanic vote.

So I put forth this notion, should whomever is the Republican nominee, should they choose Condoleezza Rice as their V.P.?

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/c … a_Rice.jpg

Should Republicans have to have a woman or Black person to 'counter' the Democrat's nominee?

Is it necessary?

Would it be benificial?

Could she be a viable V.P. and potential Presidential candidate in 8 years?
This is an interesting question, but Colin Powell would be a better choice.

Nevertheless, I really don't think Condoleezza would make a good VP.  When it comes to the actual electable Republicans, they're better off with McCain and maybe Fred Thompson as VP.
2007-06-05 22:42:41
Bubbalo
The Lizzard
+541|6596
You assume that being a black woman is the only reason to choose her.

I reckon she's a better candidate for president than those actually running (in both parties).
2007-06-05 22:44:52
Turquoise
O Canada
+1,596|6439|North Carolina

Bubbalo wrote:

You assume that being a black woman is the only reason to choose her.

I reckon she's a better candidate for president than those actually running (in both parties).
You reckon wrong...  she's a puppet and little more.
2007-06-05 22:45:45
Bubbalo
The Lizzard
+541|6596
Which explains why she has consistently argued against what the rest of the administration wants......................
2007-06-05 22:46:47
Turquoise
O Canada
+1,596|6439|North Carolina

Bubbalo wrote:

Which explains why she has consistently argued against what the rest of the administration wants......................
I don't recall her arguing against the war...
2007-06-05 22:47:15
Deadmonkiefart
Floccinaucinihilipilificator
+177|6740
The only person who could possibly beat a black person and a woman--- A black woman.
The republacan party is finally getting smart.
2007-06-05 22:50:30
Turquoise
O Canada
+1,596|6439|North Carolina

Deadmonkiefart wrote:

The only person who could possibly beat a black person and a woman--- A black woman.
The republacan party is finally getting smart.
There's a much greater chance that a white woman would get elected than a black one.  By the same token, there's a much greater chance that a Hispanic man would get elected than a black man.

Running a white male greatly increases your chances of winning the election when the opponent is a minority of one kind or another.  America may not be that racist in everyday life, but we're still pretty racist and sexist when it comes to higher offices.  It will likely always be this way....
2007-06-05 22:54:14
Bubbalo
The Lizzard
+541|6596

Turquoise wrote:

Bubbalo wrote:

Which explains why she has consistently argued against what the rest of the administration wants......................
I don't recall her arguing against the war...
I don't recall her saying anything about the war, she apparently didn't make Aussie papers then.  Having said that, she has consistently shown herself to be the most reasonable US politician that I know of.  She has argued in favour of stronger diplomatic efforts, and has shown a willingness to break free from traditional dogma on issues like Israel.
2007-06-05 22:54:35
Deadmonkiefart
Floccinaucinihilipilificator
+177|6740

Turquoise wrote:

Deadmonkiefart wrote:

The only person who could possibly beat a black person and a woman--- A black woman.
The republacan party is finally getting smart.
There's a much greater chance that a white woman would get elected than a black one.  By the same token, there's a much greater chance that a Hispanic man would get elected than a black man.

Running a white male greatly increases your chances of winning the election when the opponent is a minority of one kind or another.  America may not be that racist in everyday life, but we're still pretty racist and sexist when it comes to higher offices.  It will likely always be this way....
Ahhhh.... No.  I think that America has gone the other direction(which is almost as bad BTW).  I know many people who would vote for a black person or a woman for president merely for the sake of them being a minority.

Last edited by Deadmonkiefart (2007-06-05 22:58:41)

2007-06-05 22:55:31
Turquoise
O Canada
+1,596|6439|North Carolina

Bubbalo wrote:

Turquoise wrote:

Bubbalo wrote:

Which explains why she has consistently argued against what the rest of the administration wants......................
I don't recall her arguing against the war...
I don't recall her saying anything about the war, she apparently didn't make Aussie papers then.  Having said that, she has consistently shown herself to be the most reasonable US politician that I know of.  She has argued in favour of stronger diplomatic efforts, and has shown a willingness to break free from traditional dogma on issues like Israel.
I'll give you the Israel thing.  She'd be better than Bush for sure, but I still don't trust her.
2007-06-05 22:59:59
Turquoise
O Canada
+1,596|6439|North Carolina

Deadmonkiefart wrote:

Turquoise wrote:

Deadmonkiefart wrote:

The only person who could possibly beat a black person and a woman--- A black woman.
The republacan party is finally getting smart.
There's a much greater chance that a white woman would get elected than a black one.  By the same token, there's a much greater chance that a Hispanic man would get elected than a black man.

Running a white male greatly increases your chances of winning the election when the opponent is a minority of one kind or another.  America may not be that racist in everyday life, but we're still pretty racist and sexist when it comes to higher offices.  It will likely always be this way....
Ahhhh.... No.  I think that America has gone the other direction(which is almost as bad BTW).  I know many people who would vote for a black person or a wooman for president merely for the sake of them being a minority.
I'll put it this way...  Rural middle-aged white men vote more regularly than a lot of other groups, and as long as they are a large voting block, I don't think we're going to see a woman or racial minority in the Oval Office, much less a racial minority woman.

You're probably seeing a lot of young people react in the PC way you described.  The older people still prefer a white guy in there.

In about 20 to 30 years, we'll probably see Hispanic men in these higher offices since Hispanics will eventually outnumber whites.  It's really just a numbers game, if you think about it...  Majority rules.
2007-06-05 23:56:42
Bubbalo
The Lizzard
+541|6596

Turquoise wrote:

I'll give you the Israel thing.  She'd be better than Bush for sure, but I still don't trust her.
You show me a trustworthy politician, and I'll show you an unsuccessful politician.
2007-06-06 02:15:57
T.Pike
99 Problems . . .
+187|6317|Pennsyltucky

Bubbalo wrote:

You assume that being a black woman is the only reason to choose her.

I reckon she's a better candidate for president than those actually running (in both parties).
Yeah, baby!  Condie Rice FTW!
2007-06-06 02:23:23
T.Pike
99 Problems . . .
+187|6317|Pennsyltucky

Turquoise wrote:

Deadmonkiefart wrote:

Turquoise wrote:

There's a much greater chance that a white woman would get elected than a black one.  By the same token, there's a much greater chance that a Hispanic man would get elected than a black man.

Running a white male greatly increases your chances of winning the election when the opponent is a minority of one kind or another.  America may not be that racist in everyday life, but we're still pretty racist and sexist when it comes to higher offices.  It will likely always be this way....
Ahhhh.... No.  I think that America has gone the other direction(which is almost as bad BTW).  I know many people who would vote for a black person or a wooman for president merely for the sake of them being a minority.
I'll put it this way...  Rural middle-aged white men vote more regularly than a lot of other groups, and as long as they are a large voting block, I don't think we're going to see a woman or racial minority in the Oval Office, much less a racial minority woman.

You're probably seeing a lot of young people react in the PC way you described.  The older people still prefer a white guy in there.

In about 20 to 30 years, we'll probably see Hispanic men in these higher offices since Hispanics will eventually outnumber whites.  It's really just a numbers game, if you think about it...  Majority rules.
I hate to agree with you because it's not PC, but I think you're correct.

You have to take into consideration though the voters Condie or another candidate would draw.

Pennsylvania is a good example.  We have two major metropolitan Cities on either end of the state (Philadelphia & Pittsburgh) with rural areas in the middle 300 miles.

The voters in the metro areas decide who gets elected.  How else can you explain PA going to the Democrats in the last Presidential election ?

BTW -> I moved from the Philadlphia area to "Central PA" back in 2007.  It was true culture shock.  If I didn't know better I'd swear we're South of the Mason-Dixon line.

Last edited by T.Pike (2007-06-06 02:25:08)

 

Pages: 1

Board footer

Privacy Policy - © 2024 Jeff Minard