For many of us, we will go to the polls this November, unhappy with our choices for President of the United States of America.
If you are a liberal, you will most likely have Hillary for your candidate. I know, you think Obama has a chance, and he might win, but the best bet is Hillary, regardless of who endorses Barack. For the Obama, Edwards and Kucinich supporters, that is a tough vote to cast. Especially when it is likely she will not choose Obama for her running mate. Ted Strickland of Ohio and Bill Richardson of New Mexico are far better choices than Obama.
For the conservatives, most are afraid of a John McCain candidacy. And now some are calling for Joe Lieberman to be his running mate. No thanks. And others say that Mitt Romney is a bigger flip-flopper than John Kerry at a cheap sandal convention. So they really can’t support him either.
Conservatives also know that if we sit this one out, we face another Clinton White House. None of us want that, so we face casting a ballot for the lesser of two evils.
But I have a feeling that this year is going to be much different than most election years. I think this year, there will be a few more candidates than just the Democrats and the Republicans. And I’m not talking a third party, but a fourth, fifth and possibly sixth.
Ron Paul has said over and over that he does not intend to run as a third party candidate.
For weeks rumors have swirled that Paul, who trails his opponents in national and state polls, will eventually run as an independent or libertarian candidate.
“I have no intention of doing that,” Paul told The Trail.
Why would he? He intends to win the nomination for the Republican Party. But, he won’t. I know, I know. Calm down. He raised a lot of money, but he is not pulling in the votes in the primaries. It may be that Ron Paul finds himself running as and Independent, or as a Libertarian again. Either way, he will still have quite a bit of money and support, especially if John McCain is the Republican candidate.
And you can count on him running as a third party candidate:
Asked how he’d respond if his supporters clamored for him to mount a run outside the GOP, Paul responded: “We’ll see if the supporters keep sending the money. But right now, our focus is on February 5th.”
I could see him doing well in a third party bill. Not winning, but doing well. Depending on who the candidates are, I might vote for him. I’ve often said that the slow road to serfdom that we are morchingdown is a bigger threat to America than terrorism. Ron Paul is the candidate to address that issue best.
Michael Bloomberg has also said he is not running as a third party candidate. But the rumors have not stopped about him. Calls are coming out for him to get off the fence:
He has talked with Chuck Hagel and Sam Nunn, potential running mates. He has delivered a tart critique of the presidential field. He is conducting intricate polling to test his appeal in all 50 states.
Mr. Bloombergâ€™s dalliance with the idea of running for president has stretched on and on, with his enthusiastic approval despite the public denials. But even before actually entering the contest, Mr. Bloomberg may have already risked losing something: peopleâ€™s patience.
I don’t think so. I think Bloomberg may be waiting to see what the primaries hold, and then capitalize on the voter’s dissatisfaction with their choices.
And regardless of what he says about not being interested, he is showing that he is, in fact, interested. One way is by meeting with H. Ross Perot’s campaign manager:
Bloomberg met privately with Clay Mulford, who is well-versed in third-party ballot access and served as campaign manager for Perot, according to an individual close to the mayor. Perot sought the presidency in 1992 and 1996.
The lunch meeting with Mulford comes less than two months before Bloomberg would be able to start gathering signatures to get on the ballot and meet Texas’ early deadline.
Considering that he refuses to admit he is running, he has some compelling numbers. A quarter of voters in California say they would consider supporting Bloomberg, and close to 40% say that that his running would be a good thing. While those numbers are not great, they could be if voters are very unhappy with the big two.
Al Gore also says he is not running. But it might also be possible that he is waiting for the primaries to end as well. I haven’t seen anything that makes me think he is running. He’s mostly been flying all over the world to tell people to lower their carbon footprints. But since he has yet to endorse anyone, there is still the possibility, however remote.
Ralph Nader is also mulling another run:
“Consumer advocate Ralph Nader said on Monday he will decide soon on whether to make a another bid for the White House in 2008, eight years after playing a key role as a third party presidential candidate.”
Recently, Ralph sent out a letter blasting the Clintons. Perhaps he is trying to get some attention in order to start his third party bid/ In the letter, he wrote:
while in the White House, Clinton took credit â€œfor developments with which he had very little to do such as the economic growth propelled by the huge technology dot.com boom.
â€œBragging about millions of jobs his administration created, he neglected to note that incomes stagnated for 80 percent of the workers in the country and ended in 2000 under the level of 1973, adjusted for inflation.â€
Moves by the Clinton administration â€œfurther entrenched corporate power over our economy and government during the decade,â€ Nader writes.
â€œHe pushed through Congress the NAFTA and the World Trade Organization (WTO) agreements that represented the greatest surrender in our history of local, state and national sovereignty to an autocratic, secretive system of transnational governance. This system subordinated workers, consumers and the environment to the supremacy of globalized commerce.â€
There is without a doubt a far left audience for that kind of rhetoric. I found an article that listed twenty-seven reasons to draft Ralph in 2008. But Ralph has been blamed by liberals for the Bush election just a little bit more than they have blamed Diebold. I can’t imagine him doing well, let alone winning.
What will America do if a pro-amnesty candidate wins the GOP nomination and we are forced to choose between a Democrat and a Republican who will give amnesty to illegal aliens and turn them into voters by 2010?
What will you do, if your favorite candidate does not win the primary?
Can the Republicans or Democrats really bring America the real CHANGE our nation needs?
Lou Dobbs is right about the issues concerning illegal immigration, no AMNESTY, and secure borders! Lou Dobbs is right about our deplorable trade agreements and the war on middle class America. Lou Dobbs is right about the rising military threat from communist China!
Lou Dobbs does not want to run for President and does not consider himself a politician. Sometimes, history demands that good people do what someone must do!
Newsday says “The CNN anchor and Harvard-educated populist is perfect for the Republican Party. Everyone knows his fully formed immigration policy, and his book “War on the Middle Class” hits just the right economic note. So what if he has no foreign policy experience?”
The Wall Street Journal reports that this effort isn’t laughable either, and that Lou is advertising for himself now. In the article, they wrote:
After months of telling reporters that he “absolutely” would not consider leaving his highly-rated CNN show in which he crusades against free trade and illegal immigration, Mr. Dobbs posted a commentary on his Web site last week predicting a surprise new presidential candidate in 2008.
From Lou’s column:
One year from now, we will have elected a new president. As eager as I am for that reality, I can’t imagine any one of the current candidates for their party’s nomination being chosen by the American people to lead this nation for the next four years. I believe the person elected a year from now will be an Independent populist, a man or woman who understands the genius of this country lies in the hearts and minds of its people and not in the prerogatives and power of its elites.
And idea who he’s talking about?
The Journal later opines that his method would be similar to Perot’s, entering the campaign after the primaries have started. Perot then shot up in the polls. This one isn’t outside the realm of possibility.
Cynthia McKinney is already running for president. And proving that this race isn’t about race or gender, no one knows she’s running. Except the members of the Green Party. Here is the campaign’s website, complete with some green Partridge family member, lying on its back.
Cynthia pledges to run a carbon neutral campaign. Upon election, I’m sure she will finally find out what really happened to Tupac. She’s also finally find a way to kill those pesky babies that survive an abortion. Yeah, you read that right:
15 members of Congress voted against the Born-Alive Infants Protection Act that would prohibit the killing of a baby that somehow survives an abortion procedure. Perhaps an abortion doctorâ€™s hand slips while holding the nine-tenths-born babyâ€™s head inside the mother as he reaches with his other hand for forceps to pierce the infantâ€™s skull, so its brains can be vacuumed out. And because of this slip, the baby slides completely outside the mother. This law would declare the baby born and in full possession of human rights. The 15 Congressmen who voted to let these already-born babies be killed anyway (call it â€œpost-natal abortionâ€) by the mother or abortionist are: Julia Carson (D-IN), John Dingell (D-Mich.), Chaka Fattah (D-Penn.), Ben Gilman (R-NY), Charles Gonzales (D-TX), Alcee Hastings (D-Fla), Jesse Jackson, Jr. (D-Ill., son of the minister), Nancy Johnson (R-Ct), Barbara Lee (D-Calif.), Nita Lowey (D-NY), Carolyn Maloney (D-NY, who won election in an anti-gun, anti-violence campaign after a relative was killed by the New York train gunman), Cynthia McKinney (D-Ga), Nydia Velazquez (D-NY), Maxine Waters (D-Calif., whose slogan-threat was â€œNo justice, No peaceâ€), and Mel Watt (D-NC).
Just what America needs.
It may be that this year becomes even more interesting after the primaries. I think that will be the case, however, Gallup says that voters are happy with their choice of candidates. To me, that’s like saying I’m happy with being offered pepperoni pizza or sausage pizza, without telling me about the buffet and dessert bar around the corner.
I have a feeling that when it comes to campaign in 2008, we haven’t seen anything yet.