Gilmore Exploring Presidential Run
Then there were 24, Again
By California Yankee Posted in 2008 — Comments (9) / Email this page » / Leave a comment »
Former Virginia Republican Governor, Jim Gilmore, will explore a 2008 presidential bid.
Decrying the lack of a true conservative among the potential Republican candidates, Gilmore said he will form an exploratory committee in January.
"There is not a committed conservative in the field who can put together a national campaign. I am and I can. I have people on the ground right now in Iowa and in South Carolina," Gilmore, 57, said in a telephone interview from New York.
His comments were directed not only at others preparing for a GOP presidential run, including Sen. John McCain of Arizona, former New York Mayor Rudolph Giuliani and departing Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney. It's also yet another of his many slaps at lavish federal spending by the current Republican administration and Congress.
"I am not someone who has to evolve as a conservative. I don't have to evolve my position," he said.
Gilmore headed a Congressional commission to investigate the threat posed by terrorism. Gilmore continues to speak about the nation's readiness for terrorist attacks and major disasters. He formed a nonprofit organization, the National Council on Readiness and Preparedness, to continue his preparedness work.
With Gilmore, there are again 24 potential 2008 presidential candidates.
« Dueling June Obama fundraising claims? — Comments (2) | The Romance Ends — Comments (25) »
Gilmore Exploring Presidential Run 9 Comments (0 topical, 9 editorial, 0 hidden) Post a comment »
_______________________________
If "pro" is the opposite of "con", what is the opposite of "progress"?
_______________________________
If "pro" is the opposite of "con", what is the opposite of "progress"?
and run for Jim Webb's Senate seat in 2012.
The bad news: Conservatism is hard to sell. The good news is that it works.
Ont the one hand, I gather that most people here are not big fans of the current crop of contenders, all of whom have some serious flaws.
But anyone outside the current front runners is dismissed as too old or not experienced enough. I don't think we have the luxury of being this picky.
the 90s are long, long gone
Well, that rules out Rudy then.
Keating is a great guy -- albeit unfocused -- but a political non-starter. He's an millionaire insurance lobbyist, for goodness sakes. We have to be realistic.
Otherwise, Jim Gilmore and Tommy Thompson are legends in their own minds. Gilmore was a good governor, and Thompson was at the start. But that was a decade ago. Since then, Gilmore has contributed little in the public or political sphere, and Thompson continues to boast about how big the HHS budget was under his direction. Bleh.
Of the new guys, Romney seems to me to be a credible candidate, with the experience and political smarts that make him electable.
Heck, I'd vote for Giuliani, despite him being a social liberal (at least if we could get a better sense of the judges he'd appoint). I really doubt his ability to influence the abortion debate pro or con. Give Giuliani a solid foreign-policy conservative as a running mate, and we're good.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but I'm pretty sure that Gilmore ran as a centrist on abortion in '97. Favored keeping it legal in the first trimester.
Jim Gilmore, Frank Keating, Tommy Thompson -- gentlemen, the 90s are long, long gone. (By which I imply that these campaign explorations largely serve to feed the maw that is their egos.)