WASHINGTON, Sept. 24, 2007
Bush Predicts Clinton Will Win Nomination
In Interview, President Also Says He Thinks Clinton Will Lose To GOP Nominee
-
President Bush said in an interview with journalist Bill Sammon that he believes Hillary Rodham Clinton will defeat Barack Obama in Democratic presidential primary voting. (AP Photo)
-
Play CBS Video Video Roundtable On Clinton Politico.com's John Harris and David Sanger of The New York Times sit down with Bob Schieffer to analyze Sen. Hillary Clinton's policy and presidential bid.
-
Video Hillary's Media Blitz Sen. Hillary Clinton, D-N.Y., appeared on all five talk shows Sunday, trying to define herself as the inevitable Democratic nominee. Joie Chen reports.
-
In-Depth 2008 Presidential Hopefuls Profiles and the latest news on the Democrats and Republicans running for the White House.
-
Interactive Campaign 2008 Profiles of the candidates, polls, fund-raising, blogs, video and more.
Mr. Bush also predicts that Clinton will be defeated in the November 2008 general election by the Republican nominee.
"I believe our candidate can beat her but it's going to be a tough race," the president said.
In primary election voting and party caucuses early next year voters either choose representatives who will nominate a candidate at party conventions in mid-2008 or indicate a preference for a candidate.
At the end of the primary process, leading candidates from both parties usually emerge forcing rivals to drop out of the race.
It has been difficult for Mr. Bush to remain silent about the 2008 president race, despite his promises not to be the "prognosticator in chief." He has been talking about the race and handicapping candidates during off-the-record chats with visitors to the White House.
He finally went public with his Clinton prediction in an interview for a book by journalist Bill Sammon.
"She's got a great national presence and this is becoming a national primary," Mr. Bush told Sammon. "And therefore the person with the national presence, who has got the ability to raise enough money to sustain an effort in a multiplicity of sites, has got a good chance to be nominated."
The White House did not challenge Sammon's account.
"Frankly, it's difficult to not talk about the '08 election a lot," White House press secretary Dana Perino said. "There's a lot of interest in it and it does have consequence."
She denied the notion that Mr. Bush was talking up Clinton's prospects in order to energize the Republican base against her candidacy.
"The bottom line is, it really doesn't matter what the president thinks about who will win the Democratic primary," Perino said. "There's going to be a showdown ...and they'll figure out whose going to be the nominee and from there the president will campaign vigorously for the Republican candidate.
On the Republican side, Mr. Bush has expressed surprise that former New York mayor Rudy Giuliani remains the front-runner despite his liberal positions on social and cultural issues normally critical to the party base, according to The Washington Post. It ran a story about Bush's recent off-the-record chat with television news anchors and Sunday show hosts.
Mr. Bush said Giuliani's popularity was a sign of how important the terrorism issue is to Republican voters, the newspaper said. It said Mr. Bush cautioned against ruling out Sen. John McCain, saying he had managed to revive his campaign after an implosion earlier this year.
© MMVII The Associated Press. All Rights Reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
The secrets of tennis legend 
- 1
- 2
- 3
- next
See all 52 Comments**** TAKE AMERICA BACK ****
**** STOP THE WAR & Corporate Corruption****
Ron Paul has it all.
He has NEVER voted:
* to raise taxes
* for an unbalanced budget
* to raise congressional pay
* for a federal restriction on gun ownership
* to increase the power of the executive branch
He HAS voted:
* against the Iraq war
* against the inappropriately named USA PATRIOT act
* against regulating the internet
* against the Military Commissions Act
He will eliminate the IRS, Wasteful Government Spending & Stop The Iraq War Immediately!
Most importantly, he voted NO on anything in Congress that is not allowed by the Constitution.
He is the only candidate not a member of the CFR!
Shouldn''''t ALL members of Congress uphold the Constitution? Aren''''t they SWORN to uphold it? You can bet Paul won''''t call the Constitution "just a G**D***ed piece of paper" like George Bush is reported to have.
If you want a candidate you can TRUST due to a proven track record, visit ronpaul2008.com and get busy spreading the word. The Mainstream Media is Blacking Out Ron Paul From Exposing The Truth! He has won 6 straw polls already and growing daily!
Ron Paul Revolution: http://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=ron+paul
Get Active Join The Revolution In Your City Today! http://ronpaul.meetup.com/cities/
Also checkout http://video.google.com search for Federal Reserve Fraud
I am proud of the service of my friends and relatives in the armed forces. I don''t feel a sense of loss, no, I feel a sense of honor for knowing them and great respect for their sacrifice.
But, that''s just me...
Posted by Hwy71So at 11:40 AM : Sep 25,2007
Talk about hypocrisy and caring NOTHING for the TROOPS!!
Maybe close MILITARY friends are NOTHING to you but for me they meant A LOT and I''ll miss them.
Sacrifice on the alter of a foolish and unthinking LEADER''S EGO, MISMANAGEMENT, MISDIRECTION and CALCULATED GREED is as WRONG as it is STRATEGIC IDIOCY.
It''s the argument of far too many DIPLOMACY CHALLENGED, failed, Empire builders as an EXCUSE for their FOOLISH actions.
I''ll continue to push for DECENT tour lengths, conditions, treatment and benefits FOR OUR TROOPS regardless.
Too bad you can''t do the same.
I wore the uniform too - for OVER 20 years. Put up with a LOT of SNAFU BS and had a chance to see a lot of the "inner workings".
Dug into some of the reasons behind what happens. STILL dealing with military stuff along with watching out for the politics behind those decisions.
Gotta admit - it''s an eye-opener most people don''t like to hear and some refuse to face no matter what.
Here''s a hint....
Honestly now, think about it, WHY would GWB come out and speak SO FAVORABLY concerning Hillary then as an aside, reassure his "base" they''ll win?
It''s NOT about politics, it''s about POWER.
For me it''s about the ABUSE of that power - on BOTH sides. I prefer Facts over rhetoric.
Yet, the democrats constantly down play their abilities, their effectiveness, their loyalty, etc. CONSTANTLY. Meanwhile, all they preach is "pull them out". Make THEM look like fools on our behalf. They don''t want closure, they want to save money.
Well, believe what you like. I WORE the uniform, I didn''t look at it from the sidelines.
Posted by Hwy71So at 10:56 AM
Yep, see you Served under 1 Democrat with a REPUBLICAN CONGRESS and 3 Republicans.
No wonder you''re BITTER and confused.
I go FURTHER back and look at the WHOLE Picture.
I actually paid attention to WHO pushes what and WHY.
Believe the CURRENT CIC is AGAINST the current DEMOCRATIC CONGRESS led MILITARY PAY RAISE but he DOES want 200 BILLION for his CORPORATE CRONIES and the IRAQ MONEY-PIT where OUR TROOPS get to serve increasingly LONGER deployments with ridiculously shorter times BACK HOME.
TROOPS are NOT disposable machines despite the NEOCON SPIN.
I''ve lost friends to the results.
EXHAUSTION creates "accidents" and "Mistakes" and the next thing is a family that''s being told their loved one is another "casualty of war" - BS!
The reality is they''re casualties of egotistical, calculated, mismanagement where HUMANS are considered LESS VALUABLE than equipment. Thus state of the art aircraft hangers and medieval rehabilitation centers for our troops (until the families of the troops went to the press).
Posted by Hwy71So at 09:01 AM : Sep 25, 2007
Don''t know about that do you?
Thinking back, MY BEST military pay and benefit increases were during Democratic Administrations.
Republican Administrations were better for Budget Busting Military - Industrial Complex Boondoggles like "Starwars" and the Multi-Billion dollar pieces of "defective" equipment such boondoggles create.
Since WHEN were CORPORATIONS and their profits "the military"?
That''s the problem NOW as a I see it.
THE TROOPS are being FORCED into LONGER more brutal tours and MUCH LESS chance to recuperate while the WAR PROFITEERS are raking in the dough hand over fist!
Our President considers rising CORPORATE PROFITEERING over rising HUMAN TOLL as a "success".
NO WONDER some of the officers have begun to think "why not"? and taken bribes like their CIVILIAN COUNTERPARTS.
Problem is the officers get nailed for a few thousand while the likes of HALIBURTON GET AWAY WITH MULTI-BILLIONS SCOT FREE!!!!
According to all the hype of electing the DImocrat majority was THEY, the DIMocrats, were going to affect change. What a laugh. When the repubs were lead, it was the repubs fault, now with the Dems in lead its STILL the repubs fault. What a knee slapping laugh!!!!!!
I''m about to fall off my chair here.
Posted by liberalme at 10:19 PM : Sep 24, 2007
Obama on the other hand is a gambler . . . he''s bettin'' on himself. I read it today on Cbsnews . . .
If I were Mrs. Clinton I would not be worried about Bush saying that she is going to lose to a Republican.
I would be more upset that he thinks she is going to win the Democratic Ticket.
Just name one thing that this President has been right about!!
If the American people are stupid enough to vote for someone with a track record like Bush, we will have people moving out of the US. Eight years of this is enough. My family has been here for over 150 years and we are thinking about it.
If I were Mrs. Clinton I would not be worried about Bush saying that she is going to lose to a Republican.
I would be more upset that he thinks she is going to win the Democratic Ticket.
Just name one thing that this President has been right about!!
If the American people are stupid enough to vote for someone with a track record like Bush, we will have people moving out of the US. Eight years of this is enough. My family has been here for over 150 years and we are thinking about it.
Posted by B48151 at 03:14 PM : Sep 24, 2007
Ronald Reagan was the one credibly accused of rape, not Bill Clinton.
Bill Clinton''s accuser, Juanita Broaddrick, admitted that she and her husband attended a Bill Clinton fundraiser shortly after the alleged rape. She also was involved with old Clinton enemies in Arkansas.
The accusation made against Ronald Reagan (when he was a powerful Hollywood figure) by Selene Walters is a lot more believable.
- 1
- 2
- 3
- next
See all 52 Comments