Today my John Roberts theory looks more plausible than ever. Why,

because even Huckabee knows he can not carry a national GOP win but it is also obvious that neither will Romney or any of the other GOP announced candidates. So their only solution is to bring in a ringer, a clean slate, a new character at the convention or before.

IMO, J Roberts will be that candidate. I admit it may be someone else even Bloomberg, but my point is we have to focus more on what in going on with the GOP and how to win in Nov than constantly recirculating the past.

Last night was an eyeopener for DU. We are not in touch with what is going on in the country. We have to pay more attention to the street and not the punits. The President cannot make legislation, but only introduce programs for consideration. They cannot end wars without cooperation or total defeat of all the warring parties. We need to understand how the Government works before we can change it.

Last night was a good night for the country. The people of Iowa did a good job for the country. They did it their way and should be proud.

I think we NAILED it. We've been saying all along that Hillary, the corporate media-selected "inevitable" candidated, was not electable and represented all the wrong things. And she came in third. Sounds like the "Hillary bashers" were vindicated. Obama represents at least symbolic change, and he will help Americans feel good about something, namely showing the world that we're really not that bad, that we're not haters. Perhaps. I think in the end, though, we'll fall back on the wealthy white guy. Just a hunch.

.

Even if you ignore the fact that he would never leave his current job and that he isn't a politician, he still had a highly publicized seizure.

John Roberts is going to run for office. Reality seems out of touch with you sir.

why on earth would he give up the bench for something as paltry as the possibility of 4 years in the white house?


sorry, but that makes no sense at all to me.

them. We think of jobs and stability as very, very important. They think of jobs as units of production and chaos as economic opportunity.

But what exactly is your Roberts scenario? I'm interested to hear it.

Hughes nearly won when he resigned from the SCOTUS to take on Wilson in 1916, but that was a different time.

<http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=3922179&mesg_id=3922179>

sorry, i just don't see it.

Is this just a hunch? Seems wholly speculative absent some insider knowledge.

So I'll take it as an interesting hypothetical and leave it at that.

I don't know much about his policies, or even if he has positions on issues, but he'd be better than any of the present group right out of the gate - gravitas, learning, principled. I don't know how Catholicism plays with evangelicals, though.

Whether they bring in a ringer or not, that party is done and dusted for this go round. All the corruption has turned most republican voters off, or completely into Independents if not full on Democrats.

I think you're really reaching to predict that they'll be able to find such a person, let alone sell him to the party "faithful", whom we all know has that party by the short hairs.

Or do you mean John Roberts, who is on CNN staff?

That second guess is a joke,of course.

just like any CEO. Why do the job when you can appoint your replacement? Also the risk is very low, if he doesn't win he is still Chief Justice.

The Chief Justice of the United States - in fact, no sitting federal judge - can run for public office. He would have to step down as Chief Justice in order to run.

Ain't gonna happen.

It's the Holy Grail position for a lawyer in the world. It's the dream of a lifetime. Unsurpassed power to steer the country right or left. No lawyer would give up a S. Ct. position for political office.

John Roberts of CNN?