Vice President Clint Eastwood? Rachel Maddow Explores Very Real Possibility In 1988 Campaign

video

by Frances Martel | 4:22 pm, October 15th, 2011

» 21 comments

Vice President Dan Quayle may look like a bit of a joke now, but he was the safe bet of his era– and what he was chosen over is quite the shocking revelation. In what will go down as one of the greatest “what ifs” of history, somewhere up there with Rod Blagojevich considering giving President Barack Obama‘s former Senate seat to Oprah Winfrey, it was revealed this week that, facing a dilemma not unlike the one before Sen. John McCain in 2008, the 1988 George H.W. Bush campaign considered Clint Eastwood as a potential Vice Presidential candidate. And Rachel Maddow is delighted.

In her “Best New Thing In The World” segment last night, Maddow gave the details of the mindblowing possibility that Eastwood could have been a legitimate political contender. According to a recent interview with Bush Secretary of State James Baker, the campaign needed to breathe some life into the race, and had little to choose from at the time. Torn between candidates like Bob Dole and Jack Kemp (who, strangely enough, became the 1996 Republican ticket), Bush had to choose between safe bets and wild cards. Given that he ended up with Quayle, remembered today for not knowing how to spell “potato” and siring Tea Party Congressman Ben Quayle, he chose the safe bet, but over whom? We now know, much to Maddow’s delight, that Clint Eastwood was, according to Baker, “suggested in a not-at-all together unserious way.” Eastwood was a mayor at the time and, given that Bush had served eight years under an actor himself, not entirely out of step with the thinking of the party at the time.

The segment via MSNBC below:

1988 Elections, Clint Eastwood, Dan Quayle, George H. W. Bush, msnbc, Rachel Maddow, Republicans, weird

Anonymous

A man’s got to know his limitations .
Anonymous

Quayle was a really bad choice , and look at the clueless boob in that job now .
Tedderman

“Make my day,” likely “wouldn’t be prudent.”
Anonymous

Clint Eastwood would have been a great choice in 1988! I can just see him heading the negotiations with Saddam Hussein after Iraq invaded Kuwait in 1990. “Saddam, I know what you are thinking! Has he fired six cruise missles or only five? Tell you the truth, with all the liberal appeasers back home driving us to distraction, I guess I kind of forgot myself! So you have to ask yourself a question. Do I feel lucky today? Well, do you punk?”
Anonymous

and still better than what we have now.
Anonymous

We all know how Rachel Maddow always plays gotcha with Republicans, no matter how trivial the stakes. But how desperate do you need to be to go back to 1988 to score meaningless points?

Ms. Maddow is a bit of a joke now, no? At this point, even Nancy Grace looks like an intellectual in comparison.
Anonymous

Yeah, Spell potato
Anonymous

So your down with Arnold too?
Anonymous

Nancy Grace? She is not a political pundit is she. I always thought her thing was missing children and murdered woman.
Anonymous

No, Bush is no longer in office.
Anonymous

Looks like you been watching too much Beck.
Guest

Bush was down double digits; picks Quale and wins by six points, yet media tell us untill today that Dan was a mess.
http://www.sarainitalyblog.blogspot.com/ sarainitaly

I’d take Eastwood over Biden any day.
Mrprogreso

Rachael is such a good match for msnbicile. They are lucky to have her.
Anonymous

I’ll be back!
Dale Hogue

Is Rachel Maddow still on television? If she is, then we know that MSNBC is not taking its responsibility seriously. What difference does it make who the Republican Party nominates for President or Vice President? The MainStream Media’s response is exactly the same — derision.
Dale Hogue

I would take a piece of WOOD over Biden any day.
Dale Hogue

It’s interesting to know the facts about Quayle and the word written on the card given to him by a teacher during the spelling bee in the the elementary classroom. The word written on the card by the teacher was potatoes — the correct spelling of more than one potato. Stop me if you’ve heard this before but choose to ignore it in order to make fun of Dan Quayles spelling ability. That was the word that was called for in the spelling bee — nobody in the Democratic Party and the MainStream Media remembers this fact for obvious reasons.
MikeInOKC

Moron. She was not taking shots at the GOP you reactionary nitwit. That segment highlights “COOL” things she found out for that day. The possibility of Eastwood being VPOTUS is fucking cool, your political party notwithstanding. Just a week or two ago she highlighted a Republican congressman (a doctor) for saving someone’s life on a plane.
http://pulse.yahoo.com/_PKEQSTA4WOBYU5Z7QNSBUR2LXI MASSMURDERMEDIA

she described this item as “best”, not “cool”… i mention this because apparently you paid as much attention to baker’s admission in the interview that eastwood was immediately shot down as a veep as soon as his name was floated, contradicting maddow’s assertion that he was seriously considered… seems like a shot at the gop to me, considering she devotes an entire segment to display her giddiness over the prospect of something that was never going to happen 23 years ago…
http://pulse.yahoo.com/_PKEQSTA4WOBYU5Z7QNSBUR2LXI MASSMURDERMEDIA

you mean, missing white children and murdered white women…