Pirro
Posted on 11/30/2005 12:19:34 PM PST by jmaroneps37
Jeannine Pirro should get out of this race immediately. Her campaign is going nowhere and she is selfishly wasting our time. Here's why.
“Forty-five percent (45%) now see [Senator Hillary] Clinton as politically liberal.” So says the Rusmussen Report. Why? What positions do voters believe Hillary Clinton holds that turn them off? Well people believe she supports gay “marriage.” They believe she supports abortion up to and including partial birth abortion. Likewise, they believe she supports extreme positions attacking the second amendment and they believe she supports affirmative action.
Since she is the most calculating person in American politics this perception of her, as an ultra liberal, can’t be traveling under her radar. She knows people see her for what she is, but feels no need to change what they think. She knows these positions will help her raise money from now until Election Day. She also knows that repudiating these positions would shut down much of her fundraising success.
Simply put: There is no reason for Hillary Clinton to address this perception of her because no one is pressuring her to do so. The media is working for her already. They would never ask her to clarify any of her positions for fear that doing so would put them in her crosshairs for years to come. That would seem to leave any challenge based on issues, up to her would be Republican opponent in next year’s senate race.
Nevertheless, therein lies the problem. There is no way Jeannine Pirro can challenge Hillary Clinton on her position on abortion because Pirro herself gets a 100% rating from NARAL.
There is no way Pirro can challenge Clinton to explain herself on gay “marriage” because she herself supports such odd unions.
There is no way Jeannine Pirro can say a word about Clinton’s stance on confiscating guns in violation of the second amendment. She holds the very same views and has a long record of acting on these positions.
Finally, there can not be any credible attacks on Clinton’s position on affirmative action from Pirro because she too believes in its principles.
When a challenger is running against an incumbent he or she must help the voters see the difference between them or defeat will be certain.
There isn’t enough difference between Jeannine Pirro and Hillary Clinton to fill a thimble.
When voters are given a choice between voting for a fake liberal and a real liberal, they will vote for the real liberal every time. Pirro would find breaking 40% a very tall order. Contrary to the silly wishful thinking of the so called “experts” we hear, especially on local talk radio, Jeannine Pirro would not excite America’s conservatives. She has not raised large amounts of money despite four month of hundreds of thousand dollars in free, totally one sided cheer leading, from New York’s largest conservative radio station. Unfortunately for the Pirro camp the only excitement she is generating is among the fawning media. They won’t vote for her anyway.
Pirro’s positions have ensured that she will not get the Conservative Party’s nomination. In New York State it is not possible for a Republican to win statewide office without the Conservative Party’s line.
Ultimately Pirro will not even get the Republican Party’s nomination. There is no chance that she would not face a primary from the right. Make no mistake about that. Former Mayor of Yonkers John Spencer comes to mind.
Contrary to what the “experts” think they know, forcing a primary in New York State is exceedingly easy. The necessary number of statewide signatures is about 10, 000. John Spencer could easily get 7,500 in Westchester ( his and Pirro’s home county) In Staten Island he would get all the rest he needed, with sixty counties left.
Once a primary was set, Pirro would be as good as finished. There is such a thing as the “primary rule”, again contrary to the “knowledge” possessed by the “experts.” In a Democrat primary the largest number of voters come from the left. In a Republican primary those furthest to the right turn out and vote. These voters will not support Jeannine Pirro once they learn what her positions are. John Spencer would handily win a primary with Jeannine Pirro. That fact is inescapable.
A Pirro vs Clinton race would cause barely a ripple outside of New York State. It would generate no excitement west of the Hudson River. At first it might, that has to be acknowledged, but eventually when the donor pool around the country caught on to Pirro she would find herself with less and less reason to run to the mailbox in the morning.
John Spencer’s nomination would lead to this race being the hottest in America. He could hammer her on social issues. As a Viet Nam combat veteran, he could hammer her on national security. He could excite the imaginations and checkbooks of conservatives across the county.
John Spencer is 100% pro life. He is an NRA member. He is against gay “marriage” and sees little value in affirmative action. He can hit Hillary on every one of these important issues. Mayor Spencer can force her to respond. He can destroy her presidential aspirations.
Jeannine Pirro can do none of this.
She is a very able prosecutor who could strengthen the Republican ticket and easily beat mark Green in a race for Attorney General of New York State.
Mrs. Pirro is an intelligent and able person who will come to see the value of this argument for her withdrawal from this race sooner or later. Republican State Senate Majority Leader Joe Bruno has and Congressman John Sweeney have called on her to step down. They have been joined in this call by State Sen. Nicholas Spano and by Conservative Party chair Michael Long. Mr. Long observed that John Spencer “seems to be gathering most of the support from the ranks of the[Conservative] party over Pirro.
For everyone’s best interest, she should get out now and endorse John Spencer.
“Forty-five percent (45%) now see [Senator Hillary] Clinton as politically liberal.”
------
Are the other fifty-five percent blind and deaf??? -- or just ultra-low I.Q. ??
Can someone familiar with the CP in NY tell me why this model wouldn't work well in other states (separate party, but collaborating - often decisively - with the GOP when the GOP candidate is also a conservative)?
The more I hear op/ed people calling for her to leave, the more I'm sure Hillary is directing this.
The poster has it entirely wrong. It is Spencer who should endorse Pirro.
The only thing to cause Hillary problems in 2006 would be the insistence she swear to serve out a Senate term if she wins. While Spencer can insist on that too, she need not listen or respond to him because NY is a liberal state. Against Spencer she can cross her arms and say that she is moderate and Spencer is a radical right winger and that's all the voters in NY need to know. The NYers will agree and vote for her as a moderate, not insist on a pledge to serve out a Senate term and leave her unfettered to run for President in 2008.
In contrast, Pirro can also claim to be a moderate. Hillary can't run only on her political positions versus Pirro because Pirro doesn't look like an extreme right wing conservative to the public. NY is a liberal state and that matters.
Only Pirro can 1) force Hillary to address the pledge requirement to serve out a Senate term and 2) force Hillary to look for contrasting positions and move farther to the left. Moving Hillary farther to the left is important for the GOP to win in 2008.
Pirro presents NO ideological alternative to Hillary. If we're going to run someone, let them offer the voters an actual choice, not an echo. I'm supporting former Yonkers Mayor John Spencer.
We keep treating any given state as "liberal" and running liberal ultraRINOs expecting that they'll turn things around solely because they have an "R" after their name and after time, we act all "surprised" when nothing ever changes, and the situation in said given state worsens. We have to offer bonafide ALTERNATIVES to rotten liberal corruption, statism, and do-nothingism. Believe it or not, Pataki ran and won as a CONSERVATIVE. Sadly, he stayed too long and became captured by the RINO statism and destruction. Pirro is nothing but a candidate of this same corrupt status-quo quagmire.
Hillary instigating this call for Pirro to leave?
very interesting. highly possible.
But, but, but....if we thought like that, Doug Forrester wouldn't have been elected Governor in New Jersey. After all, he was the only one who could beat Jon Corzine. Oh wait...nevermind.
They're from New York - they are to the left of her, but think they are "moderates."
Why on earth would Hillary orchestrate the trashing of an unelectable RINO who does nothing but reinforce HRC's own positions? Pirro is Hillary-lite. There's no good reason for New Yorkers to vote for her when the real thing is already on the ballot.
You mean the liberalization of the GOP isn't really all that pragmatic after all?
Bottom line is, don't trust ANYONE trying to sell you on "moderates". It's just code for libs in drag.
If we want to be truly honest, we'd better realize that no matter who we nominate (save perhaps Giuliani), the people of NY aren't going to vote Miss I Saw Everyone's FBI Files Clinton out. Saying that, we might as well go with the best candidate who can draw contrasts to Hillary.
We probably need to focus more on the Governorship. I can't even imagine the mentality of a state party that would take seriously a William Weld candidacy. Weld was to the state of Massachusetts Republican Party what the Enola Gay was to Hiroshima. Bill Clinton has more credibility to serve as a REPUBLICAN nominee than Weld does. As for Golisano, I think he's just another uberrich Perotista nut, who believes his wealth automatically entitles him to high office. I'm leaning towards Secretary of State Randy Daniels, whom I've heard some describe as Conservative. Nominating another African-American Republican for high office (along with Blackwell in OH, Swann in PA, Steele in MD) while watching out closely for the damage a coming Tom Suozzi-Eliot Spitzer fratricidal grudgematch might actually see us retain the Governorship, even if we don't really deserve to after Pataki's reign of error, and the gross mismanagement of the state party (which still seems stuck in the bossism of the 19th century). If Weld gets the nomination for the GOP, I'll campaign for Spitzer personally. At least as a radical liberal, Spitzer has the common-courtesy to be in the right party.
If anything, Forrester's campaign demonstrated that even the RINO establishment of NJ has become so powerless they can't deliver anywhere near majorities anymore (and witness the legislative erosion for the 7th consecutive statewide election since after 1991). This has held true for a long time now, and they refuse to admit it. The statist RINO establishment of NJ (and NY) needs to be slayed and buried before they end up like Massachusetts.
I'm pretty sure even the blind and deaf can see and hear those lies.
Its those willing idiots that enjoy her tripe.
It would be one thing to run "moderates" (if those are actually what they are and not cross-dressing Socialists) in areas where we are considered a lost cause FAR BELOW a statewide office (say, Mayor, State Legislator, etc.), but I don't care how 'Rat a state is, you never run these destructive liberal RINO types, period. Conservatives and those committed Republicans will SIT OUT the election if this is what is offered for opposition. Merely having an "R" after your name isn't enough to prove your worthiness. Being an "R" has to mean something.
That pic is incredibly airbrushed. What's shocking is Pirro's resemblence to Brooklyn-born Stalinist Barbara Boxer, they look like twins.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.