Skip to comments.Rudy for president?
Posted on 07/08/2006 8:12:30 AM PDT by mathprof
Well-connected public figures report that they have been told recently by Rudolph Giuliani that, as of now, he intends to run for the Republican presidential nomination in 2008.
The former mayor of New York was on top of last month's national Gallup poll measuring presidential preferences by registered Republicans, with 29 percent. Sen. John McCain's 24 percent was second, with former House Speaker Newt Gingrich third at 8 percent. National polls all year have shown Giuliani running either first or second to McCain, with the rest of the presidential possibilities far behind.
Republican insiders respond to these numbers by saying rank-and-file GOP voters will abandon Giuliani once they realize his position on abortion, gay rights and gun control. Party strategists calculate that if he actually runs, he must change on at least one of these issues.
(Excerpt) Read more at townhall.com ...
" ... does not mean you have any obligation to ever trust them in positions of authority again."
This is silly. Just because I think Allen is a dork and you disagree doesn't mean we have to keep on like this in this thread.
Where did I ever suggest that Kerik be put in another position of authority?
A recruit once said that to me, but I yanked him off of the top bunk and onto the concrete floor anyway...
That may be so, but I think Rudy will back off of most of the positions that are offensive to conservatives and will win the nomination. He will overshadow everyone in primary debates. I still think it will come down to Rudy or McCain.
I just don't think there are enough true conservatives in the Republican party to nominate a George Allen. And if he could be nominated, he would lose to a moderate Dem like Warner or Bayh. The liberals are already turning on Hillary, convinced she could not win. They will not nominate her. They will nominate an attractive candidate that perhaps only a Guiliani could beat.
Yet Reagan gave us Kennedy and O'Connor and Bush I Souter.
You never know.
And even if you did, the daily issues that confront the President are a more important voting consideration then a maybe opportunity to pick a Justice that is a crap shoot in any event. And where the Senate has the final say.
I don't want to repeat myself in every thread but I believe with his background Giuliani will pick Roberts and Alito clones.
That's a specific example? LMAO.
Rudy would most definitely offer up strong conservatives because he would not want a "Harriet Miers fiasco" of his own. He would have no appetite for a conservative backlash, and that means not peeing off the Federalist Society.
In the end, the makeup of the Senate will determine who Rudy appoints - - if it's still a Republican Senate, he will pretty much have clear sailing; a scumbag Democrat Senate changes everything. In any event, I am sure I would prefer Rudy to McCain in making appointments up and down the judicial food chain.
Granted. Reagan shouldn't have listened to Meese and Schultz when it came to nominating O'Conner. His campaign promise to pick the first woman to sit on the high court could have been better. O'Conner was already a moderate when Reagan nominated her. OTOH. Kennedy was endorsed by ALL the major national pro-life organizations, and ALL the major law enforcement groups.
Be nice. I strongly disagree that Rudy is a viable choice. But leave off with the name calling. I respect those who are dead wrong on this. They have points to make. Engage their points.
"There is no way Hillary will be the Dem nominee. She is a horrible speaker and a crappy campaigner. So you don't have to worry about a Rudy Hillary match-up. I want a conservative. Someone who will perpetuate Bush's war on terror and Reagan's war on government. No more compassion. I love W but i think on spending and immigration he just tried to make everyone happy and in the end no one was. I think the person who can do this is Newt Gingrich. I was skeptical of him but watching him speak on C-Span last month he blew me away with his ideas. And they weren't Utopian pie in the sky platitudes they were real tangible goals."
Newt would get my vote also. He is a no nonsense straight talker which I like.
"His only purpose here is to bash the religious folks..."
I don't see it in his post archives. I do see a heck of a lot of Giuliani-pimping however.
Gingrich's time has come and gone.
"The Giuliani-trolls are the ones who are trying to discredit a strong Republican candidate for president..."
Really? I think it'd be the ones pushing a liberal to be the republicans' nominee for president in 2008.
But not over the operations United States Army...
Looks like W has done well with his.
"But leave off with the name calling."
I didn't think that was name calling but I'll stop.
Giuliani is a law and order fanatic. Obsessive almost.
As Mayor of a huge city he had to act in a certain way to keep law and order in his city(and that included not doing the job of the Federal Government) but if border security is his responsibility as President, I don't believe any candidate, any, would be tougher.
I will make anyone a bet that if Giuliani is President at one time or another he will be called a Fascist by the MSM for his border policies- as Conservative cheer.
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.