Posted on 02/01/2007 5:41:39 AM PST by areafiftyone
I haven't read of any pro-Rudy poster saying they wouldn't support the republican nominee. That seems to be the exclusive talking point of the anti-Rudy's. They have their principles, you know. Compromising for the good of their country isn't one of them.
Apparently you already know the definition of a win over there.
"Jimmy Carter wasn't running in 1984. Mondale ran, and he was beaten by a much larger margin than Mr. Peanut. And Mondale was and is FAR more liberal than Carter, so the 'rat base should have been motivated to vote for him. Unfortunately for Fritz, as a candidate he was awful and he was up against King Kong."
Once again ( just for you) Jimmy Carter created more Republicans than anyone in history.
Carter lost in 1980, Mondale was tied to Carter. Everything that people saw wrong with the Carter years was tied up with Mondale when he ran.
Those voters were already changed to Republicans in 1980.
Now that is my opinion on a big part of why President Reagan Did so well again in 1984.
Mondale was Carters guy!
That is my opinion on that matter but you may look into it and see if the records from that election and opinions of others that have written about it make the same point.
I've discussed this quote before. Giuliani does not promise to appoint "strict constructionist" judges in this quote. He praises 3 of his colleagues, 2 from his days in the justice department. He praised the President for making a good political choice.
Rudy has made statements that go both ways. He praises Roberts and Alito. He also praises J.Ginsberg. Rudy even praised Bill Clinton as someone whose politics are in line with his own. Rudy`s basic standards for a justice are too loose. Sorry. Rudy talks out both side so his mouth on this issue.
I like Fred, liked him as a Senator from TN, liked his down to earth common sense but by golly I just cannot abide another cast change on Law and Order! LOL!
Seriously, when Thompson gave up his Senate seat he seemed rather pleased to get out of DC. As I recall at the time Fred had a few choice comments on the goings on in DC., almost as though he felt 'dirty' from being forced to rub elbows with some of the characters in DC. That leads me to believe he would not run but then who knows, the prospect of power is sometimes hard to resist.
The weather is ghastly over here, north of CLT. How are you doing over on your side of the state?
Thanks, had to wait for lunch break to reply.
I was around (hate to admit it) for the "I LIKE IKE' juggernaut, I see some parallels here, different time and place, different cast of characters, but the possibilities abound. Rudy is a very POSITIVE person, people don't like gloom and doomers.
And that's my problem with the Rush Limbaugh attitude that conservatism per se is a winner. I believe strongly it's the best way politically, but that does not mean you can win every election with it.
As one example, the two most popular Senators of all are the Maine Gals. Frankly, we're lucky to have them. BOTH voted for Janice Rogers Brown! BOTH voted for Alito and Roberts. No, they aren't conservative -- but the idea we could get a southern-type conservative elected in Maine is delusional.
I don't believe we will win in 2008 with a nominee like GWB or someone further right. The only way that would work is if we had a very popular conservative available. We don't. That's why all of the favorites are not conservatives, and NONE are from the South. (Gingrich isn't in yet, so that may change).
What we are REALLY seeing is a cyclical reduction in the influence of the South. Since Kennedy, the South has had a disproportionate number of Presidential candidates and Presidents. Conventional wisdom was that no Democrat could win without the South and that Northeastern or Midwest liberals could not win. But now the two top 'rat candidates are from IL and NY. Rudy is from NY. Kerry is from MA and is as liberal as they come, yet had he won OH he'd be President without ANY of the South!!
If a 'rat wins without the South, then there will be an even bigger shift within the Republican Party than what we are seeing now. The entire Midwest and Northeast cannot be surrendered just to placate the South. A regional party means no national power or influence. A national party that is successful must be more broadly-based than strict conservatism. And that means, sometimes, that the Republican nomination will go to someone who is not conservative. Welcome to reality.
Still ducking the question, huh?
Not necessarily. NJ voted for Reagan for one. It is true that it will not vote for a far right candidate but could vote for a moderate conservative.
If the Bears win Sunday because of a fluke play I won't complain.
I agree. They seem to be myopic. Threatening not to vote is.... well, I think everyone has the duty to vote for the best of the country. But it goes both ways. Their point that Rudy is not quite as conservative as our party platform indicates our nominee should be is a valid point. That's why I think both sides need to compromise. But not holding my breath.
That's a fair point and has to be factored in to any decision on whether or not to support him. He clearly embarassed the President and himself with that goof.
LOL, well, that's about as good as any reason for not voting for somebody as I've seen on these threads!
And I remember that, too; he seemed glad to get away from all the backstabbing; that was right about the time that his daughter died, too, and I think it gave him a whole new perspective on life.
As far as here, our "snow" is almost gone; I think you got a lot worse than we did. We just had "car and bush" snow, with few wrecks in Wake County. I was glad to see SOME winter though!
Awww, garsh (blushing and toeing the dirt) thanks ma'am.
Ding!
Like Tancredo.
Rudy is not a "troop". He avoided serving in the military.
I just missed Ike.
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.