Posted on 12/09/2004 7:42:34 AM PST by crushelits
Watching the Signs
The race for 2008 is already underway on the Republican side, you just have to know what to look for.
NOT SINCE 1952 has a presidential election lacked a sitting president or vice president as a contestant, and Ike was about as close as one could get to non-official incumbent. Before that, it was the 1928 race, and there, too, Herbert Hoover was, like Ike, a figure of towering popularity. In other words, there has never not been a front-runner in at least one party in the modern scrambles for the presidency. Here is a bit of evidence that the race for 2008 also has a leader, one along the lines of Eisenhower and the Great Engineer.
The National Federation of Republican Women is one of those groups about which not much is ever written, but which functions as one of the circulatory systems of American politics. There's a Republican Women's, Federated in practically every county of every size, and their monthly gatherings are full of the stuff of Tocqueville. These are the precincts of the proverbial "blue haired legions," but also younger, more partisan activists as well.
I make a point of speaking to a couple of chapters of the Federation every year, more to listen than to inform. (These ladies have legislative chairman's reports that go on for an hour--and they take notes.) Last Monday, just before heading off on vacation, I went to Temecula, California to speak to more than 200 women from the Riverside County Republican Women, Federated. After a recap and an assessment of Arnold Schwarzenegger's plans for a special election in 2005 to confront gerrymandering,
|
|
RIVERSIDE COUNTY is as "red" as any county in America, and getting redder. Before I spoke, the group had been entertained by the local home-schooling association's girls' choir, and many of the questions I received concerned illegal immigration and Hillary Clinton's ambitions. In other words--this is to use the title of John Podhoretz's invaluable book on places such as Riverside County, Bush Country.
Giuliani swept more than three-quarters of the votes, with the other three choices receiving smatterings of support. Keep in mind that this isn't an exercise in name identification--these women knew each of the candidates--as well as every possible name in the "other" category. This was an informed choice. I stopped what I was doing, repelled the audience, and then conducted a focus group.
Like many other pundits, I have been wondering whether Giuliani can escape the snows of Iowa and New Hampshire in 2008 given that Pat Robertson won the former in 1988 and Pat Buchanan the latter in 1992. Giuliani is too "moderate" to win the GOP nod, right?
Wrong, if these ladies are to be believed. Among the many praises that gushed forth: decisive, experienced, loyal to "W"--an interesting positive, that--funny and, crucially, tough enough to take on the Clintons. There were many praises for Senator Frist, and some for John McCain, but Giuliani has their hearts--already.
But the point is that, even if you disagree with Rudy on the abortion issue, you still agree with him more than do with Hillary, right? The point of an election isn't always to get the best person in, but sometimes it is to keep the worst person out.
Try not to be so damn reasonable.
1) Fiscal conservatism is much more than tax cuts or even tax policy.
2) There are many conservatives that are fiscal conservatives, but not social conservatives . . . and vice-versa.
3) Yes, social conservatives made a bigger difference this year. However, fiscal conservatives have been with the Republican Party for much longer and it was successful then too.
Take a closer look at the leadership of the Republican Party and tell me that they are pro-choice.
Bob Casey was a strong pro-life Democrat, however. I'm talking about an election that pits two pro-choicers against each other.
LOL It's tough. Just the Kentuckian in me. : )
He would probably win a NY senate run. I don't see him winning the Presidency.
I wouldn't vote for him OR McCain.
The subject is moot. It's the base that turns out in the primaries that decide our nominee and our base is very conservative. Rudy hasn't a chance to win the nomination. If it came to a choice between Rudy and Hillary I'd stay home. Period. Casting a vote for Rudy would be a mortal sin and I take that very seriously. Many Republicans were gleeful tat there were bishops refusing Holy Communion for John Kerry...those bishops will take the same stance with Rudy. If he ran it would not be pretty.
I would probably go third-party. In the end, my conscience is more important than my president.
By the way, I do not consider voting for someone who does not want to overturn Roe v. Wade to be a mortal sin. The doctor who performs the abortion? That's a sin . . . but still even a forgivable sin, not mortal.
Abortion is fundamentally EVIL. It is not just one issue out of a hundred. It is seperate and apart from everything else because of the magnitude of it's corruption. I'm not trying to be disagreeable here, but I think it's sheer folly to think we can paper over someone like Rudy's pro abortion stands and think that rank and file conservatives would ever go along with that. They won't.
You say that until your president leads the nation down a road that you REALLY don't want. Be realistic, not ideological.
Your opinion. Personally, I'm pro-life, but I'd rather have a president that is tough on security and defense. Now, I'm not defending Rudy . . . my support, right now, is behind Mitt Romney.
ALl sins are forgiveable. Mortal sins are the most serious sins.
However, Hillary is going to be the Rat candidate. The same thing could be said about her, perhaps even moreso, as Bill will actually be living and playing again with the hired help right in the White House and will have a seat in all the action. IMHO, "dynasty" will be a smallish factor, easily countered by the true status of the Rat candidate, the Clinton Co-Presidents!
Jeb has been a great Governor and would make a great candidate. Why not go with the very best? Stop worrying what the naysayers in the MSM and the spinners on the other side say. If it is somebody else, they will just find another something to carp about and pile on whoever is picked.
Go for the GOLD, people!
We'll just agree to disagree. I don't know enough about Romney to oppose or support him. My supports with George Allen. Thankfully we have a couple of yearas before all this really matters.
And, not to get all theological on a political thread, but not all sins are forgivable. According to my Christian beliefs, not accepting Jesus as your savior is not forgivable. Just the Baptist in me, I guess. : )
Before anyone goes off, yes I have friends that are other denominations of Christianity and friends that are Jewish, Muslim, and Hindu. And, yes, I strongly believe that there is a place for all of these folks in the Republican Party. Remember, we are "The Party of the Open Door". The Democrats are "The Party of the Big Tent". Big tents are for circuses though. : )
I like George Allen a lot. He's probably my second choice. But I could EASILY support him. Kind of like 2000 . . . as much as I love George W. and campaigned for him, even in the primary, I could have EASILY have supported John Kasich had he won.
American Conservative Union Lifetime ratings
"Conservative Patriot" Zell Miller.......65%
"Liberal RINO" John McCain...........84%
It would be nice if you guys checked these candidates actual VOTING RECORDS instead of just beliving all their rhetoric. "Conservative" Zell Miller can't hold a candle to even most of the "moderate" Republicans in the Senate (McCain, Murcowski, Dewine, Voinvoich, etc.) I do find it amusing how McCain is constantly blasted on FR for championing his "campaign fiannce reform" bill, but Zig Zag can champion McCain's bill, AND "hate crimes "legislation" AND unlimited lawsuits for trial lawyers AND Dasshole for "majority leader" -- but he's somehow "conservative" cuz he claims to be "one of us" and endorsed Bush.
As for me, I am happy the MORE CONSERVATIVE Johnny Isakson (who is certainly no right-wing firebrand in his own right) will be replacing Zell.
Alot of you guys are so gullible you'd believe Olympia Snowe was a hard-core conservative if kept her current voting record but adopted a dixie twang and made a great convention speech with "spitball" jokes.
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.