For 2008, Hillary Trails Both Giuliani and McCain (Rasmussen Poll)

Angus Reid ^ | 9/6/05

[Conservative til I die]

Well considering he will have a house and senate with conservative leanings, would you vote for the nominee Rudy or the nominee Hillary? or would you sit it out?

Vote third party, for a candidate that is pro-life and anti-gay marriage and pro-2nd Amendment.

[oceanview]

when people get a look at how slim to non-existent the bench of conservatives are, and judge their electability, Rudy is going to be looking pretty good.

[oceanview]

and that's exactly why Rudy is staying silent about this whole thing.

[WestVirginiaRebel]

What are the chances that joe Lieberman might challenge the Hildebeast for the nomination? Let them tear each other apart for a change.

As for Guiliani...as Mayor he got to do things his way. As President he would have to work with Congress.

[oceanview]

Rudy is for civil unions, not gay marriage. Senator Allen is also pro-choice for adult women in the first 10 weeks.

[WestVirginiaRebel]

Vote third party

So you're going to allow the Democrats to win anyway?

[oceanview]

the problem is, these same poeople won't vote for McCain either because he's backstabbed us, and the senate doesn't produce leaders. so between the two, we are better off with Rudy, because we would get alot of independent voters and conservative Democrats, and some urban voters, to make up for the conservatives who won't stay onboard.

[timydnuc]

The left MSM is trying to take our eyes off the prize. They hate us, yes, they hate us, and they think that we sit in front of our TVs and read our newspapers like good little socialists. They expect the response that they worked for, but it's not working. We require more that some "reporters" byline. It could be a lie, we've proved that. Why should we get so excited about this crap. Answer: we should not. We investigate, we report, the People decide. It's just a better "news" source.

[JohnnyZ]

so between the two

Sorry bucko, but we're not going to fall for that kind of false choice between two of your precious liberal friends.

We're going to end up nominating a conservative fresh face who'll have the base behind him and be able to get votes from a middle that is leary of Hillary.

[cajungirl]

There is a spectrum of people in the GOP, Rudi would be fine for some.

[oceanview]

let me know when he appears. because if he doesn't, I'll go with Rudy rather then litmus test away our best candidates. what's Hillary going to do on abortion and gun control? that's the false choice here. Rudy as president would likely do nothing on those issues - we'd have the status quo, much like we do now.

[JohnnyZ]

let me know when he appears.

Several possibilities have been mentioned on this thread already. "The" fresh conservative candidate won't emerge until 2007 most likely, or even 2008, like McCain emerged from just another senator to Bush's main competition with the NH primary.

The fact is you're obsessed with nominating a liberal and have no interest in any of the conservative candidates.

[oceanview]

we had a well known conservative in 2000, with very good name recognition, funding, a trusted name because of his father, etc - we lost the popular vote and barely won the presidency. so now you are telling me that some unknown "fresh face" conservative is a sure winner? is that it?

Hey, my mind is open, I'll vote for anyone to stop Hillary. most people on this thread can't make the same claim.

[JohnnyZ]

we had a well known conservative in 2000, with very good name recognition, funding

Ahh .... so you're REAL attack on conservatives is that THEY CAN'T WIN. You want us to give up on a conservative candidate so we'll go along with your abortion-loving gay marriage liberal.

Forget it.

[streetpreacher]

Well considering he will have a house and senate with conservative leanings...

LOL

[oceanview]

I want to win. In 8 years under Bush, gay marriage is advancing as fast as ever. it has nothing to do with Bush, the courts and states are advancing it unfortunately. I'd rather not toss the presidency away over it.

[JohnnyZ]

That's where we differ. You want a Republican, any Republican, in the White House, and don't care if that means gay marriage on demand.

I will not and cannot vote for a liberal just because of a party label.

[bert]

.....Vote third party, for a candidate that is pro-life and anti-gay marriage and pro-2nd Amendment......

That is exactly what Hillary is hoping for.

Your strategy will get her elected.

[Conservative til I die]

.....Vote third party, for a candidate that is pro-life and anti-gay marriage and pro-2nd Amendment...... That is exactly what Hillary is hoping for. Your strategy will get her elected.

Then what will be, will be. Seriously, I'm not a GOP drone. I'm not some third-party advocate on a mission, either. But I'm not going to be forced into voting for an absolutely rotten candidate that will do the GOP and American conservatism harm in the long run just because Hillary is running. By your logic, I can never not vote Republican because they'll always be better than the Democrat.

[Conservative til I die]

Rudy is for civil unions, not gay marriage.

I'm for neither. And again, I think a candidate that's going to move the GOP to the left is an absolutely rotten candidate. I'm not a win-at-all-costs person and get no particular joy about backing the winner.

And if Allen is pro-choice, then forget him, too.