Posted on 11/15/2006 8:49:32 PM PST by fkabuckeyesrule
America's Mayor? Maybe. But America's President?
So Rudy Giuliani has announced his intention to run for president. Well, to be exact, he has formed an organisation to explore a bid for the presidency.
When Giuliani's marriage collapsed, he moved in with two gay men and a Chihuahua named Bonnie. Is America ready for this man?
His announcement came as no great surprise, as he has been scratching his chin about this for 12 months. That didn't stop the New York tabloids from giving him front-page treatment.
The Daily News headline was "Rudy, Set, Go!" The New York Post said: "Count me in".
The New York Times thought it was worth eight paragraphs on page 18. It was next to a story about the other Republican front-runner John McCain. The two of them are the only Republicans whom opinion polls show could beat Hillary Clinton.
Giuliani actually topped McCain in a CNN poll this week, 29 per cent to 27 per cent.
Even five years after September 11, Giuliani retains the afterglow of his steadfast handling of the terrorist attacks, although a recent book Grand Illusion: The Untold Story of Rudy Giuliani and 9/11, by Dan Collins and Wayne Barrett, attempted to rewrite the story of "America's mayor".
It's only a week since the midterm elections, but, in America's endless cycle of politics, everybody is now talking about the 2008 presidential election. Already one Democrat, Iowa Governor Tom Vilsack, and one Republican, Duncan Hall, have announced they are running. Both are asterisks in the opinion polls.
A Giuliani-Clinton contest would be a rerun of what should have been the contest for the Senate seat in New York in 2000. But Giuliani withdrew after being diagnosed with prostate cancer. The Daily News called the potential match-up "the race we've dreamed of".
It may be for New York, which hasn't had a real presidential contender for a generation or more, but is it the race America dreams of?
Rudy v Hil would give America the choice of two pro-choice, pro-gay rights, pro-gun control candidates. Giuliani has been married three times (as The Daily News reminded readers, when one of his marriages collapsed, he moved in with two gay men and a Chihuahua named Bonnie), while Hillary has lived a thousand lives in her marriage to Bill Clinton.
Giuliani faces an uphill struggle to win his party's nomination, where Christian conservatives make up a vital part of the membership base.
Clinton would find it easier to win her party's endorsement, but she might find it harder to convince those same conservatives in a general election. It's early, early days yet, but America's conservative vote is still up for grabs.
Posted by Mark Coultan
November 15, 2006 03:08 PM
IMO, Rudy did a some good things for NewYorkers, but he's still a liberal. His leadership is all centered around the immediate aftermath of 9-11. That's not enough in my book. Bottomline. Conservatives will not support Rudy in the GOP primaries. Especially social conservatives. And without the Republican Party base backing Rudy, his candidacy is DOA. Some polls may show Rudy on top. Wait until people get to see his liberal governing record and his ultra social liberal positions. Some FReepers are so infatuated with Rudy, it rivels what happened around here during the 2003 Cal recall election. I said at that time, if the liberal Republican Arnold Scwarzenegger wins, it will open the door for other liberal Republicans like Giuliani. I was right. Here we go again. Except this time the playing field is a lot bigger --- the White House and the Oval Office. I will not vote for a liberal. This conservative will never vote for Rudy.
>He never attempted to abolish the city income tax.
The CITY has an income tax?
The Sullivan Act in New York went into effect in 1911, not 1931. It is one of the oldest gun control laws and predates the 18th amendment by a number of years.
Actually, I don't think he would have defeated her.
Then lets hope there is a damn fine conservative out there waiting to emerge when the time is right.
"My original post in the section was just setting the record straight that he did not support big government".
But if he (and we) assumed that he could NOT have defeated her--in a very BLUE state that is much more in-tune with his liberal leanings, where he is known best and very, VERY popular,,,,
WHY IN THE WORLD WOULD HE THINK HE COULD BEAT HER NATIONALLY,,,when 'flyover country' is much more conservative than a blue state like NY??
My bad.
NY (liberal) Times, (liberal) CNN.......all support Rudy.
WHY IN THE WORLD WOULD HE THINK HE COULD BEAT HER NATIONALLY,,,when 'flyover country' is much more conservative than a blue state like NY?
WHY IN THE WORLD WOULD HE THINK HE COULD BEAT HER NATIONALLY,,,when 'flyover country' is much more conservative than a blue state like NY?
"you know the whole 20 trillion forward deficits into 40 trillion in just 4 years...right"?
She only needs to add Ohio (which is rapidly turning more blue by the day--due to the loss of manufacturing jobs). Michigan, Pennsylvania, Wisconsin and Missouri are likely hers too!! Illinois is already a lost cause. If she adds Evan Byah as VP--she'll take Indiana which is starting to trend blue, evidenced by the loss of 3 Republican House seats in the last election (a reliable red state in the past--again, loss of manufacturing jobs). How much did YOU PAY for that bridge when YOU bought it?
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.