15 million "one issue" voters would stay home?
that's highly unlikely.
1) Giuliani's ideal justice is Antonin Scalia
2) Giuliani said Roberts & Alito are "promises kept" by the GOP to appoint originalists to the court
based on the above, if Giuliani appointed judges like Scalia, Roberts, and Alito, what difference would his personal views make?
By the way, both Roberts and Alito said that Roe v Wade is "settled law" in their confirmation hearings. So how does adding conservative judges who pledge to leave Roe v. Wade alone help pro-lifers?
Additionally, S.D. had a chance to vote on banning abortions and it failed. If a ban on abortion can't succeed there, where could it?
What do the "fire-eaters" in the "one issue" social conservative movement propose as an electoral strategy in an almost evenly divided voter base, with the trend being towards going blue in key battleground states like :
Iowa
New Mexico
Ohio
Missouri
Colorado
New Hampshire
Virginia
Minnesota, Michigan, Wisconsin, Illinois, Pennsylvania, Washington and Oregon appear to be permanently lost to the Democrats in presidential elections.
I live in Iowa, which not long ago had 2 Republican senators, 6 Republican congressman, a Republican governor, and both houses of the legislature securely in Republican hands. Today, there are 4 Democrats and 2 Republicans in the house, the Democrats have won the Governorship 3 times in a row by large margins, and both houses are in Democrat hands for the first time since the 1960's.
Again, what is the strategy of the fire-eaters to win any presidential election with those trends? And what is it they really want to do anyway. There is no way in hell they're going overturn Roe v. Wade through the Supreme Court. Forget it. Let alone a constitutional amendment. So what is the future strategy, practically speaking? Tilting at windmills like Don Quixote?
As for Iowa, the people voting Democrat are socially liberal soccer moms and Yuppies who are educated and vote in large numbers. They would vote Republican if they didn't think the party was being run by Pat Robertson. They are gennerally for limited government and low taxes.
The Democrats will easily win all the states Kerry won in 2004, and could add Iowa, New Mexico, Colorado and Ohio unless the GOP can come up with a candidate who appeals to the voters who have turned Iowa into another Minnesota/Wisconsin/Illinois.
If Giuliani brought N.Y.'s 31 electoral votes, there would be no way the Democrats could win the presidency.
That is my experience as well.
These people are not voting FOR Democrats, they are voting AGAINST the "Religious Right".
Even if Hillary carried NY (which I am not convinced she would), Giuliani would carry NJ and Penna, and probably most of the New England states. I believe he would take the Midwest blue states that were very close (like Wisconsin). In fact, I will stand by my prediction that in a Rudy-Hillary race, the electoral map would look something like Reagan-Mondale in 84. Of course if Hillary runs with Obama, Illinois will go Democrat.
Barring disclosure of some horrific skeleton post nomination, I see no way that Rudy will lose if he is nominated. I can't say that about any of the other GOP possibilities. Never mind what a hothead like McVain could do if allowed to have has his finger on the button.
the issue is not fifteen million voters staying home -- if more than four million of the fifteen stay home, the Republican loses -- using 2004 numbers. Remember Bush lost the popular vote in 2000 by about half a million because Christian conservative voters did not trust him. About four million of them did not vote in 2000.
the issue is not fifteen million voters staying home -- if more than four million of the fifteen stay home, the Republican loses -- using 2004 numbers. Remember Bush lost the popular vote in 2000 by about half a million because Christian conservative voters did not trust him. About four million of them did not vote in 2000.
Let me rephrase that. Guiliani wouldn't carry NY against Hillary.
I'd be willing to bet that's why he didn't run against her this month. Take a look at the latest NY polls with Rudy against Hillary. If he wanted to do the country and NY (and the Republican Party) a great service--he should have ran against her and removed her from the Senate. THEN,,,,,he could have ran for Pres--and maybe even got support from some of us.
He can 'spare us' his efforts now that he passed that chance up. He will never get my vote since he wouldn't even take her on where they know him best,,,and love him. No way he will get nominated.
You are spot on my friend. I hope our fellow conservatives wise up before 08. Do they really think a staunch conservative candidate will win the presidency. Guliani is a good compromise. We all know where he stands on all issues and if he becomes president, I think we will sleep easier at night knowing his stance on terrorists. Please fellow conservative, you can't change things with democrates running things. Stay tuned and watch the circus about to begin in congress. We have to win elections!
You are spot on my friend. I hope our fellow conservatives wise up before 08. Do they really think a staunch conservative candidate will win the presidency. Guliani is a good compromise. We all know where he stands on all issues and if he becomes president, I think we will sleep easier at night knowing his stance on terrorists. Please fellow conservative, you can't change things with democrates running things. Stay tuned and watch the circus about to begin in congress. We have to win elections!
You are spot on my friend. I hope our fellow conservatives wise up before 08. Do they really think a staunch conservative candidate will win the presidency. Guliani is a good compromise. We all know where he stands on all issues and if he becomes president, I think we will sleep easier at night knowing his stance on terrorists. Please fellow conservative, you can't change things with democrates running things. Stay tuned and watch the circus about to begin in congress. We have to win elections!