As you can see by the Pic, someone asked for our thoughts on our current GOP candidates... Thes are MY Takes... what about yours?
Posted on 01/16/2007 8:21:49 AM PST by Reagan Man
Today's deepest division is between those political observers who believe that Rudy Giuliani is a credible contender for the Republican presidential nomination and those who think that his chances are no better than those of California Rep. Duncan Hunter.
~snip~
Giuliani's strong showing in GOP polling reflects his celebrity status and the reputation he earned after the terrorist attacks. But if and when he becomes a candidate, that will change. He will be evaluated on the basis of different things, including his past and current positions and behavior, and he'll be attacked by critics and opponents. A Giuliani nomination would also generate a conservative third-party candidate in the general election and tear the GOP apart, thereby undercutting Giuliani's electability argument.
So, the former mayor might make a terrific general election candidate, but I don't see how he can get there as a Republican.
(Excerpt) Read more at realclearpolitics.com ...
Dear Ethrane,
I won't stay home if Rudy is nominated. I'll go third party.
I don't believe there is more than one chance in a thousand that Mr. Giuliani would select another Roberts or Alito for the Court. He'd have a big fight if he tried, and would have to expend a lot of political capital to try to win confirmation for such nominations.
However, since, in Mr. Giuliani's view, someone like Mrs. Ginsburg is also a fine candidate, why wouldn't he just nominate another Ginsburg, and avoid the fight altogether?
Remember, Mr. Giuliani has PRAISED the appointment of Mrs. Ginsburg. For him to nominate another person like her would not be against his principles. Why would he pick a fight where his own principles aren't involved?
sitetest
Some of us still remember his 2005 road show with Hillary Clinton in support of her stupid health care initiatives.
Modify! LOL Come on. Giuliani is no match for Mitt the chameleon. Romney is the true flip-flopper in this campaign. If Rudy came out and started to change his lifelong liberal positions on guns, abortion, homos, illegals and big government, folks FLUSHHHHHHHHHHH his campaign down the toilet in a NY minute.
Millions, who are not FReepers, will never read your post. They'll stay home no matter what we do here. Some people will never vote for liberalism. They don't believe in it.
Why would any fiscal conservative vote for him. NYC is a giant welfare sink that money pours into. He did nothing to change this. Other than his good handling of 9/11 those who seem to most revere him lived through the out of control Dinkens era when crime was rampant in NYC.
Most of America isn't suffering through a crime crisis, because they have not adopted the two pillars of NYC policy: massive welfare for the "disadvantaged" and victim disarmament (gun control).
Thus Rudy's signature issue is meaningless to most people in the USA.
I predict the fastest crash and burn since Dick Army ran for the nomination a few cycles back.
That's a red herring.
Here's the facts. Newt and Hillary joined forces on two issues that they found some common ground on. One issue has to do with changing the current system that handles private medical records of American's, from a cumbersome, unsafe paper file system, to a more secure electronic record keeping system. Newt and HRC also were members of a bipartisan committee to improve America's national security.
BFD!
As you can see by the Pic, someone asked for our thoughts on our current GOP candidates... Thes are MY Takes... what about yours?
Interesting that Duncan Hunter, the still relatively unknown 6 term Congressman from San Diego beat McCain in a recent Arizona straw poll, as reported here earlier today.
I was just thinking that because of his visibility as a commentator, people know him as articulate and well informed on the issues.
I think that counts for more than any gaffes the liberal media might mine from that volume of speech.
I think your post is quite correct in most respects.
The only thing I'm skeptical of is whether the overall numbers of abortions would be significantly reduced if the question were returned to the states.
There are states right now without any significant number of abortion clinics. If I'm not mistaken, either Mississippi or Alabama only has one in the entire state.
As long as Southwest Airlines has cheap Funfares, getting an abortion even if you live in a highly restricted state is not going to be too much of a challenge. There will be a number of states that will retain abortion on demand and it might take several generations of incremental progress to have a hope of changing that.
Flop.
I would not vote for a third party if Rudy were the candidate.
I probably would vote for my favorite Republican by write-in.
I've looked at the 3rd parties and (1) they've got things I simply don't buy, and (2) they only show up at election time.
It might, but the American public prefers the outsider with a bit of mystique. The new guy in town.
Nobody knows a thing about Osama Obama, so he's a frontrunner!
I think Gingrich would be the favorite of intellectual conservatives, but I guarantee you can find filmclip of him saying something which could be taken out of context and used against him. I'm afraid he'd be playing a lot of defense thanks to his record.
TransV Rudi is a FLOP!!!
Newt Gingrich/Ben Stein '08
I may not get my wish, but I know who the best team would be.
Dear Dog Gone,
"The only thing I'm skeptical of is whether the overall numbers of abortions would be significantly reduced if the question were returned to the states."
We'll never know as long as Roe is the law of the land.
"There will be a number of states that will retain abortion on demand and it might take several generations of incremental progress to have a hope of changing that."
I think that's entirely possible.
But it won't start until Roe goes.
sitetest
I didn't see him do anything so brilliant during 9/11 that he deserves the reputation as the most capable prosecutor of the WOT. That seems to be the mantra: "He'll be strong against terror!" I think that's a big leap, and a big gamble. And fighting terrorism is great, but we can't just throw everything else away to do it.
I think the only hope--and it seems pretty dim right now--is to retake the Congress with members principled enough to oppose liberalism whether it comes from a Democrat or a Republican. Or, we can avoid such a grim situation by not even nominating this guy.
Actually when resonable abortion restrictions are enforced (parent consent, 24 waiting period), the abortion rate does go down. The decline in abortion rates during the Clinton era was attributed to more abortion restrictions being passed. Cynically, the RATS claim that Clinton reduced the abortion rate, thus more pro-life than any Republican.
Dear PSYCHO-FREEP,
Projection is a powerful defense mechanism. As I look at your screen name, perhaps in your case, it may be self-admitted. ;-)
"Where an individual repeatedly continues a behavior that has proven to be unhealthy or promotes failure, expecting a different result each time."
In that I've never voted third-party, I'm not repeatedly continuing a behavior of any sort by doing so. Thus, this doesn't apply to me (at least not for this particular behavior). Do you have any perseverating behavior that you'd like to talk about?
sitetest
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.