Posted on 01/23/2007 10:03:35 AM PST by BunnySlippers
"If you can go toe-to-toe with liberals in Massachusetts and New York City and acquit yourself well, you are prepared for D.C.," said Grover Norquist, president of Americans for Tax Reform.
**
Mead credits Giuliani with mental toughness rare among elected officials. Instead of seeking consensus, Giuliani openly defied many of the city's leading liberals on crime and welfare reform.
"Giuliani confronted not only the bureaucracy, but the community groups and the academics and the journalists and all those who said you couldn't be tough on the poor," Mead said. "He said that you can be you can demand that they play by the rules. And he got away with it."
**
"It's very difficult for such a person to win Republican primaries," said Jack Pitney, a professor of politics at Claremont McKenna College.
Difficult, but not impossible, Norquist said. As an example, he pointed to Ronald Reagan.
"Reagan passed the most liberal abortion laws in the country and the most liberal divorce laws in the country as governor (of California), and then ran as the pro-life, social-conservative presidential candidate," Norquist said.
**
Giuliani's sharp-edge personality is another wild card. He sometimes rubs people, especially journalists, the wrong way.
On the other hand, his toughness might appeal to like-minded conservatives.
"A nice person couldn't have done what Giuliani did in New York," Mead said. "You needed a pit bull. Giuliani is a pit bull."
(Excerpt) Read more at investors.com ...
I am not unappeasable. I just do not vote for liberals like Rino Rudy.
LOL
Here is the Link Ronald Reagan Timeline
The first no-fault divorce law in the nation was signed in California in 1969 by Gov. Ronald Reagan.
I still haven't decided whom to support in the primaries.
But when I read what people like you have to say, it makes me lean more toward Rudy.
We could kill two birds with one stone: nominate someone who would destroy Hillary AND purge our party of Unappeasable zealots.
Rudy is a "two-fer."
Getting more obvious by the day they have no clue!
Hmmm. Bush in 2000 was pro-life. No history of supporting gun control. And didn't have reams of recent personal issues that the Dems could bang on like a tin drum.
In other words, he offered a position that could draw both the right and moderates. Rudy, quite frankly, is going to have a VERY hard time unifying the various elements of the party with his past positions.
That should be obvious to anyone. But the Rudy boosters instead prefer to say it's all the fault of the deranged one-issue posters (as if that will win them over).
BTTT
As opposed to the far greater number of Reagan Democrats who quit voting for the GOP because the GOP had drifted so far from the Reagan legacy that attracted them in the first place? You know, the legacy that also included a strong pro-life plank that offered pro-life centrists an alternative to pro-abort Dems?
Nah, all I've seen is marked attempts by some posters to question the motives of dedicated pro-life groups and to tear Reagan down a notch.
Speaking just for myself, I'm not particularly interested in "winning over" the one-issue Unappeasables.
I'm interested in kicking them to the curb where they belong.
They have no business dictating who our nominee should be, and their influence needs to be minimized.
If Reagan were running today, these pious, holier-than-thou nutbags would be tearing him down just like they're tearing down Rudy.
Pathetic.
Boy, y'all really know how to win over the base, eh? Kick 'em and demand their vote.
Guess what? You don't kick votes from people. You EARN them.
Falsehood. The only ones I've seen tearing down Reagan are those trying to diminish his legacy to make the RINOs look better.
But you don't make your guy look better by tearing down an icon of the party. You just piss off the very people your guy is gonna need to win.
Screw them. We don't need their votes.
We need the votes of reasonable, moderately conservative independents. We need the votes of loyal Republicans.
We don't need the votes of people who represent the lunatic fringe even on FreeRepublic.
Boy, for Rudy's sake, I hope you're an aberration and not an indication of how his camp hopes to win the White House.
I'm with you on that one...
Yup! Ya gotta hate those damned conservatives!!
He's right, we will do just fine without your kind.
He's not an aberration. There's at least half a dozen just like him right here on FR pulling the same tactic to bully or scare everybody into supporting liberal Rudy.
That's what's so funny, dirtboy.
You people actually think you matter. You actually believe that our nominee "needs" you in order to win.
Guess what? For every one of you, there are 5 to 10 reasonable conservatives who are willing to vote for an imperfect candidate.
And for ever such reasonable conservative, there are 5 to 10 moderates/independents who don't give a rat's hiney about your sacred issues.
The polls speak for themselves. Rudy can win this with or without you guys. If you want to remain (slightly) relevant, I'd suggest you drop the bravado and get realistic.
I used to bash Rudy too but it's very counter-productive. Just let the primaries play out and you can vote against him with your heart's content.
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.