[singfreedom]

I agree with your analysis. I love Newt but I don't think he could win in a "head to head" with Hillary. We lost a lot of ground in the last election. We are going to have to back up and select someone with broader appeal than, unfortunately, Newt can garner.

You are also correct on the "social conservative" issues. Immigration, gun rights, abortion, etc. are controlled by the legislature, NOT the President (as I keep having to explain). We need coat-tails--broad coat-tails! Sorry, folks, but for the time being, at least, we are going to have to suck it up and sacrifice some of our conservative personal beliefs, thanks to those who either didn't vote, or voted Dim, in the last election.

[NYRepublican72]

I'm with you on Newt. Personal issues aside, he's the best man for the job. He'd eat Hiterly for lunch in the debates.

But with Newt defraying his decision and losing ground, Guliani is the best alternative. Not perfect on Gun Rights, Immigration, etc., but he's savvy enough not to rock the boat too much. He effectively dealt with a bunch of whacko socialists on the NYC council and he'll do what it takes to not rock the boat with the Republican base/Congress.