Giuliani: Can hero of 9/11 win over his own party?

USA Today | 02.01/2007 | By Susan Page

[Jim Robinson]

Views on social issues could cost him Republican Party's nomination

Can't post USAToday content, but basically this article states that most Republicans don't know the full extent of Giuliani's liberal positions. When they learn he is pro abortion rights, pro gay rights, pro gun control, he probably won't get the nomination. And they say this is according to "GOP pollster," Tony Fabrizio.

Read the article here: http://www.usatoday.com/printedition/news/20070201/1a_cover01.art.htm

[onyx]

HUGE BUMP!

[Jake The Goose]

OK,

Listen, I hear Pat Robertson is considering a run !!!!

[billbears]

The eventual GOP nominee gets my vote in the general election.

Republican have for the most part fallen into two categories. They either want to legislate morality at the national level interfering into the affairs of the states (often labeled the 'true conservatives') or they want to waste money on government programs in the promise they're somehow helping (most Republicans and reminiscent of many of Bush's programs). They may throw in some lip service to the 'true conservatives', get a woo-hoo from that crowd, and move on.

What a choice. It's like being asked which eye do you want to be poked in first? Neither are worth a damn but I could live with worthless government programs easier than I could some hack 1000 miles away telling me how I should really live and he's going to pass a law to make sure I do it.

I read somewhere that Giuliani believes the issue of abortion should be left to the states. If that's the case, then he's better than the 'true conservatives' who want a new Amendment for practically everything. It means he'll appoint judges more like Thomas and less like Roberts or Alito. More of a federalist slant. I could even live with a moderate judge if they ruled most issues were concerns of the states. The federal judiciary was meant to have a very specific role with a rather limited scope. And it's clear liberals nor 'true conservatives' care about this. What will happen if Giuliani were to appoint someone like this more than likely is that there would be overspill of federalism into other decisions. And that would be a very good thing. Not too many judges support federalism on just one cause. You see it at times with Scalia and moreso with Thomas. This is just a what if but hopefully a plausible scenario.

Don't get me wrong, I don't believe in abortion, I don't support it, but I do know that some issues were not intended to be political footballs at the national level to be kicked around by morons looking for more facetime on the national news.

That being said, I have no dog in this hunt. I'll cast a ballot for Rep. Paul in the primary and as stated find something else to do Election Day (unless someone I know personally is running locally then I may bother). Life's too short to be worried which political hack gets into office and continues the same mess as his predecessor. If Giuliani wins so what? Would he be better than Clinton? I suppose. Y'all have at it.

[Indy Pendance]

You need a poll, if it was a democrat (ie Hillary) vs Giuliani, as the final contenders, who'd you vote for? Pity the republican party has come to this.

[onyx]

Come the general election and provided Rudy is the GOP nominee and you live in a battleground state, then your vote or non vote will definitely matter.

In fact, the whole red veruses blue state map, might undergo a change if Rudy is the nominee.

[Emmett McCarthy]

I'm with you. Rudy's never gonna get my vote. And, frankly, if it comes down to Rudy or Hilary, it's all over anyway.

[SIDENET]

Man, I didn't say that I supported kooks!

Sheesh. ;-)

[streetpreacher]

I'm just saying that if your only requirement is "leadership", there's a broad spectrum out there.

[Jake The Goose]

Hey SIDENET - that was a great reply to my snotty post.

I loved it.

Ok - you are not someone I will pay attention to.

Thanks for the sense of humor.

[onyx]

At this point, I don't have a favorite candidate nad I won't even begin to choose one until after the first of the debates, which start on April 4, 2007.

[Jake The Goose]

Fair enough - I will agree with that - I too will look for the best "leader" - right now,, I only know where I lean.

[Jake The Goose]

No No - I meant I will PAY attention to you.

[Jake The Goose]

No No - I meant I will PAY attention to you.

[SIDENET]

No problemo.

Thanks, Jake.

[jonrick46]

Rudy may have the formulae of sucess to win against the DemonRATs. As "America's Mayor" over the flaming liberals of New York City, he knows the enemy and knows what tactics work for their defeat. A win over the cunning DemonRATs will take the most skilled application of political science that can be devised. That takes a good team of talent which Rudy will easily find.

The left may be living in a realm of alternate moonbat reality, however that does not say they are stupid when it comes to good political strategy. One ace card they hold is the Main Stream Media. This is an instant delivery mechanism for propaganda design to destroy the opposition. Joe Six pack barely listens to the nighly news. The MSM knows how to get Joe Six pack to listen to their pap. Whoever our candidate is, he will have to demonstrate their ability to get his message out to the media. I believe the Rudy connects whenever he talks. Now he will have to learn how to get the media to voice his message at the critical times.

[billbears]

Fair I suppose. Listen to what they actually say. But then again they're politicians so it doesn't matter what they say does it? Giuliani looks to be the front runner from the polls I've seen. As I said it doesn't much matter to me which Republican they pick. I know the party establishment will keep Rep. Paul out of the loop so it comes down to Romney, McCain, or Giuliani. Back to the stick in the eye scenario. Giuliani is the only one I've seen that said some things are better left to the States.

[Mia T]

bump!

• Vote for a strict constructionist and you get strict-constructionist judges and you protect our liberties.
  
  
• Vote for a strong leader and you win the war on terror.
  
  
• Vote 3rd party, stay home, vote for the nomination of a nobody loser, and you are helping to elect the Stalinist proximate cause of 9/11.
  
  
• Help to elect the Stalinist proximate cause of 9/11 and you get dead babies, dead citizens, a dead Constitution... the death of democracy....
  
  
• And not accepting responsibility for the consequences of your own vote is the first step on this road to death.
  
  

  STALINIST RISING?
  HILLARY CLINTON ABUSE OF POWER
  (WHERE IS THE UNREDACTED BARRETT REPORT ANYWAY?)
  
  

  

[TWhiteBear]

'I'm with you. Rudy's never gonna get my vote. And, frankly, if it comes down to Rudy or Hilary, it's all over anyway.'

I doubt that Mr. Giuliani will get the nomination and if he does, I would expect him to lose in a landslide.

[onyx]

I do more than listen to what they have to say. I like to see them debate one another and see who can best persuade and articulate his views. I'm looking for a CIC who believes in state's rights and a strict contructionist judiciary.

At this point, have not seen one poll wherein the polling leaders are any of the guys I am "sort of" favoring.

My state votes on March 8, 2008, so I doubt I'll have mucuh of a say anyway.



** Please note I used the word "articulate" as a verb, NOT the racist adjective. **