Posted on 02/22/2007 7:15:43 AM PST by PDR
Say you're a top-tier Republican presidential candidate whose name isn't Rudy Giuliani. The polls are looking increasingly grim.
A survey released yesterday has the former New York mayor more than 20 points ahead of his nearest rival. What do you do?
Well, you might try dusting off the abortion issue to persuade a pro-life party to turn against its pro-choice frontrunner. But that seems to be too much for the two leading candidates nipping at Giuliani's heels to manage. Sen. John McCain's pro-life voting record isn't perfect -- he has supported both federally funded fetal tissue research and embryo-destructive experimentation -- but he has been consistent in favoring abortion restrictions since the 1980s. He just hasn't been especially comfortable expressing himself on social issues, and his relations with pro-life leaders were strained by his attacks on the religious right during the 2000 presidential race.
Campaigning in South Carolina last weekend, however, McCain overcame his bashfulness. The senator told a crowd of 800 that he opposed the 1973 Supreme Court decision that legalized abortion. "I do not support Roe v. Wade," McCain said. "It should be overturned." A pretty unequivocal statement from a longtime pro-life senator. But then the marvels of technology caught up with John McCain. The Hotline posted a YouTube video of a 1999 McCain appearance on CNN's Late Edition in which he said it was "obvious" that "if we repeal Roe v. Wade tomorrow, thousands of American young women would be performing dangerous and illegal operations." The footage shows McCain advocating a tolerance clause for pro-choice Republicans in the GOP platform.
[SNIP]
(Excerpt) Read more at spectator.org ...
And Romney's story about his conversion sounds pretty phony as well.
While the abortion issue remains a major topic in America, let us hope that our "conservative" Presidential candidate will have a platform based on the MAJOR ISSUES that revolve around the management and future of America. Such as national defense, the military, runaway spending and taxation, illegal immigration and national security, the REAL causes of the disasterous state of government schools, the costs of medical care, government corruption and focus...this country has not had a President that RAN THE COUNTRY since Reagan.
I get so annoyed with articles to seem to imagine that Ronald Reagan is going to appear on the scene for us. We've got real candidates each of whom has real weakenesses. But ONE of them is going to win- guaranteed. I get so tired of seeing articles that say "X candidate can't win because of this issue." If you add all the articles up you would think we won't be nominating anyone.
Isn't "Life" the first of the inalienable rights, ordained by our Creator, in the Declaration of Independence?
Since 1994 the Republican Party held a majority through a working coalition of two large groups: the libertarian right and the religious right. As a member of the libertarian right, I accepted the arrangement because given the choice between aligning myself with honest, decent church-going folks versus the losers, perverts and opportunists on the other side, the choice was obvious. But I held my nose on a number of things including stem cell research, intelligent design, and public funding of religious charity.
If the 2006 election told us anything, it was that the old working majority is no longer a majority. The decent, church-going folks are outnumbered by the perverts, losers and opportunists. Even in places like Virginia and Ohio.
It is not easy being a libertarian. The essence of my philosophy is individualism and self-reliance, but success in a democracy requires joining a group. And given a choice between compromising my philosophy and compromising my relevancy, I will compromise my philosophy just about every time. So what to do, what to do?
We have a candidate who I can accept, and who appeals to enough of the perverts, losers and opportunists that maybe we can have a working majority again. I will support him because the relevancy of the Republican Party is at stake. In an emerging world frought with unparalled danger and opportunity, I think Guiliani is just the man to guide us through the treacherous waters.
I hope the religious right will fall in line behind him. But it won't matter if they don't. A look at the electoral map tells you that, unless he stumbles, he will be the next POTUS.
And say hello to a President Clinton (or Gore or Edwards or Obama) on 1/20/2009. And then say goodbye to the once-great United States of America.
Abortion IS a major issue but, it is not the only issue.
----
True. Now let the media and our candidates address ALL THE ISSUES facing America. That is the job of the government --- running America and protecting it, FOR AND BY THE PEOPLE.
Yes, and if enough of us refuse to vote for Rudy because he happens to be on the wrong side of one of our pet issues, then all our lives are in danger ... because we all know that the 'Rat alternative will do NOTHING to effectively combat the Islamonazi enemy that wants us all dead, regardless of our politics.
Dear bassmaner,
Many of us are three-issue, or four-issue or more voters.
In the case of Mr. Giuliani, he's on the wrong side of more than one issue for many Republican and conservative voters. To name a few, there's:
1.) abortion and all the related life issues (which could be broken out into several distinct issues, but I'm in a generous mood);
2.) homosexual agenda and special rights for homosexuals;
3.) the right to bear arms;
4.) illegal immigration;
5.) campaign finance reform (he enthusiastically endorsed McCain-Feingold;
6.) his inability to be loyal to fellow Republican candidates (ironic now that the rudybots are trying to require of us social conservatives the same loyalty to Mr. Giuliani that he couldn't find for the Republican candidates for Governor of New York and New Jersey).
That's six right there.
Folks (including a substantial number of Republicans and conservatives) who find themselves diametrically opposed to Mr. Giuliani on all of these issues, and maybe more, aren't one-issue voters.
sitetest
What's funny is that you mention three issues, not one, that the RINOs all have a problem with...
It isn't just one issue...how about immigration, 2nd amendment, support of marriage, abortion, etc...
I have to believe that most conservatives have issues with RINOs not because of one pet issue like you say. It is the liberal slant on many issues that cause conservatives to use the RINO label.
I'm not 'there' yet on any candidate, and am more directionally in 'the other coalition'.
I do agree with you about the current national environment in which our candidate must win. Well spoken.
We need more thoughtful dialog concerning all aspects of the decisions that will have to be made very soon.
"close the deal"????
Nearly two years before election day?
What's going on here?
Of course that makes sense...but it will fall on deaf ears to the abortion trumps all conservatives on this board.
Giuliani will never be President.
That's three issues. But I guess "three issue voters" isn't as derogatory a term, even if is more accurate.
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.