FReep this poll: Giuliani vs Duncan Hunter

FR ^

[Jim Robinson]

FReep this poll: Giuliani vs Duncan Hunter:

http://www.freerepublic.com/perl/poll?poll=173

[nopardons]

Nighty night and pleasant dreams.....................

[Kevmo]

President has a habit of surrounding himself with people he knows well and trusts. He is NOT going to "dump Cheney" and try to install Hunter, to help make him better known.
***You have a crystal ball? Where does it say, "dump Cheney" as if you're quoting us? Or is it that you mean 'dump Cheney' as in so much baggage? How many heart attacks has the VP had? And your certainty of knowing that he won't have another one soon is based upon... the clarity of your perceptions? You can't even read posts without going off into the weeds.


To even bring this idea up, shows desperation on your and others' part and little understanding of politics, government, and President Bush.
***Shows desperation, that's great. Desperation means a lack of hope, and I have tremendous hope that grows every day as I see Hunter gaining ground. It wasn't an idea borne out of desperation, it was one borne out of showing people that anything could happen (Cheney could have a heart attack tomorrow) and overnight, Hunter has Name recognition. I never heard of Harriet Miers before Bush floated her name, as an example. Frankly, I don't care what you think about how much understanding I have of politics, but thanks for your concern -- it's always fun to have you around.


And all VEEP replacements must be passed by Congress.
***You obviously haven't read up on my idea. Par for the course with you. But I suppose I should answer your post quickly because who knows how long you'll be around, JimRob will probably ban you within the next few days for your lies. Anyways, it doesn't matter if Hunter passes the congressional ratification process. That's the beauty of the plan. All the rancor would give him name recognition, regardless of whether he wins the spot or not. Example: Harriet Miers can do a lot more now with her name recognition than she could before, and she didn't even get ratified.

With both Houses under Dem control, the Dems chaffing at the bit to shut down our actions in Iraq and to hamstring the president, not only would they NOT even bother doing anything about such a nomination; they'd stick it on a back burner and forget it.
***They would be neglecting their constitutional duty and I'm sure Hunter and Bush would be holding daily press conferences pointing that out. End result: Name Recognition for Hunter, chastised congress.

If this is the best that you can come up with, you need to do better.
***Of course it isn't the best, it's just one of several ideas quickly thrown together. It's one that has legs because it doesn't cost anything, gives Bush the legacy he lacks, refocuses the party, and gives that team player Cheney a fantastic chance at unselfishly taking one for the team that he'd be remembered for.

[Antoninus]

Did you not see the latest poll. In a Rudy vs Hillary matchup Rudy win the GOP vote 88%-4% with 8% undecided. He's winning the red states 60 something percent to 30 something percent. He's not breaking the GOP up. He keeping it together and he's winning independents with 64% of the vote, something no other Republican can do. He's even polling 14% of Democrats over Hillary.

Don't you get it? Those polls are worse than meaningless because they give an absolutely distorted picture of reality. Few people are paying attention yet. By the time most are, it will be a month before the primaries. Take some polls then and let me know what you find.

And if Rudy (God forbid!) somehow wins the nomination, watch what happens to his coverage in the media the second after he locks it up. They'll turn on him like a rabid pit bull--just like they've done with John McCain now that he's served their purpose. And he's got so much baggage that they'll be able to turn him absolutely toxic to the base of his own party with very little effort.

Don't you people study how the Democrats opperate? They telegraphed their strategy in 2006--run to the right and portray the Republican as soft on key issues, like border control. Meanwhile, oppose the war and criticize the GOP for not doing enough or not doing it properly or misappropriating men, material, and funds.

With Rudy, they will portray him as a liberal--very disingenuously because they are liberals themselves. And they'll have plenty of material.

Add to this the specter of a viable third party contender--and don't think the Democrats and MSM aren't smart enough to conjure one out of thin air if need be--and you've got the makings of an electoral catastrophe.

My warning to you--turn away now.

[Delphinium]

You are supporting Hunter? Good, I thought you were with the Rudy supporters.

[Antoninus]

I have now read far too many posts that prove that very few people here have any knowledge or understanding of politics.

Live by the polls, die by the polls. Requiescat in pace.

[La Enchiladita]

You will NEVER, NEVER, NEVER! silence the many Rudy supporters.

That just sounds so .... gay.

[Kevmo]

Umm, that's considered an argument from silence, a classic fallacy.

[Antoninus]

He also took money from Heston and gun manufacturers so what should I conclude is his position on guns?

If that's true, it's the worst money the NRA ever spent. Please post proof of that statement.

[My GOP]

"Don't you get it? Those polls are worse than meaningless because they give an absolutely distorted picture of reality. Few people are paying attention yet."

Rudy's poll numbers have been going up quickly in the last month just as coverage of the election and the candidates has been increasing. They are accurate. Later.

[stephenjohnbanker]

Bump!

[68 grunt]

Gee, I guess you thought wrong. I desperately don't want us Hunter supporters alienating supporters of our loyal opposition. (I sure as hell don't mean traitor demonratZ)

[Antoninus]

You don't remember "crying" about what? Not having Mods?

No, about how terribly, terribly vicious it was (terribly). It apparently wasn't vicious enough to chase you or me off. I think you're overstating your case just a bit.

Oh...........never mind, even with Mods, that's happening now.

Like I said, crying about it probably won't help. Try being nicer to people yourself.

Yes, Hillary has problems; however, she has been and is continuing to be coached. Give the devil her due...I've seen/heard give a few "passable" talks lately.

I take it you think that Duncan is uncoachable, eh?

I give Hillary no due. She's awful as a public speaker. Wooden, mechanical, and shrill, shrill, shrill. Short of a laryngectomy, there ain't no way to coach that out.

[texastoo]

With Rudy, they will portray him as a liberal--very disingenuously because they are liberals themselves. And they'll have plenty of material.

Not only that, they will pull out all the pictures of Rudy in drag and claim they didn't do it. This is the Democrats dream as they will win the white house with Rudy.

Rudy's morals equals Clinton morals.

[Antoninus]

Rudy's poll numbers have been going up quickly in the last month just as coverage of the election and the candidates has been increasing. They are accurate. Later.

Accurate? Perhaps, but what are they measuring? Nothing but name recognition at this point. As I said before, John Kerry was at 4% a mere 3 months before the primaries in December 2003. I take it you would have told him to drop out at that point, eh?

[Delphinium]

I desperately don't want us Hunter supporters alienating supporters of our loyal opposition.

I agree with that, but this argument goes both ways you know.

I really doubt if we can ever win the hardcore moderates who support Rudy.

Politics is a full contact sport.

[Kevmo]

Why should I listen to your lies?

[Antoninus]

Not only that, they will pull out all the pictures of Rudy in drag and claim they didn't do it. This is the Democrats dream as they will win the white house with Rudy.

No doubt about it. And all the screams and hollers of Rudy-bots will fall on deaf ears at that point.

Rudy's morals equals Clinton morals.

And don't think the Dems won't stoop to calling the GOP hypocrites for condemning Clinton's morals but failing to condemn Rudy's.

And if we are willing to swallow Rudy's grotesque and public moral failings and put him up as our nominee, hypocrites are what we will be.

[68 grunt]

... Politics is a full contact sport.

Indeed it is. That is why we need to be very careful maintaining our coalitions, and not burning bridges where we can avoid it.

[Antoninus]

I really doubt if we can ever win the hardcore moderates who support Rudy.

Based on my experiences here in NJ, if faced with a real conservative as the GOP nominee, many of the same "moderate" Republicans who love Giuliani will happily endorse Hillary. We'll have to make them up in yellow-dog and union Democrats. Fortunately, Hunter has some appeal to those groups.

[Dolphy]

I don't have the full articles on this computer...but you can get the information from the short summaries if you scroll through this.