Posted on 03/03/2007 1:05:48 PM PST by gpapa
Next year may see the party of the Sunbelt and Reagan, based in the South and in Protestant churches, nominate its first presidential candidate who is Catholic, urban, and ethnic--and socially liberal on a cluster of issues that set him at odds with the party's base. As a result, it may also see the end of the social issues litmus test in the Republican party, done in not by the party's left wing, which is shrunken and powerless, but by a fairly large cadre of social conservatives convinced that, in a time of national peril, the test is a luxury they cannot afford.
(Excerpt) Read more at weeklystandard.com ...
Rudy could be the attorney general in the adminstration of a good conservative president.
The people who believe this have a very good idea of the attitudes of the voters. You'd probably be surprised to realize how few social conservatices there are in this country and even more surprised to realize how sick the rest of us are of their attempt to demand more than they are entitled to. OTOH I am perfectly happy to treat your views w/ respect provided you don't think you have the right to shove them down everyone else's throats.
What was that about crickets?
This question is the game, set and match of this entire debate. You can ignore the it, but you can't stop it from being asked.
Ah, irony. . . see tagline.
We had a popular Conservative as POTUSA.
Next was a one term moderate.
Next was a two term traitor, who some people think was conservative.
Next was a two term moderate that squeaked by because the democrats nominees were very bad.
Now some people want a far left winger as the Republican nominee that most real democrats can beat because they can run to the right of IT.
I asked for his resume several weeks ago. Still nothing. LOL
The only thing Icanremember is after 9/11 he took a job as consultant to Mexico City to clean up their crime problem. Giuliani should have done an excellent job. A private citizen can't own a gun in Mexico. Would you believe he didn't make a dent in the corruption in Mexico City even though Mexico City and New York are aproximately the same in population.
" By the way, my editor had a great quip: "I'm a single-issue voter. I'm pro-torture."
I'm a single issue voter. Life.
My life, my wife's life, my children's lives, the troops' lives in Iraq and Afghanistan,etc.
The most important issue to me is the WOT.
" No group in the country backs the war on terror as fervently as social conservatives, whose main
criticism of the president's policy is that it has not been aggressive enough.
To them, Rudy is the ultimate warrior,.."
Absolutely. Conservatives are the ones accused of having a "litmus test" when in reality it's the liberals who really have them.
What's the conservative litmus test? Obviously none based on who the two presidential front runners are for the Republican party.
"What are you going to do if Hunter drops out and endorses Giuliani?"
Why don't you ask me what I'm going to do if they offer free unicorn rides after a trip on the good ship lollypop?
"This question is the game, set and match of this entire debate. You can ignore the it, but you can't stop it from being asked."
The question is idiotic. My decision on who I support come from the positions and actions of the candidate themselves, not who they may be endorsed by. The last thing anyone should look at is endorsements. They can be bought and paid for with paid campaign / consulting positions.
What will I do? Vote for a conservative. I am not locked into anyone except conservative candidates in general. Don't worry about who Hunter may or may not endorse. The RNC and the GOP leadership need to worry about what their base is going to do if a RINO who believes in abortion, partial birth abortion, illegal immigration, global warming, homosexual civil unions and federal funding of stem cell research gets the nomination.
I won't vote for Guiliani. Period. I don't care who endorses him. It's just me in that voting booth.
"What are you going to do if Hunter drops out and endorses Giuliani?"
I sure wouldn't vote for Rudy, not in a thousand years!
"see tagline."
For what? To discover you don't know how to use commas correctly?
I would be willing to bet that Hunter will not ever endorse Rudy.
Regardless, I will vote my conscious, and it will not be simply because of one person endorsing another.
And you can save all your "You're helping Hillary to win" drivel for someone else.
What are you going to do if Hunter drops out and endorses Giuliani?
I find it highly unlikely that Hunter will drop out and endorse Giuliani. If it does, that will not change my mind.
Giuliani, by his own admission, will be Hillary's equal. I will not only never vote for such a candidate, I will actively work to ensure his defeat.
Presenting an implausible hypothetical scenario is about as ironic as rain on your wedding day.
But, when Hunter's work is done and he withdraws from the race, I'll be backing Mitt Romney. Regardless of who Hunter endorses (which I'm willing to bet you $1000, won't be Giuliani in the primary).
Speaking as a Papist in good standing, I know that RG is certainly one.
Maybe not in the primary. But I suspect he will when Rudy gets the nomination.
I think it was hurricanes!
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.