Giuliani Has No Real Chance With GOP Voters . . . or Does He?

The Washington Post ^ | March 4, 2007 | Dan Balz

[Candor7]

That is where we differ. If the GOP wants my vote, they cannot give me a RINO as my choice.>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

Same Here, and I am supporting Hnter and volunteering for him.

[incredulous joe]

Your opinions would carry more weight if you typed a personal opinion rather than copy and paste from an activist website.

I have no idea where your talking points are coming from. The quotes have little context and no point of reference.

I won't vote for the Democrat and I think it's stupid to vote third party (I've done it before). As I said, my opinion on Rudy is developing, if you wish to change it you might offer something effective, practical or positive.

The nature of conservatism is hopeful, positive and forward looking. I'm not getting any of that from the hate Rudy brigade. You'll have a better opportunity to influence would-be conservative voters if you engage from the right.

[Dstorm]

Not this Conservative

[Candor7]

when everyone at this forum is bemoaning the situation of conservative leadership>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

I'm not bemoaning it, I will be FIGHTING it. As are many of us now, registering with the grass roots campaigns of conservative candidates to get out the grass roots aginst men like Giuliani during the primary season.

We conservatives do not bemoan.....like liberals ...we DO!

[Dstorm]

It's got nothing to do with anger, and what conservative causes would I be protecting if I voted in someone who believes in none of them?

[sitetest]

Dear incredulous joe,

"The nature of conservatism is hopeful, positive and forward looking."

That's true. However, conservatism also tries to be realistic.

Realistically, if Mr. Giuliani wins the Republican nomination, conservatives will have lost, as no matter whether the person with the "R" or the person with the "D" attached wins, a liberal will be the next president.

However, we optimistic conservatives, upon finding ourselves presented with a general election choice that guarantees certain short-term defeat, will optimistically look forward to the future to rebuild the conservative cause in the United States.

Which, in the judgment of many realistic but optimistic and forward-looking conservatives, will require as a first step not voting for Mr. Giuliani.


sitetest

[narses]

No hate, just facts. Like this link, a documented act of Rudy: Tuesday, June 20, 2000 MAYOR GIULIANI AND SPEAKER VALLONE ANNOUNCE CITY LAWSUIT AGAINST GUN INDUSTRY

[tarheelswamprat]

Thanks for the thoughtful response. There is much we agree on, but there are a few critical points where we do not. Perhaps we'll have an opportunity to explore those some other time.

re: Non-sentient may be a bit strong, but I think I could make a decent case that at least half of the electorate is only semi-sentient. ;-)

Agreed. I had to force myself to keep a straight face when writing that... /grin

[tarheelswamprat]

President Bush could have been remembered fondly as a tougher, less charming version of Ronald Regan had we either not gone into Iraq, or gone in with a serious plan to win and the balls to do it right. While I applaud his principled stand on Iraq, it's a shame it wasn't backed by equal levels of competence. Voters will tolerate a lot of things, but they won't accept ongoing failure in military matters.

Agree 100%

[Guenevere]

...and may God have mercy on us ...
...50 million

[Guenevere]

..having a Pro-life President doesn't mean it will end

Are you listening to what you're saying????

Having a pro-abortion President is better because????????

[Neenah]

I can't believe JimRob talked like that to YOU !!

I appreciate you ! Just wanted you to know that. I also think FR has gotten so mean spirited. It is not like it use to be. Sad.

Neenah

[truth_seeker]

"I want to back a winner more than I want to support an ideology."

Same here. I prefer Rudy, Mitt, John or Newt to any announced democrat. IOW however imperfect the Republican nominee might be, he is still preferable to any democrat.

For the record, at this I prefer Mitt over Rudy or John. If Newt opts in, I prefer him out of the top four.

I don't worry about the lower tier, until they break out to the top tier.

[Guenevere]

Can YOU believe Jim Robinson cares deeply about 50 million aborted babies?----I do!

That's the crux of it.

Does it bother you as well????--If not....it should!

[Neenah]

Can YOU believe Jim Robinson cares deeply about 50 million aborted babies?----I do! That's the crux of it. Does it bother you as well????--If not....it should!

This is word for word what Ivan said. Post number 60. (My words in red)

"That's not what she said. He was correcting the poster.

It's not the goals we disagree on, it's the means. He is explaining his thought.

Getting rid of abortion is going to require having appropriate justices in the Supreme Court to overturn Roe vs. Wade, This is a FACT.

a promise which Rudy has made, and can be made to stick to -This is true and is a FACT.

but following that, it will, by the provisions of the Tenth Amendment, follow state by state referenda. This is a FACT...not made up.

True the first part is easy, the second part, the polling data indicates, is incomplete. A TRUE FACT.

People will not be persuaded of the wrongs of abortion by being called apostates for lacking certainty on the issue." Common sense.

Ivan

********************************************************** And for THIS....Ivan was told to " GET LOST " ? I sincerely hope that Jim Robinson considers this, and realizes what Ivan was saying. (And it had nothing to do with anyone HATING ABORTION....most ALL of us do. And I will tell you another thing...Some of us are more involved with unwed mothers than you would EVER imagine , and maybe if instead of ACCUSING , and perhaps UNDERSTANDING, we could solve and cure alot of wrong thought.), and maybe as a "good will gesture" he can make right with Ivan , a respected poster, who I know respects Jim Robinson, as do I.

Neenah

[stockstrader]

No way in the world I would ever vote for him.

Liberal Republicans like Rudy are more dangerous than liberal democrats,,,because liberal Republicans BLUR THE DISTINCTION between liberalism and conservatism,,,make LIBERALISM MUCH MORE ACCEPTABLE.

No thanks.

[cgk]

Never in my worst nightmares would I believe Republicans, much less FReepers, would willingly go along with the wholesale slaughter of our helpless unborn generations. Shameful. May God forgive us.

The "going along with" isn't just "willing" among some who call themselves Republicans, and are FReepers - it's also: supportive, defensive and outright hostile to those who speak against the daily massacre of our most vulnerable.

It's shameful to US that we have some right here who continue to pretend/insist that the preservation of Life isn't an issue (or is something to mock). It isn't shameful to them - they wear it with honor around here.

[Carolinamom]

Well said, Neenah. I agree. The acrimony here is getting worse by the minute and in no way is it a constructive way to discuss the merits of the candidates and the primary goal of defeating the democrat candidate (Obama or Hillary).

If dems win, then it is a certainty that our nation will be vulnerable to terrorism, that pro-abortion judges will be nominated, that taxes will be raised, and that entitlements will increase. Count on it.

So the primary goal MUST be a Republican victory; all else can then at least have the possibility of coming to fruition.

[The Wizard]

no offense, but Mr. Hunter is not going to be president and we need a republican in the White House.

Go Rudy

[Paul Ross]

A veteran Republican strategist, who spoke on the condition of anonymity to candidly assess the situation, ...he gave three reasons: the absence of a strong, traditional conservative in the GOP field;

We can stop right there. Anonymous schmoe...who apparently seems clueless about how conservative and solid a candidate Duncan Hunter is....who fits the profile of the ..."strong, traditional conservative"...to a "T".