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

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

[motormouth]

"I certainly will but my support makes others label me a liberal."


I'm not sure that's true. Do you think its your support of him BEFORE he wins the nomination that makes others label you a liberal?



MM

[narses]

Clinton caused the 1994 GOP Revolution. It was worth it. Ending a 40 year LOCK on the Congress was absolutely worth it.

[highlander_UW]

I'm sure he has a chance with a good number of republican voters...and no chance at all with another fairly significant portion of republican voters. So if he's the republican candidate it's likely the republican base will be split and the dems will likely win the White House. Counting on people to vote the party ticket because it's not as horrific as the opposition is a very weak strategy. No matter what you WILL lose some of the base. Wouldn't have taken very many in 2000 to have changed the outcome...and not that many more to have changed it in 2004. It's a bad bet.

[Cincinatus' Wife]

I'm not sure that's true. Do you think its your support of him BEFORE he wins the nomination that makes others label you a liberal?

Give me a candidate that will win the White House and I'll consider it.

[Jim Robinson]

And the Republican party goes down the tubes.

[EQAndyBuzz]

But will it be worth two liberals to replace Stevens and Ginsberg? One Conservative of the two and Roe V Wade is over.

Isn't that what you want? You will not get that with four, possible eight years of a Democrat President. Think about 51 Democrats in the Senate and Hillary. One change to the rules and we are back to the 1990's. Because with Hillary and 51 Senators they will go nuclear.

[familyop]

I don't watch television much, but other people have been telling me that sponsors of the Giuliani "news" have chosen Giuliani for the Republican side.

[EQAndyBuzz]

Morning Jim. Early enough for you?

[Cincinatus' Wife]

...So if he's the republican candidate it's likely the republican base will be split and the dems will likely win the White House...

I don't agree. I see Giuliani picking up a strong Republican following along with Independents, anti-Hillary voters and Reagan Democrats.

[Jim Robinson]

No, but it is getting late.

[narses]

Rudy's has a track record of appointing liberals. So much for the SCOTUS if he gets in.

[EQAndyBuzz]

"Rudy's has a track record of appointing liberals. So much for the SCOTUS if he gets in."

That's right. As mayor he was given a choice of nominees by the city council. Being a liberal city, that's what he was given to work with.

He already said if elected he would appoint strict constructionists in the mold of Scalia.

[narses]

Suicide is always sad to watch. The GOP embraced how many Democrats over the last dozen years? Now we get to watch them take over the party. Maybe. Unless we fight. I am going to be trying for delegate status again so that at least one voice will be heard.

[George W. Bush]

WP & NYT and the rest of the libmedia are determined to keep drumming how the ex-mayor is the perfect GOP candidate.

This is pure propaganda. If they repeat it enough times, they think they can wear down the base with slanted polls.

[George W. Bush]

But now...To vote 3rd party out of anger at the GOP choice and let them in again? That seems a crime to me.

On many issues, Giuliani is Xlinton. Except he's actually a little more trashy in his personal life than the Xlintons.

[narses]

He lied to his first two wives, I have no interest in being lied to by him about the SCOTUS. He also praised Ginsburg and endorsed Cuomo. A twice divorced, remarried Catholic who advocates "gay rights" and "sanctuary city" status for illegal aliens as well as almost all abortion remaining legal won't fly. His gun-grabbing and his horrid record on appointments (google Kerik) all make him a very bad choice.

[Cincinatus' Wife]

And the Republican party goes down the tubes.

No Jim the party will grow. The country is too evenly divided and we can't let a Democrat control the Executive again for 4 to 8 years. Hillary will appoint the most liberal justices she can find.

Gun control, abortion and gay issues are always in the news and it isn't just conservatives that oppose LIBERAL measures. People do pay attention and as LIBERALS overplay their hand, it's not being well received and people are beginning to react negatively toward them. Local elections must not be underestimated and ignored. I don't think concerns about these issues will go down the tubes but I don't think they must define the GOP. There are other issues important to this country - - environmentalist creep, smaller government, education and a strong defense to name a few.

[familyop]

"I don't agree. I see Giuliani picking up a strong Republican following along with Independents, anti-Hillary voters and Reagan Democrats."

IMO, many "anti-Hillary voters," if faced with a choice between Giuliani and a Democrat, won't vote for either. Most of the "Independents" and "Reagan Democrats" you're referring to voted for Hillary during the '90s.

[EQAndyBuzz]

What a dilemma. If a moderate is nominated Conservatives stay home. If a Conservative is nominated, moderates will vote Democrat.

I think someone very famous said it best, "And the Republican party goes down the tubes."

[MadIvan]

The Republican Party has historically been a broad coalition. It began life as a coalition of Whigs, Free Soilers and anti-slavery Democrats - they all could only agree on the issue of slavery to start with.

If the party narrows, it will lose votes and lose power. Becoming "exclusive" rather than a "big tent", particularly when Democrats are trying to pull votes from the centre with their "Blue Dogs", is a recipe for electoral suicide.

Regards, Ivan