Posted on 03/05/2007 1:11:47 PM PST by meg88
Today I have seen the future and that future is President Rudy.
It's not that I'm voting for Rudy, but the vacuum to be filled has been filled.
Consider this:
Rudy Giuliani and Tony Snow are the only guys who have had to have fire marshals bar people from entering due to overcapacity in a very big room.
In the green room, Giuliani's speech was the only one to cause everyone to sit down, shut up and watch.
More and more, the conservatives at CPAC are realigning. You have the Brownback folks, the Mitt folks, and the people who are headed quickly to Rudy. And you know what? They are more or less cheerful in doing it.
They've found the guy who knows he needs them to get in the door. They know the calculus Rudy has made -- the conservatives aren't selling out their principles; Rudy is telling them he won't impose his social view on them, but he'll keep them safe.
After all, abortion is not an issue when a terrorist has killed you.
Look for all guns to turn on Rudy now. He's been the frontrunner all along and now the rest of the pack realizes it.
The reception he got at CPAC should worry them.
(Excerpt) Read more at redstate.com ...
Will do. Meanwhile, am looking for you to retract calling Hunter the King of Pork, since you've done nothing to back up that assertion. A C+ is not a great grade, but it's not Trent Lott territory, either.
Rudy/CPAC ping!
Let me give you some examples of things that I have added to the budget; in fact, I publish mine on the internet. I call them congressional initiatives because I think that earmark is a pejorative term. I put in an additional 10 million dollars for jammers to defeat road-side bombs, portable jammers. The Pentagon didn't have any jammers that could be carried by infantrymen. That meant they had nothing for the troops. I put in 10 million dollars and we built and deployed jammers for our dismounted troops within 70 days. We did 10,000 of them in 70 days. Armored vests, additional humvees, a ship, the X-Craft which goes 60 miles an hour, which is manned by a crew of only 26 people, which is truly transformational of the US Navy, and which has been given glowing marks by former Secretaries of the Navy - that was added. Let me give you other things that have been added by Congress - an aircraft carrier when Jimmy Carter didn't want to put it in the budget, the B-1 bomber and the President didn't want to put it in the budget, so the point is that Congress is supposed to, and is charged, and the Constitution says Congress shall provide for the Navies, the equipping of the Navies, the Army, and by implication, the Air Force. It's our Constitutional duty...
"winning" and then finding out the guy you supported increases the size of gov't more than the previous self-announced socialist?
or
"winning" and then getting a leader who is a social issues liberal.
at least you know what you are getting and how to fight against the open socialist.
Try as I may, I have not been able to locate DH's list. Just because the bacon is for the military or national defense, doesn't make the expenditure right, and the person who benefits the most from these types expenditures is often the Congressional sponsor, who is using our tax dollars to buy votes: http://www.taxpayer.net/budget/fy05defense/
I would also like to know the amount of non-military pork that HD brings back to his District as part of the Highway Bill or the Health and Human Resources appropriation, both of which are loaded with pork. Unfortunately, I have not been able to find a searchable database by Congressional Distict. The best I could find was a searchable database by municipality, and when I plugged the name of only a few of the municipalities in the the 52nd Congressional District in California, I found a couple million dollars of pork in the Health and Human Resources appropriations bill alone. Even more unfortunately, Hunter and his fellow thieves in Congress have a long history of opposing legislation that would open the books on pork and allow the citizen taxpayers to see exactly how our money is being wasted.
Teddy Roosevelt and Franklin were the last presidents from NY. But when was the last Senator from NY elected? So we will have a first either way. I prefer the Rudy be the first rather than Hillary.
Your conjecture falls apart when you put Hillary into the equation. SHE will not be close in any Southern states and will lose many, if not most, Northern ones.
There is little doubt that Giuliani will win the Presidency by a large margin so the <2%ers will be irrelevant yet again.
Rudyphobes are not afraid that he will lose to Hillary. They know he would win easily. Their fear is that by doing so their power to hold the GOP hostage will be OVER.
LoL another EXTREMELY conservative organization is thrown under the bus by the Implacables.
Hunter's campaign is on Life Support for a couple of more months but was given its death blow in the CPAC poll.
Even if there is no viable conservative third party in 2008, it is a mistake to think that evangelicals will turn out for Giuliani. Look at the 1996 results, and remember that Dole, unlike Giuliani, was pro-life. However, it is possible that the New Yorker can win without much evangelical support.
I agree that the Democrats have little hope in the lower South, TX, and the Plains States, where Giuliani will win, though probably with lower margins than Bush had. Ditto for the Rocky Mountain states, except for NM and maybe NV and CO, where the Hispanic vote may tilt the states into the Democratic column.
However, picking up PA, NJ, DE, ME, NH, and CT would more than offset defections in the upper South and Border states. The Democratic margins in NY, VT, MA, DC, and MD are probably ironclad. I don't see much change in the Midwest, except for IA, where evangelical dissatisfaction would erase Bush's razor-thin (<1%) margin in 2004.
The bellwether states of FL and OH may be a wash. In FL, retired Yankees in south Florida may well offset disaffected evangelicals in north Florida and the Panhandle. Ditto for OH, where lost evangelical voters in southern and central Ohio may be offset by strength in the Cleveland and Akron areas, which are more Northeastern than Midwestern in outlook. The key to a Giuliani victory is CA, where Giuliani's political profile is similar to that of Schwarzenegger. However, the Republican Party will have to commit to huge media expenditures in very expensive markets to have a fighting chance in that state.
That's two -- both hysterical.
Hillary will not win FL, KY or WV no matter how many third parties there are.
69.4% of FReepers say they would vote Rudy if he was running against Hillary. This is BY FAR the most conservative group around and such a number indicates a LANDSLIDE for Rudy if that high a proportion of the MOST conservative people would vote for him.
Since you agree Hillary would have little chance in the South (where evangelicals and social conservatives are most concentrated) it does not follow that she would benefit from their hypothesized disaffection in states where they are not as plentiful.
You need to take a Midol and calm down...
The murder of one innocent human being is never justified so as to save another human being's life.
Exactly so.
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.