Rudy Beats Hillary – End of Story

Special to FreeRepublic ^ | 4 March 2007 | John Armor (Congressman Billybob)

[SoCalPol]

Talk and record are two different things.

I am in San Diego, largest city and county at the Mexican border.
People are moving out of SoCal because it is close to being a suburb of Mexico.
No amnesty, no guest workers, finish the fence now.
I can understand how Israel feels with the Muzzies at their border

[b9]

Talk and record are two different things.

No kidding.
Can you imagine Duncan Hunter ever promoting Sanctuary Cities?!

[SoCalPol]

Hunter is the only one who walks the walk.
If the rest would follow his example, the remainder of the fence would have been built

[b9]

Hunter is the only one who walks the walk.

What a great example for his, and America's, sons.

[gesully]

That's a stupid remark. That kind of thinking got us a democrat congress this time.

Sure Giuliani is pro-choice. So is Obama. So is Hillary. Do you want Hillary or Obama as president along with a democrat congress?

Let the courts deal with guns and abortion. Let the president deal with terror, taxes, appointing judges, immigration and the things he is supposed to deal with.

Don't be stupid.

[itsahoot]

Shame on you John. Who would have thought you were a consensus kind of guy.

[itsahoot]

So maybe Giuliani will win, but I won't ever vote for him, and I have my doubts that the founding fathers would have abandoned their beliefs in public and private virtue to support him either.

Amen and bump.

[itsahoot]

Kids, we have pictures to settle this fued.

[johnthebaptistmoore]

Right now, it's still early, and anything can happen from today to November 4, 2008.

[itsahoot]

If your statement is in fact true, would it not be reasonable to chose the one who will get us there more slowly?

Sort of like one feeding their children to the alligators, in the hopes that they would be eaten last.

[Tarheel]

Do a bit of research on the Hasty Pudding Club and you will find it has an annual theater type production. HPC started at Harvard and was originally all male, therefore, guess what guys had to play the women's roles! Imagine that!

Research a bit further and you will find few familar names associated with the club--FDR,JFK, JQ Adams, Teddy Roosevelt!

[itsahoot]

Could any money have changed hands at this epiphany event?

[stockpirate]

Here is a great source of anti-Rudy patudie stuff. Actually it is quotes from him which may as well be anti-Rudy.

http://www.freerepublic.com/~flashbunny/

[Congressman Billybob]

I'm not a "consensus kind of guy." I am simply reporting the net effect of two things I have observed. 1) I read the polls last week, and the ones this week from different sources have all confirmed the same order of finish for the Republican and Democrat candidates for President. 2) I observed the reactions of the people at CPAC to the speeches of the various candidates, and to the absence of John McCain.

I combined those two sets of information with my knowledge -- shared by most people on FR -- about the differences between red and blue states. The column was the result of that.

Most US elections come down to a choice between just two candidates. In only two elections in 43 years of voting have I agreed 100% with any candidate. In all but two of the others, I have pulled the lever for the more acceptable of the two candidates.

Most voters calculate as I do. They support the best candidate they can find. But if that candidate is not nominated, then they make a tough choice in the general election.

John / Billybob

[CWOJackson]

Excellent analysis. Thanks for sharing it.

[Congressman Billybob]

Very fine piece of research, there. Seems like Hasty Pudding is just like Paint and Powder, which I describe in my column.

John / Billybob

[You Dirty Rats]

Great column, CBB. I found the attacks on you for daring to write this objective analysis to be hilarious.

This column reminds me of this one:

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/939395/posts

That analysis turned out to be deadly accurate.

Rudy is quite simply the only popular Republican in the country, the only candidate with strong support in every region, the only candidate who appeals to members of both parties and independents, and the one with the most name recognition (except for Bill's WINO).

In addition, Republican candidates who lead early get the nomination -- unlike on the 'rat side. Unless Rudy screws it up, which I don't expect, he'll get the nomination.

Rudy also is helped by the fact that the other three main candidates have obvious flaws, and the rest are a bunch of mini-mees. Particularly amusing are the members of the "Jaeger Battalion" -- who are no doubt passionate in their support but lack the numbers to have a realistic shot at victory.

I see the SC Primary as key. Rudy has a strong organization down there, and his selection to speak to graduates of The Citadel is IMHO hugh and series! That indicated support from the movers and shakers of the Palmetto State. If Rudy wins SC, I don't see how anyone could stop him from the nomination.

If it is Rudy v. Hillary that will be the biggest NY battle since Ali-Frazier I.

[Forgiven_Sinner]

Sorry I'm so long in responding to your article.

Our salient disagreement is here:

"But this is the simple, real world truth; the Republican Party consists of more than just the bedrock conservatives – even if they were monolithic, which they are not."

That is absolutely true--but the Republican primary consists of a MAJORITY of bedrock conservatives. The CPAC I feel represents those primary voters. As a religious conservative I will not vote for Mr. Guiliani in the primary and I feel he will NOT get 51% of the primary vote.

He might win the nomination with less than 51% of the primary vote, through a brokered convention. But I expect the conservative vote to coalesce around one candidate and I expect that candidate to be Mitt Romney.

"And the 51% that it takes to win a national election consists of more than just the Republican Party."

Again true, but not relevant for the primary. You make a good argument people should vote for whom they think will win the national. But just because Guiliani can win (according to the polls at the moment) doesn't mean another candidate can't win, nor does it mean that Guiliani will win. We ought to vote in the primary for the candidate we think will be the best President. As much as I like Mr. Duncan Hunter, I feel a Presidential candidate MUST have executive experience, so I feel he must be a Governor.

Interestingly, although I differ with Rudy on abortion, I think running the nation's largest city of 7 million is equivalent to running a state, so Rudy qualifies on this score. But abortion is an absolute moral question and any person who supports abortion is morally unqualified to be President in my opinion. So I cannot vote for Rudy in the primary.

In the general election, should Rudy become the Republican candidate, the question then becomes, which President will do the least harm to the nation. Against Hilliary, this will be an easy choice--Rudy.

[Congressman Billybob]

Yours is a very thoughtful post, and I agree with almost every word you wrote. My only caveat to your comment is the legitimacy of Mitt Romney. I think he's papered over some serious ideological cracks.

We come down in the same place at the end. If it is Rudy against Hillary, the answer has to be Rudy.

Cordially, John

[antisocial]

" If it is Rudy against Hillary,"

That would practically guarantee a conservative third party candidate would show up and split the vote to give Hillary the win. Why would you be pushing for that if you claim to be a conservative?