So, who is that candidate if not Rudy?
Even Brownback polled 41% to Hellory's 46% yesterday and he is a 1% in the primary. Any Republican that does not lose the base can beat her.
She polls at 48% negitive with likely voters still and cannot win without spliting the consevative base vote of the Republicans. Her only hope is someone like McInsane or Jullie-Annie splits the conservative base of the party. Why do you think the media, who's around 90% liberal dem, keep pushing them?
The pro-life and pro-gun groups are not going to vote for Rudy, period. I believe the Republicans can write off maybe 10 to 15 million votes out of their base if he gets the nomination.
If we stop the rush to judgement and see who else might join the race, we might find someone outside the current field. Personally, I still like Duncan Hunter. I also like Jim Gilmore a great deal even though he's in the exploratory stage right now. I could vote for Fred Thompson, and I think many conservatives who couldn't vote for Mr. Giuliani could vote for Fred Thompson. I think the same is true of Mitt Romney. I don't like Mike Huckabee, but I could support him as could many others. Newt Gingrich would have a hard time winning the general election, but he's another possibility.
One big mistake we're making is front-loading the primaries so much. Long primaries don't weaken a good candidate. Ronald Reagan had a long, hard fight to the nomination, and he won big. On the other side of the coin, Bill Clinton had a long fight for the Democrat nomination in 1992, and that fight only strengthened him for the general election. We need to change the primary schedule if we can and never do this foolishness again. We need to let the nominee be decided by plenty of primaries that give the primary voters a good chance to meet candidates and make decisions.
Bill