Replies

Evidence is solid polling data that establishes your premise. The public polling data that are available (Quinnipiac, Rasmussen, Gallup, Zogby, etc.) show that Rudy already gets about half the vote to Hillary's 42 percent. It also shows Rudy with very low negatives and Hillary with very high negatives, which means that the 8 percent undecided are more likely to go Giuliani's way (or, like you, would not vote for either candidate, which doesn't hurt Rudy). Landslide Giuliani in the general election. That is what the data says today.

Yes, it might change. But someone will have to dramatically increase Rudy's negatives to accomplish it, and attacks from the right are not likely to do that, at least in a general election. No one else, Republican or Demoncrat, comes anywhere close to this level electability. No one else has the money, or the capability to raise the money to beat Giuliani in the primary, except McCain. So Giuliani is going to be the nominee.

You'd better get used to it.

There is a tendency for people to think that everyone else would do what they would do in a given situation. You say you would not vote for Rudy and you are upper middle class secular. Therefore, no one else would either. That is not evidence. It is a sample size of one.

Nonsense again. I made no such claim or extrapolation, I merely pointed out that your condescending stereotyping of myself was nowhere near accurate, and in fact your statements seem to say that you want to attract such voters as myself, but don't even realize that the group you think you are after may not actually think as you believe. I certainly do not, and others who think along the same lines as I (that I have discussed this with) do not share your enthusiasm in the least. That certainly does not translate into "everyone in my sect believes as I do", but it should give you pause in your flawed (IMO) analysis.

Evidence is solid polling data that establishes your premise. The public polling data that are available (Quinnipiac, Rasmussen, Gallup, Zogby, etc.) show that Rudy already gets about half the vote to Hillary's 42 percent. It also shows Rudy with very low negatives and Hillary with very high negatives, which means that the 8 percent undecided are more likely to go Giuliani's way (or, like you, would not vote for either candidate, which doesn't hurt Rudy). Landslide Giuliani in the general election. That is what the data says today.

Once again, those polls do not include Mr. Thompson and are irrelevant if Mr. Thompson decides to run. Polls this early do not take into account the fierce battles that will begin in earnest come primary season, and although Clintoon looks like the obvious dim candidate, that also in not engraved in stone. Giuliani does not have to be saddled with high negatives (although in time he most certainly will be when his track record is exposed to an interested electorate in the summer of 08, which admittedly may be too late for Mr. Thompson at that point in time) in order to be bumped from front runner status.

If Giuliani is the nominee, you better get used to a permanent socialist government and the eventuality of a second American Civil war, which is what I believe will eventually happen, and not at all because of the 08 election, which will simply be another ongoing symptom of the larger illness which is afflicting our country.

You seem to want the RNC to become an offshoot of the Democrat Party, conservatives be damned as long as you win. That is pitiful, IMO.