Posted on 03/21/2007 5:04:50 AM PDT by Cincinatus' Wife
A majority of respondents to a Crain's online poll agree with columnist Alair Townsend, who wrote in this week's issue that former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani doesn't have the temperament to be an effective president.
Ms. Townsend wrote that, while she had voted for the former mayor three times, she would not be casting a fourth vote for him, criticizing his "stick-in-your-eye" style. Ms. Townsend said that his strong personality would not translate well when it comes to dealing with international leaders and Congress.
About 70% of the 784 respondents to the Crain's poll agree that Mr. Giuliani's argumentative temperament makes him a poor candidate for the White House.
"Rudy does not have the ability to work with others. It is his way or no way," wrote poll respondent Elaine Walsh. "The decisions he made as mayor were not in the best interests of New York City and on Sept. 10, 2001, his days were numbered and he was leaving with a poor record."
Another respondent worries that Mr. Giuliani's aggressive demeanor would do little to bring about much-needed change in Washington.
"If there's one thing we should have learned from the current administration, it's the tragic risks we face when our leaders fail to listen to divergent views," wrote Bill Melville, in survey comments. "For the sake of the nation, we need to get as far from the 'my way or the highway' thinking we're now mired in as possible. Unfortunately, Rudy won't get us there."
About 30% of respondents say that Mr. Giuliani's style would be well-suited for the White House.
"Apparently the ultra liberals are running this poll and feel that Mayor Giuliani is not the man," wrote poll respondent Joseph DiMauro. "I feel differently because he knows how to make decisions in a very hard world filled with tough people."
The results come after a poll earlier this month showed a majority of respondents were concerned about comments made by Mr. Giuliani's son. Fifty-three percent of respondents to that poll said the statements, which revealed an estranged father-son relationship, would renew concerns about Mr. Giuliani's personal life and could damage his presidential ambitions.
Do you like the new New York or the old New York?
There still are guns in New York.
I second everything you say. Before Rudy, it was impossible to imagine that New York City could ever change. The city was run by time servers waiting to collect their pensions. The police did nothing but fill out paperwork -- and arrest the occasional citizen who tried to defend his own property. A slide into anarchy seemed inevitable. He changed everything.
My favorite Giuliani move had to do with welfare. Every time anyone tried to reform the welfare system the papers would be full of heartbreaking stories about how the cuts would result in the deaths of abused and neglected children. Giuliani announced that since child welfare was so important he was making it into a separate agency. Poof -- the big argument against cuts disappeared.
By the way, it was true that the child welfare agency was a mess. Workers had no computers available to them for one thing. They dictated their notes, then the tapes were sent to the typing pool which eventually got around to entering them in the computer system. Of course, since the computer records were always months out of date, no one ever referred to them. Giuliani started the process of bringing the system up to date.
The posted article is right about one thing. Giuliani is a "for me or against me" kind of guy. He sometimes alienates people who might otherwise support him. I'm waiting to see whether this will be a problem in his campaign. On the plus side, I think he has the ability to shape up agencies like the State Department and the CIA, kick a## with the opposition, and reverse our descent into an EU-style bureaucracy. That's why I consider him a conservative stealth candidate, even though he won't offer leadership on a number of issues conservatives care about. You can't do everything at once.
How much are you being paid?
Nothing. Why. Are you alleging I am?
I'm anti-rudy because he's a liberal. I don't want a liberal running the country or getting the GOP nomination.
It's not "negative campaigning". It's his record. It's the truth. If the the truth about his record is negative, that's a problem he created himself.
I am in favor of Rudy dropping out of the race because he sucks.
I'm using his record to expose him. He's a liberal. There's no reason to defend his liberalism.
Here's a question for you. Answer it honestly:
If all the things said by rudy were said by hillary, would the same people rooting for rudy dismissing them, or would they be attacking hillary for saying those things?
Everything you have listed are really "state" issues and are legislated as such. If the POTUS could ban abortions, and dismantle the the ATF, on a federal level, dont you think that it would have already been done? I mean isnt that you whole case against him? Abortion and guns?
What I am looking for in a candidate is someone who gets the WOT. Where does he stand on the WOT?
As expected, you didn't answer my question.
Thanks for playing "ignore the issues" just like every rudy booster does.
There still are guns in New York.
The recent reports from NYC indicate that Bloomberg is allowing the city to slide back down to what it was before Rudy was elected mayor. Rudy's accomplishments as mayor were due to his focus on law enforcement, something his successor has failed to continue.
Indeed there are still guns in New York; the laws prohibiting them were in place long before Giuliani came along. Had he simply enforced the laws that were on the books, nobody would think of him as a gun-grabber. Unfortunately, his enthusiastic support for Clinton's anti-gun agenda (as evidenced by his lawsuits against gun manufacturers) tell the real tale.
I don't know where you came up with that "Rudy understands the 2nd Amendment" comment, but I question the careful wording. Note that it's not "Rudy supports the 2nd Amendment"... he "understands" it. Understands *what*, exactly? How far he can go in circumventing it by extra-legislative means?
Again you ignored the question, yet asked another expecting me to answer yours when you apparently don't have the guts or integrity to answer mine first.
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.