Posted on 04/05/2007 6:23:18 PM PDT by Valin
I like Rudy too but that doesn’t mean I think he’d make a good president. America is a far different place than NYC.
There is much more about Rudy that I can’t stomach besides his abortion stand. He could do a 180 on abortion and still not be in the running for my vote. That cracked windshield just needs to go ahead and shatter. Then sweep him into the gutter.
Hey Rooty...Good luck winning with the mushy moderates, you moron!
The Rudy campaign theme for rural, Red State America,
‘an aborted fetus in every pot, and no guns in your garage’
Go RUUUUUUUUUUUUDEEEEEEEEE!!!!!!!!!!!!!
I wish people wouldn’t divide the base into fiscal and social conservatives like that and just assume that never the twain can meet. They must hang together and agree to support each other’s basic issues, or they will hang separately.
Unless social conservatives show some respect for fiscal conservatism, they’re going to lose too many votes to win.
And unless social conservatives show more respect for issues like abortion, there’s no way on earth that they can win either.
Rudy’s comment may have been a misstep or an unconsidered remark, sure. But it was SO BASIC that I don’t see how he can undo it at this point. Too bad, because I was also hoping he might be a possibility. What she says about his attractive side at the start of the article is true. But this is the same damned mistake McCain has always made. A winning Republican may need to reach out to independents. That’s fine. But he can’t afford to disappoint the base on their most fundamental concerns. Rudy has done that, and it’s unlikely he can fix the damage.
This is very telling of who Rudy is. Disturbingly, I think his analysis could turn out true, if the non-liberal Republican field does not thin out before the primary and caucus filing dates.
Snap, crackle, ping to a heartwarming story. ;-)
I'm an economic and military conservative who's not fixated on social issues. But he still loses me and a lot of small-l conservatives like me who are turned off on his stances on small government Constitutional issues such as his stances against guns, for eminent domain, for property forfeiture even when the accused has been acquitted, and for authoritarian ideas such as collecting the DNA of all newborns.
I also don't think republicans win when we write off significant, overlapping GOP factions -- social conservatives, small-l libertarian conservatives, and national security conservatives. We need all three.
Maybe the best description I've seen of Giuliani's last couple of days.
But this anecdote, overheard at a New Hampshire house party, suggests something different:
After the house party, the mayor met with his hosts and a few influential Republicans in the bar at the hotel where he was staying and where a few reporters had also decamped. In a voice loud enough to be overheard on the other side of the room, he outlined his view that the other candidates would divide up the “right-wing,” voters, as he called them, leaving him to consolidate the moderates and the economic and military conservatives who aren’t fixated on social issues.
Yet he's never going to win without the support of those "right-wing" voters.
He sounds like someone who actually believes the Clintons' nonsense about a "vast right-wing conspiracy."
While I completely oppose public funding of abortion (and oppose Roe v Wade), and I am reticent about Giuliani's gun control positions, I will bask in the warmth of freedom when the religious right can no longer dictate what this party does and who this party nominates.
If Giuliani wins the nomination (a big "if" since the social conservatives will hit him with everything they have), he will win the general election by virtue of the fact that he does not have the stench of the religious right all over him. He may even win the Republican primary for the same reason. Apparently he thinks he can. Santorum, Allen and Talent all had the support of social conservatives, and look what good it did them.
The voters, including a lot of conservative Republicans, are tired of defending the indefensible agenda of the religious right, including a constitutional abortion ban, our teachers being forced to pledge allegiance to intelligent design, Internet regulation, flag burning amendments, tax money paying for religious social services. Yada yada yada.
The religious tyrants cannot get the American people to accept their values, so they attempt to impose them by force of law.
Liberty is a CONSERVATIVE value. The restriction of liberty is a RELIGIOUS value. The true conservatives want their liberty back.
BTTT
This must be Talking Point #1 in the Rudy! newsletter. I've had several freepers rub this in my face here at FreeRepublic. They've told me that it doesn't matter if they lose the "socon" vote, because they will get the moderate dem votes & not only will they gain that one vote to replace the one they lost, but Her Hindness, the unbeatable Hillary Clinton will LOSE one vote.
Rudy and his supporters have made it quite clear that they don't want, don't need and don't care to get the social conservative vote.
That's worth repeating
If this is accurate as to the candidates ruminations I and others respect his public candor. Few pols are anything but smarmy snakes—and I do not believe McRudy to be one.
Public funding of abortions?? Well Rudy just send a coupon out once a month with the entitlement checks to anyone under 65.
Mark this date. Your campaign is now everything but officially over. Pass the forks please.
Neither my wife or I believe any of those things but we consider ourselves social conservatives.
Then there is Rudy's anti-gun stance. And his serial infidelity with at least two mistresses between his three wives.
"How can I trust a man if his wife can't?" - Harry Truman.
I disagree. The NRA has probably spent almost as much money on paper and ink demonizing Giuliani as they have Hillary. I think the gun lobby would come to the same conclusion I have... If a President Rudy proposes more gun control, the Republicans wouldn't be willing to fight against the standard bearer of the party, and the Democrats will sign up for it because they WANT to chip away at people's rights. If Hillary is President and proposes gun control measures, the Republicans will boldly oppose her, supported by the fact that she'd always have a fairly high disapproval rating. Realistically, as President, she'd take her dear hubbie's advice and not propose anything in the way of gun control that would lead to a repeat of 1994.
If the conservatives split thier primary vote, and Rudy gets the nomination by picking up the votes from people like you, the NRA will most likely advise the 2A people to vote third party and let Hillary win. The issue of judges might give them pause in recommending this action, but Rudy seems to be taking the stance that he's going to do whatever he pleases and doesn't give a damn what the traditional Republican voter thinks, so the chances of him nominating somebody acceptable are fairly remote anyway.
Rudy's loss in the general election would be of epic proportions.
Picking a solid 2A guy as our nominee would get the progun voters out in droves to keep Hillary out of the Whitehouse. Picking Rudy probably ensures that she'll win.
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.