I constantly hear people, including quite conservative people, who warmly embrace Rudy because the option is Hillary. For Fred to be seen as a viable alternative, he actually has to be in the race.
But until we have evidence to the contrary, poll after poll after poll shows that Rudy is beating him by a medium-sized to- huge margin.
I am fully aware that some social conservatives are supporting Rudy now, because “they want to win” not because they agree with the great majority of his positions. My point is there is a large contingent of his supporters who are backing him because of name ID, not political affinity (see the Gallup poll yesterday, which demonstrates that among uninformed/apathetic voters give him the leads he currently enjoys). The campaign has not begun yet. The first votes will not be cast for over 4 months.
The American people suffer from chronic impatience, and I include myself in that appraisal. But early starts and very well financed candidates are not guarantors of success. Phil Gramm in 1996 and Steve Forbes in 2000 proved that. And neither of them labored under the ideological baggage that Rudy does. As the Pew poll found, Rudy’s support right now is broad but not deep. Only 21% of likely Republican voters strongly approved of him. 31% strongly approve of Fred Thompson. And the campaign has not begun in earnest. Only Romney is running ads. No comparison ads highlighting Rudy’s positions have been run yet. We are in a phase right now that is akin to the “eye of the storm” in which everything is very placid. I think you and many others make a serious mistake in assuming that this situation is going to persist. It never does. There is a campaign. Choices are made, based almost always on ideology first, that is the nominee must be broadly acceptable to the entire party, and then electable.
As for late starts, I refer you to Reagan’s start in late November 1979, with the Iowa caucuses in January 1980. Also, Bill Clinton started in December 1991, with the Iowa caucuses in January 1992. Both of them won the nominations comfortably. I am completely comfortable with Thompson’s strategy, since it appears to be working, but time will prove where wisdom lies.
You’re the problem for conservatives, the GOP and America. You want to give a self-professed liberal a total pass on a lifetime of advancing the leftwing agenda. Come on. Rooty was a McGovernite. The man has no respect for the Constitution. Right. Now you’ll tell us, Hillary has even less respect for the Constitution. That type of thinking will never break the stranglehold liberalism has had on America for most of the last 40 years!
Politics isn’t always about compromising and supporting the lesser of two evil. How about standing on values, beliefs, convictions and principles. Rooty is a destructive force for all the issues conservatism stands for and is really no better than Hillary, Edwards and Obama. Stop defending liberalism. This nations morals are in the toilet. Both our fiscal and social morals. A “President” Giuliani is not the answer to solve those problems.