Posted on 09/04/2007 7:17:53 AM PDT by presidio9
Rudy Giuliani - the thrice-married presidential candidate who staunchly supported abortion rights, gun control and gay rights as the Big Apple's mayor - is receiving a surprising level of support from social and religious conservatives.
A recent Diageo/Hotline poll shows Giuliani leading the GOP field among Christian evangelicals and abortion opponents. He beats his nearest rival, ex-Sen. Fred Thompson,
(Excerpt) Read more at nypost.com ...
Wow. You've been living in a cave for the last year. Nothing else could explain such a hollow remark. EEE is absolutely right. The liberal media has held back its criticism and given Rooty a pass in the hope that it will help him become the nominee. The liberal media knows full well, with Rooty at the top of the ticket the GOP will fracture. Many conservatives have made it abundantly clear, we will not vote for Rooty under any circumstance whatsoever.
I do agree with you, however, the left does hate Rooty. Not because he's a liberal on most issues, or because he's an opportunist and a major authoritarian. They hate Rooty becasue he's a Republican! If Rooty was still a Democrat, they'd be falling all over him as an icon of the leftwing. Wakeup!
When was the last time you needed to re-login, out of the blue, to make a reply to a thread?
Assumming the democrats still controll the Senate after the election, Giuliani, or whomever the Republican President will be, will not be able to get another Scalia or Roberts past the Senate.
It all comes down to who controls the Senate, and unless there is a huge shift, the democrats will hold to a majority.
If Hillary wins, with a democrat majority in the Senate - lib nirvana comes to U.S.A. D.U. and KOS will rule. Won't life be interesting then.
May you live in interesting times - Chinese Curse
“I look at Rudy simply as this, he is a NY Conservative, pure and simple. He’s about as conservative as he could be in that town and have gotten elected.”
Which is why he is unacceptable to any REAL conservative outside NYC. Rudy is going to plummet in the polls within
3 or 4 months.
How long have you worked for the Rudy Giuliani Campaign?
Don’t work for his campaign, don’t work for any campaign, just call it like I see it. Republican my entire life, and of the field right now, like it or not, he’s the strongest guy running. Now you can complain about it, and not like it, but that’s my honest opinion.
Now you can argue that that’s a sad state of affairs for the R party as a whole, and that may be a valid argument, but of the lot running, no one else is close. In terms of falling in the polls as other have said, well, they’ve been saying he’ll fall in the polls in the next few months for nearly a year now....
I don’t see it. Sure I’d love another Regan to appear, but guess what? There sure ain’t one in this lot. Those that pin their hopes and project their dreams on Thompson are set to be very disappointed IMHO. Thompson can deliver some nice rhetoric to friendly crowds, but hes stumbled and bumbled so far on the only question he’s had to answer that wasn’t softball, and frankly that question wasn’t remotely a hardball.... Two stepping and back tracking over whether he advocated for an abortion group.
Anything is possible in Politics, but I just don’t see anyone else in this group that’s leadership material. Doesn’t mean I personally hate them, (as the rudy basher seem to) just don’t see them winning the primary.
Been hearing this “he’ll plummet in the polls in a few months” for what? nearly a year now... this line is not coming to fruition. Republicans are about 30% of the overall electorate... maybe a 1/4 (probably less) of them are hard core one issue social issue voters... IE vote soley on one social issue and one social issue alone... and that’s it.
Social Conservatives don’t rule the party, never have. While the R party is a generally socially conservative group, the idea that they are just one giant block of my way or no way people is nonsensical.
Sure we’d all love another Regan, but guess what? Regan was a once in a lifetime candidate/leader. This idea that one of this lot is heir to his legacy is nonsensical and dillusional.
Thompson can’t even hit his fund raising goal, the idea that he’s a grass roots groundswell is just not true. Mitt just looks forced every time I see or hear him.... I’m sure he’s a nice guy, but I don’t see this guy getting the nomination, let alone to the White House.
Time will tell what happens, in politics anything is possible, but among the lot this year, I think your prediction is completely unfounded and off base. Time will tell whos right.. if either of us.
Rudy may be consistent with his numbers in the 25% range, but he also hasn’t GAINED any support. As the true conservatives
expose his positions on ABORTION, GUN CONTROL, HOMOSEXUALS and other issues, he cannot possibly gain enough conservative votes to win a general election.
He is a divider, not a uniter. He will not get my vote under any circumstance whatsoever. If the GOP wants to destroy the party and nominate a liberal like Giuliani, they deserve what they get in November, 2008.
Please,
They hate Rudy because he doesn’t represent what they want... that’s the facts. You go and read the NY press from the days of Rudy being mayor... the idea the LEFT was holding back is laughable. He was attacked daily.
You think the libs agree with forcing bums off the streets? Please if it was up to them, they’d force you to give up your extra bedroom to house them. You think the libs wanted the sex shows and other hedonism of times square shut down? Please....
You are either ill informed, or willingly ignorant. Rudy’s faces more negative press than any other individual candidate over the course of his career. The left hate him, not because he’s simply a Republican, but because he does not share their world view... and has enacted many policies completely counter to it.
You guys can keep throwing around this “he’s a liberal” nonsense, but it just doesn’t stick. If you think Rudy is a liberal you don’t know what a liberal looks like. If you think there is no difference between Hitlery and Rudy then you are not only dillusional, but pathetically ignorant.
The idea that the press is propping Rudy up is comical, please, the D’s are being propped up like crazy, never have they had a weaker top tier, and frankly the R’s top tier is pretty weak as well.
Social conservatives have to accept reality, and that is, the republican party is not simply a bunch of social conservatives, and 1 issue voters. The social conservatives don’t like Rudy, but they are only about 1/4 of the registered Republicans at most. There are some social issues that most Republicans and most AMERICANS will agree on, but that doesn’t mean that social issues rule the day, in fact social issues should not be part of the legislative or judicial fiat.. and if the R’s had any balls at all they congress could have banned most of them from the courts pervue by simple legislation when they held congress (yes the congress can constitutionally limit what the court can review).. but they didn’t, nor did they even make an attempt to.
Social conservatives wish to have a candidate strong on them, then they need to organize and recruit someone who can actually get votes. Thompson ain’t it, Mitt ain’t it, and no one else is even worth mentioning based on their poll standings at present. So, organize, and build up a coalition that has some clout, and maybe next cycle you’ll be able to have someone that better represents these ideals you want that can actually attract voters. This cycle, this sure hasn’t happened, and isn’t likely to happen.
As to the GOP splintering if someone who is not a hard core social conservative becomes the nominee.... I think that’s wishful thinking.
Not this social/religious conservative.
Ron Paul???? You seriously think this guy’s got a snowballs chance?
Look if articulate conservative idealogues were what the Republican party wanted or what America wanted, Alan Keyes would have been president long ago.
This is a fundamental reality.
I disagree with your analysis. Thompson is a great white hope, nothing more. Lots of folks are projecting onto him qualities they wish a candidate had, but he personally does not. And no, he hasn’t met his fund raising goals, which were modest to begin with.. this shows that while he may get cheers when he’s spewing rhetoric in front of friendly crowds and Sean Hannity concerts, he’s not able to move people to action. If he was a large grassroots player being recruited by the people then his coffers would be overflowing with small donations from these poeple... its not, not even close. Thinking that once he formally declares it will somehow change is well... naive.
He two stepped a simple question one that any strong candidate should have been able to easily handle... he’s not the candidate folks are making him out to be... he can’t handle a presidential race... flubbing this simple nearly softball question out of the gate shows just how poorly he’s going to be when the going gets rough. He’s the republican equivalent of Barack Obama... he’s a fairly blank slate, that is articulate, and can offer the friendly crowds what they want to hear.... so they can project whatever they want on him.
Time will tell what happens, but I don’t see Thompson or Mitt winning the primary, I really don’t.
“Great White Hope”
The first African American heavy weight boxing champion Jack Johnson beat all comers.. well needless to say the Whites in America didn’t like this much, so they looked to find a white boxer to return the belt to its proper race.
White folks found their “great white hope” in a boxer named Jim Jefferies.. “The Great White Hope of the Western World”.
Millions of white convinced themselves that their honor, virtue and sense of reality depended on the outcome of the match between these two. Jefferies was said to be invincible, and would restore order to the world. They projected onto him every hope and dream and promise they could.
Their fight took place on July 4, 1910.. Jack Johnson obliterated the Great White Hope.
Tommy,
We’re just going to disagree on this. I find it interesting that if he can manage to get the nomination of the conservative party, that somehow he won’t stand a chance in the general.
The general election is far less weighted to hard right social conservatives than the republican primaries.
This is simple, if you will remove your blinders. Social conservatives and evangelical Christians will not vote in favor of Giuliani. He cannot get a large enough voter base in the Republican Party. He would need to get 90% of GOP voters and still need to pull a large number of Democrat voters. It cannot happen. He cannot carry the South, and there hasn't been a President elected without carrying the South in recent history.
Incidentally, didn't you mean the REPUBLICAN PARTY, rather than the "conservative party"? If Giuliani is nominated by the GOP, the Republican Party will have abandoned the conservatives, and it would no longer be the "conservative party".
Wrong! The shoe is on the other foot. On issues related to both social and fiscal policies, Giuliani is full fledged liberal. His life long support for liberal issues and liberal causes is crystal clear.
Freepers have been doing extensive research on Rooty for the last 12-15 months. The amount of damning evidence that we turned up was liberally posted on this conservative forum since last August 2006. It exposed Rooty for the liberal he is and revealed his true intentions for 2008. Rooty has been lying about his record and obfuscating the facts. In the long run, that won't work.
Btw, I don't remember seeing you make any effort to refute anything that was posted of relevant important concerning Rooty`s liberalism. Now you come on FR denouncing anyone who doesn't agree with your choice to be the GOP nominee. You're a little late coming to this fight.
We don't support liberal candidates around FR. We support conservatives. From all your posts I can only conclude one thing. You're a Rudy Boostering, liberal troll. That's right!
Wrong.
I question your understanding of the national politic.
30% of voters are registered Rs and about 30% are registered Dems.
40% are the swing voters, and they are the ones who swing elections.
You don’t need 90% of hte GOP vote to win, hell even 100% of the GOP vote won’t give you a national win.
Lets say of the 30% who are registered R, 25% of them stay home out of spite.. that’s equates to less than 10% of the overall electorate. You don’t need 90% of R’s to vote for you to win, it certainly helps, but its the swing voters who select the president in the general, not the party voters.
We aren’t looking at a 2000 election, with a tight margin this time. Hitlery is hitlery, and everyone knows it. I don’t see her getting the swing vote, and frankly is going to have a very hard time with her radical left base as well.
Do the math, you’ll see your claims are a bit preposterous.
What now you are tattling on me to JimRob because you don’t like my oppinions? Wow, big man you are.
Look, calling Rudy a liberal is insanity, I’ve offered pleanty of proof of my stand, and all you have offered is tired rhetoric, which I have answered before time and again.
The claim Rudy is out of step with the party platform 80% of the time is nonsense. I’ve posted the link to the FULL AND COMPLETE 2004 Republican platform for anyone to read. The rhetoric being espoused by yourself and others is just that, it doesn’t jive with the facts.
You don’t like where Rudy stands on certain social issues, that’s your perogative, but to then claim he’s a liberal? You don’t know what liberal means if you think Rudy is the same as Hillary.
A liberal does not get rid of homeless, they encourage it. They don’t lower welfare rolls, they enlarge them.. .they don’t clean up cities and neighborhoods they make excuses for them.
The “broken window” theory is not something that comes from the mindset of a liberal mindset. Hillary is a student of Saul Alinski, she’s a hard core liberal and communist ideologue, she’s proposing the government take control of privately run daycares, socialise the national health care system, the bringing back of the fairness doctrine, etc etc etc... That’s liberalism. Modern liberalism is the belief that government is the solution to the human condition in all things.... that rights flow from the government... etc etc etc. This is not remotely the world view that Rudy has espoused or moved from.
You don’t like his stands on many things, primarily social issues, that’s your right. However because you don’t like them doesn’t mean the person is a “liberal”.
I’ve countered every argument presented to me, and I have ignored yours because they are the same ones been put forward by others before that I have responded to.
Look, simple put, this cycle IMHO, like it or not, there is no one in the field who is going to take down Rudy, particularly of this pathetic lot. Mitt is just a mess... Thompson is just projection and everyone else can’t get any traction to save their lives.
Now social conservatives cannot claim when this primary cycle is over that they had no one representing their views... there have been pleanty, and most are stuck in single digits and going nowhere. So that means social conservative one issue voters need to do a better job organizing and grooming candidates. Tearing down other candidates is not going to get them anywhere.
No, I mean the conservative party.
This notion that conservativism is defined only by stands on social issues and policy is nonsense and ignorance.
There are 10s of millions of registered republicans and like it or not, many are not one issue voters or insane social conservatives.
The press likes to paint the entire base this way, because it makes the party look like a bunch of biggots and rednecks, and sadly there are a few that do live up to that stereotype.
However conservatism is not defined soley by social issue stands, never has been, never will be. In fact there are far far far more fiscal conservatives as a whole than there are social conservatives in general.
You will see large numbers rally against gay marriage and other social issues, but in general fiscal responsibility is a far more consistent group of voters than this or that social policy.
There is no “conservative party” but a combined party of many different facets. The largest facet is the conservative base. Rudy Giuliani does not cater to those, and has already caused many of them to turn against the GOP should he be the nominee.
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.