nah. why even try to have a reasoned discourse amongst the passionate.
adios.
there are those of us who just happen to believe that rudy CANNOT beat her.
“Reasoned”? It is to laugh.
Now, whether you like Rudy or not, he is the only candidate currently announced who is capable of defeating X42's spouse.
Wael, that is one of the fun things about reading FR. People are passionate.
Passionately reasonable? Reasonably passionate?
"He's a great speaker. He's had a good record of winning in New York City, and he can be tough."
For the time being, I'm a Thompson man. Giuliani isn't even on my short list of desired candidates, but I think I know what Ford saw in Giuliani. The man can speak with a public voice and he can be brutally tough.
Had not cancer taken him out of the Senate race against Clinton, we might have seen more of it. But, from what little I saw via the TV of Giuliani dealing with New York political enemies, they seemed to fear and loathe that acid tongue of his. I had hoped to see it lashing Clinton. That might have been a worthy and entertaining audition.
I recently watched an old 1984 (?) PBS series on the Constitution, specificially a segment dealing with immigration. It consisted of a panel composed of lawyers, judges, activisists and public officials. The Dean of the Columbia School of Law served as moderator. Giuliani was on the panel as the U.S. Attorney for New York.
If Giuliani wants to appeal to the "let's get tough on immigration" crowd (I'm a member), he ought to resurrect that appearance. Then, he'd only have to reconcile what he did as U.S. Attorney with what he did as Mayor of New York. That might be interesting.
I think it might go something like this: "I was appointed to be U.S Attorney to accomplish certain things, so I did them; I was elected Mayor of New York to do certain things, so I did them; and, this is why you will elect me President, and I will get them done. That is what I do."