The myth of Rudy's electability [MUST READ!]

North Star Writer's Group via The Keizer Times ^ | November 2, 2007 | Paul Ibrahim

[2ndDivisionVet]

Most Republican presidential candidates can brag about attracting followers with their valiant stances on important issues.

Rudy Giuliani's followers support him because they think he can beat Hillary Clinton.

In and by itself, the reasoning of Giuliani's supporters is not illogical. Many people do take into account electability when voting for a primary candidate (although most will not sacrifice their basic principles in the name of an election victory).

The problem is, this perceived electability is the only thing going for Giuliani.

But here is the real kicker: Giuliani is not electable.

In fact, he is far less electable than the only other Republican frontrunners understood to be capable of beating Hillary, namely Fred Thompson and John McCain.

To this, Giuliani's people inevitably shout the following talking points: First, Giuliani's moderate standpoint will attract unaffiliated voters, and can help Republicans make up for the unpopularity they have inherited from the George W. Bush years. Second, Giuliani has a lot of conservative accomplishments going for him – just look at how he handled 9/11, reduced crime in New York City, and how he reduced crime in New York City while handling 9/11!

They fail on both points.

First, Giuliani is a liberal. He supports abortion, and welcomes illegal immigrants to sanctuary cities. He opposes gun rights. He supported a Democratic candidate for governor in New York, and among his 75 judicial appointments, Democrats outnumbered Republicans by more than eight to one.

Though he attempted to knock Thompson on tort reform in the last presidential debate, he failed to mention his own poor record on the matter. Only a few years ago he sued two dozen gun manufacturers and distributors for essentially being functioning gun manufacturers and distributors, calling them "an industry which profits from the suffering of innocent people."

Giuliani's supporters will concede that he is not that conservative on social issues, but that really it is a good thing because we don't want extremist evangelical Christians taking over the GOP. But opposing abortion, illegal immigration, gun control and liberal judges does not make you an extremist. It merely makes you conservative.

Knowing they lose on the social issues, the Giuliani team holds on tight to fiscal matters allegedly showing that the man is really conservative. Since economic questions are often not as black and white as social topics, the Giuliani team knows that critics will have a harder time debunking the myth of Giuliani's economic conservatism.

But it can be done, and briefly so.

Giuliani tenaciously battled the line-item veto, which allows the executive to cut waste from legislative bills, taking the fight as far as he could in the courts. Giuliani also defied the promise of free trade – perhaps the only concept economists virtually unanimously support – through his ardent opposition to NAFTA.

These facts might explain why Giuliani indiscriminately answers "crime" and "George Will said I'm conservative" during the presidential debates as many times as Ron Paul brings up "foreign policy" in response to completely unrelated questions. Giuliani has nothing else to run on in order to win over conservatives. Unlike the other candidates, he cannot brag about his primary strength – the perception that he is electable.

But the fact is, the general election will be no head-to-head match up if Giuliani is the Republican nominee. In 2004, the Constitution Party ran Michael Peroutka against President Bush, now widely considered to have pandered to social conservatives in extreme fashion. You bet these social conservatives would run a candidate against nominee Giuliani. You bet the Libertarian Party would eat away more Republican votes. And you bet Clinton would win.

Giuliani is a liberal. And if nominated by the GOP, he would be a liberal running against someone who is better at being liberal. He would have to compete just as hard for conservative votes as for liberal and moderate votes, and he will lose.

Giuliani is not conservative. Giuliani is not electable. A thorough look at his record, the polls and the political reality cannot lead to any other conclusion. He's got the worst of both worlds.

[CZB]

“...Poor Romney and Rudy posters have to twist themselves into knots to defend those two. And the attacks on Fred are so pathetic, never on substance, always on “style “ or “energy” or some subjective claptrap that can neither be proven nor refuted. Rarely on the issues, and never on the principles, do they try to attack.

Some twist the truth so much it reminds me of that old saying down south, “They ain’t got a shame bone in their bodies.” I am presuming that at least some of them are being paid. That must be where some of Mitt’s $50 million went....”

Well, I’m not being paid by anyone and I’ll say that I haven’t heard a word of substance come out of Fred Thompson’s mouth. He is a single issue candidate and his issue seems to be to repeat as often as possible, “I am a conservative.” To which I say, loopty-doo. What’s he gonna do when Iran finishes their nukes and hands them off to Hezbollah—say, “I am a conservative.” Wow. Guiliani, Romney and the others have been out there punching and hacking and taking the heat while this idler Thompson has dawdled like he isn’t sure he’s happy enough with the script to shoot the movie. And what’s he ever done? What organization is he qualified to run? His record ain’t even all that conservative when you get down to it, although he really has an idler’s record.

As for electability, winning the primaries is all that matters along those lines. You campaign hard, you win, you campaign even harder, you win again, etc. I could be wrong, but I don’t see Fred Thompson winning anything that could get him anywhere near a showdown with Rodham at the end of line. He ain’t gonna win the nomination, so he ain’t electable. I don’t have to twist anything. He just doesn’t have the goods and he won’t win.

[Brices Crossroads]

“I’ll say that I haven’t heard a word of substance come out of Fred Thompson’s mouth.”

Sorry to learn that you are hearing impaired. If you are unaware of Thompson’s positions, you obviously do not visit this site often.

“What’s he gonna do when Iran finishes their nukes and hands them off to Hezbollah—say, “I am a conservative.””

Let’s see. I recall in the debate that Romney answered that he would check with his attorneys first to determine whether he needed to get Congress’ permission to defend the United States. Fred’s response was that he would check with his generals first. But I guess you missed it. (Maybe you didn’t hear it.)

You really ought to be better informed if you are going to post here. Otherwise you end up looking a little foolish.