Posted on 12/01/2007 5:01:26 PM PST by Jay777
Rudy Panic set in for many Republicans this week, with conservative leaders both nationally and in Iowa concluding they need to settle on a single champion to prevent Rudolph W. Giuliani from winning the GOP presidential nomination.
They fear that victory by the socially liberal former New York mayor could permanently shatter the largely successful coalition of social, religious, economic and national defense conservatives that, more often than not, has worked electoral magic for Republican candidates at all levels.
"The main driving force behind all of that is a belief that Rudy Giuliani is positioned to win the nomination and a belief that, and I describe it this way, the four most central planks in our Republican platform would be sacrificed in the process: life, marriage, guns, border security," said Rep. Steve King, Iowa Republican. He said the calls and e-mails in Iowa grew "utterly intense in the last week" as Republicans urged one another to settle on an anti-Rudy candidate.
A new poll showing a statistical tie between Mitt Romney and Mike Huckabee for the Jan. 3 Iowa first-in-the-nation presidential caucuses is fueling the frenzy.
"What conservatives have to realize is that Giuliani is now relying on Mike Huckabee to take his most viable opponent, Mitt Romney, down in Iowa, and that anyone voting for him there in the caucuses will be inadvertently, and ironically, helping the New Yorker," David A. Keene, chairman of the American Conservative Union, said earlier this week in a surprise endorsement of Mr. Romney.
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtontimes.com ...
That is why state-by-state organization for each is critical as it will be the basis for the organization in the general. And who has the best state-by-state? Rudy and Mitt.
Huck has a "Sign up for the Huckabee Newsletter section. This contains a list of check items for issues of interest. One of them is "Foreign Relations: Israel" - clearly an appeal to a subset of American Protestants. What I had hoped to see but did not was "Foreign Relations: China". What Huckabee does have is a strong and spirited position statement on the sanctity of life, with a very nice thumbnail. He is not ashamed to be pro-life, and makes no effort to hide it.
Romney offers a well-organized and well-presented website. His "Issues" section is organized into problem definition ("Challenge") and response featuring a Romney quote. Under Global Competition on China, his "response" is merely a re-statement of the challenge: they are hard-working (true), competing with them will be tough (true, but not the whole story), etc. An appeal to global corporations followed. Nothing about trade or human rights violations - rather soul-less. Talking points, there more for the presence of text than the content value of solutions. He had some general platitudes about strong families but little of substance.
Thompson's site is also well-organized. It says very little about the sanctity of life (you have to dig deep to find a passing reference), and absolutely nothing that I could find about China. Content was sparse, as my two issues are not treated in the website of this particular campaign. Most content was about endorsements, campaign materials, and "getting involved" but left me wondering, getting involved in what?
I realize our guy's website is not exactly great - and certainly does not compete as far as "fluff" goes. But deep and solid content on the issues I sought was present.
All three sites were slick and well presented with no technical difficulties encountered. They seemed to capitalize on issues before the average voter ("Immigration"), but said very little about serious and complex threats facing this nation long-term ("China").
Sorry if that offends anyone, and I do not disrespect the candidates themselves. I tried to be as fair as someone already supporting a candidate can be, and what I wrote here is what I saw regarding these two issues - China and the sanctity of life. The absence of anything about China - other than Romney's astute observation that they are a tough competitor - is extremely worrisome. It jives with what I've heard to date from the candidates. The next 45 days or so will prove a test of whether we are a "thinking" people or a "feeling" people.
If I've missed something - and I'm sure I have - I would welcome respective supporters to point it out. Links would be helpful.
That is the bared-steel truth, and it is a damnable shame that so many on FR would capitulate so easily. The wool is already o'er their eyes, to be sure. Running to their prophets with itching ears.
PROPS to you, sir!
He seems to think that corporate taxes are responsible for sending jobs oversees. This will help him gain corporate sponsors, ostensibly from corporations who wish to send yet more jobs out of America.
He says nothing about trade imbalance, however, or about the respective character or motives of our trading partners or about the potential military threat posed by a trade arrangement that does not have U.S. interests at heart. More mindless "rah rah!" free [sic] trade, without critical analysis of the underlying rules governing said trade. His approach is simplistic and one-dimensional.
“Right—my favorite candidate is Anti-Hillary—whoever can beat HER! “
Not quite I read your posting history, you are a rudybot.
Looking at your posting history is a trip, Rudy is your man and for month after month you keep spamming threads with those soft Fred is old, Fred just doesn’t look good nonsense over and over, gentle little digs, very feminine in their subtlety and innocent appearing bitchiness.
You even do it with the Romney people to a degree, nothing up front, just more small digs, sounding almost sympathetic and supportive.
In typical Rudybot fashion you also see conservatives and evangelicals as something to overcome.
It is the worst type of spamming. I recommend highly that people read your posting history for the last 7 months it is amusing.
“”Fred is old”, “Fred doesn’t look good” should not enter into the equation. We’re adults.”
Very true, A few months ago a few sincere statements along those lines was not a huge deal, but month, after month, after month, constantly from one individual, always acting like it is a fresh observation?
That avenue never panned out and the moment has passed for that smarmy silliness.
What concerns me is primary states like New Hampshire that are open and allow cross party votes. Reports are that NH got "spammed" by MoveOn.Org last election and will get the same this year. Since it's still a high-profile state it appears that the radical left has more say in selection the GOP candidate than the GOP itself. How many states will that be the case?
It's an insane policy, IMHO. As another FReeper responded to me last night on a similar topic : "Why do you think the rats always vote for open primaries".
The left is hijacking this election and the GOP is doing nothing.
All those “conservative” pundits I take with a barrel of salt. After 2008, many others will join me, I’ve a feeling. What they do is basically, “talk”. Hell if I wanted just “talk”, I can get that from the “top tier”. I want someone who has “done” and will “do”, something.
I know excessive use of scare quotes.
PS; I am almost sure Bo Derek and the American Associated Union of International Equestrians & Horsies for Growth is going to endorse Hunter. Keep your fingers crossed.
Well in fairness, a lot more people thought the same about an old actor they dug out of mothballs. You would really need to understand what percentage of the American people know who the current president and vice-president are to really understand why you are wrong.
Um...
Okey Dokey...
I am sure your email has helped him grow some more...
“Well in fairness, a lot more people thought the same about an old actor they dug out of mothballs”
You need to pay more attention to current events, then you would know that Fred Thompson has been involved in the political scene at some level for much of the last 35 years, (he was an assistant U.S. Attorney before that).
As an example, this is what he was doing since he left the senate way, way, way back in 2002.
Post-Senate activities
Political work
Fred Thompson on July 25, 2007 in Dallas.In March 2003, Thompson was featured in a commercial by the conservative non-profit group Citizens United that advocated the invasion of Iraq, stating: “When people ask what has Saddam done to us, I ask, what had the 9/11 hijackers done to us — before 9/11.”[51]
Thompson did voice-over work at the 2004 Republican National Convention.[52] While narrating a video for that convention, Thompson observed: “History throws you what it throws you, and you never know what’s coming.”[53]
After the retirement of Supreme Court Associate Justice Sandra Day O’Connor in 2005, Bush appointed him to an informal position to help guide the nomination of John Roberts through the United States Senate confirmation process.[54] Roberts was subsequently confirmed as Chief Justice.
Until July 2007, Thompson was Chair of the International Security Advisory Board, a bipartisan advisory panel that reports to the Secretary of State and focuses on emerging strategic threats.[55] In that capacity, he advised the State Department about all aspects of arms control, disarmament, international security, and related aspects of public diplomacy.[56]
Legal defense for Lewis Libby
Main article: Lewis Libby
In 2006, he served on the advisory board of the legal defense fund for I. Lewis “Scooter” Libby, Jr, who was indicted and later convicted of lying to federal investigators during their investigation of the Plame affair.[57][58] Thompson, who had never met Libby before volunteering for the advisory board, said he was convinced Libby was innocent.[30] The Scooter Libby Legal Defense Fund Trust set out to raise more than $5 million to help finance the legal defense of Vice President Dick Cheney’s former chief of staff.[59] Thompson hosted a fundraiser for the Libby defense fund at his home in McLean, Virginia.[60] After Bush commuted Libby’s sentence,[61] Thompson released a statement: “I am very happy for Scooter Libby. I know that this is a great relief to him, his wife and children. This will allow a good American, who has done a lot for his country, to resume his life.”[62]
Radio analyst
In 2006, he signed on with ABC News Radio to serve as senior analyst and vacation replacement for Paul Harvey.[63] He used that platform to spell out his positions on a number of political issues. A July 3, 2007 update to Thompson’s ABC News Radio home page referred to him as a “former ABC News Radio contributor,” indicating that Thompson has been released from his contract with the broadcaster.[64]
So supporting moderates and liberals is what conservatives should do...
Got it...
Barring a future attack on the homeland, imigration will be the main issue in the next election and that favors conservatives and most democrates agree with us on the issue, americans love there country ‘dem or repub’ and are sick and tired of the pol’s playing fast an loose for political reasons with the security of the nations borders for cheap goods.
As a union member ‘UAW’ and a conservative republican I speak to many democrates and some follow blindly there parties panderers to the working class stiff, but if you ask them about illegal imigration they are just as mad as we are.
There perspective is this ‘we don’t want to have to compete for work with people who will break the union to take a job for half of what were making now, we fought long and hard for what we get payed and were being forced backward by slave labor’, ‘first they send good jobs over seas for cheap labor now they are just importing the labor, no matter who it harms or what it’s effect may be to the working class’.
The problem is they blame republican buisness types for the problem when you and I know this problem is non-partisan.
We need a real ‘control the borders’ republican in the general election or the democrates will win because it’s the only issue that many democrates know they will be betrayed on by there party.
Now that is funny, seriously, I almost spewed beverage on the monitor...
No panick here... I will just write in "Bullwinkle" if the party is dumb enough to push that liberal.
I’d write in Bull, but I would not finish with winkle...
I just know at this point who I will not vote for and who I am most likely to vote for...
Yes, I am aware of Fred’s resume. You left out Lobbyist, Watergate counsel and a prosecutor in Tennessee. You missed my point and that was, regardless of the bona fides, no one knows who Thompson is a great deal more than anyone else. More people likely know him as Arthur Branch than Fred Thompson.
Few people knew who Romney was and I am still not sure. If he ever figures it out himself I am sure he will let us know. I am not counting anyone out at this point and I have no idea what the magic formula is. One would have to know the collective American mind and that in itself is a scary thought. It goes beyond just money, or just name-recognition. All help, but there is always that unknown, unexplainable quantity. Perhaps it is that battered-voter syndrome or something? We can’t elect a decent candidate because we don’t deserve one. When they crap on us it is probably our fault. Otherwise, what we would have to complain about for the next 4 years?
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.