Posted on 06/08/2011 5:01:12 PM PDT by Bigtigermike
I'm told by two reliable sources that Rudy Giuliani intends to run for the GOP nomination for president in 2012. He may throw his hat in the ring soon.
Rudy's theory of the race: In the fall of 2007, he decided he couldn't compete with both Mitt Romney and John McCain in New Hampshire, and disastrously decided to try to pull back there and pitch his tent in Florida. This year, he'll commit everything to New Hampshire, where he thinks he has a good shot at beating Romney—whom he criticized there earlier this week. He then thinks he can beat whichever more socially conservative candidate(s) is left by winning what are still likely to be winner-take-all primaries in big states like California, New York, and New Jersey.
Rudy's message: I'm tough enough to put our fiscal house in order and to protect us from enemies abroad. The U.S. in 2012 is in bad shape—like New York in 1993.
(Excerpt) Read more at weeklystandard.com ...
That’s all we need in the race, another RINO.
I second that - no question about it!
Romney = Obama.
Well guys after a conservative wins the nomination- and this is looking more likely IMHO- the establishment Republicans are no longer our worst enemy but our most accessible allies against Obama.
I’m looking at the campaigns of these guys from the viewpoint of the day after the nomination is won by, hopefully, Palin.
And I see the VP stakes.
Ditto. I am not for Rudy in any way for President, but he is utterly fantastic on some issues. He is also bad on other critical issues important for a White House run. He is vastly better than the flip flopping Romney.
That’s my thinking, also.
North East Republicans are rarely, if ever, Conservatives.
I see no reason to compromise on the VP, who could instantly become President.
Democrats win with the most liberal and stupid of all VP’s: Biden and Gore to cite the most recent two winners.
We should go for the best conservative.
Sure the nominee can take Mitt or Rudy as her VP. She could ask Tony Weiner too.
I would hope that she would pick someone who is at least pro-Bill of Rights and pro-life and has at least as much character as John Edwards which leaves Rudy out.
#############################################
That was his biggest mistake. He should have picked a conservative as his VP.
It has been said that George H.W. Bush was more or less forced upon Reagan to be his VP. Supposedly the RNC would not have provided financial support for his presidential campaign unless he chose him as his running mate.
I’ve heard that too. I think he could have told them to stick it and raised enough to win without their money.
I do see where you are coming from, and it is possible if we get a really solid conservative nominee that they may go for some "moderate" the media will like to shore up the mushy middle, but a pro-abortion candidate is just unacceptable. Alienating social conservatives would be a big mistake.
Personally, I am thinking top choices for a VP nominee would probably be someone like Rubio or perhaps Pawlenty (assuming he doesn't win the nomination). Both could help us win important states, and both can probably appeal to independents (Rubio brings in Hispanics too).
Compromising simply does not work. So-called 'Moderates' attempting to curry favor with the left, who will not vote for them anyway. All attempts with this misguided strategy has resulted in failure.
All we get in return is a Republican Party that is marching inexorably leftward.
I’m a Northeast Republican. But my roots are in Oklahoma and Texas, so I’m not a normal NE pubbie.
That’s one of the primary reasons the GOP-E doesn’t want Sarah Palin to win the nomination!
She won’t play their game!
She will pick her own VP and if the GOP/RNC want to withhold money, so be it!
She’s the only one who can raise the needed $Billion without their help.
I’ve heard that and believe it.
But even if Bush were not overtly forced upom him the VP is usually chosen to appease the losing wing of the Party.
Well, I meant elected office holders.
:)
Hindsight is 20 20. ;-)
I see a couple of problems with this:
There are no "moderates". There are conservatives, leftists, and also uninformed and thus somewhat confused conservatives and leftists. We need to explain conservatism to everyone with the confident expectation that most Americans are conservatives.
The media will absolutely excoriate our ticket no matter who is on it.
Yes, I agree. My preference is for an all conservative ticket. I certainly don't want a social liberal like Rudy as our VP choice.
Hmmm, interesting. I may be overemphasising the NE-establishment-moderate mollifying character of the VP choice, but neither of those seem to have enough of it.
OTOH none of the candidates I think of, like Romney or Rudy, who do have that quality can bring in a single electoral vote.
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.