Posted on 02/06/2007 10:43:27 AM PST by ElkGroveDan
God bless you for your service.
I wonder what was in MRS BILL CLINTON's calculus back when she was running against Rudy (before he dropped out). Did she think she had the goods on him then, or was she only propelled by the fact that she thought she could garner the feminazi vote, etc.?
When the candidate is good on the "top issue" and wrong on all the other issues, that "top issue" will not rule. Being secondary does not deprive an issue of any weight at all and a mass of issues of lesser weight will overcome a single issue that is the generally acknowledged "most important" issue. Giuliani is a "practical" liberal, one who recognized that a Liberal society that includes liberalism in law enforcement becomes a society in which it is impossible, or at least very unpleasant, for a liberal to live. His law-and-order proclivities are only for making the social landscape prettier and safer for liberal people.
Just want to be clear here: are you saying it was Republicans who refused to vote who lost us the election in 2006?
Robertson has gone off on some strange tangents before.
Does he need NY, though? Is any other Republican wannabe candidate even have a prayer in NY either?
No offense, but this sounds a bit like you are judging Rudy based on his *intentions* or *motivations*---i.e., he's for law and order, but for the "wrong" reasons.
Such thinking is the bane of liberalism.
You know, given how much people around here hate Pataki, and how many people say he was worse then any D could have been, Rudy sure gets a lot of crap about that.
Anyhow, it's not a major consideration.
And Giuliani cannot win the Christian votes by an appeal to hearts. He must appeal to minds over hearts.
A quote from James Lileks' article, posted here:
And none of the objections obscure the central appeal of the Rudy candidacy: He'll nuke 'em if he has to. That won't be the central theme of his campaign, of course, but it's the unstated strength of his candidacy. He's not a wuss.
Again, can someone name a Republican presidential candidate who *is* electable in NY?
No. It's not worth spending a dime there. But the argument is that the moderate Rudy can attract modereates and independents in big numbers. This poll, and it is just a snapshot of those polled, argues against that notion.
BFLR
It was my honor to do so.
If a city tolerates graffiti, or stile jumping in the subway, etc, then people get the idea that those little things are acceptable and things a little more serious are acceptable. It is a progression. A city that tolerates graffiti is regarded as generally lax and people don't report things that they know will get no response from the law. People with the scofflaw mindset are much freer in their attitudes and activities and people who are comfortable doing the little crimes have much less aversion to doing the badder crimes. Really it is a matter of drawing of a line and is not well heeded. A line anywhere below the top is hazy and constantly moves. Only a line at the top is sharp and bright. Great numbers of people don't recognize much difference in quality between petty crimes and major crimes. "I'm not doin nothin no worse than everybody else!"
"I hope Hillary wins in 2008"
You can't be serious. I think you should reconsider.
No. I am recognizing that his "conservatism" extends no farther than this and it is insufficient. It certainly does not permeate his attitude and I am not so sure that his attitude toward law enforcement is very relevant to the primary tasks of the presidency, especially the next presidency. He is great at organizing rescue from a disaster but his liberal mindset may well disqualify him from understanding the Islamic War and fighting it any better than any other viable Republican candidate would. I expect he will be into making grand deals with individual "Leaders" among the enemy thinking he has acted in "Realpolitik. "Giuliani impresses me as a chessplayer a la Nixon and Kissinger. That is possibly appropriate in a Metternichian world of discreet nation states jockeying for advantage where no one is suicidal. It is not appropriate when facing Jihad. There are no chess players in Dar-al-Islam.
Well, I don't follow that. Just because Rudy can't attract moderates and independents in NY, where NO Republican presidential candidate could attract moderates and independents . . . how does that advance the conclusion that Rudy can't attract moderates and independents anywhere?
I do think it would be rather embarrassing politically for Rudy to lose NY, but it wouldn't necessarily be fatal to his chances. Again, since NO Republican presidential candidate has much of chance in NY, Rudy would be in no different position.
The difference is that Rudy probably has more of a chance to take some other Blue state. And he probably has more chance of taking a Blue state than losing a Red state.
The one problem I have not seen discussed in regard to Rudy is the Muslim vote. The WashPo even came out and stated that it was the huge numbers of Muslims in northern VA that, in hatred of Bush, turned out to defeat George Allen. I can imagine that a similar reaction might be had to Rudy by this voting bloc.
Really? Rudy wouldn't even take a check from a Saudi sheik after 9/11.
I don't think Rudy will be singing kum-by-yah any time soon.
Also see post # 471.
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.