On Point: A serious option (Vince Carrol piece on Rudy Giuliani)

Rocky Mountain News ^ | Thursday February 8th, 2007 | Vince Carroll

[ajolympian2004]

Conservative Republicans will make a huge mistake if they fail to treat Rudy Giuliani as a serious option for the 2008 presidential nomination. The former New York mayor may have a liberal record on abortion and gay rights - actually, there's no "may" about it - and his messy personal life includes three marriages, but his record as mayor was at times Reaganesque in its willingness to battle an entrenched liberal establishment along a host of fronts. Those who have forgotten his record, or only followed it after 9/11, should read Steven Malanga's article "Yes, Rudy Giuliani is a Conservative" in the winter issue of City Journal (online at city-journal.org). It recounts his groundbreaking initiatives on crime, welfare and dependency, his relentless attempts to reform the public school system (his failure there persuaded him to embrace vouchers), his disdain for social engineering, and his understanding of how high taxes suffocate an entrepreneurial culture.

Giuliani also appreciated the critical role that intact families play in maintaining a healthy society with well-adjusted children, even if his own behavior did not always bear this out.

But if you really want evidence of Giuliani's credentials as a credible Republican candidate, you need to know only this single fact: In the 1990s, the political left in New York despised him. They demonized him without pause, while peddling hysteria about the calamitous effects his supposedly mean-spirited policies would usher in (but didn't).

Put it this way: Even if Giuliani is unacceptable to the social conservatives who dominate the GOP's base, they ought to give the man his due. No candidate so far in the running has jousted more with their own enemies, and none boasts more victories to his credit, either.

[ajolympian2004]

Ditto

[ajolympian2004]

Rudy will wipe the floor with hillary in any debate.

[silverleaf]

Bottom line in 2008:

We are going to have to pick a candidate who can protect this country from worldwide islamo fascist terror that desires to and has proven the will and capability to strike us on our streets and which will have access to nuclear weapons.

That candidate's ability to respect the rights of the states to legislate on social policies and his/her ability to nominate Supreme Court replacements (Stevens and Ginsburg at a minimum) who are not prone to re-writing the US Constitution as a "living document" ... is also at stake.

If you really can't see a difference between Giuliani- vs Rodham, Pretty Boys Edwards and Hussein Obama, then God Bless us all.

[George W. Bush]

It would be more straightforward to give Hillary the GOP nomination. I'm not sure why we should care about the opinion of this fruit in Colorado. He looks like he's in the Rudi camp for the gay marriage payoff.

[George W. Bush]

article: Giuliani also appreciated the critical role that intact families play in maintaining a healthy society with well-adjusted children, even if his own behavior did not always bear this out.

Yeah, that's why he left his wife and notified her through the press announcement. Then he moved in with the two gay guys.

Maybe Rudi should have been more concerned with the welfare of his own family.

[George W. Bush]

Those FR polls have been pretty good lately. How about one that asks 'which candidate will you never vote for no matter what'?

I think McStain would 'win'. But Rudi might be a contender.

[Jacquerie]

"They (other candidates) have great ideas like Tom Tancredo and Duncan Hunter do, but not have the necessary leadership experience."

That's right, the Presidency is not an entry level executive position.

In a GOP primary I am likely to vote for the proven executive leader, even if he is soft on social issues. A through and through conservative, lifelong senator or congressman without executive experience is likely not qualified for the Presidency. After years or decades of hiding among the crowd, changing votes, waffling, dissembling, posturing for the hometown, etc, such a man cannot be expected to suddenly change his approach to his work. For this reason alone, the Hildebeast is unqualified.

Just as I would not quietly accept inexperience in the CEO of a company that I held a lot of stock in, I would only reluctantly accept a newbie Republican executive as President. JMHO.

[George W. Bush]

Sean Hannity was right about some people here (a very tiny few of idiots) at Free Republic like yourself.

Hannity resents that many of us correctly perceive he carries water for liberals as long as they're Republican.

Go straight to freaking hell you lowest form of low life dirt bag trash scum of the earth!

Nice.

[Amalie]

"If you really can't see a difference between Giuliani- vs Rodham, Pretty Boys Edwards and Hussein Obama, then God Bless us all."

This is all true. The bigger issues that we need to deal with here are pretty simple - is Rudy the ONLY candidate who can win in the present election cycle (and we then take 50% of something rather than 100% of nothing), and, if not, who would a standard bearer in his place (and, frankly, closer to our own values). Yes, the media is pushing him now, but they will also push him over the cliff after the primaries are over; I have personally decided that this is a real Achilles heel in this race, especially if Hillary is defeated in the primary cycle.

The biggest challenge is money and media. The DEMs now have a cash advantage, one that they will hold this cycle due to their congressional positioning, and the media will be that constant drumbeat of 'change,' anti-war rhetoric, and painting all conservatives into a box. So what is new about that? If the war effort is faltering (or steady as opposed to progressing), the anti-war crowd will push all unprincipled candidates to the left. The only conservative message that will ring true in the heartland will be a strong, steady one, because '08 is ALL about getting the vote out. A marginal candidate from our side, ESPECIALLY if the anti-Hillary vote factor is gone, has little chance in this cycle.

So, is Rudy the candidate? Does Hunter have the personality to pull the center his way? I don't know; it is a popularity contest in a very fickle environment, and any candidate who running for president will need to be able to pull the swing their way.

Pro-life, pro-2nd amendment, pro-family candidates will always face an uphill battle. Nixon's economic disasters and political blunders led to Jimmy Carter, Carter's worsening of those things by a large measure made the populism of Reagan possible. Reagan's personality gave him the WH despite opposition from both the DEM media and the clubhouse GOP.

In 84, the DEMs miscalculated the populist mindset badly with Mondale / Ferraro; the Beirut terrorist attack and sabre-rattling by Russia resonated more than the ideas of isolationism and social change. That was 24 years ago; in '92, tax-promise breaking Bush gave Clinton 8 years. In 2000, a cliff hanger election gave us Bush II, and John Kerry became the SECOND LARGEST vote gatherer in history in 2004.

The 2008 cycle will be just as volatile, with a fresh youthful but liberal-leaning base nationwide, front burner issues on immigration and war, and a questionable Congressional role (they may be wrong but they are not stupid; they will paint their inefficiencies as reason to vote DEM in 08 so they can REALLY get something done). I am not happy with Guliani on a lot of issues, but we are going need somebody with a LARGE amount of photographic and verbal charisma to win this cycle. I don't know who else that would be yet...I am hoping SOMEBODY rises to that role, however.

Finally, I am agreement with some posters that a Guilani presidency and a DEM congress would be a BIG problem. Better than a Hillary, probably, but very bad for conservatism in general and for social conservatives in particular. I am fairly pessimistic that Congress will swap sides in '08' we may get the Senate back, but the House is probably gone until 2010, and we will win it back only if there is backlash to a DEM WH (terrorist threats actualized prior to that notwithstanding).

[dirtboy]

The column put the abortion issue in play:

Put it this way: Even if Giuliani is unacceptable to the social conservatives who dominate the GOP's base

[jmc813]

What I cannot understand is the enthusism for Rudy displayed on this forum. It seems as if many FReepers - perhaps even most - are eager to concede defeat in the Culture War and are turning on those who still think it is worth fighting. On some of these threads, it looks as if FreeRepublic has morphed into FreeAbortions (at taxpayer expense). How do you account for it?

It is a loud minority. Look at the recent FR poll. Rudy only had the votes of a 15% minority of freepers.

[hosepipe]

[ Conservative Republicans will make a huge mistake if they fail to treat Rudy Giuliani as a serious option for the 2008 presidential nomination. ]

Vince is not hitting on all eight cylinders and he's backfiring on politics..
Giuliani is a shape shifter..

Vince obviously needs a political tuneup..

[jmc813]

So I support Rudy Giuliani for President and now all of a sudden I'm a person seekeing to marry another man. Go straight to freaking hell you lowest form of low life dirt bag trash scum of the earth!

I'm assuming he was referring to the writer of the article, not you.

[George W. Bush]

I'm assuming he was referring to the writer of the article, not you.

I thought I was clear enough. I was referring to the writer.

[EternalVigilance]

I saw the image. Didn't see a thing wrong with it.

One of the primary reasons abortion continues is that it is hidden.

It's pretty sad if a line drawing like that - after all, it's not like it was a bloody nasty true representation of what it REALLY is - can't even be shown on America's premiere conservative forum.

[phillyfanatic]

OK, so let us welcome Obama or Her Highness in 2008! Sure I would love Rudy G to be the pure conserv we all dream about, but haven't had since Ronaldus Magnus. He is far better than any Dem socialist pacifist. So dream on and pray for a reincarnation of Ronnie. It ain't going to happen. Not with this patch of Gopers. Newt would do it but would lose badly. That the GOP cannot afford in '08. I empathise with you but I want to win.

[Peach]

Don't play dumb. You know what image and you know why. It's never been accepted practice to post that kind of image on FR and then to spam it to boot.