Replies

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.

"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).