Posted on 02/15/2007 11:25:14 AM PST by azhenfud
Just as the title says.
Here's the irony beagle - if Rudy is nominated, I suspect enough conservatives are going to go pull the Constitution Party lever that the Constitution Party candidate would tie, if not beat Giuliani in a general election.
I wonder what it would do to the plans of these party over principle types to have their precious GOP come in third in a general election.
No it's not. It's hoping people see the REAL Rudy or if they do, quit ignoring or denying it altogether. If his policy suits you - fine. But don't deny it IS what it IS.
Rudy carried his city's sanctuary policy all the way to the Supreme Court defending it against the 1996 federal law that made it illegal for cities to prohibit their employees from cooperating with the INS.
Losing that challenge directly, as a "work around" he even suggested he'd offer those employees "early retirement" if they violated his sanctuary edict.
Rudy respects law only as RUDY sees law.
But his direct violation and contempt of federal immigration code is only one of the many aspects I see upon which to reject Rudy.
Fine. But immigration is not near the top of my list in terms of key issues. I support GWB's position on this, so you won't be surprised that I can get 100% behind a Giuliani presidency. But I do deny that Rudy's refusal to crack down on illegals is tantamount to giving haven to terrorists. You'll note that Rudy did crack down real hard on violent and otherwise disruptive criminals.
"I wonder what it would do to the plans of these party over principle types to have their precious GOP come in third in a general election."
I doubt it will be enough third party to come in second but I have no doubts that it would be enough to cause a landslide for the RATS all the way down the ticket. Buy 2012 a third party might even have a shot at winning because there will be little left of the Republican party.
I would vote for Rudy for mayor of my city in a second but what he did as Mayor of New York in no way qualifies him as having done anything good in the war on terror. He handled a situation well.
On the flip side his support of making NY a safe haven for illegals does terrible things for the war on terror. While I don't know I agree with the assertion he has been as bad as Hillary on balance he has not been a help. If he enacted the same policies nation wide that he did in NY it would be far easier for terrorist to enter and hide in the United States. This is not an extreme opinion just one you disagree with.
When you call someone who disagrees with you an extremest you're playing the Liberal game.
I will disclose there is no way I would vote for Rudy because of his position on Abortion and the second Amendment (which he seems to think is about hunting).
I don't think your conclusions follow. First of all, it's not a "scientific" sample. Secondly, individuals matter a lot. Fill in the names. You'll probably find that conservatives would vote for Rudy or Romney over a Democrat or a Constitution Party or Libertarian candidate.
Thank you for sharing your opinion - however, given the success that Ross Perot saw despite entering the race, leaving the race, and re-entering the race based on a general discontent...
...I think you'll find the outcome of a rather more motivated and directed cause abandoning nominee Rudy to be far more significant.
But to get the Democratic nomination Nelson would have to act like a typical Democratic candidate or he'd split the party.
If Romney or Giuliani gets the Republican nomination, it will be because one of them has convinced other Republicans that he's in the party's mainstream. A party split is another possibility, but if that looks to be the likely result of nominating Giuliani or Romney, their candidacies will suffer in the primaries.
"When you call someone who disagrees with you an extremest you're playing the Liberal game."
I don't consider your views extreme, but when one asserts there is no difference between Hillary and Rudy, I'd say that was extreme. When one tries to equate Rudy with some kind of terrorist supporter because of his illegals policy, I'd say that's extreme. When one responds to my arguments by saying I'm either ignorant or a liar, I'd say that's extreme.
And now we know where you stand. You're a "Bus" hater as well.
It should be; it's what cost us 3,000+ lives in NY City. Immigration control is an integral part of the war on terror.
Your posts give me no reason to respond with any words other than "yeah, right."
I'm pretty sure the 9/11 people all came in with visas, that is, legally.
For the slow people in the audience, that's called lax immigration control.
And for the real slow people, sanctuary laws invite and encourage illegal immigration.
Let's not forget that Rudy wants to give away 12+ million green cards. Considering the dismal condition of our immigration services, I'd say there is very good chance 19 or more terrorists might get green cards making their job here in the US that much easier.
Stakes are higher now, though
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.