[EternalVigilance]

Clearly there is a great deal of fear that Rudy will win a fair primary battle. If he does win, there is no law that required primary losers or their supporters to support him. It's a free country. But if they do leave of their own free choice, to whine about being kicked out after losing a fair fight would just be pathetic.

While not challenging your main premise, I would like to point out that it would appear that it is going to shape up to be a battle between Giuliani, with the media, lying pollsters, mucho dinero, and many of the party's power brokers (who have set the accelerated primary schedule which is friendly to money and more liberal candidates) on his side, versus the conservative grassroots. Does that sound to you like a "fair fight," or one that forces the grassroots folks to start from the bottom of a deep hole?

[oceanview]

lying pollsters? I figured after the 2006 republican wipeout, that this nonsense about "the polls are all wrong" would have stopped on FR.

and you are saying that unless the primaries are structured to provide small states, with high concentrations of social conservatives, first in the schedule - that its "unfair"?

[Blue Collar Republican]

ARE YOU GUYS STILL CHEWING ON THIS? It is reasonable for a Republican candidate to disagree with 20% of the conservative platform. RUDY is a 40% dissenter at best. Duncan Hunter would be a good choice, but only people that pay attention know who he is. The only TRUE conservative is John McCain.

[You Dirty Rats]

While not challenging your main premise, I would like to point out that it would appear that it is going to shape up to be a battle between Giuliani, with the media, lying pollsters, mucho dinero, and many of the party's power brokers (who have set the accelerated primary schedule which is friendly to money and more liberal candidates) on his side, versus the conservative grassroots. Does that sound to you like a "fair fight," or one that forces the grassroots folks to start from the bottom of a deep hole?

The battle is between Giuliani and other candidates, not "between Giuliani ... versus the conservative grassroots".

The main problem facing those who oppose Rudy is that there isn't a "true conservative candidate that has a realistic shot to beat him. If Jeb had another last name he would get my support, but he can't run right after his brother. Newt is damaged goods, McCain isn't trusted and Romney is just not catching fire. The rest, including Hunter, are unknowns. Unknowns occasionally win the 'rat nomination, but the GOP has preferred known commodities (which hurt us in 1996).

"Lying Pollsters" is a fair charge on some occasions (notably the 2004 exit polls, which clearly were grossly misleading, IMHO deliberately so) -- but to claim that all of the many polls in many states over the past two weeks are all lying is just not credible. Rudy is clearly in front now, and the history of our Party is the the early leader has a big advantage. No, the race is by no means over, but it will be difficult for anyone else to beat him, and nearly impossible for anyone other than McCain, Romney or Gingrich.

As far as the media support, money support, etc. -- yes, that is tough for a very conservative Presidential candidate to get, but Reagan did. Of course the process isn't fair. Of course the media is biased. Of course there are fat cats who finance candidates for less-than-honorable reasons. So what? We all have to deal with it, because most people do not care that the MSM is a biased group of hacks and there is nothing we can do to change it.

We did run that SOB Rather off CBS. That's something.