Giuliani up 25 points over McCain: poll (GOP "Unaware" of Rudy's Stance on Guns, Gays, Abortion)

Yahoo ^ | 3/3/07

[Mr. Brightside]

Giuliani up 25 points over McCain: poll

41 minutes ago

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Republican presidential hopeful Rudolph Giuliani, virtually tied with John McCain (news, bio, voting record) in a January poll, held a 25-point lead over the Arizona senator in a Newsweek magazine survey released on Saturday.

Among registered Republicans, 59 percent said they backed the former New York City mayor and 34 percent said they favored McCain, who announced on Wednesday he would seek the presidency in 2008, Newsweek said.

"Most registered Republicans are not familiar with Giuliani's positions on key social issues," the magazine said, listing his support for abortion rights and gun control as examples.

"When asked about whether Giuliani's views on these same issues would be enough to prevent them from supporting him, few registered Republican voters said it would," it said.

Giuliani was in a statistical dead heat with McCain in a January 24-25 poll, with 48 percent compared to McCain's 44 percent, the magazine said.

Meanwhile, a Newsweek poll of registered Democrats showed Democratic Sen. Barack Obama (news, bio, voting record) chipping away at front-runner Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton's lead in the past month.

Clinton enjoyed the support of 52 percent of registered Democrats in the latest poll to Obama's 38 percent. That compared with 55 percent for Clinton and 35 percent for the Illinois senator in late January, Newsweek said.

In a potential general election matchup, Giuliani was virtually tied with Clinton and former Democratic Sen. John Edwards and five points ahead of Obama in a poll of all registered voters.

Newsweek surveyed 1,202 adults on Wednesday and Thursday. The poll included 283 registered Republicans, 342 registered Democrats and 349 independents and had a margin of error of three percentage points.

[James W. Fannin]

You're plenty smart to be wary of his type, swamp. His arguments have statism written all over them. More power for government, not less. He's clearly defending the current level of "reasonable" gun control that is the status quo in Washington, and brought to us by the Democratic party and RINO politicians in the name of securing our safety.

It's interesting that we're having to argue with people about this topic at all.

[MACVSOG68]

On the other hand, if the other militias also though the government was in the wrong then unless the government could summon together a large enough group of militias to act against those that opposed it, it would have to back down.

Heck, it sure sounds a lot easier than all that voting and stuff like judges, courts, laws, etc. Think of the money we could save. Oh but then which "militia" would be the right one? It works well in Baghdad. When they are unhappy with something, they just go out and take care of business. Saves on police, etc.

As I see it, the Constitution was meant, in part, as a guide so that people could know when to fight against rogue militias who opposed legitimate government action, and when to join with militias who legitimately opposed rogue government action.

A guide?????????? I've heard it called many things, but never a guide. Here all this time I thought it was the supreme law of the land. That would be quite a bit different from a guide, don't you think?

[SWAMPSNIPER]

"They" can take Rudy, and shove him! I started out with an open mind, ready to negotiate and bargain, never ready to have any pretender shoved up my ass!
"They" may think they have a genetic lock on all the smarts, but, Oh well!
Tell me straight, are you personally convinced that Rudy is so much damned smarter than you are, that Rudy is the last damned hope to save the Nation?
Rudy may be "electable" but he is still an anti
American pissant liberal!











1

[Texas Federalist]

Did not Mr. Giuliani file lawsuits against firearm manufacturers and distributors, with the intention of using court costs to put them out of business?

You are absolutely correct. He has shown that he has every intent of using executive power to limit access to all handguns and assault weapons. He has also made statements which indicate he believes the Second Amendment protects only the right to own firearms for hunting.

[MACVSOG68]

I may not be smart enough to keep up with your ass, are your really sure that you are smart enough to keep up with your ass?

Heck, I can't even keep up with my beer. Now where did I put it......?

[James W. Fannin]

Weekly Standard (interview with Michael Goldfarb posted by Daniel McKivergan on August 3, 2006 05:33 PM)

Here's what I read from the interview you posted above:

1. He favors a technological barrier rather than a physical one. Do you know how hard it will be to measure the success of a technological effort? Very. That's probably the point, though. Throw some techno dollars at it and call it done. Many American factions claim to be happy. But illegals are maybe still getting in.
2. He sides with the rest of DC on amnesty. He favors it.
3. He wants to monitor Americans so that we can find the bad guys. Here's the crux of our problem: if we would slow down immigration and stop the illegal variety altogether with barriers on the border and deportation, we wouldn't need Big Brother to monitor the population. That's not an option for Giuliani, who doesn't mind solving the symptoms of a problem while violating Constitutional principles along the way - if the people are content.

You want strong government? Don't mix that up with patriotism and Constitutionality. Rudy doesn't even try. Sure he's tough, but that's not necessarily principled.

[areafiftyone]

Well Talk is cheap right now with all the candidates. And if we still have a Democrat controlled Senate and Congress (which I have a feeling we will) we will get nothing done about the border.

[James W. Fannin]

I don't know exactly what it takes to get politicians to commit to gaining control over the border, but Giuliani's "technological" fence isn't any better than what we've seen in the past 25 years out of Washington DC. An anti-gun, socially-liberal candidate whose best solution to the immigration crisis is to unleash Big Brother is just more of the same, if not worse.

Remember a few choice words from some of our more fiery politicians during founding of our nation:

• Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety.--Benjamin Franklin
• If ye love wealth greater than liberty, the tranquility of servitude greater than the animating contest for freedom, go home from us in peace. We seek not your counsel, nor your arms. Crouch down and lick the hand that feeds you; May your chains set lightly upon you, and may posterity forget that ye were our countrymen.-- Samuel Adams

I don't want to be fed by Giuliani, and I hope most Americans choose not to let the kinds of chains he favors rest lightly upon them. We needn't purchase a small measure of safety from his anti-gun stance, either.

[Old Dirty Bastiat]

Do you believe that Rudy's gun control positions "conform to the second amendment"? Does a strict assault weapon ban "conform to the second amendment"? Sane, law abiding citizens denied the right to own handguns "conforms to the second amendment"? This type of gun control has plenty to do with a person's normal rights to own a weapon and use it.

Please, explain how disarming sane, law-abiding citizens is a rational method for "dealing with a city rampant with killings".

I like Rudy, and he's better than most blue state politicians on most issues- way better than Hillary or Barack, but let's be honest about his gun control positions. They are very much the Democrat positions. I find it hard to believe that he wouldn't sign any gun control legislation that crosses his desk. He's a free market guy, but he's not a bill of rights guy. Not that there are many bill of rights guys to choose from among the front runners.