It should be about all the choices and their differing positions on the issues.
It should be about putting all of the candidates before the electorate and debating about who will best represent our Party platform.
It's my opinion that there are several candidates besides Rudy that we can run against the Dem candidate, and if we all get behind him in the general election, we can beat anyone.
To say only Rudy can win insults the average Republican voter, who will turn out in large numbers to support a quality conservative candidate.
The issue is simply why the most important election of our times is going to be held hostage for a candidate who meets the approval of the social right, a relatively small part of the Republican Party.
We all know how important this election is. That's why we're already working hard so early to promote our choice for nomination next year.
It's bad enough that Rudy fans are supporting such a left leaning guy on this conservative forum, but your arguments insisting Rudy is our only chance to win in November '08 ignore the fact that there is a long, hard primary race to fight, delegates to choose, a Party platform to agree on and a Convention to hold.
Rudy folks want us to skip the primaries, set our arguments and principles aside, and rally around a man who does not share our conservative ideas.
And you may think that we social conservatives represent a small part of the electorate, but our conservative views are shared by a much larger portion of the general population than you may want to admit.
In fact there are three who have enough of an understanding of what issues are important to most Americans, and who can bring the conservative Democrats and independents into the fold. I think there is a 4th possibly, but he has yet to declare. The rest can certainly be discussed, and should. So no, this isn't about Rudy from my perspective and never has been. It is about the total attempt to destroy the top three to keep them from the nomination, not to push other candidates who are more acceptable. I would love very much to see some civil, yet substantial discussions of the pros and cons of each candidate rather than the spam machine that is working overtime now...on both sides.
To say only Rudy can win insults the average Republican voter, who will turn out in large numbers to support a quality conservative candidate.
I agree as I said above. But any candidate who cannot see past the social right values in terms of campaign issues is a sure loser. After the infamous 109th Congress debacle, most Republicans want change, and want a candidate who has leadership potential, experience, and mainstream conservative values. Further, they want someone with a broad enough appeal to bring in those on the other side and independents who fear the leftism that has completely taken over the Democrat Party.
It's bad enough that Rudy fans are supporting such a left leaning guy on this conservative forum, but your arguments insisting Rudy is our only chance to win in November '08 ignore the fact that there is a long, hard primary race to fight, delegates to choose, a Party platform to agree on and a Convention to hold.
Two points. First, I have never made such a statement anywhere. Second, I agree that the primary race has many months to go, but realistically it will be over in early February rather than several months later, as it always has been. Finally, unless Fred enters the race, no one else realistically has a shot even within the Party, and if their agenda begins with abortion rather than the security of the Nation, the election is over.
Rudy folks want us to skip the primaries, set our arguments and principles aside, and rally around a man who does not share our conservative ideas.
It's not only Rudy, but also the other two who will in all likelihood not put the traditional social issues in their campaigns. For most of us who call ourselves conservatives and Republicans, we understand that, and poll after poll shows that.
But there will be debates, campaign speeches, editorials, and commercials. Unfortunately for those whose candidate is one of the one-percenters, money will be the key to the nomination and ultimately the victory in November '08. So clearly , time and money are against most of them.
And you may think that we social conservatives represent a small part of the electorate, but our conservative views are shared by a much larger portion of the general population than you may want to admit.
I do know how important the social agenda is to many. But again, right now, 70+ percent of Republicans favor one of the top three. That points out that even though they all have social values to some extent or other, they know how an election must be won.
I don't demean anyone's value system, but have made the point many times that believing in a social agenda that includes many of the values seen here daily does not make one a conservative. In fact, some of them fly in the face of conservatism. Most of us are against abortion to varying degrees. Some with exceptions, some completely. Most of us do not believe in gay marriage, but yet understand that the 10th Amendment gives the power to each state to fashion its own family laws. Most of us were sorry to see Terri Schiavo die as she did, but understand that bringing in the federal government to handle every social issue we bring up is anti-republican and definitely anti-conservative.
There is more, but suffice is to say that we mainstream conservatives are not your enemies, though many here would dispute that.
Few from the social right are actually radicals or extremists, but many of those show up here, which not only gives the site a bad name from its competitors, but gives conservatism a bad name through guilt by association.