Posted on 05/06/2007 12:05:17 PM PDT by Jim Robinson
[Giuliani, McCain and Romney all face problems with the grassroots activists in Iowa caucuses]
~~snip~~
Grassroots activists
In some ways, keeping up the interest level may be easier for the Republicans, because they have more to prove to their grassroots.
At least, that is true of those in Boone County, north of Des Moines, who I met at their monthly meeting in a room above the local public library.
These committed grassroots activists, who will vote in the caucuses and set the tone for the presidential race are - in general - from the socially conservative wing of the party.
For them, all three frontrunners - Arizona Senator John McCain, former New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani and former Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney - are problematic, whether it's because they have been married more than once or, in the case of Romney, because they are of a different, Mormon faith.
Marti Streeter, the co-chair of the Boone County Republicans, said she could not vote for any of the three leading candidates - and if Mr Giuliani were the nominee, she would resign from the party.
Others, though, were less categorical. Tom Rosenbaum was among those who gave the former New York mayor high marks for his performance on 11 September 2001.
However, Mr Giuliani's three marriages prompted another activist, Matthew Murch, to say "if the choice was between Giuliani and Hillary, I'd write in Mickey Mouse as my candidate".
Senator McCain was accused of changing his mind on issues, but the candidate with most to do in Boone County seems to be Mitt Romney.
Unprompted, a majority of those in the room stated categorically that they would never vote for a Mormon.
"We are a Christian nation," Anne Darby said, "and we should have a Christian president."
(Excerpt) Read more at news.bbc.co.uk ...
“Nonsense. Anyone making the claim that Romney is as liberal as Giuliani hasnt looked at his record and hasnt even glanced at his platform, which is by far the most well spelled-out of any candidate in the raceDemocrat or Republican.”
I agree. Also I have a concern about where these folks even stand on some issues. Ideology aside, Romney has the most thoughtful, organized and clearly stated positions and the most up-front and organized campaign. He brings competence and articulateness to the table.
We are a Judaeo Christian Nation
My second answer ... we dont need to picture it ...
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/1829020/posts?page=6
... it seems Romney handled himself quite well on Pat Robertson’s turf.
Issues like marriage and personal life are not some minor peripheral concern but a window into the real person - in stark contrast to what they want the public to see. It is the reason employers often ask for personal references.
No, this gentlemen was absolutely correct to cite this as the #1 concern with Rudy. Midwest farmers are neither stupid or foolish, and aren't looking to be dazzled by celebrity status like many city folks. They're looking for real content.
Fields white for the harvest ping (Iowan Republicans unhappy with the Top Three)
You sound like Romney staff, newbie. Are you?
If this sounds like a conservative, I'd like to see your definition of a liberal:
Romney strongly defends his decades-long pro-abortion record
>> Issues like marriage and personal life are not some minor peripheral concern but a window into the real person - in stark contrast to what they want the public to see. It is the reason employers often ask for personal references.
No, this gentlemen was absolutely correct to cite this as the #1 concern with Rudy. Midwest farmers are neither stupid or foolish, and aren’t looking to be dazzled by celebrity status like many city folks. They’re looking for real content<<
Character does count. I’m not sure 1992 is the example you want... wasn’t that the year Clinton was elected?
Rocky Anderson
This isn't Giuliani endorsing Cuomo over Pataki for Governor of New York, but it's pretty darned bad. It's a major strike against Romney, especially with Utah Mormons who are aware of Rocky Anderson's outright liberalism and antagonistic attitude towards the LDS Church.
Massachusetts wouldn't knowingly elect a conservative to statewide office. So, is Romney liberal enough for Mass. voters? Or, did he lie his way into their hearts ("run left and govern right")?
The other possibility is that the Dem vote was split and he won with something less than 45% of the total. But, according to Wikipedia, "Romney was elected Governor in November 2002 with 50 percent of the vote".
So, that Romney was able to win 50% of Massachusettsby any meansis definitely a point against him.
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.