Posted on 06/19/2007 3:13:48 PM PDT by StatenIsland
He won’t garner anywhere near the support Perot did. I doubt even his mom would vote for him.
YEEEESSS! And now Nader is rumbling about running, too! A four, maybe five-way split of the electorate? HOT DAMN, we got a shot at getting a conservative in for once!
Which makes it that much more important to get rid of Rudy McRomney and get a constitutionalist into the GOP slot, so we have the ballot access we need!
Well, you can’t call him a RINO any more, ‘cause you have to ba a republican to be a RINO as that’s what the “R” stands for , right? ;o)
Bloomberg——Gee whiz I’m all broken up abou that...is that the Bloomingdale’s guy?
He’s a democrat through and through.
The Dems have a few blocs of votes they always count on- blacks, feminists, gays, unionists and secular Jews. Bloomberg will garner many votes from the latter. This doesn’t bode well for Dems.
In a strictest sensce, of course you are correct -— I was using “Communust” in the against “too much” wealth and pro-redistibution sense.
Populist? Socialist? Certainly some Communist tendancies.
Bloomie better watch his back and beef up his security detail. Arkancide looms large in his future. That Sopranos spoof that Mr. and Mrs. Bill Clinton put on the internet may have been a veiled warning to all who threaten the Heinous Harridan!
He knows he doesn’t have a chance in h*ll. The ONLY reason he would run is to split the Republican vote.
Shocking...
Guiliani/Bloomberg/Clinton are pretty much the same policy-wise.
Bloomberg doesn’t have Guiliani reputation for abusing individual rights or all of Clinton’s baggage but that doesn’t make Bloomberg’s policies any easier to swallow.
Its makes-work for the MSM. Lots of TV ads revenue, little results.
If Rudy is not a Republican, than what is he? Does this sound Republican enough for you:
-Cutting taxes in a city that had never seen a tax cut before
-Reducing deficits
-Cutting crime by 64 percent (murders down 67 percent)
-Ending open admissions policy at City University, resulting in SAT scores of incoming freshmen to rise 168 points
-Attempting to take over NYC schools from the teacher’s union
-Fixing the NYC welfare system (1 in 8 were on welfare in 1993, 600,000 less were on in 2001, 100,000 found jobs)
-Increasing city revenues
-Shutting down X rated sex shops
-Pissing off the NY Times and the ACLU
-Being one of the most successful federal prosecutors ever
-Worked for President Reagan
-Blames Islamic terrorists for terrorism, not America
-Believes we must succeed in Iraq
-Pro school choice
On social issues he is wrong, especially abortion. But the fact is that abortions actually declined in NYC while he was in office, and no President since 1973 has made a real dent in abortion. He also publicly supported Alito and Roberts.
Except he’s pro-abortion, pro-gay rights and pro- gun control
I wouldn’t call closing down an X rated shop isn’t really Republican or Democratic action. We are smart enough in this state to realize this and so our municipal elections are non-partisan.
Increasing city revenues is not exactly a Republican or a Democratic thing, rather it’s a, don’t spend more than you take in kind of thing, and also, cities tend to increase revenues when they take in new territory or see a boom, and New York boomed when Giuliani was in office. He deserves some credit, but some of it would have happened anyway.
Being Mayor of New York doesn’t qualify you to be President, it basically qualifies you to be, Mayor of New York.
Rudy has spent most of his life in New York, and his entire public career was in that city. He hasn’t had to deal with the kind of geographic and interest diversity that say, someone elected to a statewide executive position, has to deal with. I love our previous past mayor. He helped turn our city around too and now we’re recognized as a shining light in the region. He’s great, but I don’t think he’s qualified to be President. Same with Rudy. It just takes a different skill set to be Mayor. Mayor of New York in 2009, might be his thing, the Presidency, is not.
I think he became a Republican when he saw all the dems that were in the mayors race. Field was way too crowded.
“He knows he doesn’t have a chance in h*ll. The ONLY reason he would run is to split the Republican vote.”
How could he accomplish that? He is truly a Republican In Name Only, having shifted parties merely to run for the office of Mayor without jockeying for position in a too-crowded Dem field.
He is not a Republican, he’s an Upper East Side Liberal. Why would any Republican vote for him?
“Hilary just dropped her left nut.”
BWAAHAAAHAAAHAAA!!! Never heard that term before, but how very appropriate for the HildaBeast! Thanks for the laugh.
You must have missed the many polls where Ghouliani's approval ratings were well into the 30s. He has dropped about 10 points in the past two months.
Just as I and others have predicted, the more the generic Republican finds out about Ghouliani, the lower his support. And, there are still a large number not paying attention yet.
Worse, for Ghouliani is that when the field narrows, it is unlikely his approval numbers will improve while it is likely conservatives will rally around a conservative, probably Thompson.
But, if you don't like social conservatives, why not become a Democrat?
Dick Morris was on radio (WAEB) talking about this the other day. Suggesting Bloomberg’s run could cost Hillary at least NY electoral votes.
Naaaa,,, a flaming liberal like that will suck up rat votes instead...Greasing the skids for Fred!
.
Excellent potlatch -
No garlic bagels please!
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.