Posted on 12/01/2007 5:01:26 PM PST by Jay777
Rudy Panic set in for many Republicans this week, with conservative leaders both nationally and in Iowa concluding they need to settle on a single champion to prevent Rudolph W. Giuliani from winning the GOP presidential nomination.
They fear that victory by the socially liberal former New York mayor could permanently shatter the largely successful coalition of social, religious, economic and national defense conservatives that, more often than not, has worked electoral magic for Republican candidates at all levels.
"The main driving force behind all of that is a belief that Rudy Giuliani is positioned to win the nomination and a belief that, and I describe it this way, the four most central planks in our Republican platform would be sacrificed in the process: life, marriage, guns, border security," said Rep. Steve King, Iowa Republican. He said the calls and e-mails in Iowa grew "utterly intense in the last week" as Republicans urged one another to settle on an anti-Rudy candidate.
A new poll showing a statistical tie between Mitt Romney and Mike Huckabee for the Jan. 3 Iowa first-in-the-nation presidential caucuses is fueling the frenzy.
"What conservatives have to realize is that Giuliani is now relying on Mike Huckabee to take his most viable opponent, Mitt Romney, down in Iowa, and that anyone voting for him there in the caucuses will be inadvertently, and ironically, helping the New Yorker," David A. Keene, chairman of the American Conservative Union, said earlier this week in a surprise endorsement of Mr. Romney.
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtontimes.com ...
(unless you went lib recently due to head injury or something)
I just think Rudy, and the RNC if he is their “man” needs a bit more than BULLwinkle...
Being a congressman (Member of the House) is not proper preparation for becoming President. (Being a Senator is not much better)
Only two sitting Senators have EVER been elected President (1920 and 1960) and no sitting Member EVER has, although Henry Clay was a serious candidate in 1824.
I do not understand all the reasons why this is so, but the Hunter, Tancredo, and Thompson people should at least think about why that might be so.
If people can say they "like Mike", without reviewing his record, then I submit I've talked with Republicans and Democrats who "like Mitt".
If all we had to choose from came down two of them, we need to ask ourselves which one of these men has the maturity and Presidential image to lead this country?
It isn't Huckabee..
And as far as a VP goes, we need to balance it out with a STRONG border anti-amnesty candidate. That would be Hunter.
sw
Two things to make clear:
(1) David Keene endorsed Willard as an individual. The ACU has not yet endorsed anyone.
(2) David Keene also endorsed Arlen Spector (ACU 47%) over Pat Toomey (ACU 97%) in 2004.
One thing is for sure is that he picks the winner. I wonder if his endorsement will work this time.
The only think Huck has going for him is pro-life.
You say only and I say that is my number one issue. Sounds like a winner to me. However, he is not my first choice. Duncan is!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
What did Rush say that sounded like a Thompson endorsement?
He did not endorse Thompson. I heard exactly what he said and it was basically that Thompson is a nice guy. No endorsement but FREEPERS love to embellish.
Bishop Willard and the rest of the
seven dwarves need to get off the stage.
Go Fred.
Funny that you say that as one of those 7 dwarves are going to be the nominee. Fred is not. Just this morning they were talking about how Fred’s campaign is talking about taking government funds. Isn’t that hilarious for a federalist....ROTFLMAO!!!!!!
Glad to see Rush came around to our side!
That is pretty arrogant of you to spin what he said and come to the conclusion that he is definitely on Fred’s side. I heard the same exact thing on the radio and did not leave thinking the same thing. Besides whatever happened with Fred blasting up the polls after the pro-life endorsement that was promised from FREEPERS on here. That never materialized. In fact, he fell down the polls pretty far down now. GO HUNTER!!!!!!!!!!!!
The MSM has done the calculus.
The national election is irrelevant, Huckabee is the one giuliani can defeat hucabee in the other states. Huckabee can be used to eliminiate the rest of the competition.
CNN and PMSNBC have no substantive republican coverage other than Giuliani and the other guys.
FNC is only about protecting Giuliani.
The MSM likes hucabee because the general would be ark. vs. ark and there hillary wins.
“Top Tier” candidate with only 3-4 percent in New Hampshire.
Also, he’s not showing himself to be a very good campaigner! :-( I’m rather disappointed.
During the last debate he was surrounded on the stage by a bunch of guys who wanted him to lose, and the CNN-selected questions didn't allow him to play to his strength (the war on terror). It just wasn't fair.
Liberal Philanderer Rudy vs wife of liberal philanderer (Hitlery)
The coalition is already splitting into Fred, Romney , Huck and Paul camps.
Thanks
Let me try to answer that, because it's a very important question.
There are a lot of people who would vote in a referendum question, once Roe v. Wade is overturned, to severely restrict but not ban abortion. This is the majority position in the country, I think, or it could become so.
Most of those people understand that abortion will never be "banned" or "outlawed", at least not until the American libido is restored to what it was in, say, 1950. That's a bad thing (at least I think it is), but it's the truth.
Now, we come to the GOP on abortion. I understand, and I think most people who have consistently voted Republican since 1980, understand the platform to express a wish, or a desire, for an end to abortion. The language in the platform is not an action plan (or, if it is, is is the most weak and ineffectual action plan in history). George W. Bush said as much when he said that nothing could happen until "America's heart" changed on the subject. FDT recently said something quite similar.
But there is a faction of post-1980 GOP voters who believe that their political action WILL have concrete, direct results such as amending the constitution or passing laws against abortion. This faction is becoming increasingly frustrated because, despite their loyalty and their efforts, NOTHING IS HAPPENING.
So now, they want more than the meaningless platform. They want a candidate who, when he says he is pro-life, a) isn't lying, and b) means to do something about it, beyond appointing USSC justices with a 50-50 chance of being Scalia or Souter.
For these people, a guy like Hunter or Huckabee is the real deal.
But the voters, mired in ambivalence about abortion, are not about to elect a man who will really act against it, rather than engage in the charade of ending his pro-life work by signing the platform.
A real anti-abortion nominee is another Goldwater, and will make 2008 another 1964. You know it, and I know it.
Those who want such a candidate say "Good! Tear it all down, and the rebuilding can start. Then, 2028 (or whenever) can be 1980 all over again"
For myself, I don't think the nation can survive another 1964. Besides LBJ, we got the most radical Congress in history, and a spate of America-destroying legislation unlikely ever to be reversed.
If the Democrat nominee brings in 68 senators and 295 representatives, like LBJ did, what they will do is beyond imagining.
The reason the 30% "Rudyites" haven't left over abortion before this is that they AREN'T "abortionists" and "baby-killers". They're content with the platform language, just as long as nobody running on the platform does anything about it.
LOL.
I admire Hunter, but at this point in the campaign, support for Hunter is support for liberal Rudy or, worse, liar Romney.
I disagree with your analyses. Most of the 30% who support Rudy aren’t supporting him because he’s pro-abortion. The vast majority of his supporters fall into 2 groups. A) Those who believe the skillfully crafted myth about the wonderful job he did as mayor and the equally mythical belief that he was some kind of hero on 9-11. B) Those who mistakenly believe he’s the only Republican running who can beat Hillary or Obama.
Almost all of these people also fall into the broader group that will vote for ANYBODY the Republicans nominate. There’s no need to worry about that group’s vote. They aren’t going to leave over abortion or anything else. You can count their votes right now.
The people politicians have to make happy are the people who are deeply interested in their particular issues, and who have what the Ford Republicans said the Reagan Republicans had, a “rule or ruin attitude”. These voters will stay home or vote third party if they aren’t satisfied.
The party can’t win if they nominate someone who is as liberal as Rudy. There just aren’t enough “anybody but a Democrat” voters to pull it off. The ONLY chance Republicans have of winning is to nominate a conservative.
“Mr. Davenport said that among the front-runners, Fred Thompson, the former senator from Tennessee, is the most closely aligned with traditional conservatives.”
Thats all voters need to know, the truth!
The ONLY way for someone with Hillary's polarizing personality and high negatives to POSSIBLY win--is to nominate a liberal who SPLITS the Republican Party wide open while demoralizing the base. No one does that better than Giuliani. No one.
If Giuliani loses the first four primaries/caucuses, he will not be the nominee.
National polls mean less than state by state polls. Survey USA is a good polling firm, so I wouldn’t discount them. Unfortunately they are the only one who polls a wide range of swing states (at this point). 500 sample is large enough and as for registered voters you can just add 1 to GOP and subtract one from dem and you’ll have your likely voter result. Yes in the Ras everyone is beating her, but McCain is beating her by the widest margin. See?
But you wanted evidence and I provided it. Try to accept the evidence. We shouldn’t make excuses because it doesn’t coincide with our desires.
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.