Skip to comments.N.Y. GOP Seeks 2006 Senate Candidate
Posted on 11/10/2004 6:07:32 PM PST by wagglebee
ALBANY - New York Republicans don't have a lot of time to bounce back from their drubbing at the polls last week: The race against Senator Clinton is just two years away.
Defeating the former first lady, or at least tarnishing her image, will be a priority for Republicans nationwide in 2006, given Mrs. Clinton's status as the Democrats' early front-runner for president in 2008.
(Excerpt) Read more at nysun.com ...
Please, don't let Alan Keyes run.
Run Rudy run!
Why not Alan Keyes?
He worked out so well for us...
Just did that,his name was Mills.
hah, maybe he can try for sub 10% of the vote this time?
People keep mentioning rudy for 2008, but he would crash and burn as a presidential candidate. The south that is the base of the republican party would never go for a guy like him.
Better to have him run against hillary in 2006 and solve three problems at once.
its Rudy, or Pataki (my bet) - else Hillary wins re-election.
This is the proper place for Giuliani, but I doubt he will have to run against Bill's lesbian life partner.
so the south is going to vote for Hillary over Rudy, is that your contention?
I don't know if Sean could win in a NY statewide election. Has she announced if she is actually going to run for re-election? Many have suggested that she won't risk it and instead spend the two intervening years campaigning for the Presidency if in fact that is her intention. If she lost re-election, then she would be "damaged goods" for the Presidential election and have a lesser chance of winning.
I still say Giuliani is our best chance - he's Republican but his social values reflect many New Yorkers (now I'm not speaking for anyone!!).
or they could just stay home.
nothing like having a candidate who discourages your base to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory.
The RATS already tried that and sKerry lost :)
He'd be a good choice, but he's not a New Yorker - he lives in Illinois.
"so the south is going to vote for Hillary over Rudy, is that your contention?"
No... we won't vote at all. Bank on it.
Say what you will, but all pro-choices are the same to evangelicals.
What makes you think Sean 'Hey buddy, how are you buddy, lets have that steak dinner, buddy!' Hannity can win in a state that went for Kerry 3-1?
Rudy is the best man the NY GOP has to beat Hillary.
And I don't think even he can do it.
Or is that Maryland?
Keyes needs to go back to whatever it was he did before he ran one of the worst campaigns in history.
no way Rudy will run. he is a leader, not a senator.
What are the three problems?
1. Hillary Clinton's seat
2. Knocking Hillary out of the Pres run
3. What to do w/ Giuliani (?)
How about Michael Savage?
Actually, I think it will be Pataki, Rudy can't run for the senate and then turn around and run for president (especially against the same person).
From a New Yorker:
It's going to be either Pataki or Guliani. And if not, it doesn't matter, because Hillary's approval rating is not good. People figured it out four years too late...but that's okay. At this point, we could go find Rick Lazio and run him again!
Rudy has the same position on gay marriage as Bush - he is against it, but for civil unions. on abortion, its another story. but anyone who thinks Rudy would be running on some rapid pro-abortion agenda, or enact such policies, is nuts. he wouldn't.
also note this about Rudy: most republicans run to the right, and then when elected, move left. Rudy as mayor, ran to the center/left, then governed to the right. as mayor, he got rid of the homosexual public schools chancellor, referring to him in the first person as "precious" at a press conference. he enacted tactics amongst the police force to reduce crime, that would otherwise be unheard of in a liberal city like NYC. but he did it. and he broke the back of the corrupt NYC board of education, returning control to the mayor (it didn't actually occur till Bloomberg got it).
I hope you're kidding.
No doubt about it...Rudy.
look at the county map of Lazio's losing race versus Hillary. all Rudy would have to do is hold lazio's votes, and do just a few points better in the NYC counties where he won two terms as Mayor, to win a statewide race.
Anyone with the cajones to call her out and make her answer the tough questions can beat her like a rug. No wusses need apply. Keep reminding everyone about her "Take from the haves and give to the have nots statement." Repeat it over and over. Make her disavow it if she can.
I hate to say this, but I don't see any reason why Hillary! would not be re-elected, not at this point. She's been admirably innocuous so far.
I'd say "no" to Sean, and I'm sure he's not inclined to give up the money and the power/the power and the money as of yet.
Could Pataki get the job done? Maybe.
Would Rudy want to? I don't know. My guess is Rudy probably thinks he could be pres (which he certainly could). The thing for him is: which is going to be the bigger issue in '08, terrorism (Rudy wins!) or social issues (Rudy loses). That's how I see it.
Who to run against Hillary! Good question. My vote, right now, is for ANYBODY BUT KEYES!
Maybe we could draft Ditka?
Thank you. I appreciate that perspective - I didn't know that. I wasn't trying to sound negative or presumptuous about Giuliani's politics. In fact I like him, even though I am strongly against abortion.
By the way, do you think Giuliani would win versus Hillary if she ran?
I agree and I thought Pataki would challenge Schumer for the Senate seat in 2004. He is 1 year into his third (and I expect final) term, didn;t have to defend the Gov seat, and really had nothing to lose.
I consider Schumer more vulnerable than Hilly, though only marginally. I can see Pataki beating Schumer easier than I can see him beating Hilly, who I figure the females of the Empire State, in large enough numbers, will support no matter what. Just overhear any Lawn Giland soccermom convention after a 'day trip' to shop in Manhattan in Granc Central Terminal - it's Hilly country, people!
I just as soon see Rudy run fro President at this point - a Senate loss to Hilly in 2006 would take a bit of the 'shine' off him, but that being said, he needs to do something to keep the 'shine' on him for another 4 years if he is to be a credible candidate in 2008.
All this being said, while I think Hilly is a good campaigner who can raise a lot of $ in a national run, and has friends in both the right and the low places, I don't think she is nearly the 'shoe in' at the primary stage, nor the general election stage, as her fawners like to think.
You don't think Rudy could beat Hillary??
for president? it would be close, you can see the sentiment here from conservatives.
but its going to be close in any case, because if its not Rudy, its going to be some low starpower republican like Owens or Allen. they will be running against a celebrity, who will do well amongst women, and will have Richardson on the ticket to appeal to Hispanics.
and if Bush passes an amesty program, conservatives may stay home even for Owens or Allen.
But do you think they could beat her? Pataki or Giuliani I mean. Give us the NY perspective!
Hell will freeze over before I vote for Pataki.
When you look back over the last several decades, the "frontrunner" for a presidential nomination almost never gets it: Dean, McCain, Bradley, Gore (in 88), Hart, Bush (in 80) and the list goes on.
Well either I guess. I meant the Senate seat. If she loses that, her electability as President would fall (I'm not saying she couldn't pull it off, but unlikely). So if she in fact is planning to run for re-eletion then I'd like to know about Giuliani's or Pataki's chances.
We are old Freeper pals and NY-philes, but I am very pessimistic about it.
Hilly carried the day in 'the city' by an absurd margin of 3-1 or so. Rudy may break into that a bit, but I am not sure. His window to do it was back in 2000, but health reasons caused him to bow out. At that point, I pretty much conceded the race to Hilly.
Kerry carried nyc by 3-1 or 4-1 I think. NYC simply just does not get it - from the gum cracking sassy latina secretary or GAP associate, to the crusty working class 'union'' type who puts on his 'nice' sportcoat from time to time to talk down to everyone else, to the terminally lib 'suit' who works on Wall St or a NYC law firm, in the end, it's Hilly country.
9-11 did nothing to shake up these know-it-all NYCers. I have written them off. It's a shame that they will consistently swing the state in these types of matters.
Sorry if I am more jaded than I should be. They are a lost cause.
Hilly is formidable but something tells me she just won't be able to get it together for the 2008 dem primary. I agree with you.
The name I've heard the most is Governor George Pataki. And he hasn't ruled it out.