Posted on 10/02/2005 9:21:43 AM PDT by wagglebee
I'd take a bit of issue with using "brains" to refer to Hannity.
And here I thought it was the liberalizing of our economic policy that was costing us so dearly.
You're missing the point. There are lots and lots of people nationwide who are not political. They don't vote strategically. A huge chunk hardly votes at all. They may or may not be registered with a party but they don't think of themselves as part of their party.
They are disconnected voters. They get up off their rears and vote when something or someone comes along where they can say , I get it. I agree with that guy. A lot of them are moral conservatives who think of the entire political process as evil and corrupt. Reagan pulled a huge chunk of disconnected voters off their couches because he said things they had been waiting to hear, and they agreed with him on the important issues.
Giuliani won't do that, because he's more of the same to them. They won't make a strategic vote, they just won't vote at all. It's not a childish tantrum, it's more like you not buying any shoes because nothing caught your eye in the shoe store that day. They will just sigh and go back to what they were doing.
I have met these voters in droves over the years. I understand them, but it doesn't mean I would vote that way. Nonetheless their behavior is predictable and they exist in large numbers in every corner of the country.
"And here I thought it was the liberalizing of our economic policy that was costing us so dearly.'
You were WRONG!
The lowering of our social mores ALWAYS costs us - not just emotionally but financially as well - remember the dirty needle trade in program for drug users? The same kind of think.
Maybe but Bush was elected as a strong social conservative and hasn't succeeded in turning back the tide much. I would rather hold the dam as it were on the social side if we could get someone in office who knows how to live within their means.
Don't.
The same goes for Newt Gingrich. Just don't.
Well, I'd take my personal pick of Tom Delay/General Honore as the next dream team for the republicans in '08. Delay is a tough stance, 1 woman man who doesn't back down from the media thugs, and General Honore could herd the sheep in congress like no other general in recent history. THAT's my dream team: PRESIDENT DELAY/VP HONORE!
Unless, things change considerably, I really feel that George Allen is the best possible candidate: he is conservative, he is charismatic, he is popular AND HE CAN WIN. The GOP's biggenst problem in the past has been their inability to understand the need to nominate somebody who actually has a chance of winning (i.e. Bob Dole in 96 never had a chance).
Hilarious.
I think Rudy should run for Governor of New York next year, he would easily defeat Elliot Spitzer and be perfectly positioned to be George Allen's or Mark Sandford's running mate in 08. But, I guess he wants the WH himself, and if that's the case he's going to have to change or seriously moderate his positions on some social issues before I would consider supporting him. Currently I'm leaning to Allen.
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.