It's time for Jeannine Pirro to get out of this race

Jeannine Pirro should get out of this race immediately. Her campaign is going nowhere and she is selfishly wasting our time. Here's why.

“Forty-five percent (45%) now see [Senator Hillary] Clinton as politically liberal.” So says the Rusmussen Report. Why? What positions do voters believe Hillary Clinton holds that turn them off? Well people believe she supports gay “marriage.” They believe she supports abortion up to and including partial birth abortion. Likewise, they believe she supports extreme positions attacking the second amendment and they believe she supports affirmative action.

Since she is the most calculating person in American politics this perception of her, as an ultra liberal, can’t be traveling under her radar. She knows people see her for what she is, but feels no need to change what they think. She knows these positions will help her raise money from now until Election Day. She also knows that repudiating these positions would shut down much of her fundraising success.

Simply put: There is no reason for Hillary Clinton to address this perception of her because no one is pressuring her to do so. The media is working for her already. They would never ask her to clarify any of her positions for fear that doing so would put them in her crosshairs for years to come. That would seem to leave any challenge based on issues, up to her would be Republican opponent in next year’s senate race.

Nevertheless, therein lies the problem. There is no way Jeannine Pirro can challenge Hillary Clinton on her position on abortion because Pirro herself gets a 100% rating from NARAL.

There is no way Pirro can challenge Clinton to explain herself on gay “marriage” because she herself supports such odd unions.

There is no way Jeannine Pirro can say a word about Clinton’s stance on confiscating guns in violation of the second amendment. She holds the very same views and has a long record of acting on these positions.

Finally, there can not be any credible attacks on Clinton’s position on affirmative action from Pirro because she too believes in its principles.

When a challenger is running against an incumbent he or she must help the voters see the difference between them or defeat will be certain.

There isn’t enough difference between Jeannine Pirro and Hillary Clinton to fill a thimble.

When voters are given a choice between voting for a fake liberal and a real liberal, they will vote for the real liberal every time. Pirro would find breaking 40% a very tall order. Contrary to the silly wishful thinking of the so called “experts” we hear, especially on local talk radio, Jeannine Pirro would not excite America’s conservatives. She has not raised large amounts of money despite four month of hundreds of thousand dollars in free, totally one sided cheer leading, from New York’s largest conservative radio station. Unfortunately for the Pirro camp the only excitement she is generating is among the fawning media. They won’t vote for her anyway.

Pirro’s positions have ensured that she will not get the Conservative Party’s nomination. In New York State it is not possible for a Republican to win statewide office without the Conservative Party’s line.

Ultimately Pirro will not even get the Republican Party’s nomination. There is no chance that she would not face a primary from the right. Make no mistake about that. Former Mayor of Yonkers John Spencer comes to mind.

Contrary to what the “experts” think they know, forcing a primary in New York State is exceedingly easy. The necessary number of statewide signatures is about 10, 000. John Spencer could easily get 7,500 in Westchester ( his and Pirro’s home county) In Staten Island he would get all the rest he needed, with sixty counties left.

Once a primary was set, Pirro would be as good as finished. There is such a thing as the “primary rule”, again contrary to the “knowledge” possessed by the “experts.” In a Democrat primary the largest number of voters come from the left. In a Republican primary those furthest to the right turn out and vote. These voters will not support Jeannine Pirro once they learn what her positions are. John Spencer would handily win a primary with Jeannine Pirro. That fact is inescapable.

A Pirro vs Clinton race would cause barely a ripple outside of New York State. It would generate no excitement west of the Hudson River. At first it might, that has to be acknowledged, but eventually when the donor pool around the country caught on to Pirro she would find herself with less and less reason to run to the mailbox in the morning.

John Spencer’s nomination would lead to this race being the hottest in America. He could hammer her on social issues. As a Viet Nam combat veteran, he could hammer her on national security. He could excite the imaginations and checkbooks of conservatives across the county.

John Spencer is 100% pro life. He is an NRA member. He is against gay “marriage” and sees little value in affirmative action. He can hit Hillary on every one of these important issues. Mayor Spencer can force her to respond. He can destroy her presidential aspirations.

She is a very able prosecutor who could strengthen the Republican ticket and easily beat mark Green in a race for Attorney General of New York State.

Mrs. Pirro is an intelligent and able person who will come to see the value of this argument for her withdrawal from this race sooner or later. Republican State Senate Majority Leader Joe Bruno has and Congressman John Sweeney have called on her to step down. They have been joined in this call by State Sen. Nicholas Spano and by Conservative Party chair Michael Long. Mr. Long observed that John Spencer “seems to be gathering most of the support from the ranks of the[Conservative] party over Pirro.

For everyone’s best interest, she should get out now and endorse John Spencer.

"State wide office in NY is dominated by one thing - New York City. Republican bastions like Nassau County (being from here I can tell you that we've lost our grip), Western NY and the Hudson Valley are not enough to offset NYC."

Half the reason, if not most of the reason, why these areas fail to offset NYC is because that these RINO statists (corrupt in many instances) have allowed the party to shrivel on the vine. There is no excuse whatsoever for losing Long Island en masse. You can trace this back to places like the Silk Stocking district in Manhattan in the late 1950s. Believe it or not, this district sent a Conservative Republican named Fred Coudert, but the RINO establishment of its era insisted upon forcing Coudert from office by running someone who could "hold the district" (sic). That individual that forced Coudert out was a man by the name of John Vliet Lindsay. We all know how that turned out in the end. The lesson of Lindsay continues to fall on deaf ears in some quarters, and the consequences for New York are enormous...

"BUT - the hard fact is that a pro-life, pro-gun, anti-tax, anti-big gov't Reaganite cannot obtain office in state-wide elections. Even those who we would consider amoung us, state Senate leader Bruno in particular, have strayed off course and embraced tax hikes and deals with the NYC unions."

Then by this argument, this states there is no longer any need for the Republican party to exist. You've ceded every bedrock issue that separates us from the Socialist 'Rat party as being not worth the trouble to defend or fight for. We win nothing, we advance nothing for policies and ideology that is a proven WINNER, by embracing the Socialist 'Rat agenda. If our people insist on moving in that direction, perhaps they should join the 'Rat party whose ideology is more to their liking.

"I've said it before here, I can tolerate a man like Weld if it means keeping a socialist like Spitzer out of office."

Do you know anything about Weld ? Do you know his record as Governor of Massachusetts ? Do you know he destroyed the MA GOP as a viable alternative to the 'Rats in the span of less than a decade ? Do you know that thanks to Weld, the Governorship of MA with a "Republican" holding it is a POWERLESS position ? The Governor doesn't even have the authority to fill a Senate vacancy. If you knew ANYTHING about Weld and the destructive reign of terror he left behind in Boston, you wouldn't let him run for the office of dog catcher. Not even the current RINO Governor of Ohio, Robert Taft, III, with a 6% approval rating caused as much destruction at Weld did to his own party. Spitzer couldn't in a million years cause that much destruction to the NY State GOP as Weld would.

"I can tolerate Pirro if it means hurting Hillary in any possible way. For all of the issues I disagree with them on, and there are many, the one that means the most to me in living in this state is lower taxes, which everyone I have listed (with the exception of Pataki in recent years) believes in."

Tolerating Pirro means declaring defeat. The only difference she offers is the same ideology in a different body. That's not a choice.

"Can I vote for any of these people in a national election? Absolutely not. But my local wallet gets hit a lot harder than my national wallet. And since I walk amoung the enemy everyday, as a conservative NYer, I have to overlook the reality of blue for the dream of red."

We've got serious enough problems when fellow Republicans and Conservatives bought hook, line, and sinker the color of Communism the media foisted on our party. I'm a BLUE Republican, not a damnable "RED" !

Whoa - a lot of anger to address.

To your first rebuttle point - you can rail against RINOs all you want and you can point to historical turning points as justification for your view points, but the reality is that more solid, conservatives are leaving NY because of the problems brought on by both parties. And those filling the holes are simply branching out from the five boroughs.

Second point - of course there is a need for the GOP in NY. Of course there is a desperate need for more conservatives to take hold of the party. You want to fix that problem over the course of the next year by putting up some no name from Yonkers against Hillary and voting for Spitzer if Weld gets the nod? To prove what point? That we can lose in varying shades? Plus, given the political landscape, you have no assurances that any conservative would be able to withstand the unions and the Democratic controlled assembly and crumble like a cookie. I point to Bruno and some of the Nassau delagation on that point regarding taxes.

Third point - the NY GOP is already on life support. Long and the Conservative Party are ineffective. Do you think Weld will actually make this matter worse than it already is? You have already pledged your support to Spitzer! A man who would be looking to take even more than the state takes from you already and who will hold hands with Sheldon Silver on every issue you and I oppose. How can Weld be any worse than Pataki?

Fourth point - if Hillary can get elected under the circumstances she did in 2000, she'll blow away any conservative put in front of her. I would think that despite her shortcomings and her lack of experience, if Pirro were to get the seat the GOP leadership could at least lean on her enough to make the right choices on taxes and terrorism. Any way to defeat Hillary is a victory. And having ANYONE over her in the Senate should be the dream of any true NY Republican.

Last point - I don't see how you can say you'll vote for Spitzer and call youself a conservative. Better off to write in that guy from Yonkers than pull the lever for a socialist.

"To your first rebuttle point - you can rail against RINOs all you want and you can point to historical turning points as justification for your view points, but the reality is that more solid, conservatives are leaving NY because of the problems brought on by both parties. And those filling the holes are simply branching out from the five boroughs."

That still doesn't change what I said. There's way too many so-called "Republicans" that refuse to look to the past to see where we've been going wrong, and to try to learn from those mistakes.

"Second point - of course there is a need for the GOP in NY. Of course there is a desperate need for more conservatives to take hold of the party. You want to fix that problem over the course of the next year by putting up some no name from Yonkers against Hillary and voting for Spitzer if Weld gets the nod? To prove what point?"

What's my point ? To save the party from irrelevence and further RINO-inflicted damage for the long run. If you listened to anything I said regarding Weld, you'd realize that. Calling Spencer a no-name helps your cause not one iota. After all, who the hell knew who Pataki was in December 1993 ? He was just a no-name from Peekskill. As I pointed out elsewhere, no Democrat has EVER BEEN DEFEATED as a sitting Senator from New York since we went to popular elections. On that count, Hillary has history on her side.

"That we can lose in varying shades? Plus, given the political landscape, you have no assurances that any conservative would be able to withstand the unions and the Democratic controlled assembly and crumble like a cookie. I point to Bruno and some of the Nassau delagation on that point regarding taxes."

This only proves that Bruno has jumped the shark and needs to be removed from his position and replaced with someone who will advance the Republican agenda, not a Democrat one. Electing strong-willed (and not jellyfish)Conservative Republicans will lay it out plain what WE stand for and what WE will stand against. If we can't even do that simple thing, there is no REASON for the Republican party to exist. Otherwise, we're just rubber stamps for the radical 'Rat left.

"Third point - the NY GOP is already on life support. Long and the Conservative Party are ineffective. Do you think Weld will actually make this matter worse than it already is?

Yes, and you have no idea how much worse it CAN get. Imagine a New York in 2013... 5 or 6 Federal GOP Congressmembers. 25% of the State Senate. 20% of the State Assembly. No Republican Mayors... anywhere (aside from some tiny villages in upstate). You'll begin to see what Weld WILL and INTENDS to do. Michael Dukakis couldn't have done that in 60 years to the Republicans what Weld SINGULARLY inflicted in only SIX YEARS.

"You have already pledged your support to Spitzer! A man who would be looking to take even more than the state takes from you already and who will hold hands with Sheldon Silver on every issue you and I oppose."

Spitzer CANNOT destroy the Republican party from within. Once his nutty ideas come to the fore, it will FORCE the GOP back to its core values and aggressively challenge Spitzer. So, would you prefer Weld holding hands with Shelly Silver instead to enact a liberal agenda and sabotage Republicans from within ? Because Weld did precisely that with the 'Rat legislative leaders in MA all the while the party disappeared into dust and he lifted not one finger to stop it. He never wanted to. Better to vote for the liberal 'Rat than the RINO ready to infect the Republicans with political AIDS.

"How can Weld be any worse than Pataki?"

You have federal Republicans ? Massachusetts hasn't -- not in 10 years. You have a State Senate majority ? Massachusetts hasn't, they've got 6 or 7 members out of 40. There were 16 when Weld took office. You have more than 20% Republican membership in the Assembly ? Massachusetts doesn't... they barely have over 10%. You have Republican county leaders, Mayors, etc. Aside from some small insulated communities, Republicans are no longer a competitive party and lead NOTHING in the state. Even the Republican Governor there is without party, has not enough members to sustain a veto, demand a roll-call vote, he cannot appoint a Senator upon a vacancy, and cannot even do the basic party-building in a state that once was one of the most Republican in the nation (even during the Depression, MA sent a MAJORITY GOP House delegation to Washington). Think it can't happen in New York with Weld ? It can... and it will. Cuomo couldn't make that happen, Spitzer couldn't make that happen. Weld WILL make that the reality. Just give him the chance.

"Fourth point - if Hillary can get elected under the circumstances she did in 2000, she'll blow away any conservative put in front of her. I would think that despite her shortcomings and her lack of experience, if Pirro were to get the seat the GOP leadership could at least lean on her enough to make the right choices on taxes and terrorism. Any way to defeat Hillary is a victory. And having ANYONE over her in the Senate should be the dream of any true NY Republican."

Pirro can't defeat her. It's that simple. Failure to grasp this is ignorance. You can't defeat an opponent who is so similar on almost every single point that they can't point to a LEGITIMATE IDEOLOGICAL REASON for removing the incumbent. Pirro, on the other hand, presents an opportunity to win the state Attorney-General's office. I'm not particularly thrilled with that prospect, but as long as they're not running her for Governor, let her give it a shot. But she won't listen to even some of her fellow RINOs (or this Conservative) telling her what she could win. The one candidate who COULD win isn't in the race, and that's Giuliani. Absent of Giuliani, I'll stick with Mayor Spencer, he'll at least offer New York voters a CHOICE and not an echo.

"Last point - I don't see how you can say you'll vote for Spitzer and call youself a conservative. Better off to write in that guy from Yonkers than pull the lever for a socialist."

Sometimes the upside to electing an extremist 'Rat to office is watching the voters get scared straight and voting for the Republicans (who presumably would find their backbone) in the next election. As horrid as Slick Willie Clinton was, it took his election in '92 to get the Republicans something they had been shut out of for 40 years... the majority (sadly, that wouldn't have happened under GHW Bush had he won a 2nd term - but don't get me wrong, as an 18-year old Bush voter in the '92 election, I'd have rather had an anvil dropped on my scrotum than vote for either Clinton or Perot, and I warned everyone within earshot that Clinton would be impeached -- 6 years before the House did just that). Think of it as short-term pain for long-term gain, sometimes it's the only way. And as I said, I only endorse Spitzer IF Weld gets the nomination. The likelihood is that it will either go to Golisano or Daniels, so the prospect of having to go that route will fortunately not have to come to pass.

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.