Skip to comments.Rudy for president?
Posted on 07/08/2006 8:12:30 AM PDT by mathprof
Well-connected public figures report that they have been told recently by Rudolph Giuliani that, as of now, he intends to run for the Republican presidential nomination in 2008.
The former mayor of New York was on top of last month's national Gallup poll measuring presidential preferences by registered Republicans, with 29 percent. Sen. John McCain's 24 percent was second, with former House Speaker Newt Gingrich third at 8 percent. National polls all year have shown Giuliani running either first or second to McCain, with the rest of the presidential possibilities far behind.
Republican insiders respond to these numbers by saying rank-and-file GOP voters will abandon Giuliani once they realize his position on abortion, gay rights and gun control. Party strategists calculate that if he actually runs, he must change on at least one of these issues.
(Excerpt) Read more at townhall.com ...
"I might get flamed.."
I might get flamed too, but I'll vote for him if he runs.
Not too hard to pick Rudy over a known Marxist and a absolute nutjob.
He'll play hell getting the Nomination, though.
Desperate times, desparate measures.
I disagree with some of his stances. But I think the single biggest issue we are facing right now is the War on Terror. I would rather vote for a canadate who I think would do well on the biggest issue we are facing then to get someone who might be 100% in line with my views but not as capable a leader in the War on Terror.
I'd back him.
Gun control, I hope.
I'd take Rudi over McCain and Hillary. Even though he is a gun-grabbing, pro-choice, gay-rights advocate. I hope it doesn't come to that. In fact, I think Rudi will not run.
No insider - but this is a "Duh!" statement of the highest magnitude.
Rudy and McManiac, for that matter, have NO chance. That's zero / zilch / nada!
Rudy had his chance to take on Hillary for the Senate seat. He could have made an excellent NY Senator.
Way too liberal for the rest of the country.
I agree that the War on Terror triumphs every other issue at this time and someone like Rudy would be just as strong as GWB in this respect. I may be wrong but Rudy is also pretty much fiscally conservative so that is a big plus as well to keep this economy rolling.
The first WashDC insider to report that Rudy Giuliani will try and buck the system, becoming the first full fledged liberal Republican to EVER be nominated for President.
Will conservatives vote for a pro-big government, pro-abortion, pro-gun control, pro-illegal immigrant and pro-homo rights candidate? Giuliani is a solid northeast liberal. A NYCity liberal. Is this what America wants as a leader? I don't think so.
Btw, is Rudy a better choice then John McCain? The choice would be between Giuliani the liberal and McCain the mavarick/moderate-conservative. Think about it.
At minimum, I hope he dives in. He's be a great addition to the fray.
"first full fledged liberal Republican to EVER be nominated for president?" --
You do remember a president named Abraham Lincoln?
The Love-Fest McCain has enjoyed with the media is slipping away from him. You'll see more and more stories getting out about how unhinged he really is. They're gonna push him to run third-party in hopes of reliving '92
There is no way Hillary will be the Dem nominee. She is a horrible speaker and a crappy campaigner. So you don't have to worry about a Rudy Hillary match-up. I want a conservative. Someone who will perpetuate Bush's war on terror and Reagan's war on government. No more compassion. I love W but i think on spending and immigration he just tried to make everyone happy and in the end no one was. I think the person who can do this is Newt Gingrich. I was skeptical of him but watching him speak on C-Span last month he blew me away with his ideas. And they weren't Utopian pie in the sky platitudes they were real tangible goals.
LMAO Old Abe was NO liberal. That is funny.
If it would come to Rudy running as GOP presidential candidate against Hilarity, there would be a very big and very active 3rd Party conservative candidate come forth. I would vote for that person. I am dismayed that many Freepers would give up their basic political tenents anti-abortion, pro-gun, anti-gay etc. so easily. I am glad you guys weren't around in 1776, we would all still be British subjects.
Rudy would be a fine pick for a different job. But he is a social liberal with a mess of a personal history. Nice guy but wrong choice for President.
Rudy is a true leader. He is liberal on things that don't matter a lot for a President, and conservative on things that do. Go Rudy!
The choice would be between Giuliani the liberal and McCain the
mavarick/moderate-conservative pompous ass with anger issues.
I get flamed sometimes but I'd definately vote for him.
"He'll play hell getting the Nomination, though."
Over who? McCain and Allen.
Rudy Giuliani is like Joe Lieberman, someone who is very good on national security issues but is extremely liberal on abortion (even opposing the partial-birth abortion ban!), taxes, guns, special rights for gays, and most other issues. Maybe I'm being a bit unfair when I say that Rudy is just like Lieberman, since Rudy is a lot tougher on crime than is Lieberman, but the reality is that Rudy's issue positions are a lot closer to those of a liberal Democrat such as Lieberman (who, belying Kossite whinings, actually had an ACU rating of 0 last year) than to those of a moderate-to-conservative Republican such as John McCain. I thought I would never support a third-party candidate for the presidency, but if GOP primary voters are stupid enough to nominate Rudy Giuliani in 2008, I will have to support (to my chagrin) the Constitution Party nominee or maybe an independent candidacy by a conservative who doesn't want the election to be a choice between two liberal extremists.
As I have said before, I think that Rudy's positions on national security and crime are so good that I would support him for Governor of NY or even for U.S. Senator (I almost never support a pro-abort for the Senate, since they tend to vote against conservative judicial nominees, but this being NY I'd make an exception), but there is no way that he can be the GOP presidential or VP nominee without destroying our party.
Fact is, on the issues Giuliani is the Joe Lieberman of the GOP. Think about it. Lieberman supports the Prez in the WOT and in Iraq. And Lieberman's association in the past with Bill Bennnet shows he has a moral conscience. The latter is more then can be said about RudyG.
Problem. I wouldn't vote for Joe Lieberman anymore then I'd vote for Rudy Giuliani. Conservatives don't vote for liberals. Period.
I'll take Hillary! over Rudy or McInsane. I figure that four years of her (IF she lasts that long) and this country won't vote for a crat for president for at least forty years.
If I was you, I'd do some serious research on Rudy the liberal before considering a leftwinger for POTUS.
When the choice is a Democrat or Rudy, who are you going to vote for?
Such as the Bill of Rights. You must be a transplanted Southerner.
LOL. Now that's a principled conservative for you.
If we get Hillary or another democrat then that person will appoint 2 or three Ginsberg clones to replace SCOUS retirements. Think of that.
This is exactly why he'll never win. The number of voters who actually think this so-called "war on terror" is the single biggest issue is pretty small -- and is comprised almost entirely of Republicans anyway.
The term applied to Lincoln was liberal. Its a contemporary political term. However, Lincoln was NO liberal. The closest thing to classic liberal in todays political environment is called a libertarian. Lincoln was no libertarian either. I'd say Lincoln was a classic Republican. Rudy Giuliani is a leftwing liberal.
Wrong, imo. The appointment of Constitutionalist judges in the federal courts is absolutely vital. To be true to his pro-abortion position, Rudy would be looking for those who can discern those emenations from those penumbras.
He'll play hell getting the Nomination, though."
Rudy can easily win the Presidentcy. Getting the nomination will be the hard part.
If Rudy would be so great for the war on terror, make him Secretary of State or Attorney General. I don't want him making domestic policy, or appointing two more David Souters to the Supreme Court.
George Allen or Mike Pence seem to have the strongest conservative credentials, though Pence is losing some traction with his immigration proposals.
Maybe there's a good conservative Republican governor out in the hinterlands who can rescue the GOP before it implodes.
Huh? What leftwinger? My point is merely that both Guliani AND McLame are unacceptable. If either get the nomination, there will be a great sucking sound - a mass desertion of the party by social and moral conservatives. Mark my words.
I haven't done battle with gun grabbing, abortion pushing, sodomy approving liberal moonbats for 50 years, to turn around and vote for one.
Agreed on Rudy over Hillary or McPain, but you don't have to look too far to find a better Conservative than Rudy.
Right now, George Allen will make an interesting candidate IMO. But its early yet.
I remember MANY people after four years of Bill Clinton saying things just like that. Then we got four more years of him.
Illegal immigration? Crickets...
I may be wrong but Rudy is also pretty much fiscally conservative so that is a big plus as well to keep this economy rolling.
Illegal immigration? Crickets...
I hold the same position on Rudy Giuliani that JimRob has towards John McCain.
"If you do run, I'm afraid you're gonna be at least one vote short. And that's a campaign promise you can take to the bank."
Jim Robinson on John McCain
And how will that change the makeup of the Supremes? The next two most likely to retire are Ginzy and comrade Stevens. Perhaps the poofster Souter may leave too. The statis quo is the result.
You can shake the hoary head of Hillary! at me all you like. I am not afraid.
I'll agree; of course my first choice would be a true Conservative (both fiscally and socially) would be Pence.
I can't see many others than he that would fit the bill of being a true 'conservative-conservative' in the line of Reagan or Goldwater..
(WE NEED TO TAKE OUR PARTY BACK FROM THE RINO'S)