Social Issues Unlikely To Hurt Giuliani

The State ^ | 8/21/06

[Liz]

Rudy can't even get it up------guy's got groin strain
and crotch itch from straddling both political camps.

[AmishDude]

When you see him on stage and you see him debate - you will realize that Rudy being VP is like ...

Dick Cheney being VP.

[Dante3]

Then there is Rudy's link to Kerik. Democrats will have a field day with all his baggage and his poll numbers will drop drastically.

[mrsmith]

ALL HAIL THE LIBERAL MEDIA CANDIDATE!

[Jake The Goose]

There truly is only one Dick Cheney.

His resume cannot be matched by anyone - so no use making that comparison.

[AmishDude]

Like George Allen, who's constantly sticking his foot in his mouth?

Don't buttress the WaPo's insane hit pieces. Even if George Allen has a general problem with "strategery".

He's either a doofus or he's so brilliant that he uses racial slurs in Latin. Hard to say at this point.

[Liz]

MAJOR STUDY BY THE PEW FORUM ON RELIGION AND PUBLIC LIFE:

Republicans Can't Win Without Christian Conservatives (this means you, Rudy)

SOURCE: http://72.14.203.104/search?q=cache:QS6fK2c8AP0J:pewforum.org/events/index.php%3FEventID%3D115

Americans who regularly attend worship services and hold traditional Christian religious views increasingly vote Republican, while those who are less connected to religious institutions and more secular in their outlook tend to vote Democratic, according to a major study by the Pew Forum.

Some of the conclusions of this report were already evident in 2004 exit polling data. For example, voters who attend church more than once a week (16 percent of all voters) chose Bush over Kerry by a margin of 64 – 35 percent.

Likewise, those who attend Christian denominational Churches on a weekly basis (26 percent of voters) supported the President by a 58 – 41 percent margin. Also very telling, those who never attend Church (15 percent of voters) overwhelmingly supported Kerry 62 – 36 percent.

The study further found that traditionalist elements within each religion tended to vote Republican, while modernist groups within the religions trended towards the Democrats. A multiple regression analysis of exit poll and public opinion survey data from 2000 and 2004 enabled the Pew Research Center to assign a relative weight to various demographic markers.

Interestingly, church attendance was tied with race as the most significant factor. But even that number is deceiving; in that race is only an important factor due to the high level of support the Democrats receive from black voters.

These trends represent a major shift over the past forty-five years. White Christian Evangelicals in 1960 favored Democrats by a two-to-one margin; now they are Republican by a 56 – 27 percent margin. Seventy-eight percent of them voted for President Bush in 2004.

In 1960, 71 percent of Catholics were Democrats and now Democrats have only a slight edge among Catholics (44 – 41 percent) and Catholics voted for President Bush (52 – 47 percent) in 2004. These trends have also brought an increased acceptance of religion in the public square.

While Americans do tend to favor the separation of church and state, 70 percent of voters want their President to have strong Christian religious beliefs. Likewise, the study reveals that 52 percent of Americans believe that Christian churches should express political views. Surprisingly, support for political involvement of churches is strongest among younger voters age 18 to 29 (59 percent).

[sitetest]

Dear Jake The Goose,

LOL!

So, you really ARE getting ready to throw us overboard.

Either get on the program or "walk the plank," eh?

Sorry, that approach isn't exactly going to entice us to vote for liberals with "R"s pasted to their backs.

"I for one am getting a little sick and tired of being preached to."

I'm not preaching to anyone. I'm just stating openly, loudly, forcefully, clearly, unambiguously - I won't vote for Mr. Giuliani. And neither will a large number of social conservatives.

No preaching, just simple facts.

My goal is merely to make sure that all the folks who support Mr. Giuliani understand the consequences of nominating this liberal. Should we fail to stop his nomination, many of us will not ever vote for him in the general election.

My goal is that when his supporters come back, after suffering defeat in the general election, whining about us social conservatives, I will be able to say, "Hey, we were upfront about things. We told you we wouldn't vote for this man. You shoved him down our throat, anyway. Take your lumps."

"We're at war overseas - we don't need to be at war at home."

We've been at war at home for decades. The liberal left (including Mr. Giuliani) has been warring against the United States for quite some time. Social conservatives believe that legal abortion on demand up until the point that the baby is 9/10s already born, the homosexualist agenda, etc., have been undermining our country for a long time, and that we won't need the external threat of Islamofascism to defeat us if we continue on the path that we're on.

The Islamofascist threat doesn't make all these other threats to our country go away.

You want my vote for the Republican presidential nominee? Don't nominate a liberal. There! Wasn't that easy?


sitetest

[CPT Clay]

What I thought as Mayor of New York city was what was good for New York city, but now I need to think about what's good for the whole country, and it's clear that not all of the policies that work in highly crowded New York are the right thing for the rest of the country and this would be one of them."

Then he'll simply ignore any issue relating to gun rights or the second amendment
If he says that, he will be formidable.

That being said, I will not vote for him or McCrazy,Rommney or Pataki in a primary.

Allen, Frist, and some Gov's like owen(Co),Pawlenty, or even Nussel from Iowa. I wish Brett Schundler was an option.

Newt is poison. He is not a good leader, however, he is a great IDEA man. Anybody read "Winning the Future"?

[Liz]

DEMOCRATIC STRATEGISTS ISSUE MEMO ON LOSS OF CATHOLICS

Washington, DC, Apr. 13, 2005 (Culture of Life Foundation/CWNews.com) - A memo authored by a prominent Democratic strategy organization calls the decline in support of white Catholics for Democrats "striking" and "a big part of the 2004 election story." One of the analysis' key findings is that Catholic voters are becoming more pro-life, which the authors called "a factor in the recent losses and one of the blockages for Democrats, at least in the Midwest."

The data also reveals that young Catholics are more pro-life than their parents and that bishops who speak out against pro-abortion politicians help bolster the pro-life vote.

The abortion issue is particularly potent for a group called "Democratic defectors" who either identified themselves as Democrats or voted for Bill Clinton in 1996 but voted for President Bush in the last election. Among this group, "26 percent believe that abortion should be illegal in all cases, nearly three times the number for all Catholic Democrats."

The memo was issued by Democracy Corps, a research and tactical advice organization founded by Democrat strategy virtuosos James Carville, Stanley Greenberg and Bob Shrum. Titled "Reclaiming the White Catholic Vote," it is based on data from a nationwide survey of more than 1,000 white Catholic voters.

The decline in the white Catholic vote has been steady over the last decade. Clinton won it by seven percentage points; Al Gore lost it by seven points; and Sen. John Kerry lost it by 14 points. The data provided in the report provides a fascinating window into the much discussed Catholic vote and makes it clear Democrats are losing ground because of their stance on a range of cultural issues.

It turns out that one of the most contentious and visible issues in the 2004 election, the denial of the Eucharist to pro-abortion politicians, did not hurt the pro-life side as many said it would.

The poll found that when white Catholics were asked whether or not they were more or less likely to vote for a Democrat that "is denied Communion by the area's bishop for voting to support abortion rights" 49 percent said they were less likely while 33 percent said they were more likely.

The memo also made it clear that the abortion issue is not going away. "Although the pro-life position is strongest among seniors, Catholics' current pro-life position does not appear likely to lessen with time.

While middle-age Catholics lean toward keeping abortion legal, voters under 30 are more pro-life: 53 percent believe abortion should be illegal in most cases." The pro-life position could be a winning one for Democrats according to the study.

Fifty-nine percent of white Catholics say they are more likely to support a Democratic candidate who is pro-life and 35 percent say they are less likely, giving a pro-life Democrat a 24 point advantage. Even on the East Coast where Catholics are less pro-life, a pro-life Democrat has a 12 point advantage over a pro-abortion candidate.

The memo advises Democrat candidates to get around the issue by presenting themselves as one who "[b]elieves in a woman's right to choose but believes all sides should come together around the common goal of preventing and reducing the number of abortions, with more sex ed, including abstinence, access to contraception and more adoption."

This common ground approach is reminiscent of a recent speech given by New York Senator and likely presidential candidate Hillary Rodham Clinton, in which she softened her approach to abortion by calling it a "tragic choice." In the speech she said faith-based abstinence should be embraced but also called on increased funding for "family planning services," a euphemism for contraception, abortifacients, and abortions.

SOURCE http://www.cwnews.com/news/viewstory.cfm?recnum=36492

[Calpernia]

Take this quote:

"Rudy offers conservatives a man who will really fight the WOT the way it needs to be fought,"

And add it to my post here:

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1687294/posts?page=74#74

Rudy is a member and partnered with the same group that funded the anti war movement.

Now, how is that quote: "Rudy offers conservatives a man who will really fight the WOT the way it needs to be fought," suppose to be interpretted?

[sitetest]

Dear Jake The Goose,

"That said - look at this thread - social conservatives are not exactly open to anyone who does not walk in lock step."

ROTFLMAO!! What a comedian!

I'm willing to vote for nearly anyone the party nominates. Sen. Allen, Sen. Frist, Sen. McCain, Rep. Tancredo, former Speaker Gingrich, Rep. Pence, Gov. Owens, Gov. Barbour, to name a few.

Several of these guys are truly flawed from a social conservative perspective.

Nonetheless, they offer to us social conservatives perhaps a slice of the loaf, if not a half-loaf (and very far from a whole loaf). In some cases, maybe little more than crumbs.

Conversely, Mr. Giuliani would take away what little part of the loaf that we have earned with great difficulty over the past few decades.

Your threat to social conservatives is that we must support our enemies or be read out of the party.

Okay. If you nominate our enemy, we will leave.

And take our votes with us.

How's that?


sitetest

[justshutupandtakeit]

Why do you keep posting on these threads? It only forces Guiliani down the throats of the Innocent.

[justshutupandtakeit]

But what about AFTER he gets the nomination?

[tkathy]

Social issues are irrelevant if we are in mortal danger.

[justshutupandtakeit]

It is 100% accurate.

[RegulatorCountry]

"We're at war overseas - we don't need to be at war at home."

So, why start one by trying to shove a "progressive" Republican presidential candidate down religious conservatives' throats, then?

[Jake The Goose]

Take the walk..........

[Liz]

Heads-up conservatives---this brillian post by sitetest deserves a repeat read: ======================================================

RUDYPHILE ENDLESS WAR HOPEFUL POSTED: "We're at war overseas - we don't need to be at war at home."

SITETEST: "We've been at war at home for decades. The liberal left (including Mr. Giuliani) has been warring against the United States for quite some time.

Social conservatives believe that legal abortion on demand up until the point that the baby is 9/10s already born, the homosexualist agenda, etc., have been undermining our country for a long time.............

..... we won't need the external threat of Islamofascism to defeat us if we continue on the path that we're on. The Islamofascist threat doesn't make all these other threats to our country go away.

[justshutupandtakeit]

He is probably twice as smart as the competition. It would be great to see him dealing with the Treason Media's inane questions.