Israeli panel: Giuliani is 'best' presidential candidate for Israel

Haaretz ^ | 9/05/2006 | Haaretz Staff

[texas_mrs]

Former New York City mayor Rudy Giuliani is the "best" candidate in the 2008 race for Israel, a panel of eight Israeli experts assembled by Haaretz has determined.

Giuliani is followed by former Speaker of the House Newt Gingrich, Arizona Senator John McCain and New York Senator Hillary Clinton. Ranking bottom of the list is Illinois Senator Barack Obama.

[Sabramerican]

I don't know enough about Opus Dei or how Brownback might be influenced by it, if his views have changed.

I read an intimate interview regarding Israel he did years ago- before his conversion- and my feeling was that his strong Christian Zionist beliefs would be the most pro-Israel.

In any event he can't win. He's not a player for the top spot.

[Sabramerican]

bit unseemly to use foreign (whether Chinese, Mexican, British, Israeli, or other) public opinion to influence USA elections

I doubt texas_mrs woke up this morning knowing she had such power by merely posting a Haaretz article on FR.

I wonder if she's Mossad.

[Sabramerican]

And by the way, the article is not about public opinion, it's a political science discussion among "experts" as to the affect on their country of a distant potential political occurrence

As everyone but the crazy paranoid readily understand.

[texas_mrs]

I doubt texas_mrs woke up this morning knowing she had such power by merely posting a Haaretz article on FR. I wonder if she's Mossad.



I'VE BEEN OUTED!

[SJackson]

The panel is very much clueless. Hagel should be in negative numbers. Allen should be much higher then Frist. Rice? Dodd? Others?

I've no idea what standards they used, apparently they polled a panel of academics and ex-diplomats. Then somehow they add a weighting to the results. Don't try to make sense of the numbers.

I would have written it all off to Ha'aertz and their liberal cronies, but reading the thread I realize it's the work of the Elders, so I suppose I should pay attention as they update the poll weekly. Rudy is the choice of the Elders you know. I've read here that he'll start any war his handlers order him to.

==============

Survey Results: Week ending 09/09/06

The panel was asked to score the candidates on the following issues, on a scale of one to 10, with one being "worst" for Israel and 10 being "best" for Israel. The first four questions deal with ongoing events and so will change each month; the fifth is a general question that will be asked each time:

1. How much of an effort will the candidate make to resolve the Israeli-Palestinian conflict?

2. To what extent does the candidate view Israel as a strategic asset?

3. How much of an emotional connection does the candidate have to Israel?

4. How willing would the candidate be to use military force to prevent Iran from getting nuclear weapons?

5. How "good for Israel" is the candidate?

The results:

* The "weighted average" is the figure our pollster Camil Fuchs gave to each candidate after taking into consideration the voting habits of each panel member and adjusting the results accordingly.

[SJackson]

They give Hillary kudos for wanting to move the embassy. That is a wet dream (moving the embassy, not her thighness).

Also part of the 2000 and 2004 Republican platform, a promise, broken, of their Presidential candidate. She must be moving to the right.

[ArrogantBustard]

most Orthodox rabbis would not support Giuliani over a more morally conservative and pro-Israel prospect.

That's nice ... if they're Americans, I'd hope that they're supporting whichever candidate because they think he'd be good for America. If they're not Americans, they're welcome to keep their opinions to themselves.

[ArrogantBustard]

Oh, yes. I forgot.


FReepers don't vote. And nothing posted on this forum could possibly affect anybody's electoral choices. Ever. This forum is strictly, totally, utterly, irretrievably irrelevant.


How silly of me to think otherwise!

[Sabramerican]

Most of those rating numbers seem absurd.

How do they rate, know even, someone's emotinial tie. I don't know that Giuliani or Gingrich have such an emotional tie as compared to a practical one towards Israel.

And you're right that what Haaretz believes is good for Israel isn't nessesarily so.

I want to vote for the candidate who would get a zero for an active part in the "peace process". The "peace process", as understood by Haaretz, is never pro Israel.

[SJackson]

Welcome to the conspiracy. You must be one of the oil patch operatives.

[RockinRight]

So let him run for President of Israel then.

(just joking folks! The headline was worded funny...)

[Sabramerican]

Hagels' emotional tie =4.

Do you automatically get at least a 4 if you haven't actively called for Israel to be nuked?

A shame Pat Buchanan isn't included.

[SJackson]

Do you automatically get at least a 4 if you haven't actively called for Israel to be nuked?

Probably. After all, the greater your propensity to push a "peace process", the higher the score.

[justshutupandtakeit]

Conservatives hated the Red Chinese with a white hot passion and hated them no more for bribing Clinton. Who is so naive as to believe that the Israeli lobby has not been very influential in our politics?

[Honestfreedom]

That is the most puzzling and masochistic aspect of the Israeli left. Actively engaging the peace process only means twisting Israel's arm.

[onedoug]

God help us.

[Sabramerican]

I've been curious after your posts.

Brownback converted in 2002.

In 2004, he received an award from ZOA.

http://www.zoa.org/2004/12/at_zoa_dinner_i.htm

In 2006, he addressed the meeting of the new organization Christians United for Israel.

It doesn't look like his views towards Israel have changed.

If they haven't, of those mentioned I believe he does remain the most Pro- Israel candidate.

Speech to Knesset

http://www.internationalwallofprayer.org/A-289-US-Senator-Brownback-Brings-Blessings-to-Israel.html

.............................

He still won't be elected President.

[TommyDale]

Giuliani effect on GOP:

[familyop]

Thank you very much for the information. I don't have much, beyond his opposition against fathers' rights in Kansas.

[rmlew]

1. I care who is the best candidate for the US.
2. CLinton is no fan of Israel. This panel is made up of idiots.
3. Why is Tancredo not on the list? He has actually won straw polls.
4. What are the damn standards by which candidates are judged?