Posted on 02/14/2007 7:14:04 AM PST by meg88
Rudy abortion spin point #1 - the president can't directly do anything about abortion.
Wrong. Clinton vetoed two PBA bans. Bush signed on. Rudy opposed them all.
If people insist on being single issue voters, we might as well hand the election over to Hillary.
General Rudy talking point #4 - his opponents are single issue voters.
Oh, if that were only the case. Rudy has at least SIX critical non-conservative positions. He's pro-choice. Pro-gun-control. Pro-amnesty. Pro-gay-rights. Pro-CFR. And now pro-global-warming.
I think I'm gonna compile a list of all the nonsensical Rudy booster talking points and attacks we've seen on FR to date.
I guess it doesn't occur to many in the GOP leadership that the best way to avoid a conservative rift is to NOT push a guy at the far left of the party as the nominee.
I can't think of a better example of the power of the media to influence public opinion. They are about to vanquish their worse enemies, religious and social conservatives, and they really don't have to do much to make it happen. Indeed, FReepers will do it for them.
That is true, but many FReepers would prefer Hillary to Rudy, so it seems.
Fine, work against him in the primaries,
but not supporting him in the general will get you Madame President Hillary.
If Soros didn't pay for it, it's a sure thing he and his kind are loving it.
Tell that to Mel Martinez at the NRC. Blame Ken Mehlman and Karl Rove for this development. They sat back and let this happen in an effort to disarm the Religious Right and kill the conservative arm of the party.
My vote is with Mr. Gingrich.
Me, I just don't understand this apparent hate fest over Rudy Giuliani.
Do Freepers want the Republican Party to field a candidate capable of beating Hillary Clinton, or don't they?
Gilliani . . . nice twist.
I usually see Guiliani.
Both of which make me think he'll never get elected, since people can't spell his name even when it's staring them in the face from the article.
Rudi is a great candidate if your goal is to elect anybody with an "R" next to his name. He is a horrible candidate if you want to elect a Conservative.
Bingo. The President has, at best, a tiny marginal impact on the abortion issue anyway.
The job description of President is not "Abortion-Decider". We've had an outspoken pro-life President for seven years now. Abortions still occur at pretty much the same rate. This should result in headache-inducing cognitive dissonance for the single-issue Freepers.
What if Newt throws his hat into the race? Will you support him then
And those PBA bans passing, or not passing, had a huge impact on whether/how many abortions take place.
Right?
Dude... that's what we're doing. And, by the way, we're getting called traitorous names for doing so...
No doubt about it. I used to use my mother and grandfather as a gauge on elections. Gramps is 93, a union man, democrat. Mom is a liberal dem her entire life and they both voted for Bush and they know what Hillary is all about. They would absolutely NOT vote for her, but it doesn't matter that their eyes have been opened by events, myself and FR---they're automatic votes for Dems has been replaced by...well, I don't want to turn this into an immigration thread so I'll leave it at that.
How about a Rudy/Newt ticket?
See, now, you're being too sensible and rational. That's not good enough for some Freepers. They want PURITY.
Only if you flip around the candidates.
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.