Posted on 04/16/2007 3:19:27 PM PDT by madprof98
I'm not sure why the Rudy folks want us to abandon the formula that has worked in all GOP presidential victories from Reagan on ... nominate a conservative or moderate conservative that is a political ally of social conservatives, though not too closely identified with the Christian right.
Thompson fits that formula. Romney might. Rudy does not.
“...when Republican primary voters hear about all this”
Do you see the problem here? If so-called Repubs have not heard about Rudy’s positions by now, they are not paying any attention at all. We pay attention here, but what does it say about the sheeple, if a large percentage of “conservatives” are willing to not just hold their noses and vote rudy, but enthusiatically support rudy?
——signed depressed dynachrome
“Do you see the problem here? If so-called Repubs have not heard about Rudy’s positions by now, they are not paying any attention at all.”
Correct....they are not paying attention at all. It is way way too early for the average Joe to consern himself with an election 16 months away. We got started early, most of America is right on schedule.
I heard a poll report on the radio news this a.m., something to the effect that typical American adults could not name the VP of the USA nor the president of Russia. I really doubt many people, quite a few of whom will vote, have yet heard about Rudy Giuliani's views on social issues. But I am quite sure that if he comes anywhere close to capturing the GOP nomination - or if he gets it - the voters will hear. After all, they learned about John Kerry's war record, didn't they?
“learned about John Kerry’s war record”
Yeah, I was just making the observation that people do not pay attention to what their elected officials are really doing and saying. Sometimes until it is too late.
Remember, the primary voters are the ones who bother to register with a political party and are supposed to be payin attention.
True, but we still have plenty of time.
Just for the record, I do not consider Giuliani a conservative and have stated so many times. On that point we are in complete agreement.
Today on his radio show, Rush estimated the chances of Hillary Clinton becoming the next Prez at 80 percent. I think that is about right. Whatever Republicans do, we had better get it right.
I think this dialog is extremely important in that regard. Thank you for the reply.
I disagree with Rush. Hillary is the most hated woman in America.....many liberals despise her too : )
If Rudy, like Romney, cannot forthrightly square his past record on abortion with a full 'Right to Life' platform, which I agree he has not done, I expect he will fall by the wayside.
As far as Rudy being "my boy," he's not. But I'll plead guilty to casting about for a Republican who (a)can win (b) is Pro-Life (c) will rebuild the military and prosecute the WOT (d) will keep economic stability on track and keep lowering taxes.
I reckon you and I then both have a problem in candidate selection. That's because any candidate who has been involved in government has made some accomodation with abortion and those who support it. That includes Giuliani, Romney, McCain, Thompson, even Hunter, who in his years in Congress has supported bills that indirectly, in some way, further abortion. A great number of abortions occur every day in this country, even though we have a Pro-Life President. No candidate has ever told me how he plans to end that.
But, I will not vote for any candidate who is pro-abortion, a "woman's right to choose," or anything less than a total commitment to the Right to Life.
Good for you. Then, for a start, please rule out a candidate who--JUST DAYS AGO--said it was a good idea for government to fund abortions for poor women so they wouldn't miss out on the chance to get rid of their babies. Hint: His initials are R.G.
Liberals will vote for her in the general, make no mistake about that.
I feel like I am a scout standing in the middle of a barren field. There are two armies about to battle on this field. One is a former dynamo now battered and bruised, a remnant of its former self. The other is younger, savvier, growing, with greater resources at its disposal, more willing to adapt, fresh from victory and ready for a fight.
I stand in the field and I see the coming bloodbath, and I see but one maneuver that might be tried whereby our side could come out victorious. But alas, our side is not adaptable, refuses to reach out to new recruits, insists it can win the battle by using the same tactics that got us crushed in the last battle.
I fear we are headed to the dinosaur graveyard. But I will go there with you, if that is what the unit decides.
Verbum sat sapientes.
” I see but one maneuver that might be tried whereby our side could come out victorious”
Okay, now ya got me. What maneuver?
Well, totally surrendering all our principles and voting for Rooty Tooty, of course.
I still believe Rudy is the MSM’s favorite pick.
The Washington DC suburbs are now the decisive vote in Virginia. The Philly and Pitt suburbs are now decisive in PA, etc.
In short, we need the some people who are pro-freedom as far as abortion and alternative lifestyles, but pro-business on taxes and spending. We have to let some more folks into the tent.
Giuliani is the only guy I see out there who can bring them in, but if we lose the base in the process, it will not work. So there we are, damned if we do and damned if we don't.
The only hope for the Republicans to hold the presidency is for conservatives to compromise. I am seeing more and more that they will not. They'd rather roll the dice on a conservative candidate, even when the highest possible water mark (even if there was a Republican tide, which is highly unlikely) is for that candidate to come about as close as Kerry did in 2004. One state short.
More likely it will be several states short: MO, VA, PA, OH, CO are all very likely to be lost to us in 2008. All of these states are now decidedly more liberal than they were in '04.
Let me guess. You are basing your “facts” on your own opinion again.
http://people-press.org/reports/display.php3?ReportID=312
So I am merely asking. If not Giuliani, who? Where is the evidence that the who you name can win OH or PA?
That's because the GOP, with candyasses like Specter, Collins, Whitman, etc. keep pushing the party to become more "tolerant" instead of drawing a line in the sand. The GOP elitists refuse to defend the pro-life movement and instead allow the opposition to set the debate. That's why you have the pro-baby killers running around saying they're pro-choice while the pro-lifers are "anti-choice." It's a bogus argument but the GOP has done a sorry job in this area.
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.