Posted on 04/17/2007 11:21:44 AM PDT by Ol' Sparky
Liberal Republicans like JulieAnnie are much MORE DANGEROUS than liberal democrats,,,,
because liberal Republicans BLUR THE DISTINCTION between liberalism and conservatism,,,,
MAKING LIBERALISM MUCH MORE ACCEPTABLE!!!
At least he FINALLY referred to something religious!!!!....lol
He made his statement the day AFTER she had died, I am unable to find any statement he made while she was being killed. That is not showing support as far as I'm concerned.
As far as everything else goes, it's mainly one time statements or decisions he's made. He hasn't suggested makeing any of this a part of his platform.
Let me suggest this unnamed hypothetical candidate to you:
- The candidate believes in the "right" to abortion, including partial birth abortion.
- The candidate believes in the "right" of homosexuals to have a legal union that resembles marriage.
- The candidate believes in the "right" of illegal aliens to illegally enter and remain in our country.
- The candidate believes government has the "right" to modify the Second Amendment of the Constitution at will to curtail the right to keep and bear arms.
If this was the ONLY information you had, would your conclusion be that this unnamed hypothetical candidate was a conservative Republican or a liberal Democrat?
Here’s an interesting fact, none of the polls show Rudy winning New York. When was the last time that either party nominated a candidate that they didn’t believe could win his home state?
liberal, pro-abortion, GUN GRABBING, pro-amnesty, big govt pro-litigation NY lawyer, and GAY RIGHTS CRUSADER,,,,who believes in using our TAX MONEY for public funding of abortions--(the fact that his personal life is a TRAIN WRECK is another big plus down South). /s
I am sick and tired of references implying that only democrats love the poor......the difference as I see it is that the dems give hand outs while the republicans give them a hand up.
That’s a very good point. Giuliani would probably lose to an “unnamed Democrat” in New York, which ought to tell you just how much his appeal elsewhere in the U.S. is inflated by name recognition.
Shhhh.... Didn’t you get the memo from the Rudy Rooters that repeating facts about their beloved liberal on a conservative website is “spamming” and/or “smearing”?
Remember, he was in NYC in 9/11, so he gets a pass on everything. (Is it just me or does Rudy bring up 9/11 in the same fashion that John sKerry brought up Vietnam?)
And as evidenced by his 30%+ DROP in recent polls, as soon as voters start finding out what he stands for, they start looking for CONSERVATIVES to vote for.
He promised to be faithful to his wives in public, too.
“I cannot tell you anything about the other states you mention, but I can guarantee you that Rudy will NEVER carry PA unless there is NO Democrat opposing him on the ballot.”
How can you guarantee this when every poll has him ahead of Hillary in PA? Besides, you are discounting a major factor—the Italian-American vote which is heavily pro-Rudy and which is concentrated in many key states like PA. So far Rudy’s ahead in PA, NJ, CT, RI, FL, MI and is doing amazingly well in CA. And he’s tied in OH with Hillary. Ethnic loyalty is the real reason Rudy is doing well in most of these states—besides his popularity across the country generally since 9/11—and it has nothing to do with organization. This is not going to change. NJ, for instance, is not going to vote for Hillary if Rudy’s on the ballot—not in a state so heavily populated with Italian-Americans. The same is probably true of PA. A Thompson or a Romney couldn’t possibly attract this huge voting bloc the way Rudy can. The same is true of battleground states like FL and OH, both with very large Italian populations. Not only this, but this vote alone represents 10% of the entire electorate—comparable to the black vote—and is concentrated primarily in blue and purple states. And while it’s not a monolithic vote by any means, it’s still a very very significant factor. Added to this would be Rudy’s overall appeal to voters in general because of his truly outstanding leadership qualities which are best known on the east coast and which appeal to many Independents and a significant number of Democrats.
If you’re going to give Rudy “credit” for this silly ethnic loyalty in the Northeast, then I would suggest you slash 30 points off his poll numbers in every state south of the Mason-Dixon line where a lot of people simply won’t vote for an Italian-American liberal from New York City.
No way in hell does a Republican candidate win in New Jersey. Heck, the GOP couldn't even defeat a flaming homosexual whose main claim to fame was that he picked up anonymous gay partners in rest areas all over the state.
Its common knowledge in the media that he is a gun banner and the media will keep hammering him with questions about it.
Sooner or later he will cram his foot in his mouth and reveal that he is still a gun grabber.
Where would they have been if all conservatives thought as you do, refused to vote for Specter, and ended up with a Democrat in charge of the Judiciary Committee? A similar situation faces us right now with Rudy. We need to accept the imperfect in order to achieve the good.
Me thinks there’s a lot of FRAUD going on in New Joisey and PA.
Congratulations. This post just made the "Good Quotes From Other Freepers" section of my FR homepage.
...Hiring and going into business with mobsters like Kerik.
PA, he can win. Bush was close to Kerry in ‘04 in PA. It was closer there than the margin in OH. Other states like CA, I am not so sure. It would take a hell of a campaign to win the far left states.
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.