Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Will FR embrace socialism to make way for Rudy Giuliani as a Republican presidential candidate?
vanity | April 21, 2007 | Jim Robinson

Posted on 04/21/2007 6:42:25 PM PDT by Jim Robinson

We've got some real challenges facing us. FR was established to fight against government corruption, overstepping, and abuse and to fight for a return to the limited constitutional government as envisioned and set forth by our founding fathers in the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution and other founding documents.

One of the biggest cases of government corruption, overstepping and abuse that I know of is its disgraceful headlong slide into a socialist hell. Our founders never intended for abortion to be the law of the land. And they never intended the Supreme Court to be a legislative body. They never intended God or religion to be written out of public life. They never intended government to be used to deny God's existence or for government to be used to force sexual perversions onto our society or into our children's education curriculum. They never intend for government to disarm the people. They never intended for government to set up sanctuary cities for illegals. They never intended government to “rule” over the people and or to take their earnings or private property or to deprive them of their constitutional rights to free speech, free religion, private property, due process, etc. They never intended government to seize the private property of private citizens through draconian asset forfeiture laws or laws allowing government to take private property from lawful owners to give to developers. Or to seize wealth and redistribute it to others. Or to provide government forced health insurance or government forced retirement systems.

All of the above are examples of ever expanding socialism and tyranny brought to us by liberals/liberalism.

FR fights against the liberals/Democrats in all of these areas and always will. Now if liberalism infiltrates into the Republican party and Republicans start promoting all this socialist garbage, do you think that I or FR will suddenly stop fighting against it? Do you think I'm going to bow down and accept abortionism, feminism, homosexualism, global warming, illegal alien lawbreakers, gun control, asset forfeiture, socialism, tyranny, totalitarianism, etc, etc, etc, just so some fancy New York liberal lawyer can become president from the Republican party?

Do you really expect me to do that?


TOPICS: News/Current Events; Politics/Elections; Your Opinion/Questions
KEYWORDS: abortion; aliens; banglist; bernardkerik; bugzapper; bugzapperinventor; bugzapperthread; byebyerinos; bzzzt; classicthread; damties; dragqueens4rudy; elections; fr; freedom; freepercide; freepersturnedtroll; freepicide; giuliani; globalwarming; gojimgo; greatzot; gungrabber; herekitty; hizzoner; homosexualagenda; howlermonkeys; howlermonkeyzot; howlinzot; hsw; immaturity; jrrocks; julieannie; julieanniebotsmad; lemmings; liberty; lookatmenow; massresignation; newt; no; nonopus; nopiapspleez; onepercentersgone; onepercentersrule; opus; opuscentral; peachcompost; piapers; pridegoethb4; prolife; propertyrights; propiaps; rabidfringeshame; realmenofgenius; rino; rinorudy; rinos; rossperot; rudy; rudyhasalisp; rudyinadress; rudymcromney; rudytherino; ruhroh; runfredrun; savagegotitrite; selfimmolation; socialism; socialist; springcleaning; springhousecleaning; stoprudy; stoprudy2008; suicidebymod; supo; sweepuptime; takingoutthetrash; thanksjim; themanwhosavednyc; thtoprudy; travesty; undeadthread; vikingkitties; weneedfred; wideawake; wideawakes; zap; zapper; zot; zotbelt
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-50 ... 251-300301-350351-400 ... 18,451-18,458 next last
To: Jim Robinson

We will continue the good fight, JimRob. It looks like the best shot may be Fred Thompson. There will never be another Reagan, but he is a good man.


301 posted on 04/21/2007 7:56:47 PM PDT by doug from upland (Stopping Hillary should be a FreeRepublic Manhattan Project)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: veronica

I’ll miss his posts too, but I think the ban is permanent.


302 posted on 04/21/2007 7:56:55 PM PDT by Peach
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 289 | View Replies]

To: veronica

So calling attention to you playing the “cheney’s daugher is a lesbian” card is a personal swipe?


303 posted on 04/21/2007 7:57:07 PM PDT by flashbunny (<--- Free Anti-Rino graphics! See Rudy the Rino get exposed as a liberal with his own words!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 238 | View Replies]

To: joesbucks

Hi, Joe. Given that this forum was largely behind Keyes, I can see that neither of us is worried that they’re freaking out now over Rudy’s national frontrunner status :-)

Time to say goodnight.


304 posted on 04/21/2007 7:57:53 PM PDT by Peach
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 295 | View Replies]

To: Jim Robinson
Case in point: Giuliani Criticizes a U.S. Crackdown on Illegal Aliens
305 posted on 04/21/2007 7:57:56 PM PDT by NonValueAdded ("One if by land, two if by sea, three if by legislation")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: beancounter13
I can tell you for sure that Giuliani’s appointees will be less liberal than any of Hillary!’s. Hillary!’s appointees will be just like her husband’s - another Ginsberg and another Breyer. 0 for 2. No thanks.

At least Giuliani might rely on folks like Ted Olsen to help him make nominations, and most nominees will likely be Republicans, making it more likely that they will be strict constructionists. Hillary! will not.

If (as most of us hope) Fred Thompson enters the race and wins the primary, we ultimately might not need to have this conversation.

306 posted on 04/21/2007 7:58:34 PM PDT by conservative in nyc
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 263 | View Replies]

To: djf

One is Thompson and the other is Gingrich.

Bump


307 posted on 04/21/2007 7:58:43 PM PDT by Jet Jaguar (Just say no to Brady Bunch Republicans.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 292 | View Replies]

To: potlatch; devolve; ntnychik; Grampa Dave; gonzo; Mia T
Hillary is a flat out communist in most respects.

Hillary interned under Robert Treuhaft and espouses to this day the "tell any lie for power" of radical activist Saul Alinsky.

Hillary is on record as being out to take things from us for her version of the common good, precisely the Marxist from each according to his ability to each according to his greed.

Hillary was complicit in the treasonous sale of U.S. defense secrets for ChiCom campaign cash--and will repeat this treason.

There is no one in either party remotely as dangerous as she.

There is no one in the Republican party in the same universe of treason, treachery and totalitarianism as she.

Self-immolators to the contrary notwithstanding, there is a clear and present danger and it is She Who Has Advertised Her Surrender In the War Against Islamofascism.

Then comes sharia law--as is the spreading trend in pockets of France, England and elsewhere in Europe.

She proudly demands more treasonous negotiations with those who would behead all of us infidels.

A stay-at-home in the coming contest against Hillary and the Seventh-Century Death Cult is a vote for the onset of the New Dark Ages.

There is only one bastion left--Tony Blankley, Mark Steyn, Melanie Phillips and a host of others are sounding the alarm.

To give it up to the party of Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi is to bow before the beheaders.

An undervote is an underwriting of the Mission to Damascus--and more grovelling, more abasement, more appeasement.

Socialism? Human Events, John Fund, George Wills, Steve Forbes all find Rudy's fiscal conservatism in NYC nothing short of miraculous.

The Reagan policy was the economic and security counter to the Carteresque malaise. Anything else is revisionism.

Further this deponent sayeth not.


308 posted on 04/21/2007 7:58:43 PM PDT by PhilDragoo (Hitlery: das Butch von Buchenvald)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 206 | View Replies]

To: veronica

I agree with you about quid.....a good diversity of perspectives is critical for healthy debate, and it’s important to have discourse with people you disagree with, even if it just serves to sharpen and strengthen your own positions.


309 posted on 04/21/2007 7:59:29 PM PDT by rottndog (American First, Conservative Second, Republican Increasingly Reluctantly...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 289 | View Replies]

To: Strategerist

FWIW, overall, It’s more like California than it is like FR - simple reality.vvv

= = =

Too true.

We must have an ELECTABLE CONSERVATIVE . . . as close to one as possible.


310 posted on 04/21/2007 7:59:32 PM PDT by Quix (GOD ALONE IS GOD; WORTHY; PAID THE PRICE; IS COMING AGAIN; KNOWS ALL; IS LOVING; IS ALTOGETHER GOOD!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 209 | View Replies]

To: KATIE-O
I will not join a third party and cause a fracture in the Republican Party.

"The alternate domination of one faction over another, sharpened by the spirit of revenge, natural to party dissension, which in different ages and countries has perpetrated the most horrid enormities, is itself a frightful despotism. But this leads at length to a more formal and permanent despotism. The disorders and miseries, which result, gradually incline the minds of men to seek security and repose in the absolute power of an individual; and sooner or later the chief of some prevailing faction, more able or more fortunate than his competitors, turns this disposition to the purposes of his own elevation, on the ruins of Public Liberty."
-George Washington (The REAL George W.)

This is what you get when you support the party instead of ideas.

311 posted on 04/21/2007 7:59:44 PM PDT by Pan_Yan (All grey areas are fabrications.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 119 | View Replies]

To: veronica

“I am going to ignore any personal swipes taken at me on this thread. I think I am making myself clear to the specific person I am addressing.”

I don’t know any of us who knows anybody else here well enough to take true personal swipes. Just have fun, Veronica. Smile when you type at your opponents. Especially me.


312 posted on 04/21/2007 7:59:57 PM PDT by Luke21
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 238 | View Replies]

To: KrisKrinkle

Your points are well made. One step forward, two steps back is better than annhilation at the hands of Hillary or Obama.


313 posted on 04/21/2007 8:00:46 PM PDT by IndySecurityMom (Nicely Painted Toes)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 288 | View Replies]

To: Jim Robinson

There comes a time when you have to draw a line in the sand. Rudy’s supporters on this board have insinuated that FR only represents the view of a minority of “conservatives”. If our views are in the minority on the subject of Rudy, I think it is only because we are more informed.

What Rudy’s supporters can’t deny is that we are a strong voice in the conservative internet community and we receive a fair share of media coverage outside the internet. I’m all for using that voice to just say NO to Rudy and his liberal views. The Rudy supporters need to hear loud and clear that we just aren’t going to stand here and be run over by them. Conservatives need to see that someone does really believe that we can win with a conservative candidate before the lie that our only choice is Rudy or Hillary is so firmly embedded that it becomes truth.

I see you drawing a line, Jim and I’m standing behind you.


314 posted on 04/21/2007 8:00:49 PM PDT by Elyse (I refuse to feed the crocodile.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: truth_seeker

I see from your page that you’re a friend of Bill Wilson. Then you know the main reason why most people fail the program is because they’re not honest with themselves. If you are truly a truth_seeker and are honest with yourself, you will investigate rudy’s actions after the OTHER Islamic terror incidents in NYC. After the Statue of Liberty ordeal, he called for gun control. He supports a sanctuary city for illegal aliens, and it just so happens that several of the 9/11 hijackers were illegal aliens at the time of the attack and would have enjoyed sanctuary in his city. Honestly, really honestly, rudy is not as strong on WOT as other candidates and if that is your main plank, you will look elsewhere.


315 posted on 04/21/2007 8:01:10 PM PDT by Kevmo (Duncan Hunter just needs one Rudy G Campaign Video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RVBtPIrEleM)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 190 | View Replies]

To: do the dhue
"Give me a Conservative or give me death."

Unfortunately, if history is a guide.....FR will support whoever the republican party gives us to vote for.

I truly hope this is not the case.....

IMHO

316 posted on 04/21/2007 8:01:15 PM PDT by glasseye
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 91 | View Replies]

To: SoCalPol
I don't get your point. Some FReepers also post at Lucianne.com.

This all gets back to the same question that I posed earlier. The personal preferences of the owner of this site aside, are pro-Rudy posters to be allowed to post here????

If so - then the anti-Rudy crowd will have to suck it up, debate the issues, defend their candidates of choice and see how it all pans out.

317 posted on 04/21/2007 8:01:19 PM PDT by veronica
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 296 | View Replies]

To: veronica
No way. NO WAY would Tom McClintock have beaten Bustamante. I know CA voters.

Sorry, I do not believe that even California voters would elect such a blatant racist and completely moronic buffoon.
318 posted on 04/21/2007 8:01:26 PM PDT by rottndog (American First, Conservative Second, Republican Increasingly Reluctantly...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 299 | View Replies]

To: Choose Ye This Day

OK, I’ll take your word for it. Just please don’t send me a picture.


319 posted on 04/21/2007 8:01:42 PM PDT by Mad_Tom_Rackham (Elections have consequences.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 262 | View Replies]

To: AZRepublican
I'm curious. Since when did the prospect of Hillary in the Oval Office (and Bill in or anywhere near the White House) stop being that troublesome for some Freepers? Because it would still be very much troublesome for me. I lived through Bill's two terms. Without benefit of FR, by the way. I didn't register with the site until during the post-election mess in 2000. I didn't start posting regularly until the next summer. In any case, eight years of those two and their mob was enough. More than enough. Way more than enough. I'd had enough by Election Day '92, frankly. I'd have been a lot happier never to have seen them again after that. Asking me to see Rudy Giuliani as a bigger threat than Hillary Clinton (and Bill, and company) is, essentially, asking me to forget what I remember of Team Clinton. Sorry, folks. I won't do that. I can't do that. No. Hell, no. Not now. Not ever. And any Freeper who knows anything about why this site was created in the first place should know better than to expect me to.
320 posted on 04/21/2007 8:01:45 PM PDT by RichInOC (I remember the Clinton years. Have you forgotten?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: truth_seeker

“And up to the post number here, there has not been one single word in this thread about national security, world terror threat.”
“The site is less and less in touch with reality,”

You need to reread the thread.


321 posted on 04/21/2007 8:01:49 PM PDT by ansel12 ((America, love it ,or at least give up your home citizenship before accepting ours too.))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 134 | View Replies]

To: IndySecurityMom

“One step forward, two steps back is better than annhilation at the hands of Hillary or Obama.”

No...it’s not.


322 posted on 04/21/2007 8:02:12 PM PDT by Bigh4u2 (Denial is the first requirement to be a liberal)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 313 | View Replies]

To: Strategerist
But our country is nothing like California

FWIW, overall, It's more like California than it is like FR - simple reality.

More donations to FR come from California than any other state.

323 posted on 04/21/2007 8:02:17 PM PDT by Doe Eyes
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 209 | View Replies]

To: Jim Robinson
I've got your six on that all the way.

I'm not here to support anything else.
Socialism is simply antithetical to the republic our Founders established.

324 posted on 04/21/2007 8:03:00 PM PDT by TigersEye (For Democrats; victory in Iraq is not an option.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Enosh

Conservatives are tired of being told they support Hillary simply because they don’t support Rudy.

While I’m certain pro-rudy people are tired of things said about them as well, this is a conservative site, and conservatives are getting tired of being attacked by pro-rudy people. One is calling conservative liars, one said we would have the blood of aborted babies on our hands if we didn’t vote for Rudy who supports abortion.

I don’t think the pro-rudy people realise how bizarre that was, seeing a pro-lifer post that we should vote for a pro-abortion candidate or else we’d be responsible for abortion.

It was like hearing someone say they would help load up jews on the train for Auchwitz if they thought getting the train to move quicker might mean fewer people were put on the train.


325 posted on 04/21/2007 8:03:22 PM PDT by CharlesWayneCT
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 97 | View Replies]

To: Jim Robinson

I won’t - I will not support socialism, and I won’t support anybody that doesn’t strongly support the second amendment.


326 posted on 04/21/2007 8:03:23 PM PDT by meyer (Bring back the Contract with America and you'll bring back the Republican majority.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Jim Robinson
Jim, let me try one Hail Mary pass to reform Rudy, although Hail Mary passes have a very low completion rate. As mayor of NY, Rudy was in one of the biggest liberal cesspools on earth. The fact that he did reform the NY crime situation and the budget in a total left wing climate are good signs.

But as mayor of that city he was going to support liberal policies. For example, no way he wouldn't want federal welfare for illegals, because he had a ton of them living in his city.

Will he become more conservative as he runs for the whole country, not just NYC? I think the only honest answer is he will somewhat, but not on all the issues. Many of them he will stick with just to show that he is consistent. So the best hope is that Thompson overtakes him because most people here don't like McCain and who else is going to do it?

327 posted on 04/21/2007 8:03:30 PM PDT by Williams
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 225 | View Replies]

To: staytrue
If Rudy wins the primary, then you must support him.

This is how I look at it. If Rudy wins the nomination then we have already lost the election. The general election is then about damage control.

328 posted on 04/21/2007 8:03:37 PM PDT by HarmlessLovableFuzzball
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 193 | View Replies]

To: devolve; PhilDragoo

Bump for an excellent anti-Hillary rant!


329 posted on 04/21/2007 8:03:50 PM PDT by potlatch
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 308 | View Replies]

To: Jim Robinson

Well, he’s certainly no George Bush is he?


330 posted on 04/21/2007 8:04:11 PM PDT by ShadowDancer ("To succeed in life, you need three things: a wishbone, a backbone and a funny bone.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: staytrue
If Rudy wins the primary, then you must support him.

NO, YOU MUST VOTE FOR A 3RD PARTY CONSERVATIVE CANDIDATE OR YOU KEEP THE NATION IN A CONTINUAL SHIFT TO THE LEFT. FACE IT...A VOTE FOR GIULIANI IS A VOTE FOR A DEMOCRAT.

331 posted on 04/21/2007 8:04:14 PM PDT by politicalwit (Family values don't stop at the border...but Federal laws do.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 193 | View Replies]

To: Peach
>>>>This is the forum that largely chose Alan Keyes as the presidential candidate in 2000 so I’m not terribly worried that they don’t like Rudy. LOL

That's a crock of crap!!!

I was here in 1999 and most FReepers supported GW Bush. In fact, JimRob bounced many rightwingers who were just here to cause trouble and rightly so.

This time around Jim`s not gonna stand for BS from you Rudy loving Republican leftwingers, who think trashing conservative candidates and promoting liberal candidates is a good thing.

Btw, what happened to ALL your posts promoting Rudy Giuliani for POTUS, and ALL your posts trashing Ronald Reagan? Haven't seen any lately. Maybe you're scared Jim's working on you next. LOL

332 posted on 04/21/2007 8:05:39 PM PDT by Reagan Man (FUHGETTABOUTIT Rudy....... Conservatives don't vote for liberals!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: Blackirish

If elected, I believe he would. After election, the base can be ignored. (FWIW, I think Pres. Bush and the ‘pubs were hurt more on the spending and big gov’t issues than anything else in 2006)


333 posted on 04/21/2007 8:05:43 PM PDT by dynachrome ("Where am I? Where am I going? Why am I in a handbasket?")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 287 | View Replies]

To: conservative in nyc

So you think Rudy MIGHT pick a conservative justice because of Ted Olsen?

I can still recall a post-presidency interview with Bush 41, and the topic being Souter. The elder was obviously distraught in his choice and kept saying that his advisors ASSURED him Souter was the only conversative that would pass the confirmation hearings.

That did a lot of good for us, didn’t it?


334 posted on 04/21/2007 8:05:54 PM PDT by beancounter13
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 306 | View Replies]

To: MrEdd; Jim Robinson
Loved the pics!

Smart players will decline the Giuliani Gambit!

335 posted on 04/21/2007 8:05:58 PM PDT by tarheelswamprat (So what if I'm not rich? So what if I'm not one of the beautiful people? At least I'm not smart...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 90 | View Replies]

To: veronica
The only question is, will those who support Rudy be allowed to post here.

Well let me put it this way, I'm checking your FR profile and those of your fellow RudyBots about every 10 minutes.
336 posted on 04/21/2007 8:05:58 PM PDT by mkjessup (Jan 20, 2009 - "We Don't Know. Where Rudy Went. Just Glad He's Not. The President. Burma Shave.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 221 | View Replies]

To: staytrue
If Rudy wins the primary, and you support the democrat or an unelectable 3rd party, then I am out of here and probably more than just me because we love the US, and opposing Rudy after the primary is supporting the destruction of the US as we know it.

I'm with you on not supporting a third party candidate.

Any real conservative candidate who isn't some Hillary put-up and who really wants to win will put his name in the Republican primaries.

Why? Because that's where the conservative voters are.

337 posted on 04/21/2007 8:06:08 PM PDT by FreeReign
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 193 | View Replies]

To: joesbucks

Ok, we’ll pick an item from my list and let you go for it. Please name the founding fathers you think would go for abortion. How about partial birth abortion? How about taxpayer funded abortion? Do you think the founding fathers would say that abortionism is next to Godliness or would they think it’s a purely evil and barbaric practice? How many founding fathers thought they were writing “A woman’s right to choose abortion” into the constitution? Please name them and provide examples from their quotations and writings on the topic. When did the founding fathers debate abortion rights at the constitutional convention? Which founders were on each side of the debate? Where are the minutes or notes of the debate? Where are the letters, books, etc, written by our founders regarding the big abortion debate?

Please answer these questions, then we’ll tackle the next issue.


338 posted on 04/21/2007 8:06:16 PM PDT by Jim Robinson
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 284 | View Replies]

To: Jim Robinson
I will never vote for Mr. Giuliani or for Mrs. Bill Clinton.
Mr. Giuliani will destroy the Republican Party if nominated.
I support Fred Thompson.
P.S I also support Jim R. It is time to clear the decks. Trolls, RINOs et al, just take up cyberspace.
339 posted on 04/21/2007 8:06:17 PM PDT by TWhiteBear
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Godebert
..just so some fancy New York liberal lawyer

..you supported Arnold over the Conservative McClintock.

It's really a NY thing. Arnold is conservative, don't you know./s
340 posted on 04/21/2007 8:06:57 PM PDT by presently no screen name
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: nctexan
If Reagan can win 49 states, why can't Fred?

If you can't see the difference between the two, nobody will explain it to you.

The comment stands. Up yours.

341 posted on 04/21/2007 8:07:17 PM PDT by FreeReign
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 300 | View Replies]

To: RichInOC
I lived through Bill's two terms.

Unlike the rest of us. LOL

342 posted on 04/21/2007 8:07:22 PM PDT by TigersEye (For Democrats; victory in Iraq is not an option.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 320 | View Replies]

To: colorcountry
So are you saying conservative ideals don’t have a snowballs chance in hell.

It will be very difficult to win this presidential election cycle with a candidate perceived as "hard conservative".

We _might_ have had that chance, IF we could win exactly the same states that Bush won in 2004. But we can't, because Ohio is going to be a problem. As someone wrote in another thread recently, the Republican party is in deep doo-doo in that state. It may be impossible for ANY Republican presidential candidate of ANY persuasion to capture Ohio in 2008.

There is also a problem with the [formerly] "reliably red" states "turning purple". Cases in point would be:
- New Hampshire: seems like the Democrats have been winning this once-conservative state with increasing frequency lately
- Arizona: didn't they just VOTE DOWN a gay-marriage ban? What the heck is going on there?
- New Mexico: another once-reliable state that is slipping from the Republican grasp.
Hard conservatives aren't guaranteed these states any more, because the states themselves are no longer hard conservative.

On the other hand, there are blue states that Giulianni could actually WIN. Cases in point would be:
- New Jersey: Rudy is doing VERY well there. I think he could take it (even though he probably doesn't have a chance of winning New York across the Hudson; it's just too damned blue to hope Republicans can ever win there again).
- Pennsylvania: Although Philadelphia and Pittsburgh are 'rat cities, the heartland of PA is red. It's a battleground state and Rudy can probably take it easily.
- Florida: Rudy could cut through the purple haze to win there, too.

If we can take NJ, PA, and FL, we can sustain the loss of Ohio and win. But there is only one Republican I can see, capable of winning in New Jersey.

Political fortunes ebb and flow, like the tides. I think it's safe to say that at the moment, the fortunes of the Republican party in general, and of the hard-right in particular, are on the ebb. The war in Iraq is going to be a BIG problem, better not kid ourselves on this. Any candidate we put up is going to have to be perceived by the mushy middle to have "credentials" in regard to "terrorism" (remember that the American public, by and large, still _thinks_ it is supposed to be a "war on terror", regardless of what this struggle REALLY is about). Rudy has those credentials. What does Fred Thompson have?

There's no denying that we took significant losses in 2006. How might the loss of BOTH houses of Congress otherwise be seen?

We cannot afford to lose the Presidency in '08. We have to be pragmatic, shift tactics if necessary, and DO what is necessary to hold that office.

2008 will be a "defensive" election for Republicans. We must hold the line, try to minimize losses in the Congress (even pick up a few seats), and hold the Presidency (which gives us an edge for judicial picks for the next 4 years, in which Stevens and Ginsburg will have to be replaced on the Supreme Court).

Of course, one can stand hard on principles - NO COMPROMISE. And lose.

Or we can be pragmatic, compromise, and win.

Which is better?

Really?

- John

343 posted on 04/21/2007 8:07:32 PM PDT by Fishrrman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: mkjessup
Well let me put it this way, I'm checking your FR profile and those of your fellow RudyBots about every 10 minutes.

Gee - you live a boring life. :)

344 posted on 04/21/2007 8:08:09 PM PDT by veronica
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 336 | View Replies]

To: staytrue

If Rudy wins the primary, then you must support him.
***Why is that? Is this a GOP website? NO. It’s a conservative one. It’s just me in that voting booth.

If Rudy wins the primary, and you support the democrat or an unelectable 3rd party, then I am out of here and probably more than just me because we love the US, and opposing Rudy after the primary is supporting the destruction of the US as we know it.
***Then Free Republic will be a socon site once again. At least we’ll have that to look forward to. Another good reason not to vote for rudy.

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1785129/posts?page=156#156
To: PhiKapMom
If the Republican party writes off the pro life, pro liberty, pro gun planks, well, let’s just say it will lose a great deal of respect, and I’m predicting a great deal of support. I can just about guarantee you that Free Republic will become much more anti RINO, anti liberal, anti big government than it’s ever been. If we are left with no conservative leadership and no conservative majority to worry about maintaining, then I think it’ll be open season on all RINOs from the top down and there will be a complete overhaul in the works.

148 posted on 02/15/2007 12:13:35 AM PST by Jim Robinson (”Electable” gave us Gerald Ford and Bob Dole. Voting for the right-wing kook gave us Reagan. ~ A.C.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 125 | View Replies | Report Abuse ]


345 posted on 04/21/2007 8:08:27 PM PDT by Kevmo (Duncan Hunter just needs one Rudy G Campaign Video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RVBtPIrEleM)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 193 | View Replies]

To: RichInOC
Asking me to see Rudy Giuliani as a bigger threat than Hillary Clinton (and Bill, and company) is, essentially, asking me to forget what I remember of Team Clinton. Sorry, folks. I won't do that. I can't do that. No. Hell, no. Not now. Not ever. And any Freeper who knows anything about why this site was created in the first place should know better than to expect me to.

Much agreed. But he's only a somewhat less dangerous globalist.

Shrillerry--HARXIST--would race us into the global government at the speed of light.

Rudy would likely take a train or maybe a bus to get there.

We must do all we can to see Fred Thompson or Hunter be the GOP nominee. No small task, seems to me.

346 posted on 04/21/2007 8:08:42 PM PDT by Quix (GOD ALONE IS GOD; WORTHY; PAID THE PRICE; IS COMING AGAIN; KNOWS ALL; IS LOVING; IS ALTOGETHER GOOD!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 320 | View Replies]

To: dynachrome

“If elected, I believe he would. After election, the base can be ignored”

Not if Rudy wants to slap around his fellow big spending repubs in congress. He will really need the base then.


347 posted on 04/21/2007 8:09:14 PM PDT by Blackirish
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 333 | View Replies]

To: Fishrrman

Excellent post.


348 posted on 04/21/2007 8:09:53 PM PDT by Miss Didi ("Good heavens, woman, this is a war not a garden party!" Dr. Meade, Gone with the Wind)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 228 | View Replies]

To: buccaneer81
He’s electable,

Not a good thing to say here.
349 posted on 04/21/2007 8:09:59 PM PDT by presently no screen name
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 49 | View Replies]

To: glasseye

I am not so afraid of Hillary that I would believe that I need a liberal to beat a liberal.

I am voting my conscience in the Primary.


350 posted on 04/21/2007 8:10:33 PM PDT by do the dhue (May God have mercy upon my enemies, because I wont - George S. Patton Jr)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 316 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-50 ... 251-300301-350351-400 ... 18,451-18,458 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson