27% of Republicans Would Vote for Pro-Life Third Party Instead of Giuliani (Proof Rudy CAN'T Win)

Rasmussen Reports ^ | 10-4-07 | Rasmussen Reports

[scarface367]

If GOP nominates Guiliani, don’t waste your vote, vote your principles VOTE THIRD. It’s the only way your vote will be counted.

Yes, your vote will then be counted among those that are so blinded by one single issue that they chose by default to elect Hillary instead.

[newnhdad]

I agree with you, we need Hillary as president because she’s a real socialist and the Republicans are closet socialists.
That’ll solve all our problems, that along with tax increases, the “fairness doctrine” to suppress the opposition, more of the same open borders nonsense and socialized medicine.

Then you’ll get that socialism you speak of.

[Man50D]

Lose for a generation and wonder why the nation goes even more secular, more Third World than if we had a Rudy, Mitt vis a vis a Clintonista Presidency for 8 years.

By your line of thinking it is preferable to settle for a slow transition to socialism instead of a faster transition. That's tantamount to preferring a slow death instead of a faster death. The end result is the same, more socialism. Great solution!

[penowa]

Stop ingesting the stuff being fed to you by the elite media, right or left. Try doing some thinking for yourself if you have the capability. If not, it’s a pity, but not surprising.

[penowa]

Evil is evil.

[scarface367]

Yes, but this is reality. In many cases you have no choice but to choose from the lessor of two evils. Ignoring this fact does not make it go away.

[vin-one]

call me dense, if you dont support the nominee you in effect elect the beast, that is the definition of dense. I don’t necessarily like Rudy, but he has to be better than the hildabeast. We know what it was like under one clintoon administration, the beast will be worse. I will not vote for hillary, but a vote for a third party is the samething.

[Man50D]

In many cases you have no choice but to choose from the lessor of two evils. Ignoring this fact does not make it go away.

Republicans have been ignoring for decades the fact appeasing evil has only resulted in more evil. Obviously the GOP prefers to appease evil instead of confronting it. For too long the GOP has been under the misconception ignoring evil makes it go away.

[Man50D]

call me dense, if you dont support the nominee you in effect elect the beast, that is the definition of dense.

Many in the GOP fail to accept the obvious fact the party has been shifting away from its conservative base and towards socialism. The result is attempting to legitimize some socialism to prevent more socialism and castigating those seeking to prevent socialism. This type of slippery slope thinking has put the GOP in this dilemma. It is tantamount to choosing between a slow death and a faster death. Voting for Giuliani would be no better than voting for Clinton because they are both socialists!

[Paul Ross]

In many cases you have no choice but to choose from the lessor of two evils.

Ah, but this is not such an occasion. We have plenty of time to eradicate Rudy from serious contention.

We do need to coalesce around one consistently conservative "umbrella" candidate. And now, while making it clear that the fracturing of the Base by the liberals means...Rudy has to go. That will drain away the logic from those who mindlessly support him based on a "winnability" thesis.

I will be blunt, to get there, we need to get the field dramatically narrowed. Without question Brownback should withdraw. Also obviously there as a favor to Bush. Huckabee should withdraw. Too liberal. Romney should face the financial realities. His campaign is held up by his checkbook alone. His credibility is seriously questioned. He should stop the bleeding, and withdraw and throw his support to the guy whose views he has tried to echo. We know who that is. We also know who else needs to go. Tancredo. He also needs to stop splitting the border enforcement consensus, and throw his support to Hunter, and then we have a four-way contest still, between him, Giuliani, McCain (who will NEVER withdraw), and Ron Paul...who will also obviously be there to the end.

We may well be looking at a brokered Convention here in St. Paul, but I frankly feel that Hunter would do quite well based on his history and solid positions, he will appeal to enough delegates to break the slates.

[vin-one]

so, you in effect put the beast in office. not just a socialist, worse. Rudy might be considered by many on this forum as a socialist, but he will not destroy this country as fast as the Hildabeast will. At least with Rudy after four or eight years we may be able to save the U.S. with the Hildabeast it would in my view be questionable.

[muleskinner]

Voting for Giuliani would be no better than voting for Clinton because they are both socialists!

Your perspecitve is mistaken.

Do you want national health care - socialized medicine? That's Hillary's prime goal once in the W.H. With democrat majorities in the House and Senate vitually a given, and Hillary in the house, we may get to wait 3 months or more for critical surgery.

[Ol' Sparky]

That's like saying... 'my wife is unattractive, so I'm going have an affair with a woman twice as ugly.'

No, it's like saying I'd rather be alone than with either one.

[Man50D]

Rudy might be considered by many on this forum as a socialist, but he will not destroy this country as fast as the Hildabeast will

Oh I see! It's better to die a slow death than a quick death. No wonder why the Democrats regained control of Congress and the GOP is dysfunctional.

[O6ret]

...third party candidates on either side of the political spectrum could play a significant role by peeling away one or two percentage points of the vote.

A vote for a third party candidate is like throwing it away.

I don't care who the Republican nominee is...he will get my vote.

[Man50D]

A vote for a third party candidate is like throwing it away.

The GOP has shifted so far to the left that its ideology is basically the same as the socialist Democrats. They are essentially one party. An alternative candidate would represent the second party.

I don't care who the Republican nominee is...he will get my vote.

That line of thinking caused the GOP to lose control of Congress and split the GOP. Some members are so hung up on party titles they can't accept the fact the party has adopted socialism. Voting for a GOP socialist over a Democrat socialist will still result in a socialist in the White House.

[Sola Veritas]

“I don’t necessarily like Rudy, but he has to be better than the hildabeast.”

He isn’t, and voting for him, even against Hillary, is unacceptable to 27% of the base. On the things that matter, to moral conservatives, there is NO difference between the two. Actually, Rudy scares me more that Hillary.

[Bainbridge]

The old ad hominem, huh?
I notice that you ignored the content of my post in favor of proffering silly platitudes and sounding like a pompous blow hard
Thanks for your inspiring advice.

[Clintonfatigued]

This sucks, as I admire Rudy’s accomplishments. But we have to face reality, so supporting him in the primary is unwise.

I’ve concluded that Fred Thompson is the best choice for President. But Giuliani would be a great choice for running mate, as he would bring great strengt in the northeastern states.