[Old Retired Army Guy]

Wonder how long it will take the Rudy haters to start pouring out their angst on this one?

[Chi-townChief]

Hopefully, we’ll make a better choice than Rudy although he still stands head and shoulders above Lady MacBeth.

[Huck]

Better it would be to inhale Marlboros than to fool with the proscribed substances that eventually killed or demented many of the singers and attendees in that famous field.

This guy sounds like a combination Phillip Morris and Yoda. And let me also say, as one who has inhaled marlboros and marijuana, ingested LSD and psylociben mushroooms, marbs are definitely at the BOTTOM of the list. I'd take any of those other substances again before I'd ingest marlboro's addictive poison.

[gridlock]

It's a long time before I'm gonna settle for Rudy.

I expect it will be a long time before the Donks will be willing to settle on Hillary! Rodham _(Clinton), as well.

[4CJ]

Hillary vs. Rudy

Bwbahahahahahaha, on both counts.

[Grut]

I doubt it will, but if it does come down to those two I'll be writing in Moe Howard's name.

[Judith Anne]

I doubt either one of them will actually run.

We’ll have two other choices. Monica Lewinsky’s boyfriend’s wife would like us to THINK she’s inevitable, but she isn’t. And her vast negatives are going to keep her out of the election.

Rudy isn’t a Republican. That’s why he won’t get the nomination. Maybe vice president; other than that, he’s not national material.

Just my opinion.

[Jim Noble]

There are going to be at least four "major" candidates, in our first replay of 1860.

Rudy and Hillary are two of 'em, for sure. Thompson could be a third (if he wants it, which I doubt), and the fourth could be Gore, Obama, or somebody else.

After Hillary is elected with 35% of the popular vote, hang on to your hats.

[expatpat]

BS. In August of 2003, Howard Dean looked like a certainty and Kerry was fading fast....

[Convert from ECUSA]

That’ll be quite a contest. Eva Peron would be battling someone that looks better than her (at least when he’s in drag). Of course that isn’t saying much. The back end of a Greyhound bus looks better than Eva Peron and her shreiking socialist voice.

[Willow25]

I am not a Rudy hater..but I would not vote for him at all..and I do not think he will be on the other side when it ocmes to the primaries...That will be Duncan Hunter..

[Apple Pan Dowdy]

Please, let’s don’t call us Rudy Haters! It’s not a matter of hating the man, just that we don’t believe him to be the person that represents conservative America all that well.

I, for one, refuse to fall for the same “stuff” that we heard over and over when Bush was running in his first primary. We were told that as good little Republicans we had better vote for him or else we would end up with a Democrat in the White house. While that argument was most likely true in 2004, it was not necessarily true in 2000. We might have saved ourselves the present agony of electing a president who has turned against so many values of his party, such as his giving the country away to foreign illegal aliens.

Now is the time to stand up to the party and say.... NO, we will NOT elect Rudy. Give us someone with the values we believe in.

Back in 2000 election primaries I was told here on Free Republic essentially to support Bush or shut up and leave. I am afraid, if it comes to shutting up again for all I believe in, I will chose to leave.

[Mr. Jeeves]

Rudy might get 5% fewer votes in the South than a more socially conservative candidate. Meaning he will win those states over Hillary 60-40 instead of 65-35. That's the only downside. The upside is that as the nominee Rudy immediately puts New York, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, and California in play for the Republicans, forcing Hillary to spend a fortune playing defense in big electoral states which she would otherwise have locked up without much of a fight.

You have to think Electoral College here - the Democratic candidate is in very good shape for 2008 if he or she doesn't have to defend any of the 2004 Kerry states. We are heading straight for the opposite of 2000 - a popular vote win for the Republican as red statesturn out en masse to expresss their disgust for Hillary, coupled with a narrow Electoral loss as Ohio goes Democrat and none of the 2004 Kerry states change hands.

I don't see any of the other Republican candidates taking back even one of those Kerry states - yet people on FR seem to think that because Thompson or Hunter might win some of the Southern states 70-30 they are better candidates. It boggles the mind...unless these people just want to lose honorably and make a statement. Rudy may not get the huge Southern popular vote that someone like Thompson could, but he'll win all of the 2004 Bush states in the South easily - and he has a much better chance to flip some of those Kerry states back to red. A Republican who wants to win must be able to do that.

Rudy is - like GWB, sad to say - essentially a JFK Democrat. But the American public has shown time and time again that they prefer JFK Democrats in the White House - they always vote for the candidate (even Reagan) who looks and sounds more like one.

[saganite]

Hillary; Rudy. Two New York liberals. Somehow this represents a face off between liberals and conservatives? Only in the feeble mind of this writer.

[Scotsman will be Free]

Don’t think that it will be Rudy.

[jch10]

I will vote for the Republican nominee. I will not stay home nor write in a name.

I will never, ever surrender to the democrats!!

[A CA Guy]

I think they will find out Hillary is actually Osama Bin Laden in disguise and she won’t make the actual elections.

[balch3]

Fred.

[latina4dubya]

okay—i guess it’s time to put away all the campaigning... we already know more than a year out who the nominees are... gosh—that makes it so simple...

[A CA Guy]

When Fred enters the race in 2009, this whole debate will be tabled as Fred dominates the race...

Yep, still waiting for Fred to get in before it’s all over.