Can a Republican win the White House without winning over the conservative base? That is the big cloud over former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani’s high poll numbers for 2008. His multiple marriages and support for abortion rights, gun control and same-sex domestic partnerships are just too much for many. “It’s an insult to the pro-Christian agenda. . . . He’s going to spend a lot of money finding he can’t get out of the Republican primaries,” said Rick Scarborough, a Southern Baptist minister and president of Vision America.
Posted by Rhonda Holman
Registered?
Commenting on WE Blog now requires you to be a Kansas.com member. Use the links above to register, if you haven't already, or to log in.Contact us
Follow us
Daily Archives
-
Recent Comments
- Raptor on Open thread 11/21
- janeeyre on Open thread 11/21
- Regular on Open thread 11/21
- XXX on Open thread 11/21
- Daniel on ACORN stole election?
- Daniel on Open thread 11/21
- satatom on Open thread 11/21
- satatom on ACORN stole election?
- Wahine_Tara on Open thread 11/21
- Wahine_Tara on Open thread 11/21
44 Comments
Giuliani is a closet Democrat. The man was mayor of New York for Pete’s sake! You don’t become mayor of New York if you’re Republican; plain and simple.
Will! Giuliani is a die hard Republican.
This could be a great opportunity for Democrats to get back the evangelical base. Since Dems are back in power, the evangelicals usually go where the power is, so you probably see a lot more of Rick Scarboroughs voting Democrat.
But Rudy would make a great candidate. So far the only super conservative is Brownback in the race and he won’t win the Primaries, so Rudy does stand a great chance, so long as the Republican field of candidates are thin.
America will experience die terrorist attack with mass destruction weapons and economic collapse. Elections in 2008 will be suspended.
I remember Rudy talking during the attack about how the rules of office should be suspended so he could run the city while the after effects of the attack were sorted out. Made me wonder whether he was worried about the city or being out of office. That minor sound bite left me with a bad taste about him and his real intentions.
Actually Walker it was everybody else that was saying Rudy should stay, even Hillary Clinton wanted the election suspended so Rudy can stay in office.
But Rudy said no and the elections went on.
Walker nailed that one, huh?
Will’s comments above show why Giuliana will not get nominated. In BOTH parties one needs to be a ‘purist’ to do well in the primaries; however one needs to be more ‘centrist’ to do well in the general election. This process has been increasing the polarization we have seen for many years.
I love how the media continually say Rudy is winning in the polls but can’t win the conservative vote.
The Southern Conservative base of the GOP cares more about the war on terror than any other issue. Sure Guiliani is not pro-life and he supports civil unions but not gay marriage. He’s had personal issues with his own marriage and even appeared once in drag.
But, the important thing is he is a tough as nails leader who has the ability to inspire. He has shown he can lead through tough times. Remember what New York was like under Mayor Dinkins?
Even more importantly, Rudy can win. He’s promised judges in the mold of Roberts, Scalia, Thomas and Alito. He’s right on the war. He’s right on taxes and business regulation. He can get lots of Democrats to vote for him. And he saves Republicans from the nightmare of President Rodham.
There’s a lot to like about Rudy, but his personal baggage is too much for many to bear.
It made my jaw drop, as did Newt’s history. We won’t get saints, but there is a limit. IMHO
gster,Fair enough, but would you sit at home in November 2008 if the race is Guiliani v. Clinton?
I never stay at home during elections.If it’s really smelly, I might write-in John Galt or Mortimer Snerd, or more likely – my dog!
I agree with the sentiments that 2008 could look to be a lesser of two evils contest.
I just find it funny how behind the CW the Eagle editorial board is.
Here’s Ralph Hallow in the Washington Times saying conservatives will support Guiliani.http://www.washtimes.com/national/20061222-121150-6030r.htm
Jonah Goldberg in National Review saying how Guiliani can win:http://author.nationalreview.com/latest/?q=MjE5NQ==
Tom Bevan in Real Clear Politics:http://time-blog.com/real_clear_politics/2006/12/will_conservatives_vote_for_ru.html
Michael Barone in US News:http://www.usnews.com/usnews/opinion/baroneblog/archives/061221/polls_for_the_r.htm
The list goes on, but the Eagle is way behind.
Maybe Rudy Guialini will finally get the Religious Right to break away from the GOP and run Brownback as their own candidate?
But, of course, when it comes to power the Religious Right will also gravitate to power but I don’t think they would ever join the Democratic Party to do it. I really think they would have the grandiose delusion that they are big enough to take on everybody and win.
Rudy is just another Ronald Reagan and we don’t need that. I have never seen the attraction of Guiliani. Just because he has a the gift of the silver tongue does not make him a good presidential candidate. And that personal history is horrible. If a man treats his family that way, then he wouldn’t give two hoots about the rest of us.
Rudy is being called a “libertarian” Republican by the media. But we libertarians are a bit skeptical of him, viewing him as almost too socially conservative. He cracked down on prostitutes in Times Square. He supported the Drug War.
We libertarians are open and willing to support him. He just needs to explain these two stances to us libertarian voters first.
Eric at http://www.mainstreamlibertarian.com
What do y’all have against Reagan? He fixed the destroyed economy (Carter’s legacy, but not all Carter’s fault), took a firm stand on terrorism, broke the Soviet’s back, and tore down the Berlin wall…. Look at the dignity with which he ran the Office.
Guiliani would make a better Vice President for someone. His vote in the Senate would certainly twist the smile on some Democratic faces. :)
Giuliani is a Republican’s Republican in every sense of the word. He stood up against the mafiosi and drove them out of New York. Many compare him to LaGuardia who also stood up against corruption in Tamany Hall. Billary is toast!Everyone knows you can’t bring a woman to do a man’s job, and being the President of the United States is definitely a man’s job!
Giuliani in 2008!
Cracking down on prostitution and drugs is a problem why? Cleaning up the streets is socially conservative???
Yes well solie
Reagan also began the war on the middle class and the reversal of the New Deal.
Rudy’s only claim to fame is 911.
I fail to see how that is a plus. Five years on and they are STILL finding remains and no memorial built?
Rudy has no chance even with his own party.
Unlike the parade of democrat contenders (pretenders), Rudy is a leader. He saved NYC after 09-11. Ask him tough questions and he’ll give you answers.
Holman is giving us insight as to how they–the liberal loving media–are going to attack Rudy if he gets the nomination: create doubt about his elect-ability, all the while giving the democrat candidate a complete pass.
Reagan spent money we did not have and built up a debt that we could not pay. Reagan and Daddy Bush started the Iraq-Iran trouble 26 years ago. Reagan did everything he could to bring down the middle class. This clown went so far as to try to classify ketchup as a vegetable for school lunches.
All the time in office, he had the gift of gab and that was it. Reagan had everybody so enamored by his ‘feel good’ talk that nobody noticed what he was really doing to the country.
If you want to just feel good, then go get a hooker. Either way, Reagan or hooker, you’re getting screwed.
We should not speak in terms of the “lesser of evil”. Our two party system and our multiracial democracy are a beacon to the rest of the world.
Rudy isn’t so bad, he is in favor of gun control, he is in favor of amnesty for undocumented persons and he is a staunch supporter of Israel.What more could you want?
The World is for Everyone!!
Just to show ‘em, I going to vote for either Newt or Rudy. I need to find out which one has been married more often. To the most married goes my vote!!!
In an electorate in which divorce is common, I don’t know that Rudy’s prior marriages are that big an issue. More troubling is his 2nd amendment position, but I doubt that will be an issue in 2008. Both parties have learned that more gun control is an electoral loser. Dead issue.
The big question, of course, is can he appeal to the socially conservative right wing which dominates during the primaries? We’ll see. He’s certainly electable in November, if he can get there. Does the right want purity, or do they want to win?
Of course, Hillary has been assuming she has the corresponding left wing of her party in the bag, and has been running to the center for the last 2 years. Perhaps Obama is reminding her that the left is not as in the bag as she thought?
GMC, you have identified the issue for both Rudy and Hillary. As to Rudy, I would submit that the socially coservative right wing will not only have problems with the divorces, but also with the open “squiring” of his mistress during the time he was married. As to Hillary and Obama, my “gut” (carefully developed and nurtured over these many years) tells me it is also the center where Obama is a threat.
JR – Rudy was only mayor immediately after 9/11. The 5 year cleanup / memorial delay can be blamed on Bloomberg, Pataki, and other politicians. Rudy led after 9/11 better than anyone, including Bush.
To everyone who insists on knowing how the right wing will vote, look at what conservatives are saying. I linked to several prominent conservatives who think Guiliani will get the conservative vote.
Look at the polls of Republican primary voters in South Carolina. Guiliani is leading McCain. For that matter, look at all of the polls – Guiliani is the front-runner.
It’s not like the people that like Guiliani don’t know about his personal problems, we just don’t care.
Would I prefer someone who has never been divorced or cheated on his wife? Sure. Is that more important than having a leader that can articulate the importance of the war on terror and rally the American people to defend themselves? Of course not.
Would I prefer a pro-life President? Absolutely. Do any of the Republican candidates fit that bill? Brownback and Romney are pro-life now – not so much in the past. (Not to mention neither of them can win.) McCain is despised by the Christian Right (remember his blasting of Christian conservatives in 2000?). Besides Rudy has promised good judges in the mold of Roberts, Scalia, Thomas, et al. What more can we ask for?
Would I like someone better on guns? Of course. Will it matter if Hillary is President that the GOP nominated a purist on guns? Abortion? or any of the other so-called important litmus test issues?
Rudy can win and lead – and he is mostly a small-government conservative who is tough on crime and strong on national defense.
But if Social Conservatives vote their faith and conscience, how can they vote for Rudy Guilani with his divorces and blatant adultery after these very same Social Conservatives attacked Bill Clinton for his affair?
A true Social Conservative cannot say Bill Clinton was wrong for his adultery and not put the same label on Rudy Guiliani. Or is hypocrisy okay in the Social Conservatives’ book?
Rebel:
I’ll remind you again; Clinton was NOT impeached for having an affair. He was impeached for perjury.
And Reagan was divorced as well, remember? Rebel, you assume that social conservatives are a monolithic block that votes on one issue and ignores anything else. That is your cardboard cutout of this group of voters, and like a cutout, is thin and misleading. Voting, for nearly any block of voters, is far more complex than that.
And again Bill Clinton lied about sex. Republicans lie all the time but that is okay?
Social Conservatives are a one-issue group. They harbor on gay marriage and then when that dies down, they harbor on abortion. It is always a one-issue with them. I’ve never seen social conservatives to be objective about anything.
It’s their way or no way – which is why they lost in the last election. The time of the Social Conservatives hyprocrisy power is over.
So the party of family morals (GOP) doesn’t care about those so-called morals if it is one of their own? Reagan was divorced and nobody ever said anything about it. But when a Democrat is running for office, the first thing Republicans look for is the personal dirt. How come?
Suza, because the dirt has been found in the primaries.
and, unfortunately, dirt has sometimes been made up out of nothing. That tactic has also been found in the primaries.
Rebel:
You miss the point. It don’t matter what he lied about. It matters that he lied UNDER OATH.
And Social Conservatives have never been as cardboard as you like to portray them.
GMC – but did he? My understanding of the case is that in the deposition “sex” was defined as vaginal intercourse. He denied having done that which would “technically” be true. (Of course, our wives would cut it off for that but … )
hmmmm . . .
Without going back and rehashing all of that; it seems I remember that after his term was up, the Arkansas bar disbarred him for the violation. They apparantly thought it was perjury.
From reading the remarks of the Dems on this topic, you would think they were afraid to death of Rudy.
Hmmm! I guess he places a real challange to Hillary.
Hillary is the nominee only in the eyes of the right Joe. We’ll pick our own candidate thanks.
Five years down the line and the victims are still not all recovered from a site the size of a few city blocks. Yeah Rudy is a real hero. Ha!
Oh, you’re so wrong, Joe! Democrats would just love to see Rudy as the Republican nominee. Absolutely.
Obama would kick his comb-over across the board.
As I recall, Giuliani was caught with his secretary and his pants down in his city office. After what the repubs did to Clinton, there’s no way they can nominate Giuliani and keep a straight face!
Joe Williams! Hillary was the Democratic nominee in 2004!
Well, at least that is what all the rightie radio talkers were saying.
Just because the rightie radio talkers are pushing Hillary does not mean that she has the nomination. After all, those rightie talk radio heads are nothing but overrated, overpaid, self-righteous big bags of wind.
Let Rudy run but I don’t see how social conservatives can nominate him with a clear conscience (assuming they have a conscience).
Sure the Republicans are going to nominate a pro gay, pro abortion, anti gun Catholic who has had affairs and been divorced 3 times. They will nominate Rudy for President when they elect Senator Kennedy to be their next Speaker!