And I support Rudy Guiliani for president even though oi disagree with him on most issues. Why?

Because he is a demonstrated and proven Leader.

He used the office of Mayor of NYC to demonstrate that the cesspool of New York City was indeed governable. He also led the city when the massive terrorism happenedand demonstrated command.

Compare that to the idiocy of Mayor Nagin to the inevitable damage of a Hurricane going inland near New Orleans.

I personally would like a Guiliani-McCain ticket. Easterner and Westerner. Moderate Liberal and Maverick Conservative. And especially if SCOTUS #5 is seated before Dubya leaves office.

Plus I beleive that until the Democrats right themselves and become both an American and Loyal opposition again, which they no longer are, it is imperative that the Republicans rule.

Best of all, the purpose of a political party is to win and govern; we need a Republican landslide and Rudy can deliver that more likely than any one else on the Republican horizon.

1) “Fatman”…There is no such thing as a “RINO”. Look up RWR’s 13th Commandment and learn the history and the original principals of the political party you desire to extol.

2) Per the person who spent all of his time figuring out how Rudy could be elected, good job, that was very interesting. While I think you’re wrong and that RG would be lucky to get out of the goomba basement, I appreciate your moxey.

3) The Republican Party, in its original form, was created by people who believed in the freedom of the individual to set his or her own path.

The Republican Party, in its original form, grew rather quickly upon its inception into the most successful political party in America’s history relative to elected officials across the board. Regardless of the Dan Rather’s, Larry King’s, Walter Cronkite’s and Barbra Streistand’s…this rapid growth the Republican Party took and the successes it has achieved was not by mistake.

The Republican Party, in its original form, dictates that the individual is responsible for him or herself. It stands for self-reliance, freedom, doing what one deems is right for them personally within the boundaries of sensible, logical laws for the masses. Senator Barry Goldwater put it best when he said…”keep the government out of your pocketbook, out of your bedroom and off your back”.

The Republican Party, in its original form, doesn’t care if two consenting adults of the same gender want to get married…doesn’t the government have better things to do than worry about what two homosexuals in Topeka want to do in their bed? Who cares?

The Republican Party, in its original form, doesn’t want the government to support through American citizen’s tax dollars a person who’d rather belly up to the bar than work. The Republican Party, in its original form, doesn’t believe the United States should be the planets police chief. For some reason however, the Republican Party was hijacked in the 1980′s by deep pocket moralists; i.e., the Religious Right (see Falwell, Robertson, Dobson).
The American electorate has made a transformation over the past few years. They like a little of this, and a little of that…that’s why a centrist by the name of Senator John McCain is the most popular politician in America. The Republican Party better get it’s head out of the sand and get back to its roots supporting people like John McCain for President in 2008, a man in the vain of Jefferson, Lincoln, TR, Robert Taft, Ike, Bob Michel’s, Jerry Ford. Can you name a NATIONALLY recognizable and continuously successful Republican in American history, besides President Reagan, who wasn’t a Centrist? You give up? You wonder why you can’t??? Cause there aren’t any. The electorate no longer cares for other people preaching to them about how they should live their lives. They care about their jobs, their mortgage, their gas tank, their kid’s education, and their retirement savings. They’ve had a belly full of multimillionaire Preachers, lawyers and politicians telling them what’s best for them while the electorate is living paycheck to paycheck.

Well, that’s all I have, what say you?

As for what I meant about Giuliani needing to win Iowa and New Hampshire convincingly, I think he needs to build up enough momentum to make his candidacy seem the strongest bet, if not inevitable. That would make things a little easier in the South.

What would really make things easier in the South would be something he almost certainly won’t do; name his running mate in advance of the primaries. Someone like Mike Huckabee or George Allen, if he can convince either of them to settle for #2. Or perhaps Mark Sanford, Lindsay Graham (though they’re both McCain men), Sam Brownback or John Cornyn. A Southerner with an impeccable pedigree as a social conservative.

As for the general election, he could definitely take Pennsylvania. We have a long history of electing Rockefeller Republicans to statewide offices; Santorum is really an anomaly. And I recall seeing (though I can’t remember where – sorry) a poll that showed the Hilde-beast beating Giuliani convincingly for a Senate seat from New York, but the same poll showed a virtual dead heat for the Presidency. So he just might be able to pull it off.

Which is why I’ve got gas. Again.

In a span of five minutes he showed his hawkishness and his fiscal conservatism, better than Bush has done in six years. He is the closest thing to Reagan out there and his credentials are strong.

Not the charisma of Rudy, nor the record of service of McCain-but he is the first guy in a loong time that has shown the abiltity to carry conservative ideas and make them understood. His debate skill will make or break him, but I have a feeling they will make him.

Well, I wouldn’t think so – everyone in the Midwest knows that Milwaukee and Madison are far – left outposts in a moderately centrist state, so the rest of the population that doesn’t live in these cities may well tip the balance of the state into the Red zone. You can see the same dynamic at work in Iowa (Iowa City is akin to Madison) and Michigan (Detroit is akin to Milwaukee).

Rudy is someone I could seriously consider supporting, especially if it kept McCain from the nomination. I’m still hoping to see Condi get into the race, but she might well make an excellent VP choice for Rudy instead.

Having said all that, I agree that although he posseses many fine Republican values, he worries me greatly on 2nd Ammendment issues. My worry is that his liberal views on firearms might well allow him to further erode our rights by bargaining them away to the left in order to get other legislation passed.

I won’t vote for Bishop Romney. I’ve suffered too much bigotry at the hands of members of his faith to ever vote for one for the Presidency, especially one that also holds a church leadership position. To my own mind, it would be akin to supporting the Taliban for office. But that’s just me…..

I like Allen more and more, but I still don’t have enough knowleadge of him and his position to cast my full support for him, though I’m working on learning more about him.

It might well be that Rudy would be the better wartime president than any other choice. Rudy has demonstrable leadership skills. He knows how to take in the facts and make a decision based upon what is NEEDED and what is RIGHT, not what looks best in the polls. I suspect that many Americans would agree with that assesment. He may not be all we would like him to be as a President, but he’s trustworthy decision-wise. I can trust him to lead from the front.

He also has one quality that will serve him well, and that he is articulate and candid when he speaks. I like that, and most Americans do as well. Give me the facts, plain and simple, and tell me what you propose to do about them. Be visible, at least APPEAR to be in charge, and know what to say and when to say it.

Respects,

Gwedd

However, I definitely aspire to be moderate in my manner and presentation, and that’s what the Coalition was all about…

However, I do feel the hardcore conservatives are, for reasons that are understandable, looking at the two most likely Republican nominees and holding their noises. I don’t share their distaste. I would happily cast my ballot for McCain or Giuliani.

New booths at several farmers markets that carry only anti republican anti Bush t shirts, buttons etc.

I mentioned how much I love Texas at a coffee shop and was told “Shhh dont say that too loud around here!”

The sidewalk is littered with pictures of Bush made to look like Hitler.

Conspiracy theories are openly acknowleged as fact in any political conversation Ive had.

Despite the high taxes, high crime and high absurdity I love this town. Its not going red.

Incidentally, I was a member (I guess I still am) of Mark’s Coalition of the Chillin’, and I credit that posting with bringing me out of the throes of wingnut-land and into the reasoned realm of rationality.

Really?

This is Mark’s house, so I’ll bite my tongue. Except to say that insulting your audience is probably not the best way to convince them of the righteousness of your beliefs and arguments.

As for Giuliani’s chances of winning the presidential general election, he first has to win the nomination. And in order to do that he has to

a) win the Iowa caucuses. Convincingly. Which won’t be easy, since he, McCain and Romney are all trying to appeal to the Rockefeller wing of the GOP, aka the RINOs (sorry, Mark).

b) win New Hampshire. Convincingly. This, and to a certain extent Iowa, could hinge on how well Romney does at cleaning up the scandal-plagued Big Dig project in Boston (the Massachusetts legislature just handed him total control over it, after a woman was killed by a falling, three ton block of concrete). If Romney straightens it out, or at least puts reforms in place that will lead to cleaning up the mess, he’ll be tough to beat.

c) convince voters in the southern primaries that a Giuliani presidency wouldn’t just be Hillary-lite. That’s not going to be easy. If you go here

http://decision08.net/2006/07/08/run-rudy-run/

and scroll down through the comments, you’ll see why I think that.

One caveat: Giuliani’s position on homosexual rights is a non-issue with me, though not with a lot of other social conservatives, obviously. On the other hand his positions on gun control and abortion are issues with me.