Posted by Karol at 08:42 PM
Technorati Tags: Rudy+Giuliani Glenn+Reynolds Rudy+Giuliani+2008 Election+2008
I think that a third party could be more successful in 2008 than any third party has been thusfar.
I don’t think a 3rd party can win, but if the Republicans are smart they’ll nominate Guiliani. Everyone loves him except the doctrinaire anti-abortion voters. (Even the mildly anti-abortion voters like him.)
Surely Dorian you do not see someone doing as well as TR did in 1912 ?
Of the recent candidates, I think Chuck Hagel and, based on his recent endorsements, Tom Tancredo would be more likely than Rudy G to leave the party.
The other factor I would not rule out would be an independent bid by Roy Moore. I think he’ll get screwed out of the nomination in Alabama in 06 and pay the GOP establishment back in spades. I think he would do very well against a lot of the field who tilt a bit left (McCain, Rudy, Pataki) for some conservatives; against Romney (whose Christianity would be questioned) and even against a bland type like Frist.
A gay-loving pro-choicer cannot win a Republican nomination. Ever.
Not to mention a man who divorced his wife and moved in with his lover.
How many Americans actually know that? If Giuliani were smart, he’d run as a Democrat.
If by the Perot of this decade he means the guy that splits the Republican vote and gets
(H.) Clinton elected, then from his lips to God’s ears.
Do even DEMOCRATS want HILLARY elected? Come on now…
Though I did love the debut of the campaign commercial starring Geena Davis.
You know what? I give up trying to talk to you people. Go ahead. Ruin the party. Have fun. Nominate some milk-toast ass clown because he’ll please the Religious Right and the other “smart” people currently running things. Just don’t come crying to me when you end up with a Democrat as president for the next eight years.
Ken, where did THAT come from? No one wants a milquetoast assclown. That said, we don’t want someone who’s all wrong on moral issues just because they’re hawkish.
What Ken said. RINOs rule!
i second (or third) what Ken said.
If the Brits chose their leaders based on so-called “moral issues” Churchill would never have held office. I’m sure Neville Chamberlain and his ilk were much more “moral”.
Ok, ‘we’ will. Ken, do you understand how elections work? Do you understand how primaries work? It’s not like this blog gets to decide who’s the candidate just to piss Ken off. I’m just telling you to be realistic. It’s not going to happen. You’re imagining a situation that I think is not feasible. You’re just as bad as the people over at Daily Kos dreaming of a Clark or Dean presidency. It’s ridiculous. Look at the primary process. Look at what states make the initial decisions. Look at how candidates were covered the last few go-rounds, how McCain was seen as too liberal, how John Kerry was the least liberal (except for Lieberman). You all are going to be in for a serious shock if you don’t face reality. Again, no one but no one loves Rudy more than I do. It’s just that he’s not going to be president and you should start thinking about plan B (and no, plan B is not Condi).
Funny, I never thought of elections as predetermined. Somehow I thought the idea of a campaign was.. I don’t know… to campaign.
Giuliani has a very tough road ahead of him. But rather than pronounce his chances dead so far ahead of time, why not notice that he has amazingly high levels of support from more factions than just about anyone else right now (except for the Condi infatuation – which most of us share as well), and that the prevailing response to his candidacy is “I love him, but he can’t win… right?”. Doesn’t it say something that so many people see him as their top choice? Why not work to make it happen instead of throwing in the towel so soon?
New York City political blogs
On the RightOn the LeftIn the MiddleMedia Blogs