I think Giuliani may win the Rep. nomination

[cally]

and I think it's a huge mistake to assume he won't.

There has always been a minority of Republican loyalists who stay with the party but are uncomfortable with the Christian right. If this block coalesces behind Rudy, the the fundies disperse their vote among the others, then Rudy will be the nominee. I look at the primary schedule and the race right now, and I think Rudy will be the nominee. Of course, this is assuming he doesn't say something stupid which he tends to do.

[AllegroRondo]

1. My freeper Sister-in-Laws head will explode

when she finds out he's pro-choice.

She says thats the ONLY reason she voted for Bush last time, because shes Catholic and must vote for a pro-life candidate.

[Deep13]

3. That will be entertaining.

Her thinking is a betrayal to the Founding Fathers, the Constitution and all those folks in Arlington. Letting the Pope (or any other authority figure) tell you how to vote is no different than having a king.

[AllegroRondo]

7. The sad part is, the current Pope has already spoken on this

not long after he became pope, he said that, while the Church is pro-life, it does not 'require' its members to vote for only pro-life candidates. Voters are expected to look at all the issues, and as long as you dont vote for a candidate only because they are pro-choice, the Church is fine with it.

But of course, she refuses to listen to that.

[Deep13]

9. So she's more Catholic than the Pope.

:eyes:

[AlinPA]

11. He won't be pro-choice for long, nor tolerant to gay people. He must submit

to the far right evangelical fundamentalists in order to win. Get ready to listen him quoting Bible verses and watch him hanging out with Falwell, Robertson, Dobson and maybe even Haggard since Haggard has gone through his "cleansing".

[Telly Savalas]

52. The other GOP candidates sure as hell won't give him a free pass

on such drastic changes in position. While he may be one of their stronger candidates among the general electorate, the guy is facing an uphill battle within his own party.

[Czolgosz]

24. He's not just pro-choice; he's pro-D & X (so-called partial birth abortion), and has publicly said

he would pay for his own daughter to get an abortion.

[Deep13]

2. That might not be so good for us.

Will we be forced to run HRC just to avoid losing NY? Which Midwest states will we lose if we do that? Should we pick a moderate from the South or SW to go after FL instead?

[DemKR]

6. I think we win NY anyway

Hillary is leading in Ohio by a few points I believe. The Republican candidate is always ahead it seems in states like PA and NJ and then our guys come home.

NJ is VERY close to NY...I would not worry about this now, because Hillary knows Rudy like a book. She's known for a long time now how to deal with him.

[AX10]

29. New York we will keep.

New Jersey will be the problem. 13 ev's.

[Czolgosz]

4. I hope so. We take back the South in 2008!

[skipos]

12. What specific Dem candidates do think would possibly win states that

B Clinton didn't win? Even he didn't win a majority of the southern states.

[Bucky]

17. Re: "didn't win much of the south" Hey, let's count the EC votes he did win

Missouri (11 votes), Tennessee (11), Kentucky (8), Arkansas (6), Louisiana (9), Florida (25), West Virginia (5), Maryland (10), Delaware (3)

That's 88 Electoral College votes. Does anyone think we can spare 88 EC votes in the next election?

[skipos]

23. I don't understand your point

You consider Maryland, Delware and Missouri "the south?"

[Czolgosz]

22. Bill Clinton wasn't running against a thrice-married, pro-gay rights, pro-D & X , New York Yankee

(I'm a pro-gay rights, pro-choice New Yorker who moved down South so I have some insight into how widely that view is embraced down here).

I don't think there is a single Southern state where an Edwards/Webb ticket wouldn't pose a significant challenge against a Guiliani/Anyone ticket. I think an Edwards/Clark ticket would do nearly as well in the South.

[skipos]

27. So you think

Alabama, Mississippi, Georgia, South Carolina and North Carolina would vote for a pro-gay rights, pro-choice Dem like Edwards instead of the "hero of 9-11?" What facts are you basing this on? Those states historically vote 15-20% more repub than the rest of the country.

I doubt Edwards would even win NC at the top of the ticket. He got the usual 4-5% VP boost in 2004, but NC is a state that is typically 14% more Repub than the national average in presidential elections. Even a 10% boost wouldn't help him, and I doubt he is popular enough to get much more than that.

[Czolgosz]

32. Many Southern fundamentalist Repubs harbor a great regional bias against New Yorkers. Also, there is

a strong vein of populism here that transcends party lines.

I think a strong populist message from Edwards would sell better in Alabama, Mississippi, Georgia, South Carolina and North Carolina than Guiliani's "I'm the mayor of 9/11 from six years ago and now I'm in favor of escalating the war" message.

Have you ever heard the phrase "he peaked too early"? By February 2008, that phrase will be universally understood as synonymous with the new phrase "he pulled a Giuliani."

[Clark2008]

37. No he won't - they think he's as Coulter described him.

He's really NOT strong in the South and I wish you people would believe me (hey - I have been right about Rudy and Hillary in Pennsylvania so far).

[Czolgosz]

38. He's 100 times stronger than Clark here (and I like Clark, but Clark is flat-lining in the South)

[AX10]

59. You seriously believe that the fundies will just stay home...

and let a Democrat into "their" Whitehouse? :shrug:

Right now, I believe that 80-90% of the fundies will vote for Rudy just because he's a Repub.

[skipos]

39. Kerry/ Edwards did not do well in those states

The message of "I am an idiot but I will say things that sound real nice on a bumpersticker" resonated with more people than anything Kerry or Edwards said. I think "I'm the hero of 9-11" will resonate just as well. Dame Rudy has a 70% favorable rating. Who is going to change that? MSM? Thoughtful Americans researching their candidates? No and no.

I like Edwards, Webb and Clark and it won't suprise me if our ticket has two of them in it. However, I am extremely confident that any state that voted for George Wallace and George W. Bush will not vote for a pro-choice, pro-gay Democratic candidate over the "hero of 9-11."

Feel free to bring this up if I am wrong in Nov 08.

[Czolgosz]

41. Are you not aware that Guiliani says you ought to pass a written test to own a gun? That don't hunt

in the South. Edwards, Clark, and Webb all believe in a broad reading of the Bill of Rights, which includes the Second Amendment.

Here are a few other positions that WILL NOT SELL to Repubs in the South:

Giuliani is pro-choice and has even supported the right to D&X procedures (also called "partial-birth abortions" by the folks who vote regularly in the Repub primary and who won't be voting for Giuliani).

Giuliani opposed Bush on banning gay marriage and extended all city benefits to same-sex couples (with a crowded field of Repub options, do you REALLY think they are going to choose the ONLY candidate who has extended benefits to same-sex partners?).

Giuliani opposed prayer in school (sweet Jesus, won't they pray for delivery from Rudy's secularism).

Giuliani supports the Senate's immigration bill will a guest worker plan and a path to citizenship (called "amnesty" by the folks who vote regularly in the Repub primary and who won't be voting for Giuliani).

Just in case you skipped the opening line:

Giuliani has proposed that all gun owners ought to have to pass a written test (do you REALLY need a focus group to tell you how this one goes over among the right-wing nutjobs who vote in Repub primaries?).

There is zero-point-zero chance that Giuliani will get the nomination (and that's leaving aside his sexcapades in the governor's mansion and his divorce-by-press-conference and his "accidental" marriage to a cousin etc.) once the base gets wind of Giuliani's record on not being a complete tool on every issue.

If there was an open, non-partisan election, MAYBE - just MAYBE - Giuliani would have a chance. With the primary system in place, it will happen over Karl Rove's dead body (which might be a decent trade-off, but that's another topic).

[skipos]

45. Most people disagree with you.

Rudy's odds of winning the nomination are 2:3 over on tradesports.com. Go make some money. Hopefully you are right.

[Gabi Hayes]

47. the key ingredient he's ignoring is the impact the media are having in their idolatry of St. Rudy.

if they keep pumping him up the way they are doing, and they're already set their narrative on him, there won't BE any revelations about him, though there are many to be found (like his not telling the truth to the FBI when they asked him about his father's FELONY conviction when Rudy was nominated to be a federal prosecutor...heard about that?).

they're going easier on the Hero of 911 than they did on the chimp in 1999-2000, when they REFUSED to touch the drug/abortion/AWOL/Harken, etc., stories, any one of which would have destroyed his campaign in the offing.

how does that happen? dunno, but it did, and is happening now.

[Czolgosz]

50. Just as the media creates a front-runner, it destroys a front-runner. That's what passes for news in

our times.

Giuliani has peaked WAY too early. In fact, if Giuliani has peaked four months from now, it would still be too early.

Just ask Howard Dean why he lost: "We peaked too early and gave everybody an opportunity to go after us. We knew that whoever won Iowa was going to win the whole thing and we just peaked too early, and there was not much we could do about it."

Dean peaked too early, and he peaked just a couple months before the Iowa caucus. Giuliani has peaked 10 months before the caucus.

[jcrew2001]

53. Repubs are easily fooled by the media

and they like to crown their candidates, so I fully expect them to crown Rudy.

If they were true conservatives - most will be fooled into voting for Romney - who's moving farther to the right than Rudy.

[Czolgosz]

49. They were offering similar odds on Gephardt 4 years ago. I am not opposed to Guiliani getting the

Repub nomination - it would do a world of good downballot here in the South.

The betting odds change to follow the polls (and we all know how reliable the polls are at this early, right?)

ODDS ON PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATES

REPUBLICAN NOMINEE

» John McCain: 1/1

» Mitt Romney: 3/1

» Rudy Giuliani: 3/1

http://www.examiner.com/a-509119~Political_betting_becomes_increasingly_popular.html

Mark Warner at 7/1, Rudy Giuliani at 8/1, and Jeb Bush and Mike Huckabee, both at 20/1.

http://thehill.com/david-hill/oddsmakers-see-super-race-for-president-2007-01-31.html

[Czolgosz]

36. Also, many Southern Baptists see Guiliani as (yet another) threat to "the institution of marriage"

Southern Baptist Leader Questions Giuliani's Marital History

A Southern Baptist leader said Tuesday that evangelical voters might tolerate a divorced presidential candidate, but they have deep doubts about GOP hopeful Rudy Giuliani, who has been married three times.

Richard Land, head of public policy for the Southern Baptist Convention, told The Associated Press that evangelicals believe the former New York City mayor showed a lack of character during his divorce from second wife, television personality Donna Hanover.

"I mean, this is divorce on steroids," Land said. "To publicly humiliate your wife in that way, and your children. That's rough. I think that's going to be an awfully hard sell, even if he weren't pro-choice and pro-gun control."

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,257300,00.html

[skipos]

60. Go to surveyusa.com

and do Dame Rudy vs. Edwards. Unfortunately the sight only lets you do a couple matches and then you can't do it anymore. If my memory is correct, Rudy vs. pretty much anyone is ugly, but Edwards doesn't appear to have (at this time) any advantage over Dame Rudy in the south. Now I realize that polls this far out don't mean a ton, but Edwards and Dame Rudy both have pretty good name recognition at this point.

My only point is that I see no remotely scientific evidence that a Dame Rudy nomination will put the south in play for us. If it comes along, let me know.

[iamjoy]

5. This Could Be a Good Thing For Us

if you follow the polls (and they seem to be all over the place), Guiliani seems like a tough candidate for any of the Democratic candidates to beat. But those are in one on one match ups. If Guiliani gets the Republican nomination, there is a strong chance we will see a "third party" candidate go after Guiliani's stance on social issues. I think such a candidate would get more attention and gain more traction this time than last time.

Giuliani would have been better off going for the Unity ticket. That would have been far more worrisome for Democrats.

[skipos]

14. I am not going to hold my breath on a 3rd party emerging if Dame Rudy is nominated

Conservatives don't like to Naderize themselves as much as we do. We already hear Nader talking about running against a HRC nomination, have you heard about a conservative running against Dame Rudy? Neither have I.

If no strong 3rd party emerges (unlikely imo) the hero of 9-11 will go untarnished by MSM, and will be the toughest to beat in the gen election.

[Bucky]

19. Correct: they're much better about falling into lock step. Plus Giulie will toss 'em a sop for VP.

Giuliani's weak spot will be women voters who correctly understand that his treatment of his wife in 2000-2001 is a measure of his character as a leader.

[saltpoint]

8. I think Rudy's dead on arrival. Even Brownback will beat him in Iowa.

He ain't from around here, the fundie nutbags will say. And they'll turn out in droves to support one of the other candidates, I think more likely Brownback.

[cally]

21. But if they split the vote, then Rudy may win..nt

[TygrBright]

10. Sit back and wait for the popping sounds...

...it will be knuckle-dragger heads exploding by the thousands. Kinda fun, really... like the Fourth of July.

Messy, though.

hopefully,
Bright

[Gabi Hayes]

13. check it out.....

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=389&topic_id=222969

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=389&topic_id=151710

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x286410

[Matariki]

15. I agree. My moderate (not wingnut) republican east coast relatives are all for him

And they've been really disgusted with Bush and the republican party lately. They couldn't care less about Giuliani's marriages and divorces, they like that he 'cleaned up' New York. They're moderate and reasonably intelligent but not politically educated and that's about all they've been able to say about Guiliani. And that seems to be enough for them, sadly.

[ronnykmarshall]

16. I think it's too early to tell.

But I think right now, he's the favorite.

Maybe ol' Jebbie will jump in!

[MasonJar]

18. Actually he is already catering to theml he has already said that

Roe vs Wade should be overturned. Do not let any of these republics fool you. Their goal is get elected.

[SammyWinstonJack]

20. Geez, if he is the best the GOP has to offer, they are so screwn!

:evilgrin: America's Mayor is a huge fraud! ya :think: :rofl:






;

[PaDem]

25. I think he has a good shot.............

and I can't figure out for the life of me why so many DUers want Rudy to win the nomination. He'd be hard as hell to beat in the general. I think he'd have an excellent chance to win in Pennsylvania, Ohio, Virginia, and even Michigan. He wins a couple of those and it's game, set match.

[AX10]

26. I agree. He will the worse candidate for us.

[skipos]

28. Yep. Polls show Rudy beating HRC in PA, NJ, OH, FL

and those candidates are equally well known.

MSM IS NOT going to tarnish the image of the mythical "hero of 9-11."

[AX10]

30. But it's very early.

[skipos]

31. Sure it's early but Dame Rudy's favorables are about 70%

What is going to change in the next year? Rightwingers will find out he is pro-gay and pro-choice, but is that going to make them stay at home or vote for the Dem? Probably not, they seem to be able to stomach candidates that don't do anything for them. Will MSM show AMerica that "Rudy the 9-11 Hero" is a myth? I doubt it.

*IF* he gets the nomination, he will be the hardest to beat, imo.

[Frances]

35. I think my fundie relatives

will vote for Rudy. They are very authoritarian types and Rudy is definitely authoritarian. I think my Southern relatives who are politely racist will vote for Rudy because they think he will protect them from minorities--that's what they think happened when Rudy "cleaned up" New York crime. (I've never understood why my white Southern friends were convinced that we would be victims of racial crime--the statistics show that blacks were more likely to be victims of whites.)

I think those issues will override Rudy's divorces etc. Most of my fundie relatives have had "colorful" lives themselves.

[PaDem]

48. here's how I see it playing out................

if Rudy wins the nomination. The Dobson/Robertson/Falwell crowd will rally conservative evangelicals around Rudy. This will be instructive in that it will prove that the leaders of the religious right movement are as fundamentally pro-corporatist and anti-tax/anti-social spending as the are "pro-family". Rudy won't get as many conservative evangelical votes as Bush did in 2004, but he'll get 90% of them. The small drop off in evangelical will be more than offset by the moderate dems and independant voters that Rudy will pick up. The only hope that a Dem beats Rudy is that evangelicals stay home in high numbers, and as I said the vast propaganda machine that controls that voting bloc won't allow it to happen. They'll bitch about Rudy throughout the primaries only to rally behind him when it counts. For what it's worth, the only Democrat I could see beating Rudy under this circumstance is Obama. Every conservative evangelical alive will come out and vote against Hillary, no matter the opponent.

[Frances]

55. I think you make good points

Fundies say that a woman should stand by her man no matter what, which is what Hillary did. And yet the leaders hate Hillary. To me, that says the evangelical leaders are about power for the corporations and not for those who try to do what Jesus says. So, yes, the evangelical leaders will rally around Rudy. Our main hope is that there is a long time until the election.

[PaDem]

57. I think these leaders like Dobson and Falwell...........

initially started their movement because of concerns related to their "pro-family" agenda. However, as the GOP began to cozy up to them, they became hypmotized by power. As the "religious right" became an increasingly important player at the table, their agenda began to meld with the traditional anti-tax, pro-corporatist agenda of the GOP. Dobson and his ilk will carry Rudy's water if it means keeping their seat at the table.

[Warren DeMontague]

43. But Rudy WAS a hero on 9-11. In that, he didn't spend the whole day hiding.

:eyes:

Unlike certain other politicians people were waiting to hear from.

[AndreaCG]

51. Fortunately NYC firefighters don't agree

And Rudy was a fool to put crisis response center in 7 WTC after the 1993 bombing there.

[PaDem]

33. It is early, and a lot can change..........

but I am quite confident that he'd take a sliver of registered Dems with him in those states, a sliver bigger than the one Bush took, and I am equally confident that he would win the so called swing vote.

[ScreamingMeemie]

34. He's not tall-ish and he hasn't got good hair.

:sarcasm:

[Warren DeMontague]

40. If nothing else, maybe that'll make some folks shut up about the all-powerful "values voter"

Geez. I thought, since gays, atheists, and pro-choicers are the REASON WE LOSE ELECTIONS :eyes: :sarcasm:, such a thing would be impossible.

One thing's for sure- the "conventional wisdom" waterheads can't have it both ways. Either 'Merika doesn't love Rudy, or this country is a helluva lot more pro-choice and far more socially libertarian than they would like us to believe.

[Warren DeMontague]

42. The problem is, the fundies RUN that party. Rudy thinks abortion should remain legal, whereas

the folks running the Republican Primary Process don't even think BIRTH CONTROL should be legal. Take it from me- even in California the glassy-eyed Jesus whackos control the party; the only way the GOP could get a pro choice (and electable) governor was to have Enron rip our state off with a phony energy crisis, so Der Gropinhauser could be snuck in the back way. If that's California, you can only imagine what the Republican Primary voters are like in other parts of the country.

I think you're wrong. The day the GOP nominates anyone even marginally pro-choice will be the day I eat my hat.

[Czolgosz]

44. Nominating a pro-choice candidate? Not in my lifetime. A pro-choice/pro-gun-control candidate? Never

[jcrew2001]

54. Bush Sr and Reagan were not

viewed as social conservatives and they won on their economic and military stances; and I think there is still a lot of this in GOP base - they want to take back the party from the Fundies; and they have the money do keep a Rudy candidacy alive - Wall Street money.

The Fundies aren't as strong as they once were, and there is a huge backlash against them. I will still be shocked if Rudy keeps the momentum and gets the GOP Nom, but I am now realizing that that possibility is not that far-fetched.

Rudy will be dangerous versus Hillary - because Hillary can't win the South. It would be great for a 3rd party Fundy to weaken Rudy, but I don't see the GOP letting that happen.

I think the only option for us Dems is a Edwards vs Rudy matchup - and Edwards will win the South and the WH.

If Clark gets more polished as a candidate, he might win the Nom, and of course, Gore can jump in, but I'm not very excited about Gore and want a fresh candidate.

[Czolgosz]

58. Both Reagan and Bush Sr. were anti-choice and anti-gun-control. They were both social reactionaries.

[helderheid]

46. I'll be thrilled. We have a lot on him.

[and-justice-for-all]

56. I dont care who the rethugs nominate..

They do not have a chance at the winning. Shrub and his cronies have single handedly destroyed the Rethug party...The Xtian-Rights domination agenda will not come to pass either.