I am delighted that in the aftermath of last week's Democratic landslide, there are some in the Republican party who think what they need in 2008 is a pro-choice, pro-gay candidate.
I guess the Karl Rove strategy of energizing the base really is dead. I can't imagine anything that's more of a kiss-off to the James Dobson types than supporting a divorced Catholic with known fidelity problems who used to appear at public functions in New York City in drag.
I won't vote for him, but I will definitely support his candidacy.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
15 comments:
The dream ticket, indeed.
Energizing the base? Are we looking at the same politick?
What Rove has been energizing is the Evangelical Wing of the Republican Party. Economic onservatives have been dissappointed since two years into the first term. They got him elected out of necessity rather than enthusiasm.
You could call it triangulation I suppose. Their strategy has been to energize the Christian Right, stir up economic conservatives against the Democrats, and bring to the polls terror-conscious "security moms" and other pro-security voters.
That or the Republican Party is thoroughly genuine in every one of their values. Considering the fact that they are politicians, that would be somewhat of a stretch.
NOW, the triangulation failed because 1) Economic conservatives have been betrayed by big-government Republicans that filled the government 2) Security moms have separated the Iraq War from the war on terror, 3) Security-minded conservatives were frustrated with the lack of initiative on the Mexican Border issue.
Thus one angle in the "triangle" (not what Morris had in mind I know) has grown with pronounced opposition to gay marriage and abortion via Judicial Nominations while the others have shrunk considerably. Pretty soon it's not even a triangle any more- its just a line.
Giuliani does not have my vote, but he would reverse this trend. He would be tough on terror, tough on spending and taxes and would do almost nothing on cultural issues. He is not capable of the triangulation needed to win the White House. He only has two angles.
Of course the thing I'd most like to see is Giuliani taking on the UN relief programs like the squeegie guys they are- they take our money and make things worse with it. Throw the bums out!
I don't think Rudy will get very far.
Actually, despite his being a moderate Republican (and whatever hope that holds), I remember pre-9/11 Rudy. Most people couldn't wait to see him go--and with good reason. He's a bit of a tyrant.
On the other hand (or am I up to three hands now?), maybe he's just more forthright in his views, while others hide and fake things better.
He would be tough on terror
By that, I suppose, you mean supporting the slaughter of hundreds of thousands of people who didn't attack us in the process of invading a country that posed no threat?
rudy's conservatism is based soley on his past as a crime fighter with the liberals always trying to free the crooks.
he is not conservative, and i havent heard him pronounce a single point of conservative philosophy.
he's not running for president, anyway. he's running for attorny general, or something else. running for pres keeps his ID up.
he aint stupid. much to gain. nada to lose.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't he keep a balanced budget as mayor?
although a balanced budget is a nice thing, and is a natural outcome of conservative govt, it is not a philosphical principle.
CA is a fairly socialistic state, and our budget is balanced every year, by law.
a deficit is a symptom of bloated govt, but a balanced budget doesnt say the same for a limited govt.
govt can be bloated, and still have balanced budgets.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't Bill Clinton balance the budget as President?
yes and no, but that dosent make him a conservative either.
Clinton did so by downsizing the military and hiking taxes. Rudy didn't have a military to deprive, and I'm not sure about his tax record, but I do believe he was a fiscal conservative in his spending.
you cant be fiscal conservative if you run NY. the place is a hotbed of waste and patronage,payoffs and paybacks.
Little Cicero's triangle definition does not match with the polls since the election.
Americans have said that corruption was one of the biggest reasons they voted against Republicans.
Americans were with the President on the war untill they found out that he had corrupted that issue too, by lying about his reasons.
Americans were willing to put their lives on the line against a mad man with nukes, but when they found out it was just another neo-con geo-political game, they decided it wasn't worth their sons dying for.
Rudy can't win, but it will be fun having him in the race for a while.
Yes, let's not forget that after being mayor, Giuliani went into business with that scrupulous paragon of virtue, Bernie Kerik. Corruption? Dirt? Mafia skeletons in the closet? The thousands of homeless people who disappeared from New York in the 90s?
Help me out here NB, where do I read the polls wrong. I think I've got a pretty accurate look at the polls.
Post a Comment