Forums | MacLife

vaeaglesfan · 2005-11-19 8:28 pm

I just read this artcile from the AP on Yahoo!:

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20051119/ap_ … ry_vs_rudy

I've thought forever that Rudy Giuliani would be a Republican candidate worth voting for, but my opinion has changed. Reading only this article would make one think that our next president will be from the state of New York and there are no alternatives.

I don't think the Republican South will support Rudy Giuliani, nor will the Democratic Party stick with a Northern candidate for president this next go around. If the Dems want to win they need to find a centrist. The GOP knows this, but will continue to attack the Democratic base by avoiding the war ("We're tough on terror.") and bringing up "social" issues like gay rights and religion.

A perfect Southern Democrat to run would be my governor of Virginia, Governor Mark Warner. In VA we call him a "centrist Democrat" because he takes a conservative stance on the economy, but believe in taxation; and a slightly more liberal stance on social issues, like welfare, etc.

Gov. Warner made his millions as co-founder of Nextel, but appeals to traditionally Republican Virginians because he's very personable and just this past week several people in New Hampshire (where Warner visited) said he "connected on a one-on-one basis." Warner took our $8 billion deficit and turned it in to a $1.5 billion surplus, which he plans on using to cure transportation woes we have in VA and better-fund education (which he pushed in New Hampshire, shaping a national platform to run for the presidency on).

Warner's popularity and success in VA basically won the gubernatorial race (Warner's term expires in Jan. 2006, VA governors can only serve 1 term) for his Lt. Governor just two weeks ago.

I know most people in these forums are more liberal, or even if you're conservatice, I invite you to check out Mark Warner. You'll hear his name more and more as we get closer to 2008. I think he's the right man for the job of taking back the White House.

ShnickyShnack · 2005-11-19 9:49 pm

Rudi won't even try. No way can he get the nomination.

The other guy with potential mass-appeal also has serious image problems within the party, John McCain. Repubs hate the guy. He can't get the nomination either.

after-life · 2005-11-19 9:58 pm

If Rudy had presidential ambitions he'd switch to the Democratic party. At least that way he'd have a good shot of being nominated.

He's FAR too liberal for the taste of the Republican base.

wellfleation · 2005-11-19 10:01 pm

For Dems, I think it was U.S. News (mag) where I read there was an indication that Gore was planning on running again with Barack Obama as his VP. This would be interesting. I would vote for them.

SonicSamurai · 2005-11-19 10:10 pm

Dear lord...that may just be a horse of the apocalypse.
And either way, I dont buy it. Parties have a hard time supporting losers. Gore and Kerry would probibly have a much harder time that even a complete newcomer.

vaeaglesfan · 2005-11-19 11:09 pm

Oh, I forgot to add: under Mark Warner's reign as governor of Virginia, we were named best managed state in the Union.

Metacell · 2005-11-20 1:13 am

SonicSamurai wrote:
Dear lord...that may just be a horse of the apocalypse.
And either way, I dont buy it. Parties have a hard time supporting losers. Gore and Kerry would probibly have a much harder time that even a complete newcomer.

Nixon did it. Ronald Reagan lost 2 presidential primaries before finally succeeding. But I agree, Gore isn't any more attractive now than he was in 2000. Obama would be the vote getter.

mo' ron · 2005-11-20 2:33 am

after-life wrote:
If Rudy had presidential ambitions he'd switch to the Democratic party. At least that way he'd have a good shot of being nominated.

He's FAR too liberal for the taste of the Republican base.

I don't know about "FAR" too liberal, but he's liberal enough that I wouldn't draw a big distinction between him and Hillary (who's a bit too socially conservative, I think). Plus, if he switched, it would just start another "flip flopper" campaign by the Republicans.

But, I don't think Guiliani and Hillary are different enough to make for an interesting race ideologically, but they are both kind of "superstars" in the political sense, since most people who don't even follow politics would recognize the name, so from a media standpoint, it would be interesting.

Between the 2, I would personally vote for Hillary simply because I want to see how a woman would handle being president.

But, I agree that the Repubs would never run Rudy.

resedit · 2005-11-20 2:42 am

Rudy is liked by far more conservatives than you guys seem to give him credit for.
I don't agree with all his policies - but he knows how to lead.

Compare Rudy in his disaster with the mayor of N.O. in his disaster.
Rudy has some excellent qualities - and yes, I think he could get the republican nomination.

Will he?
I don't know who else is running - but I can't think of anyone who would be guaranteed to mop the floor with him either. McCain might among swing voters, but McCain is not well liked amongst hardcore republicans to get nominated - he's more conservative than Rudy, but he's done some things to piss off certain people. Rudy hasn't - he plays ball.

Tetrachloride · 2005-11-20 6:02 am

Bernard Kerik, son of Rudy so to speak. Corrupt. Thumbs down on Rudy.

Gatchaman · 2005-11-20 11:51 am

resedit wrote:
Compare Rudy in his disaster with the mayor of N.O. in his disaster.

So? 99.9% of NYC was unaffected by 9/11. There were no masses of homeless, starving people. Even the direct victims had a warm bed and food in their bellies that very night.

Robert B. · 2005-11-20 1:59 pm

It's way too soon for Obama. And with Gore? Suicide.

resedit · 2005-11-20 4:09 pm

Gatchaman wrote:
resedit wrote:
Compare Rudy in his disaster with the mayor of N.O. in his disaster.
So? 99.9% of NYC was unaffected by 9/11. There were no masses of homeless, starving people. Even the direct victims had a warm bed and food in their bellies that very night.

99.9% of NYC was unaffected by 9/11?
Are you really claiming that?

resedit · 2005-11-20 4:15 pm

Tetrachloride wrote:
Bernard Kerik, son of Rudy so to speak. Corrupt. Thumbs down on Rudy.

Ya know - so far, the only people I have heard talking Rudy are those who generally support democrats and have vile things to say about the right.

As such - I don't see a problem with him getting the nomination - since those people have nothing to do with who the right nominates.

Look at me - am I not as right wing as they come?
I was described in another thread as a Limbaugh ditto (or something like that).

Maybe there is a republican who would be better than Rudy - the only one I can think of at the moment though isn't allowed to run due to term limits.

The leftists here may not like him - but they don't matter, they have no say in who the republicans nominate, and they would vote left in the general election anyway.

Tell me - is Rudy too "moderate" for the swing voters?
I think not.

ShnickyShnack · 2005-11-20 4:16 pm

resedit wrote:
Gatchaman wrote:
resedit wrote:
Compare Rudy in his disaster with the mayor of N.O. in his disaster.
So? 99.9% of NYC was unaffected by 9/11. There were no masses of homeless, starving people. Even the direct victims had a warm bed and food in their bellies that very night.
99.9% of NYC was unaffected by 9/11?
Are you really claiming that?

I believe he means the city wasn't physically devastated like New Orleans was ... on 9/11, the physical damage was localized to a small section of the city. Not to minimize the horror of it all, of course. But it's apples and oranges as far as New Orleans is concerned.

As for Rudy, even worse than his very liberal attitudes is his very squalid personal life. The guy's got serious "family values" problems.

Tallgeese · 2005-11-20 5:24 pm

resedit wrote:
Gatchaman wrote:
resedit wrote:
Compare Rudy in his disaster with the mayor of N.O. in his disaster.
So? 99.9% of NYC was unaffected by 9/11. There were no masses of homeless, starving people. Even the direct victims had a warm bed and food in their bellies that very night.
99.9% of NYC was unaffected by 9/11?
Are you really claiming that?

Half a dozen buildings were destroyed in New York.

The entire city of New Orleans was rendered uninhabitable and significant, whole number percentages were destroyed and many more parts flooded.

Tetrachloride · 2005-11-20 5:33 pm

resedit wrote:
]Look at me - am I not as right wing as they come?

Nope. Rush Limbaugh is in the foamy mouth category and you're not.

ShnickyShnack · 2005-11-20 5:43 pm

Tetrachloride wrote:
resedit wrote:
]Look at me - am I not as right wing as they come?
Nope. Rush Limbaugh is in the foamy mouth category and you're not.

Ol' res is shuffling down that road, tho.

Tallgeese · 2005-11-20 5:57 pm

Really? I always saw him headed towards John Birchland.

hal9k · 2005-11-20 6:15 pm

C'mon now...the poor guy (Res) has to rationalize the worst thing we've experienced in I don't know. What I mean is that I REALLY can't compare this to anything I know of. (I was born just before Ike's reelection).

I see him as more a non-violent inhabitant of Ruby Ridge.

ShnickyShnack · 2005-11-20 6:16 pm

Tallgeese wrote:
Really? I always saw him headed towards John Birchland.

No, the Birchers have (had?) an actual ideology of some sort, a set of beliefs they subscribed to. The Rush school of thought, however, relies on talking points and the latest spin from Warshington.

hal9k · 2005-11-20 6:18 pm

ShnickyShnack wrote:
Tallgeese wrote:
Really? I always saw him headed towards John Birchland.
No, the Birchers have (had?) an actual ideology of some sort, a set of beliefs they subscribed to. The Rush school of thought, however, relies on talking points and the latest spin from Warshington.

....and Vicodin.

Benton · 2005-11-20 6:56 pm

A mature southern centrist democrat with experience and vision and also a Director of Apple. Follow me: www.algore04.com

wellfleation · 2005-11-20 7:51 pm

resedit wrote:
Maybe there is a republican who would be better than Rudy - the only one I can think of at the moment though isn't allowed to run due to term limits.

WAAAAAAIT a minute. Are you saying bush is better than Rudy? WTF? A monkey running this country wouldn't have messed up this country as much as bush has. Rudy would've been a savior if he had won 5 years ago!

mattm · 2005-11-20 8:05 pm

IMHO McCain will not get nominated. His views will not gain enough acceptance in the GOP.

Forums | MacLife

#1 2005-11-19 8:28 pm

Presidential Race 2008

#2 2005-11-19 9:49 pm

Re: Presidential Race 2008

#3 2005-11-19 9:58 pm

Re: Presidential Race 2008

#4 2005-11-19 10:01 pm

Re: Presidential Race 2008

#5 2005-11-19 10:10 pm

Re: Presidential Race 2008

#6 2005-11-19 11:09 pm

Re: Presidential Race 2008

#7 2005-11-20 1:13 am

Re: Presidential Race 2008

SonicSamurai wrote:

#8 2005-11-20 2:33 am

Re: Presidential Race 2008

after-life wrote:

#9 2005-11-20 2:42 am

Re: Presidential Race 2008

#10 2005-11-20 6:02 am

Re: Presidential Race 2008

#11 2005-11-20 11:51 am

Re: Presidential Race 2008

resedit wrote:

#12 2005-11-20 1:59 pm

Re: Presidential Race 2008

#13 2005-11-20 4:09 pm

Re: Presidential Race 2008

Gatchaman wrote:

resedit wrote:

#14 2005-11-20 4:15 pm

Re: Presidential Race 2008

Tetrachloride wrote:

#15 2005-11-20 4:16 pm

Re: Presidential Race 2008

resedit wrote:

Gatchaman wrote:

resedit wrote:

#16 2005-11-20 5:24 pm

Re: Presidential Race 2008

resedit wrote:

Gatchaman wrote:

resedit wrote:

#17 2005-11-20 5:33 pm

Re: Presidential Race 2008

resedit wrote:

#18 2005-11-20 5:43 pm

Re: Presidential Race 2008

Tetrachloride wrote:

resedit wrote:

#19 2005-11-20 5:57 pm

Re: Presidential Race 2008

#20 2005-11-20 6:15 pm

Re: Presidential Race 2008

#21 2005-11-20 6:16 pm

Re: Presidential Race 2008

Tallgeese wrote:

#22 2005-11-20 6:18 pm

Re: Presidential Race 2008

ShnickyShnack wrote:

Tallgeese wrote:

#23 2005-11-20 6:56 pm

Re: Presidential Race 2008

#24 2005-11-20 7:51 pm

Re: Presidential Race 2008

resedit wrote:

#25 2005-11-20 8:05 pm

Re: Presidential Race 2008

Board footer