Be specific. Simply saying, "He was the mayor of NY on 9/11/01" is really not enough to qualify him for the highest office in the country. What experience does he have to prepare him for the way things work on a national level?
2007-02-07 07:56:26 · 19 answers · asked by Bush Invented the Google 6 in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
Okay, so far, I've heard "He was mayor of New York," which, again, does nothing to qualify him to lead this country. I've heard, "He has great leadership abilities." Well, being President is about more than being charismatic, I'm afraid. I've heard, "He was a great prosecutor." Again... does nothing to train him for national politics.
Anyone else?
2007-02-07 08:01:35 · update #1
Sandy: Come on. I love New York a lot, but have you BEEN there lately?
2007-02-07 08:02:24 · update #2
TomA: Giuliani is a Republican, honey.
2007-02-07 08:02:55 · update #3
Ernest: "Instinctively"? I doubt it. Mayors have advisors too. Doesn't qualify him to be President.
2007-02-07 08:14:05 · update #4
C B: Don't get defensive. If he's a good candidate for President of the United States, tell me why instead of getting defensive. You haven't yet told me why he should have my vote.
2007-02-07 08:15:07 · update #5
Michael N: So you can't come up with one reason why Giuliani is qualified? I'm not sure why you're bringing up Clinton - I haven't said I support her candidacy. I'm merely asking why I should vote for Giuliani. Why can't anyone answer this question?
2007-02-07 08:16:10 · update #6
Matt M: While I disagree with your premise that running New York City is equivalent to running the United States of America, and while I don't understand, again, why you're bringing up Obama and Clinton when I haven't said I'll vote for either of them... at least you tried.
2007-02-07 08:17:24 · update #7
NYC has more population and represents a larger economy (in total dollars) than many other states in the US and entire countries and he already served 2 terms as mayor. So, he has arguably more experience (longer time period and being in charge of more people and more money) than Barack Obama or Hillary Clinton. Furthermore, during his time in office he began revolutionary programs that drastically decreased crime in NYC and helped provide leadership to both the people of NYC and many other Americans during 9/11.
I like him because, based on his experience, his campaign so far, his views on abortion (pro-choice), death penalty(anti death),etc he is actualy clearly not a washington, DC insider nor a Bush administration insider.
2007-02-07 08:10:14 · answer #1 · answered by Matt M 5 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Well, I am not a big Giuliani fan, but:
He was the chief executive of the largest city in the United States (and did an okay job) (NYC is more populous than 38 states, and being a governor, i.e. the chief executive, helps make you qualified to be president). Being in an executive position already puts him ahead of those with solely legislative positions (which is partly why Bill Richardson would probably make a better President than, say, Obama). And he has shown to be a pretty good leader when times were not that great (Yes, 9/11).
2007-02-07 16:01:58 · answer #2 · answered by theearlybirdy 4 · 2⤊ 1⤋
In my opinion being mayor of a massive city like New York or governor of a state is adequate experience. It's the same job, being the Man In Charge, just a different scale.
What I do NOT think is adequate experience is a term and a half (like Clinton) or less (Obama) in the Senate. The job responsibilites are totally different. I'd rather see Guliani than either of them.
2007-02-07 16:01:53 · answer #3 · answered by tabithap 4 · 2⤊ 1⤋
Tough on crime! Showed STRONG solid leadership skills after 9/11!! I'm sorry but his performance as Mayor of a huge city after a catastrophic event like 9/11 is very relevant!!
2007-02-07 16:17:49 · answer #4 · answered by Jenny A_331 3 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Cleaned-up New York Crime . Former Prosecutor . Instinctively knew what to do in a HUGE crisis never before faced by ANYONE .
And his tenure as Mayor of America's largest city DOES matter .
New York City is bigger than some states. . . . and that counts for alot .
2007-02-07 16:03:27 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋
He was the mayor of a city that has a population more than three times that of Arkansas.
If you want to compare qualifications of those running he is hardly at the bottom of the heap of the '08 candidates or historically speaking.
Update-
Don't be coy with me. If you are really interested in his qualifications go look them up on his website. Here's a link...
http://www.joinrudy2008.com/
All you want to hear is a bunch of responses telling you how unqualified he is. You're a shill for the DNC.
BTW- I just saw your question about bush wasting money on Air Force One trips to Delaware. I left you a comment there.
Update#2- ...crickets...
2007-02-07 16:05:13 · answer #6 · answered by C B 6 · 2⤊ 1⤋
Nothing yet. That what the primaries are for, to prove that he should in fact receive the Republican nomination for the Presidency. He could run as an independent, but most candidates would prefer the backing/nomination of one of the major parties.
2007-02-07 16:01:38 · answer #7 · answered by taa 4 · 1⤊ 1⤋
He cleaned up Times Square.
Got rid of rampant prostution on Times Square.
Clamped down on crime.
Turned Times Square from a peep show crime ridden area to a tourist spot that it is today.
A very agressive proscuiter:
He helped take down over 11 seperate organised crime figures including the heads of the "Five Familys".
The crime rate of NYC was one of the highest in the nation and during his administration it dropped by a large margin. He cracked down on the Mafia virtually killing off their influence in the city.
2007-02-07 16:18:43 · answer #8 · answered by chefantwon 4 · 0⤊ 1⤋
He cracked down on crime and gun criminals in New York City. He had a solid high level career as a prosecutor before becoming mayor.
2007-02-07 16:00:08 · answer #9 · answered by Timothy M 5 · 2⤊ 1⤋
A more important question is what makes Hillary Clinton qualified to be president? She can't handle being a crappy Senator. There is no way she can handle being President.
2007-02-07 16:06:18 · answer #10 · answered by ? 5 · 2⤊ 1⤋