Thompson can do it I think.
I dont even like Guliani, hes one step up from Hilarity.
I will say that this election I am simply voting AGAINST Hilarity. My vote goes for whomever is running against her.
2007-09-30 07:29:39
·
answer #1
·
answered by Anonymous
·
3⤊
6⤋
Any Republican Candidate is a much greater applicable determination than Mrs. Clinton. The Republican applicants all have adventure in politics it somewhat is plenty greater beneficial than Mrs. Clintons secret artwork she did jointly as her husband became the president. I say secret because of the fact we actually do no longer be attentive to what she did and could no longer until 2012. Thats ridiculous. Immigration is the style 2 undertaking, genuine after the conflict. The conflict undertaking extraordinarily much all applicants are an analogous so it somewhat is rather no longer as probable a place to standout as immigration. Who has the ideal coverage for unlawful immigration? i think of the pollthat shows 50% of the inhabitants won't vote fro Mrs Clinton is a clean indication of ways properly she measures as much as any republican candidate.
2016-12-14 04:05:35
·
answer #2
·
answered by ? 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
First and foremost, the Republican party is not done! We are alive and well and going to win the presidency in 2008. However, I believe that Fred Thompson is the best chance we have at beating Hillary! Plus, Hillary does not have the charisma to pull off the lies and flip flopping that her husband was able to. She will be buried alive in the coming elections. As another person pointed out, people either love her or they absolutely hate her and that includes her own democratic party!! Also, I think a great running mate for Thompson would be Newt Gingrich!! That would be a great pair! Go GOP!! Go Thompson!!
2007-09-30 09:45:00
·
answer #3
·
answered by RubyUnicorn 3
·
1⤊
0⤋
Huckabee actually would be an attractive candidate on many issues, and might have a good chance against Clinton. Too bad he dismisses most accepted science regarding evolution.
If Romney weren't Mormon, he probably would defeat Clinton easily IMO.
Unlike Clinton, Romney has no baggage of past poor decisions (her unswerving support of her husband until the evidence was indisputable; her positions on Iraq; her continued defense of her husband's fiscal policies claiming that he "balanced the budget," which only is true if you believe in cash-basis, unified federal budget accounting, which most experts including the Comptroller General know is a farce.
Clinton's relative silence on carbon emissions and the federal budget crisis are negatives, and her pro-immigration policies are a prelude to disaster IMO.
Romney also has considerable executive experience as the former governor of Massachusetts and in business. If he is the Republican nominee, he'll be Clinton's toughest opponent IMO.
Mark Warner, the former Democratic governor of Virginia, would have been my top pick.
Frankly, I think the next president may have a worse mess than Herbert Hoover (Great Depression) and Gerald Ford (Vietnam) combined. I fear for our country given the current slate of candidates.
2007-09-30 07:39:58
·
answer #4
·
answered by seeking answers 6
·
1⤊
2⤋
Guiliani can't beat Hillary. I'm not sure if there is anyone in the Republican party that can beat her. Republicans act like they are afraid of the Dems. Or maybe it is because the Liberal media will beat them up no matter what they say. The media twists every issue to fit their Liberal Democrat bias.
2007-09-30 09:23:33
·
answer #5
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
2⤋
Denis Miller says the same thing. He is a Guiliani fan.
I hope any of the top conservatives can beat her if they run their campaign correctly.
2007-10-01 07:32:33
·
answer #6
·
answered by Philip H 7
·
1⤊
0⤋
If Hillary does poorly in Iowa and New Hampshire Giuliani's entire candidacy is going to collapse in flames.
Secondly, if the Christian Coalition refuses to support Giuliani, we're going to see a third party candidate like Tancredo or Huckabee and the Democrat will win.
In a straight Giuliani vs. Hillary matchup, the outcome is uncertain, but I doubt Giuliani is the only one who could beat Hillary. I think Tancredo and Paul are the sure losers though.
2007-09-30 07:35:52
·
answer #7
·
answered by M M 3
·
1⤊
2⤋
Rudy's whole claim to fame is his handling of NY City during 9-11 but has never even read the 9-11 Commission Report. That speaks volumes to me, he's not intellectually curious, not willing to think for himself, and not capable of effective leadership.
There's a big difference between being mayor or district attorney and being president, the most important difference being that as mayor you really don't need a strong background in foreign policy and he has none.
Clinton will defeat herself she's the least inspiring candidate for office since Woodrow Wilson.
2007-09-30 07:35:42
·
answer #8
·
answered by Darin H 2
·
1⤊
2⤋
I think that any one of our three front runners could get nominated and give her a run for her money AND, beat her. I truly do. You either love Hillary or have an intense distrust and dislike of her. This is one election that I believe even Rudy could win.
In the words of Dodd, a Democratic Presidential candidate:
"I don't underestimate the political abilities of the opposition," said Dodd. "Anyone who assumes this is just going to be a cakewalk, I think is mistaken."
He too doesn't believe that Hillary will make it.
2007-09-30 07:47:18
·
answer #9
·
answered by Anonymous
·
2⤊
2⤋
I think we all know the time of the GOP is over. Never mind beating Clinton, none of the GOP candidates are capable of beating any of the Democratic hopefulls.
2007-09-30 07:28:33
·
answer #10
·
answered by Anonymous
·
5⤊
2⤋
Guiliani does not invigorate the christian fundamentalist base of the republican party, so, I doubt he can generate much enthusiasm at the polls to create record numbers of voters, but, much the same can be said of Hillary...
2007-09-30 07:27:22
·
answer #11
·
answered by alphabetsoup2 5
·
6⤊
1⤋