Is Rudy Guiliani the Republican to beat Clinton?

Question

After skipping the Univision and NAACP debates, I doubt he will get the minority vote. He definitely will not get the NRA vote. Evangelicals are threatening to run a third party candidate if he is the Republican nominee because he's pro-choice. He also wouldn't get the vote of Americans who no longer support the war in Iraq. If the GOP were smart, they would throw their support behind a proven conservative who differs with Bush on the war in Iraq and a candidate who actually showed up to the minority debates; but Guiliani is in the lead in the polls.

I thought Fred Thompson would be the best choice at first; but he's starting to become a disappointment in my opinion.

Rudy is first in the polls; Fred is second followed by John McCain and Romney respectively.

The point is that Democrats would probably be more solidified in their support for Clinton than the GOP would be for Guiliani. With Clinton getting the liberal vote and a good percentage of the moderate and maybe swing vote, wouldn't the Republican nominee need the conservative vote.

If Obama wins the nod, Democrats are screwed; he has absolutely no experience and comes off as being too far to the left. Bush was the governor of Texas and I don't think that helped him much with running the country. Rudy was just a mayor and has no foreign policy experience.

In response to Susan, I think conservatives would just stay home if they had to choose between Guiliani and Clinton. Rudy's 2 divorces and his relationship with his children do not look good to the family values crowd.

Answer 1

The thing is that none of the Republicans currently running have a solid voting block among the Republicans. Saying he's the one with the best chance to beat her is like saying that putting the best high school basketball team against the winner of the Final Four is a good idea. But what other options do the Republicans have? Good Lord, she'll make mincemeat out of Rudy - in the debates and on the issues. It's really early in this race and a lot can happen. But what is going to change in the next few months? If she wins the primaries, which is looking like a lock so far, then the Republicans have to put up their best man against her. I guess with their limited choices, that works out to be Rudy. Though McCain may not be finished quite yet. But I don't think he stands a chance at beating her either, and he sure won't pull the evangelicals. They've got a BIG problem. It's going to be interesting, that's for sure.

Answer 2

Probably so.
But only if he can showcase his experience (prior to 2001/9/11) and stress the need for a President who is a proven manager.
I'm not a big fan of his, but he is one of the few candidates who has ANY relevant experience to be the nation's chief executive!

Guiliani had the 2nd-hardest job in the country, is thought by most to have done a good job (crime went down, city got safer and cleaner, etc.), and was re-elected as Mayor of NY. Then, his city was attacked, and his performance was under intense public scrutiny; most people thought he handled it rather well. In any event, the evidence is there, for voters to judge how good or bad a leader he can be.

Most of the others (including Thompson and Clinton) are Senators who offer no track record of accomplishments they have managed. There is no history on which to judge how they will perform in a job where "the buck stops here" (as the sign said on Harry Truman's desk). Voting among 99 others does not give the voters any way of deciding how good or bad a manager the person will be, when the time comes to take action.or to make final decisions and then see to it that they are carried out effectively.

And most of them are LAWYERS.
We certainly don't need more lawyers deciding things for us and trying to run our lives!!!

It is very sad that the majority of the candidates are former lawyers, who then became legislators. Nearly every one of the Democrats is a lawyer who went to the Senate:
.... Clinton, Biden, and Dodd, Edwards, and Obama.
That also describes some of the Republicans:
.... Brownback and Thompson.

Among the Democrats, the only one who ever ran a state is Bill Richardson, the Governor of New Mexico. (However, he is not really running for President; he wants to be picked for VP.) Kucinich once ran a city (Cleveland mayor), but none of the others has managed anything bigger than a law office (or the White House Travel Office, or maybe Edwards' 30,000 square-foot house!)

Among the Republicans, things are not much better:
Aside from Giuliani, only two others have executive experience:
Huckabee and Romney also ran states (as Governors of Massachussets and Arkansas, respectively). Again, the record is available, and voters have something to go on, to decide whether or not they can do the job of actually running a large organization and governing a nation!

(A few have military records, which might give some basis for predicting how effectively they can lead a small group or accomplish a mission. My favorite, Ron Paul, does have a long record as a practicing physician, and I suppose the absence of any scandals or problems says something -- but that's hardly comparable to running a city or state.)

So that's about it!!!!
Mostly former-lawyers.
Mostly Senators.
Aside from Guliani, Huckabee, Kucinich, Richardson, and Romney, not one of the other candidates can run on a significant record of management and leadership -- other than how they lobbied or voted for legislation. That tells us little or nothing about how effective they would be in carrying out things and actually ACHIEVING GOALS -- not just voting for them.

I take some comfort from history: Senators usually don't become Presidents
During the last century, with the exception of the 1960s, only two ex-Senator became President. (Truman, who was VP when FDR died, and Garfield, whose failures probably drove him suicide.)
In the 1960s, we had three of them, and each proved to be very ineffective in office!

Fortunately, no ex-senator has ascended to the Presidency for over 40 years. Let's keep it that way!


.

Answer 3

Oh so which you comprehend what Republicans think of do you? i could care much less what Monica did to invoice, or any incorrect way around. He replaced into caught crimson surpassed mendacity below oath and consequently rightly impeached. maximum Republicans sense the comparable. i don't think Rudy to be to any extent further clever than the Clinton's while it consists of the Morality component. having stated that neither would have my vote. in my view I only locate the Clinton's frightening era.

Answer 4

If he gets the nod from his party that will be ashamed this is not a good man what did he ever do? if you Republicans want a fighting change to win you all had better get behind Ron Paul because there is not one person running that can beat Hillary Clinton.but you may have a change with Paul.

Answer 5

I dont think any conservatives would get the minority vote, or the vote for people who do not want war (which is over exaggerated in my opinion) Hasnt Hillary already changed her mind on pulling the troops out anyway? I cant imagine Hillary getting the NRA vote. I still think he could beat Hillary. Some many people loathe her.

As to your additional comment, I dont think you have to worry about any conservatives voting for Hillary over Rudy. I also think it is a bad assumption to say that Hillary will get moderate and swing votes. She is extreme in her positions.

Answer 6

Lol!! I can't believe someone put Rudy Giuliani and honest in the same sentence..

I'm no fan of Hillary,. but she will have my and the rest of the country's vote over him.. He's a disgrace his own childeren won't even talk to him.. not to mention he married his cousin!!!

-He declined to sign a pledge not to raise taxes or create new taxes, confirming the possibility of higher taxes for the average American under his presidency.
- Rudy has no foreign policy experience
-Contrary to popular belief he does not support gay marriage, only civil unions!
-People assume he will be tough on fighting “terrorism” but he can’t even manage to support keeping our borders secure. According to him “illegal immigration is not a crime” expect wage depression, a higher rate of unemployment and a bigger health care crisis under his presidency as well. Also “it has been alleged that Giuliani never read 9/11 Commission's Report and that he did not attend any meetings of the Iraq Study Group after being appointed to it in early 2006.”
-The fact Rudy Giuliani is “America’s mayor” is simply a myth. Due to his negligence he caused more deaths on 9/11. He suspended the search at ground zero when 242 firefighters were still missing because of outdated radios which Giuliani was warned about!
-And New York City’s crime rate being down attributes to police Commissioner Bill Bratton, Rudy had nothing to do with it.. “Bratton, not Giuliani, was featured on the cover of Time Magazine in 1996.[54] Giuliani forced Bratton out of his position after two years, in what was generally seen as a battle of two large egos in which Giuliani was unable to accept Bratton's celebrity”

Answer 7

Guiliani isn't in the lead on the polls for the GOP, Fred Thompson is and he WOULD be a change of pace for the white house. However, you might have noticed those results from a certain state's candidate affiliation.

Answer 8

I am a Democrat. I fear Hilary will lose against ANYONE they put up, because of the built in bugaboo about "we aren't ready for the first woman president" that never seems to diminish or change. I think Betsy Ross, Eleanor Roosevelt, Rachel Carson or Ann Richardson could come back to life and they would lose against the GOP for one reason: They're women. Old ways of thinking die hard.

BY THE WAY: For those who keep repeating that Thompson is leading in the polls, they said on ABC last night that 54% of registered GOP voters said they would consider voting for Thompson UNDER NO CIRCUMSTANCES. More would vote for Rudy. Where are your numbers coming from?

Answer 9

According to the latest poll (Today Show, NBC ), he is the GOP frontrunner. I am not sure that he is the best choice to beat a Democrat, and I am not happy with the way the candidates are "buying" their way into the nomination by being the biggest fundraisers.

Answer 10

They would also need somebody who differs from Bush on deficit spending, but they won't do that and the Dems will win the fiscal conservatives too. A Republican bastion lost by the Social conservatives on their way to their quirky little church party.