as the most qualified candidate to deal with terrorism?
2007-11-17 11:47:59 · 13 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
Maybe the same way an actor (Ronald Reagan) became president.
2007-11-17 11:51:39 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 5⤊ 0⤋
It is rude to answer with a question but here I go. How is a former first lady, A Senator, A state Governor, A party Chairman, or any other Democrat candidate qualified to deal with terrorism or any other Military and security issue? The answer is that they don't have the experience or knowledge in those topics. Also Foreign policy will not make us safe. Enforcing good Foreign policy will. So if you want to talk about good enforcement of policy and law, then I think a former big city mayor who has a track record of fixing big city problems is a good place to start. Thanks for your time.
2007-11-17 12:01:06 · answer #2 · answered by The Mechanic 3 · 2⤊ 0⤋
i think of he's driving this united statesa.'s Mayor ingredient so a techniques as he can. If 9/eleven by no potential exceeded off, he does no longer have gained as plenty publicity and must be working for senator, as could be a logical next step, quite than president. and that i think of it somewhat is shameful, as is any baby-kisser who makes use of this tragedy, which I watched from my window, to their benefit. Many "much less nicely off" New Yorkers bear in mind him as a brutal mayor who exchange into extrememly racist and led to plenty suffering. i do no longer think of he's qualified, and the very actuality that he's milking the suffering of the 9/eleven households out to be some variety of crime.
2016-11-11 23:02:44 · answer #3 · answered by ? 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
There are four types of candidates, congresspeople (PC!!!), generals, ex-VPs, and those without said experience. You have to start somewhere, and America seems to be okay with that place being outside of Capital Hill.
That being said, New York City, with all its immigrant boroughs and 'hoods, is just about as culturally diverse as the UN Security Council, generally the biggest players in world politics. And in the immediate aftermath (cleaning up debris, finding bodies, swearing at the sky with rage) Gulianni has proved remarkably adept at handling terrorism. We are talking about him, aren't we?
2007-11-17 11:57:34 · answer #4 · answered by andymarkelson 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋
If being a senator is the great experience that most of the idiots we put into office have then maybe we are better off with a newbie. I'm sorry but experience doesn't always make a great leader.
2007-11-17 12:11:40 · answer #5 · answered by bluekrush74 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
More than the 35 years of doing nothing makes Hillary the most exsperience in the Democratic mind....Next question
2007-11-17 12:14:36 · answer #6 · answered by charlie s 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
The former NYC mayor has one redeeming quality: his ability to hunt down a photo op even during the more dire circumstances.
2007-11-17 11:51:57 · answer #7 · answered by LEE 3 · 3⤊ 1⤋
Ask Pat Robertson. He must think Rudy can be easily bought because these two guys make very strange bedfellows. But they are both kooks.
2007-11-17 11:56:59 · answer #8 · answered by Ktcyan 5 · 0⤊ 1⤋
He isn't the most qualified, but he's as good as any of the others running. In other words, they all suck.
2007-11-17 11:50:41 · answer #9 · answered by fsfa 6 · 4⤊ 0⤋
Because like Reagan, and most recently W, he got a lot of media time doing manly, presidential poses and saying macho crap that impresses some people. Giuliani married his cousin and dated her while still married to his second wife - and you thought Clinton thought with his wanker?
2007-11-17 11:52:34 · answer #10 · answered by commonsense 5 · 1⤊ 2⤋