I think that this story about his trysts in the Hamptons -- with publicly funded police protection (whether the funds were intentionally "hidden" or not), is a bad one. He's toast.
2007-11-30 05:42:50 · 13 answers · asked by Stephen L 6 in Politics & Government ➔ Elections
To trybeing: But a significant part of the story is about where he went with the protection what he was doing, and how often. We all know that he probably needed protection when he vacationed, but that's hardly the point.
2007-11-30 06:07:38 · update #1
Jeffrey W. The Clinton scandal with Monica Lewinski happened during his SECOND term. But he's certainly popular now, so I know what you're saying. It's just that the Giuliani story has a number of things that people can get turned off by (adultery, improper use of public funds, spending so much time in the Hamptons, trying to hide the expenditures, etc, etc.).
2007-11-30 07:53:44 · update #2
His hopes were sunk a while ago.
2007-11-30 05:55:58 · answer #1 · answered by benni 4 · 2⤊ 1⤋
Bill Clinton was impeached for having sex with Lewinsky right before beating Bob Dole by a LANDSLIDE.
The story G W Bush getting coked-up and running over a hedge surfaced just days before the Republican primary that he won overwhelmingly.
Stories like this don't stick (unless they're blatant lies like the Willie Horton thing, or the Swift Boat vets for "Truth")
2007-11-30 15:04:18 · answer #2 · answered by Jeffrey W 3 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Since he was assigned police protection as a public official, and high profile after 9/11, does that mean he would have to be under "house arrest" and not go anywhere?
2007-11-30 14:01:44 · answer #3 · answered by trybeingobjective 5 · 1⤊ 0⤋
ok and the fact clintons have secret service protection for the rest of their life that we pay for and the rent they charge the government for the SS personal in the guest house, hmmmm sound familiar
2007-11-30 13:51:16 · answer #4 · answered by djominous20 5 · 2⤊ 1⤋
No it won't. But I'll tell you what will. He has got to stop bragging about himself and his accomplishments and focus on solutions to the issues that people care about.
Who cares if the stupid Yankees won while he was mayor of NYC?
2007-11-30 13:56:20 · answer #5 · answered by dude 1 · 4⤊ 0⤋
Except that stories in this vein have come out about just about all of the leading candidates. Odd how they're still there. Personally, I don't think we'll see any major keelhauling until spring at the earliest.
2007-11-30 13:49:23 · answer #6 · answered by Richard S 5 · 5⤊ 2⤋
Pre-Clinton, this would've finished off a frontrunning presidential candidate. Post-Clinton, I'm not so sure.
2007-11-30 14:01:07 · answer #7 · answered by Brian Tubbs 2 · 1⤊ 1⤋
I believe it seriously hurts his chances. This election seems to be about being principled...open, straightforward, in some cases even if in disagreement. How straightforward and principled is a candidate ---Republicans and Democrats.
2007-11-30 13:51:12 · answer #8 · answered by AILENE 4 · 2⤊ 2⤋
it is overkill - that is how the clintons keep getting away with everything -so I wouldnt count him out even if I am not voting for him
2007-11-30 14:00:54 · answer #9 · answered by rooster 5 · 1⤊ 1⤋
I think it will tear him right out of the frontrunning position. This will open up potential for Mitt, Fred, Huckabee, and McCain to take the national lead.
2007-11-30 13:48:29 · answer #10 · answered by Elutherian 4 · 4⤊ 3⤋