Is the fact that Guiliani is being considered a serious contender for the Republican nomination an........?

Question

.....indication of how far the Republican party has strayed from it's conservative roots? Do you think Reagan would be disappointed in the Republican party if he were still alive?

Answer 1

Actually Reagan was indeed very similar to Dubya (and Rudy).
He only played with social conservative issues to court the religous right. He talked a big game about fiscal responsibility before spending us into record debt. He pretended the tax cuts that mulitplied that debt had the opposite effect of what really happened.
He led an outrageously interventionist foreign policy - randomly funding and arming anyone who could pretend they were fighting communism (no matter how imaginary the threat).
So no, Reagan would simply see his legacy continued.
Lincoln I am sure is spinning in his grave though.

Answer 2

Good question, but in all fairness... both parties are not what they once where. A plethora of labels with little understanding of true definition. Example: Liberals or TRUE liberals are now known as libertarians, Old school Republicans are conservatives, the new conservatives are republican also know as neo-conservatives. Democrats are all over the place. Most of the lunatics are known as leftist, or the far-left. Then there are the secular progressives, which fall into the leftist category. Hillary is a well known waffler, because she trys to be all to everyone. Bush is not a neo-con, he is a republican/leftist. Now that is an oxymoron but true. So yes all ideologies are not what they used to be.

Answer 3

Yes, and No. Name recognition is a powerful thing. In this phase, it's a testament to the American way of giving everyone a chance. I think your question would be more appropriate if he gets the nomination.

At that point, conservatives have a very tough choice to make, don't vote for him and split the vote with a third party, and thus allow a liberal into office, or vote for him and allow a liberal into office. Lose - Lose situation.

Answer 4

Well, the other guys are defined by their religious preferences, which are pretty irrelevant when it comes to real political issues.

Considering the secularist views of James Madison and Thomas Jefferson ("the priest is the enemy of liberty"), I think Republicans have strayed from our constitutional roots.

Take Huckabee. He wants non-Christians like myself to pay for the ten commandments in public schools, vouchers for Christian schools, and a constitutional amendment banning all forms of abortion, even if it kills a woman to continue a pregnancy.

If anything, the Republicans have been sidetracked by a rather extreme religious branch in the U.S. that doesn't seem to respect the separation of church and state and the fact that not everyone lives by their religious doctrines.

I think Reagan might have been disappointed with Bush's spending in the past seven years, speaking economically. They're not quite fiscal conservatives, are they?

Answer 5

What worthy Republican would want to Run as a Republican after 8 years of W???

Rudy has the views of a Liberal and the Scandals and Dirty Deals of a Republican.... Does that make him a Moderate?

Answer 6

It is more an indication of the mood of the country. It is highly unlikely that a very conservative republican could win the next election (although I would love it if they did). Our best bet to keep our country from taking a liberal nose-dive is to elect a "semi-liberal" candidate that would have a chance of winning the national election. We have not strayed....it is strategy.

Answer 7

No, it's an indication that it needs to get back to its libertarian roots and away from where the religious conservatives have taken it.

Answer 8

I think Reagan would be more disappointed by the current president (as a result of his ineptness).

Answer 9

yes. Guiliani is the wrong direction for our party.

Romney is the best we can do this time.

Answer 10

yes and yes