I’m at a loss to understand why some prominent conservative thinkers are seemingly shrugging their shoulders and jumping onto the McCain-Lieberman 2008 bandwagon. Some are of the opinion that McCain-Lieberman would make a good Republican team for the 2008 Presidential election..
I couldn’t disagree more. While John McCain served honorably during the Vietnam War that was what?…..Thirty something years ago. There have to be more achievements in his record of public service to compel conservatives to rally around him. I don’t see any. I have noticed that McCain has been on a very quiet tour through the Bible Belt, trying to make up for those uncalled for, hateful comments about Christians he made in the 2000 primaries.
I for one am not buying his apology tour but that’s not the only problem I have with the “maverick” Senator. The McCain-Feingold campaign finance regulation and his membership in the gang of fourteen (gatekeepers to the Supreme Court) are just two examples why McCain has been anything but a loyal Republican so I’m surprised that any Republicans or conservatives are even considering his candidacy.
While he’s sometimes amusing on Imus, McCain’s not a very dynamic public speaker unless one uses him as a sleep aid. He spoke at our daughters’ graduations from the University of Oklahoma two years ago and was quite underwhelming.
I have the utmost respect for Michael Barone and Austin Bay but I really disagree with their thinking on the idea of a John McCain - Joe Lieberman ticket. Why go for the cynical when we can have the Giuliani?
Rudy Giuliani has been my pick for President in 2008 ever since 911 and like Roger Simon I viewed his appearance on Hannity and Colmes the other night.
Rudy was very impressive. Forget George Allen, John McCain and every other wannabe Republican nominee. I predict today that the 2008 Republican nominee will be Rudolph Giuliani.
Yes, I am pro-life and more conservative in my social views than Rudy appears to be. But in these perilous times we need a man who understands the dangers we face in the ongoing war against Islamo Fascism. Rudy’s already proven he’s a man of fortitude with a big heaping of, yes, that old word, gravitas. Rudy understands that Americans want their civil liberties but the number one civil liberty is “Life.” Without that we no longer exist as a nation.
I propose a Giuliani - Romney ticket. As a southerner I understand my part of the country very well and I know we will support a Giuliani-Romney ticket in a New York Minute.
Roger Simon writes…….
Sheryl and I watched Rudy Giuliani tonight on Hannity & Colmes and were impressed. The two hosts, both of whom rate way up on the blowhard platitude scale, seemed to keep their mouths relatively shut for once, sensing they were in the presence of man with a certain amount of real, even good-humored, gravitas.
As of now, Giuliani appears to be leading in the polls for the Republican nomination and for the presidency. But every time I post about that, a number of people, usually more traditionally conservative types, jump on here to point out how Rudy will never win the nomination, that his views on abortion, gay rights, etc. are too liberal or that his private life (as opposed to JFK’s, FDR’s, Eisenhower’s, etc. ad nauseum) is too louche for the Republican faithful.
Welcome Instapundit Readers!
Welcome to Lorie Byrd and Wizbang Readers!
Trackback URL for this post:
http://www.thewideawakecafe.com/wp-trackback.php?p=1426
42 Comments »
Leave a comment
RSS feed for these comments. |
Trackback URL for this post:
http://www.thewideawakecafe.com/wp-trackback.php?p=1426
While I understand Giuliani, why Romney? He's a Mormon-mystery from Taxachusetts with a long history of homophobia. Giuliani would relegate him to the traditional role of VP; wake-up in the morning and read the obituaries to see if the President's still alive...then head off for the Senate-session. I can't see Romney getting anywhere near the level of "executive power" that Cheney or Gore enjoyed. I'd rather have Gingrich to balance Giuliani since Newt knows how Washington works, and Gingrich is a serious student of History and would bring some perspective.
Personally, I's rather see a "unity ticket" of Gingrich-Lieberman.
August 12th, 2006 | #
The best part of "President Giuliani" is that most liberal Manhattanites would go cross-eyed insane with anger, making BDS look like bipartisan love!
August 12th, 2006 | #
I'd vote for Giuliani and I generally vote Republican.
August 12th, 2006 | #
Out of the four candidates for the 2008 ticket you suggest only one is a Republican that would get support outside his own state, and that is Romney. McCain served his country honorably, but McCain Feingold has shown just how shortsighted McCain truly is, he has no support among the vast majority of Republicans on anything except name-recognition. Just like the rise of Bill Clinton in 1991-2, we don't know the Republican candidate yet, but I wouldn't bet against Romney. I like Newt as a tough, intelligent campaigner, but he is a bit of a slut, much like Giuliani. Pity, they are two of the more interesting candidates, despite Giuliani's fear of guns, God and conservative judges.
August 12th, 2006 | #
From a competitive standpoint, Rudy G would do great in a general election with or without Romney. IMHO, it's always important in national elections to run a candidate who is strong in your opponent's backyard (though this is more true for Democrats than Republicans), because the election is won in the middle not on the wings.
It may change over time, but I don't see the Democrats winning the Whitehouse without running a Southerner unless they get lucky, and the Republicans would do a lot better to run a Yankee than another Southerner who'll never be well-regarded North of the Mason-Dixon line.
Edwards would be a good Democratic candidate as it is, but he'd be a GREAT candidate if he'd ever done anything serious in politics like hold a Governorship or even Mayor of a major city.
It's quite quirky though, because to get the nomination you have to run "on the wings" and that tends to produce liberal Yankees on the Democratic ticket and conservative Southerners or Westerners on the Republican side. And if you think that the voters in the primaries on both sides have become somewhat more liberal and more conservative over the years (as I do) then that just makes the problem worse.
Given what happened to Lieberman in CT, I'd guess the Democratic primaries are pretty likely to produce another true hardcore liberal such as Kerry or maybe Rodham-Clinton in '08, and that'll make it hard again for the Democrats to win. And of course Rendell and Corzine have taken the serious path to running someday (maybe in '08, certainly in '12), but again they're quite the NE liberals, are they not?
August 12th, 2006 | #
Anarchus, you really hit the nail on the head regarding an increasingly polarized electorate and regarding the path to the whitehouse leading through the the governors mansions of the south for the Democrats. There is a reason why Carter and Clinton have been the last Democratic presidents since LBJ, the democrats have run left instead of south. Another factor that has become more pronounced though, is that I believe that the critical middle, the independents, just want less vitriol, but the parties want more, so we will see how that turns out.
One aside, in my previous post, I wish I had used the word 'cad' rather than 'slut'...
I apologize for the vulgarity.
August 12th, 2006 | #
Actually, Giuliani would do better in the South than he would in New York. That's a fact many New Yorkers can neither acknowledge nor understand.
August 12th, 2006 | #
I'd like to see Rudy run for Prez. I am a Texan and I think most center and right-of-center Texans would support Rudy in a heartbeat. A lot of left-of-center Texans would as well. The self-professed "pundits" who claim Rudy couldn't win in the south are delusional.
It's time to bury the knuckle-dragging Pat Buchanan wing of the party once and for all.
August 12th, 2006 | #
Another Tx guy here who'd vote for Rudy in a New York minute! McCain is simply a RINO addicted to the love the MSM gives him. I'll sit the election out if its McCain.
August 12th, 2006 | #
As a Southern conservative, Guliani is definitely a more palatable choice than McCain.. Even though McCain has Southern roots (MS), he is wrong on some major issues. His efforts to stifle political debate (McCain-Fiengold) are an abomidation. Furthermore, while a Senate staffer, I have personally seen him lose his cool in the room just outside the CST Comm hearing room, and he just plain looks unstable to me. Granted, this is a personal issue - but the scene was enough to put me off letting him be in charge of anything...
August 12th, 2006 | #
McCain-Lieberman vs. Giuliani-Romney...
Today, I read Laura Lee Donoho's discussion of a Giuliani-Romney ticket beating a McCain-Lieberman slate, particularly in the south. Instapundit has run with this idea and has setup an online poll.While...
August 12th, 2006 | #
Laura's ticket is truly kicking butt in the Instapundit poll. Give Laura Karl Rove's job in the new administration...
August 12th, 2006 | #
It doesn't matter which candidate the Republicans choose, he or she will carry Texas. Let's try to stay focused on the swing states, people.
I'd love to see a brainy, balanced, charismatic team like Giuliani-Romney. Even if Romney gets relegated, it still sets him up to be the president in 2016. McCain would need to demonstrate heretofore-unseen 1st amendment literacy to get my support, war heroism notwithstanding.
August 12th, 2006 | #
I could not in good faith support either ticket.
I would never support McCain due to his overt contempt for the 1st amendment, illustrated by his co-authorship of McCain-Feingold. He has done nothing since to convince me that he has changed his ways.
I would never support Giuliani due to his overt contempt for the 2nd amendment, illustrated by his anti-2A policies as NYC mayor. He has done nothing since to prove that he has changed his ways.
Neither of them are truly supportive of freedom or respectful of the Constituion, and are therefore not qualified for leadership anywhere in the US at any level, IMHO.
August 12th, 2006 | #
As of now, Mr. Guiliani seems to be the only potential candidate that really understands the goals and determination of the Islamic extremists, and the danger this poses to our society. I don't know much about Mr. Romney. It doesn't really matter too much who he chooses for a running mate.
As it was in 2004, the presidential election in 2008 will be, for me, decided on a single issue--the war on terror, which may soon become a war against Iran (and Syria, by default).
As a New Englander who's been in Texas for 13 years, Mr. Guiliani has my vote. May he stay healthy and vigorous for the good of our society.
August 12th, 2006 | #
I really, truly hope Giuliani is the candidate, and if he runs I will work my butt off for him in the primaries and general.
As to Veep, I'd much rather see Tom Tancredo or even Newt Gingrich. What does Romney have going for him?
I'm a fervent supporter of the 2nd Amendment but the President can't do squat about that. He doesn't write laws, he signs them. Right now we are in a serious war and we need a war *leader*. Giuliani is the only person with national name recognition who I would trust to lead us in this war. We need him.
August 12th, 2006 | #
I'm a conservative Democrat who would vote for Giuliani in a heartbeat if he chose a strong pro-2nd amendment running mate. Please, not Newt.
August 12th, 2006 | #
Well, I'm something like the Religious Right, I suppose, and I'd vote Giuliani. First things first. If we were in peaceful times I'd probably shy away, as social issues rose to higher importance for me. But simple sanity in the GWOT is still the #1 issue.
To be fair, I think that McCain would mostly get the GWOT right, but not be inspiring about it, and Lord knows we need that now.
August 12th, 2006 | #
I will never vote for a pro-abortion candidate under any circumstances, and most of my friends here in Texas feel the same way. Don't let yourself be fooled by the common tendency of mostly people who agree with you commenting.
The south is pro-life, and when push comes to shove, we'll stay home rather than vote pro-abortion.
--Tony in Texas
August 12th, 2006 | #
Ok, I'm from the South also. I am a Conservative Republican too.
Hmmm, let's see? McCain/Lieberman? Guliani/Romney? Huh? Last time I checked they were all "moderate" -- better yet, "liberal" Republicans. As a Southener, will I vote for Northeastern Liberals? No, I have never done so, and will stay at home rather than do so because the difference between the four is NOTHING!
You might as well ask Kerry to change party and run as a Republican.
The Northeast keeps throwing these liberals at us because those people up there have blinders on; they think the rest of the country must surly have "their values" and anybody else "just doesn't get it!"
August 12th, 2006 | #
I got here via Instapundit, and my politics are very similar to Mr. Reynold's... I'd love to see Giuliani nominated. Not sold on Romney, particularly, but I also am not all that concerned about the VP anyway.
I have my problems with McCain (like many of the rest of you, McCain-Feingold is #1 on that list), but I'd probably still vote for him. I can't see McCain-Lieberman as a Republican ticket, though. If they ran as independents, and I wasn't particularly excited by the R's candidate, I'd vote for them on the principle of ending the two-party duopoly. (I have voted for D's in the past, though not for president, and while I'm sure that there are D's out there who I'd vote for for pres, I can't see any of them being nominated this time around, so I'm not considering that.)
August 12th, 2006 | #
I write as a New Yorker. I have lived through many mayors. Giuliani did something utterly wonderful. He took a crack-ridden city, which "everybody" said was ungovernable, and he VIRTUALLY ELIMINATED CRIME. I have never seen one man make so much difference ever. He jus tdidn't give a damn that "everybody" said it couldn't be done. He arrested. He sent to jail. He refused to meet w/ Reverend Al etc. Today it is by far the safest city in America. There are no more bad neighborhoods. My relatives visit from Philadelphia and they can't believe how much safer NYC is than Philly. Rudy has single purpose, and he really truly doesn't care what "everyone" says can't be done. I would love to let him loose on the Islamofascists. I disagree w/ Rudy about many things, but he will get the big one right, and I don't want to have to wear a burka some day.
August 12th, 2006 | #
If that's the only choice I'll have opposed to a Democrat ticket, I'll stay home or vote third party.
Republicans need to wake up to the fact that they WIN elections by being fiscally conservative, strong on national defense, and supporting smaller government. None of the candidates you've mentioned give a rat's patootie about any of the above.
August 12th, 2006 | #
Bingo, Emma. Rudy was a prosecutor. As a "law and order" mayor, he cleaned the city up. He was also there on 9/11, walking on the streets of lower Manhattan. He witnessed what happened first hand.
This nonsense that he is a "liberal" Republican. Ask the petty crooks in NYC if they think he is a "liberal."
August 12th, 2006 | #
Another conservative Texan here who would love to vote for Rudy G but who would stay home if John McCain were the Republican nominee.
Note to Tony in Texas: Most of my friends are pro-life, as am I, but we all agree that winning the war is all that matters now. I don't doubt that you and your friends will stay home rather than vote for a pro-choice candidate, but there are plenty of pro-life voters who won't.
August 12th, 2006 | #
No to Romney. Yes to Rudy.
August 13th, 2006 | #
Mark me as a "South Park Republican" who will be doing something else Election Day 2008. As will almost all of my - Southern - cohorts.
I don't know which part of the South you hail from, but around here, McCain and Guiliani (as does and did Bob Dole) get lots of respect for what they've done in the past - but it would not garner them presidental votes.. just like Dole.
August 13th, 2006 | #
I will never ever vote for John McCain because of McCain-Feingold. That much idiocy in one place makes me =fear= what he would do as president.
Guiliani's pretty much an unknown to me. If he seems sane on defense and the economy (another area where McCain is cuckoo), I'd probably be willing to settle for impotence on abortion and guns.
August 13th, 2006 | #
I'm a New Englander who went to college in NY. Emma is exactly right. Rudy saved NYC twice. First when he faced up to entrenched opposition from everywhere and busted crime in all its manifestations, and second when he rallied the city, and the nation, afte 9/11. Rudy was walking the streets on 9/11 when Bush was struck dumb and Cheney cowered in his bunker. Like Rudy, Romney was elected to govern in a state whose politics is dominated by liberal hacks. He hasn't accomplished much, but has certainly tried. After the cieling started falling in on the Big Dig Romney stepped up and took control from the hack Mass. Turnpike Agency where legislative patronage has been job one for years.
August 13th, 2006 | #
Giuliani (AKA "gun grabber" Giuliani) as the next anti-terrorist President?
Well, gee, after he manages to outlaw personal firearms, what's next? Outlawing the use of box-cutters in self-defense?
As for the short-sighted goober who said " I'd probably be willing to settle for impotence on abortion and guns," why not wait until they cut off your testicles as well, since you obviously don't need them? Or is your understanding of the 2nd Amendment as weak as Giuliani's? Silly me, I still believe that a "A well regulated Militia" is still "necessary to the security of a free State." Especially with terrorists on the loose.
Let's re-elect Giuliani to the office which he is obviously qualified to hold: mayor of New York, not President of these United States.
August 13th, 2006 | #
Laura, stop making general statements such as "I understand my part of the country very well and I know who we would support...." After seeing that comment I couldn't take your opinion seriously.
Ron
August 13th, 2006 | #
As a Southerner too, I'll never forgive McCain for his comments during the 2000 primaries.
Rudy brings something no one in a long time has to the presidency... proven crisis leadership. He's the right man for these times.
As to Laura's comments about knowing the South and Southerners, I beleive she's right in this respect. Rudy/whoever on the GOP ticket will be better than whoever/whoever on the Democratic ticket for the country. Southerners will continue to do what's right for the country.
August 13th, 2006 | #
My preference is Romney/Rice, but would happily vote for Giuliani/Romney (or Giuliani/Rice). I have voted for McCain, when the choice was a Democrat, but would only grudginly give him my vote in 2008 if nominated.
I see a number of problems with Giuliani/Romney. First, the two are quite different philosophically, and I am not convinced they could work together - esp. with Giuliani in the lead. Secondly, Romney's biography would seem to indicate that he might not be happy with the second seat. And, thirdly, there would be little geographic diversity - both currently hailing from the very liberal north-east (though Romney does have Utah and Michigan roots).
August 13th, 2006 | #
Hi Laura! How about Rudy-George Allen? I'm not wild about Romney (his health insurance plan in MA seems very liberal to me) and Allen adds geographic diversity and is a true conservative.
I was musing the other day, why would I be inclined to vote for Rudy when he's a social conservative in many ways? And the answer is, because I trust him to work hard to keep us safe. As another poster said, that's the #1 issue right now. I would also be hopeful that since he was a "law and order" prosecutor his Supreme Court picks would reflect that tendency rather than his social liberal tendencies, but that's a concern.
Bottom line, though, despite any misgivings about Rudy, I would vote for him. I would NEVER vote for John McCain for many of the reasons articulated by others above. I don't trust him at all.
Best wishes, Laura
August 13th, 2006 | #
Typo above: Rudy is *not* a social conservative in many ways.
August 13th, 2006 | #
"Republicans need to wake up to the fact that they WIN elections by being fiscally conservative, strong on national defense, and supporting smaller government."
Giuliani's got a fiscally conservative record that gives today's Republicans a run for their money. And that's in New York.
Second point doesn't even need to be covered really.
I think alot of people nailing Giuliani on pro-abortion, pro-gay, anti-gun behavior do not realize that New York is a world apart from Texas. Giuliani will not be around in office to work his management magic if he makes some heavy stand against these. Then you get an inept liberal like the man before him. If you are looking for someone whose life passion is social issues, Giuliani is not your man. He's a pragmatist, and will adopt fairly moderate positions to keep the sides generally tame so he can focus on things like defense without disruptions from them. On the national arena, you can expect him to make room for more conservative opinion on them, especially since it is generally the prevailing one.
The liberal arguments against him are just pathetic, and boil down to "Giuliani has tough police, fascists have tough police, therefore Giuliani = fascist" I'm all for preserving citizen liberties against overbearing police power, but not all people in America are benevolent or just. New York was facing a breakdown of social order previous to Giuliani - what else could he have done, unless he wanted mass rioting in the nation's financial center? He did what needed to be done, and no more. Fascists persistently elevate their authority to secure the reigns of power - Giuliani did not.
I also think Giuliani-Allen would be a good ticket. I like Newt, but he's too alienating, and probably a better ideas-man and strategist anyways. Romney could replace George Allen pending a good primary showing, but I don't want his religion to needlessly (and rather pointlessly) turn people off either, when Allen would do.
August 13th, 2006 | #
I personally do not take seriously a Guiliani (or Lieberman for that matter) candidacy for President (or VP). The reason: A ticket with a pro-homosexual rights/pro-partial birth abortion zealot (i.e. Giuliani or Lieberman) will end the rise of the Republican Party, and Party elders know it.
Neither person can be considered by the conservative movement as standard bearers (they are simply not conservative except on selected issues). And the Republican Party would only consider them as Presidential (or VP) nominees to their eternal regret.
Country Club Republicansism (or moderate, or liberal, or Rockefeller Republicansism, whatever you want to call it), of which Giuliani is their best candidate since Eishenhower, holds sway in a minority of states (mostly blue states Repubs can not win any way). So to pick NE Liberals to lead a Center-Right Party, dominated by conservative Southern/Western states, simply doesn't make sense electorally, and would inevitably lead to a split that Party. Evangelicals, Libertarian-conservatives, Paleo-Cons, would bolt (who can forget Rockefeller giving the finger to conservatives in what '72)
Stop writing/wishing, this is never going to happen. Look for a George Allen or my favorite (albeit a long, long shot), Tom Coburn from Oklahoma, to be the Presidetial/VP picks.
August 14th, 2006 | #
The southern primary that matters is, of course, South Carolina. As a South Carolinian who will vote in the Republican primary in 2008 I can tell you that McCain will never, ever get my vote and Rudy could. That goes for 3 other voters in my family too. Also, if Lieberman is the VP candidate for the R's I wouldn't vote for the ticket. The idea that with all of the excellent Governors the Republicans have they would turn to Joe Lieberman is so ridiculous the only place it could make sense is DC and NYC.
August 14th, 2006 | #
The new york minute thing is right. Aint no such thing down south. They would be cast a side georgia drawl. This is urban versus rural and rural picks the republican nominee.
August 14th, 2006 | #
McCain-LIEBERMAN?
August 16th, 2006 | #
That ticket would also make sense in California - but they set the standard for brainless there!
McCain-Lieberman makes sense only if the GOP wishes to commit political suicide!
August 16th, 2006 | #
Are dealmakers Republican front runners in 2008?...
Interestingly, a growing number of conservative bloggers are suggesting an all dealmaker Republican ticket in 2008. At least two blogs are suggesting a Rudy Giuliani-Mitt Romney ticket. Most Dealscape readers already know that Massachusetts Governor Ro...
August 17th, 2006 | #