Giuliani in 2012?
I’m really not sure how I feel about this.
I supported Giuliani initially in his 2008 run. But I would dearly love to see someone fresher and younger come forward to get some energy into the Republican Party’s presidential campaign. Giuliani will be close to 70 in 2012. He’s not the healthiest of men, and many of the same health/age objections mounted against McCain in 2008 could be leveled at him in 2012. His biggest strength is in national security against Islamicist terrorism, and while that is an important part of the presidency, other considerations such as economics are likely to be huge in 2012, and he’s somewhat untested in that sphere.
Guiliani has what you might call a messy marital history. He’s been in executive office, but only as mayor, and while in that position he was soft on illegal immigration. For the last couple of years, he’s been involved with a law firm that represents, among others, some large oil and pharmaceutical companies, a position tailor-made for criticism.
Come to think of it, no, Giuliani’s not my guy. It’s odd that although the Republican Party has a lot of up-and-comers, none of them seem well-positioned and willing to run in 2012—yet. I continue to believe that some relative unknown, perhaps a governor such as Mitch Daniels, might emerge from the background. But if that’s going to happen, he or she had better get cracking. It’s getting late.
That last sentence I just typed is a sobering one. Late? Didn’t we just finish a grueling election?
A messy marital history? The guy’s a cad. Even his kids don’t like him.
Time to move on. He was my first choice in 2008. I got the impression from 2008 that he didn’t have the fire in the belly needed to get the nomination: shades of Fred Thompson.
The unfortunate reality is that the mainstream media and the left wing allegiance will utterly destroy anyone who sticks their head up as a serious candidate for the right. While things are slowly changing in this respect, the cacophony of attacks eventually renders the candidate “damaged goods” and the perception becomes the reality. I expect most candidates will wait as long as possible before announcing their candidacy.
That law firm……..isn’t it the firm involved in sucking up land either side of the NAFTA Interstate from Mexico to the Canadian Border?
Can’t get my hands on any articles about it, but I remember reading about it.
I saw Herman Cain with his intention to run on Hannity last night.
Herman Cain for pres. I don’t need to see anybody else.
Oh, crap. Did I just make myself living proof of Jeff’s post?
Everything you need to realize can be learned by studying the facts around the 1919 World Series…
(and what happened in 1921)
All you have to do is juggle the outcome and what they get depending on what happens…
Herman Cain
He is able
OK…. That isn’t funny 🙂
Off topic Ezra Klien news http://www.redstate.com/streiff/2011/01/21/ezra-klein-defends-the-congressional-budget-office/
He couldn’t beat McCain in ’08, how does he think he’ll beat The Won (or Mitt, or Huck, or Sarah, or…) in ’12?
Amazing that the Republicans have many qualified candidates, but the ones who attract the most enthusiasm, Christie (he won’t run) and Palin (she has high negatives and the campaign hasn’t even begun) are not likely to be the nominees. Cain, Pawlenty, Danielson, Pence, Huckabee, Romney, Giuliani, Gingrich, Rubio, and Thune are all names that are being mentioned. I heard Donald Trump offer on Larry Kudlow’s show that he may declare to run after June. He is very passionate about the issues because he’s convinced Obama has totally botched both foreign and domestic policy. My guess is that Romney is the only one at this point who can mount a campaign. He’s got money and that may be the key.
In spite of reservations about many of the above names, at this point I would support and vote for any of the above. Anyone who has a lick of fiscal conservatism and common sense would be preferable to the incumbent.
I have come to prefer losing with a good candidate than winning with a RINO. The “enemy” is the elite establishment, which includes the Republican fixture. The cowardice which many Republican hopefuls have just shown in not sticking up for Palin was the deciding factor. Gingrich, Pawlenty, Giulianni, Huckabee . . . they are politicians without principle.
I used the O’Donnell race to help me decide on whether or not an unpopular tea party candidate could win or not, but the latest events have shown me it makes a difference whether or not tea party candidates have the full support of the Republican Party. So screw them, that is, the Republican Party. They would rather see a tea partier lose if their own candidate doesn’t get the slot.
Getting late? Getting LATE?
Maybe for political junkies like tu et moi. We all need to take a chill pill.
See my Tatler comment here:
http://pajamasmedia.com/tatler/2011/01/21/dearth-of-obamas-screwing-up-and-catastrophic-weather-news-forces-bloggers-into-predicting-2012/
Curtis:
I was an O’Donnell supporter too. Whether she could have won in Delaware if she had had the enthusiastic support of the Republican Party will never be known, but as it happened, she was trashed nonstop by the Republican elites and pundits from the moment she won the primary.
We will not rescue our country from incipient collectivist totalitarianism by picking moderate milquetoast candidates who are acceptable to the elites and the MSM. Conservatives have to go “all in” in 2012. We must give it our best shot with our best candidate. If she loses, then at least we can say that we tried.
That last sentence I just typed is a sobering one. Late? Didn’t we just finish a grueling election?
That’s what happens when we live in a society where the government has such an outsized influence on our daily lives. I don’t remember thinking about politics 24/7 when I was younger, and I doubt that my parents or grandparents did either.
But this is apparently the “new normal”.
As with O’Donnell. She lost the general election. But she primaried the RINO. So, even though she lost, so did he.
Lesson for RINOs.
That’s the idea, Richard. That’s the idea.
Rickl, “We will not rescue our country from incipient collectivist totalitarianism by picking moderate milquetoast candidates who are acceptable to the elites and the MSM.”
Yes. Please provide supporting facts and argument. (Just kidding, but perhaps many might use what you set forth. This isn’t meant as flattery, but you have a good mind and pen, in my opinion. Many believe compromise is necessary. I did and probably still do if the compromise isn’t that much.)
A candidate who is not pro-life will lose a number of volunteers. The pro-lifers and the pro-gunners make up the boots on the ground for candidates.
I could never vote for someone like him based on my religious beliefs. I hope like heck a pro-choicer does not get nominated. There are many like me who could not vote for someone pro-choice based on a serious ‘conscience’ issue. (I consider myself a double ‘single issue voter’.)
Take my word for it, as a Hoosier. You don’t want Mitch Daniels as President. If he does for the country what he’s done for Indiana, he’ll single handed turn the government back over to the Libs.
Only reason he won re-election was that the Democrats insisted on putting forth a candidate that couldn’t win her own Congressional District when she ran.
Perhaps this is a bit simplistic, but Giuiliani ran hard for president in 2008 until people actually started voting, at which time he dropped out.
To hell with him.
If he stands any real chance of making a serious run, it’ll be a clear demonstration that the Republican Party hasn’t learned any lessons yet from the Tea Party.
Curtis and rickl,
You are both well informed and passionate about conservatism. I would like nothing more than to see a full blown, all-out conservative run on the Republican ticket in 2012. However, we all have to recognize that if a RINO is nominated, he cannot win without full on support of all conservatives. We are not a majority. Elections are won and lost in the center. I have seen it written that McCain might have won had not so many conservatives stayed home in 2008.
Although we see Obama as a disaster, and we picked up a lot of seats in the 2010 mid-terms, there are still a lot of people who will vote for him. If the Republican nominee cannot attract the independents, he/she cannot win. It is just simple mathematics. That’s why I say I will support and vote for anyone who is nominated by the Republican primary system – RINO or not. I hope you will too. The alternative is four more years of Obama.
J.J.:
The problem is that a RINO will not roll back the socialist policies that have already been enacted. RINOs will permanently cement Obama’s “fundamental transformation of America” in place. I find that unacceptable. Look at what has become of European “conservative” parties. They have been reduced to arguing that they can administer national health care better than their opponents on the left.
The only thing necessary to ensure Obama’s re-election is for someone to run as an independent é la Perot in 1992. I’ve heard that Michael Bloomberg is considering it. If he runs, it won’t matter who the Republicans nominate. He has tons of executive experience and lots of money, and he’ll have no problem getting positive media attention.
Which is why I’ve been saying that Allen West would be the perfect running mate for Palin. His conservative credentials are impeccable, and he is the only person I can think of who might peel away some of the black vote from the Democrats.
Palin/West – people would tune in to learn about West and would then accidentally listen to Palin rather than just hate her or believe that other people’s hate has ruined her.
I’d like to see Palin announce that she is not going to run. I’d like her to say the following:
I’ve looked at the field of proposed candidates, and I see strength in the Republicans if we act as a party. There are some incredibly competent and experienced people now considered as possible candidates. I certainly don’t agree with any one of them on every issue, but that is an unrealistic expectation. What I see is a great array of conservative positions and proposed policies that need to be formed into a Republican platform that will truly guide our next president. I want to see thoughtful and substantive debates among our candidates that allow our collective priorities to emerge. I want to hear the congressional input, such as Paul Ryan’s on the budget.
Foremost in this forging of common goals is that the voices of the average citizens do not get lost. I want to use the next two years to contribute their questions and opinions to the debates. I want to help ensure that the debates are substantive and reflective of concerns outside the beltway. A successful presidency requires a supportive people, and I will do my best to see that the Republicans begin a successful presidency in 2013. Who that president is will be seen after the debates and campaigns, but I am convinced that the Tea Party and other groups will bring forth a person of strength and committment to our values and our priorities.
(In other words, you won’t have Palin to kick around as unpresidential, but ignore me at your own risk.)
rickl,
A RINO preident is not the problem so much as a RINO Congress, such as we had during the Bush years. The TEA Party, of which I am a proud and active member, has made a good start on moving Congress toward conservatism. That is where real reform can come from. However, a conservative Congress with Obama as president is going to find it much more difficult to enact conservative legislation than if there is RINO as president. There is a small chance that we could get a veto- proof conservative Congress in 2012 if unemployment continues at high levels and the health care reform has not been neutered. Then Obama could not stop legislation. However, there is a good chance that HCR will be neutered by the conservative House and the moves Obama is making to revive business may have the unemployment situation looking much better by Nov. 2012. If that happens it is going to be more difficult to elect more conservatives to Congress and to defeat Obama.
Obama has read the tea leaves and is changing his anti-business policies. How far he is willing to go we will see. Never underestimate this man. If he can use pro-business policies to keep his job, I think he will swing that way.
IMO, priority #1 is to get more conservative Senators and Representatives elected in 2012. Priority #2 is to get the most conservative Republican who can win elected to the Presidency. If he/she is a RINO, I’ll take it as opposed to four more years of Obama.
None of it is going to matter much unless the country massively and rapidly moves to fiscal sanity. Giuliani v. Daniels v. Whoever is tinkering at the margins.
All of y’all need to grip that fundamental issue. Absent that, we are done.
See it happening?
I don’t.
Neo, It is far too early to even begin to guess who the nominees will be. At this point, it’s a total and utter crapshoot.
I’ve seen many a PotUS election in my years (as have you), and I suggest you think back and try and see which ones that won the nominations of the two major parties, to say nothing of the job, were the “front runners” only 2 years before.
A: practically none of them. The field is filled with a litany of failures and also-rans, while the dark horse @ 2years was often the final winner. Mondale, Hart, Simon, H. Clinton…
Look at it for 2008 — everyone was saying Obama for veep in 2007. NO ONE was thinking he could win the whole ball of wax, or even come close — It was clearly going to be Hillary. “Obviously…”.
And who he hell outside of Alaska had ever heard of Sarah Palin in 2007 (granted, that was the Veep position, but you get my point, I think, about the overall volatility of the political stage** — people come and go regularly and at the drop of a hat)
==================================
** -Sigh- Oh to be the one operating the trap door…