Christian right leader writes off Giuliani

[Thomas Veil]

Even before I read this article, I knew I could predict who they were talking about:

WASHINGTON (CNN) -- Religious conservative leader James Dobson will sit out the 2008 presidential election if former New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani is the Republican presidential nominee, he wrote Thursday in an online column.

In a piece published on the conservative Web site WorldNetDaily, Dobson wrote that Giuliani's support for abortion rights and civil unions for homosexuals, as well as the former mayor's two divorces, were a deal-breaker for him.

"I cannot, and will not, vote for Rudy Giuliani in 2008. It is an irrevocable decision," he wrote.

"If given a Hobson's -- Dobson's? -- choice between him and Senators Hillary Clinton or Barack Obama, I will either cast my ballot for an also-ran -- or if worse comes to worst, not vote in a presidential election for the first time in my adult life. My conscience and my moral convictions will allow me to do nothing else."CNN (http://www.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/05/17/giuliani.dobson/index.html)

Pretty big blow to Giuliani, but...

"Moral convictions"?? :confused:

Hey, God...remember when you took Falwell the other day? Well we're having a "buy one, get one free" sale. ;)

[SMM]

Hey, God...remember when you took Falwell the other day? Well we're having a "buy one, get one free" sale. ;)

Thomas Veil - that was perfect! :D

How about a 'Baker's Dozen'?

[leekohler]

Please let them nominate Rudy. :)

[xsedrinam]

Please let them nominate Rudy. :)
Silencer of the Lambs

[mactastic]

Ok, so Dobson can't support Rudy. What about another front-runner like say McCain? Maybe, but McCain can't be counted on to put reliably activist justices on the SCOTUS. He's got too much of a maverick streak for the Christian right (yet not enough of a maverick streak to attract moderates anymore). Plus McCain won't torture people we snatch off the battlefield, so that won't work.

Ok, Romney? The man who said he was more pro-choice than Ted Kennedy? Yeah, sure. Plus I'm pretty sure the Evangelicals are not too interested in assisting the rise to power of the Mormons.

Thompson? No. Paul? Not only no but hell no, Dobson can't support him. Huckabee? That's probably how far down the bench Dobson has to go to find a kindred Christian spirit in a reliably fundamentalist conservative who doesn't believe in evolution and hates teh gheys.

IOW, it's gonna be a rough election cycle for Dobson and company. They all laughed at lefties holding their noses to vote for Kerry 3 years ago, but now it's happening to them.

[SMM]

Ok, so Dobson can't support Rudy. What about another front-runner like say McCain? Maybe, but McCain can't be counted on to put reliably activist justices on the SCOTUS. He's got too much of a maverick streak for the Christian right (yet not enough of a maverick streak to attract moderates anymore). Plus McCain won't torture people we snatch off the battlefield, so that won't work.

Ok, Romney? The man who said he was more pro-choice than Ted Kennedy? Yeah, sure. Plus I'm pretty sure the Evangelicals are not too interested in assisting the rise to power of the Mormons.

Thompson? No. Paul? Not only no but hell no, Dobson can't support him. Huckabee? That's probably how far down the bench Dobson has to go to find a kindred Christian spirit in a reliably fundamentalist conservative who doesn't believe in evolution and hates teh gheys.

IOW, it's gonna be a rough election cycle for Dobson and company. They all laughed at lefties holding their noses to vote for Kerry 3 years ago, but now it's happening to them.

Actually, they would crucify Jesus (yep, a second time), for being far too liberal.

Something that would be a kick, is to promote a candidate who only describes his agenda in Biblical terms (non-literal). I would love to the religious right, FOX, etc, dismiss him as a liberal.

[solvs]

Please let them nominate Rudy. :)
I hope they don't. Too many moderates who think he'd do a good job. Dems probably won't go after him about his failures during 9/11 enough either. Wondering if a lot of fundies won't just sit this one out.

They all laughed at lefties holding their noses to vote for Kerry 3 years ago, but now it's happening to them.
Happening to the Dems too. Though Obama and Edwards are gaining, both have their glaring flaws. And then there's Hillary...

[OldCorpse]

I hope they don't. Too many moderates who think he'd do a good job. Dems probably won't go after him about his failures during 9/11 enough either. Wondering if a lot of fundies won't just sit this one out.


Happening to the Dems too. Though Obama and Edwards are gaining, both have their glaring flaws. And then there's Hillary...

Exactly right. If Giuliani gets the nomination, he'll have very strong appeal to Independents and even many Democrats. He's more liberal than Hillary on some social issues - gay rights for example, or at least not as mealy-mouthed as Hillary. One thing that a lot of Dems and independents can't stand about the current crew of Repblicans is their insane busybody bluenosed and frankly nutty social conservatism combined with bible-thumping. Giuliani has none of that. Plus, remember, he's from NY - he got elected there, shows you he can definitely appeal to Dems, especially the tough on crime crowd.

Meanwhile, I simply cannot undestand the crowing about the "great" candidates among the Democrats. It's like a mass hysteria - crowd madness. Are you people blind? Hillary has sky-high negatives. Many would rather vote for the satan himself than for Hillary. Obama is, sorry, an empty suit and again extremely sadly but let's get real: America is simply not ready for a black president. That leaves Edwards (whom I personally like), but he's a very poor campaigner, terribly gaffe prone, and seen as a lightweight. Gore would be great, but I'm afraid he's played out - nobody is really looking foward to replaying 2000... those who didn't vote for him then, may not want to vote for him now, as it would be like admitting a mistake... nobody likes to admit mistakes. Bottom line: Democrats come up empty as far as I can see. Sorry. IMHO, far from having a great field, the Democrats, true to form, have come up with a team primed for failure. Sigh. I really, really, really hope I'm wrong, but I fear for the worst. Most of the excitement seems to me people hyping each other and believing their own hype. And drinking your own bathwater is never a good idea. Reality bites.

[mactastic]

Meanwhile, I simply cannot undestand the crowing about the "great" candidates among the Democrats. It's like a mass hysteria - crowd madness. Are you people blind? Hillary has sky-high negatives. Many would rather vote for the satan himself than for Hillary. Obama is, sorry, an empty suit and again extremely sadly but let's get real: America is simply not ready for a black president. That leaves Edwards (whom I personally like), but he's a very poor campaigner, terribly gaffe prone, and seen as a lightweight. Gore would be great, but I'm afraid he's played out - nobody is really looking foward to replaying 2000... those who didn't vote for him then, may not want to vote for him now, as it would be like admitting a mistake... nobody likes to admit mistakes. Bottom line: Democrats come up empty as far as I can see. Sorry. IMHO, far from having a great field, the Democrats, true to form, have come up with a team primed for failure. Sigh. I really, really, really hope I'm wrong, but I fear for the worst. Most of the excitement seems to me people hyping each other and believing their own hype. And drinking your own bathwater is never a good idea. Reality bites.
The point I'm making is that the bulk of Democrats seem happy with their slate of candidates right now, and the GOP seem to be very dissappointed in theirs.

Whether or not you or I personally find the Democratic or Republican field of candidates exciting was not my point. That is a seperate matter.

[Swarmlord]

<snip>Happening to the Dems too. Though Obama and Edwards are gaining, both have their glaring flaws. And then there's Hillary...

Yup. Both sides are currently fielding flawed candidates.

[Queso]

Yup. Both sides are currently fielding flawed candidates.
Exactly as has happened here for the past two elections. If either of the opposition parties had put forward a candidate that looked like a credible leader, Blair would have been out on his ear two years ago.

[AHDuke99]

I hope we do nominate Rudy. I think he has the best shot at winning in the genral election. he has a huge appeal to independents and many conservative democrats who may be socially liberal but fiscally conserative. the toughest thing he has is to get through the GOP primaries because his liberal social views will surely hurt him. i dont see romney nor mccain beating hilary or obama on a national level.

[solvs]

I hope we do nominate Rudy.

Rudy is not that great. He put the emergency center in the WTC, after they told him not to, and when 9/11 happened, they couldn't get to it. He shorted the fire and police depts funds for working walkie-talkies, wouldn't let off duty officers help when they offered because he didn't want to pay overtime, told people the air was safe when he knew it wasn't, and about a billion other things. And that's just 9/11. He's almost as incompetent about some things as Bush is, and he's as paranoid as Nixon was. Didn't you even wonder how he cleaned up NY and got the mob? There's a reason he was so unpopular leading up to 9/11. Here's a starter for those that don't know:

http://www.democracynow.org/print.pl?sid=07/01/03/1459244

Also a good read:

http://www.amazon.com/Grand-Illusion-Untold-Story-Giuliani/dp/0060536608

[Winterfell]

Personally, I couldn't care less what Dobson or any other of his ilk believe and instruct their followers to believe as it is certainly in contention with what I believe.

That being said, there are good things and bad things about all of the candidates. It seems that Republicans, by in large take definite stands on social issues (seemingly against them most of the time) like gay-marriage and gay rights, abortion, etc.

The thing I dislike most is that most Democrats fail to take a stand on social issues, but rather it seems like they constantly try and ride the fence, leaving only the perceived far-left independents doing anything to take a stand.

I don't like that the political curve has shifted right more than anything. What was once right is now far right, what was centrist is now right, and what was left is now centrist, leaving us with those who lean-left appearing to lean so far left they remain largely inconsequential. Is it just me, or does this seem backwards to you?

Small steps are being made, but it's not the steps I'd like to see, especially with people like Dobson taking up the reigns and furthering their religious and "moral" agendas on everyone else, or trying.

I'd like to see a black president; I'd like to see a woman president. But I don't know if that's enough alone, I have to like the candidates as well, and that is, as always, the deal-breaker.

[Blue Velvet]

If at first you don't succeed, try and try (http://joinrudy2012.com/) again.

[Thomas Veil]

If at first you don't succeed, try and try (http://joinrudy2012.com/) again.Wow, I was kinda surprised to see my name under this thread; I didn't even remember posting it. (Probably drunk at the time.)

Anyway, what's up with his still accepting contributions...for 2008?

And, uh, his donors must have some deep pockets. Check out some of the amounts. :eek:

(Oh, and by the way, I knew what "other" meant. I really didn't need the e.g.)

[Blue Velvet]

Anyway, what's up with his still accepting contributions...for 2008?


I dunno, but I thought the URL was worth a laugh. :D

http://joinrudy2012.com/

[atszyman]

Anyway, what's up with his still accepting contributions...for 2008?

Probably has some campaign debt to pay off like Clinton.

[Thomas Veil]

I dunno, but I thought the URL was worth a laugh. :D

http://joinrudy2012.com/Oh heck, it was worth a laugh this year.

Hmm...I wonder if Dobson's gotten a solicitation from the Rudy 2012 committee yet?

[CalBoy]

If at first you don't succeed, try and try (http://joinrudy2012.com/) again.

Does that mean he's effectively agreeing that McCain is done?

Isn't that a bit bad for party image?

[Beric]

Does that mean he's effectively agreeing that McCain is done?

Isn't that a bit bad for party image?

I believe McCain has said if elected, he would only serve for one term.

[CalBoy]

I believe McCain has said if elected, he would only serve for one term.

If that's true, it surprises me even more that McCain was able to win the nomination.

The Republicans will have to go through a primary even if McCain wins (although at this point his chances don't look good at all), which doesn't help maintain a consistent platform.

[mactastic]

I believe McCain has said if elected, he would only serve for one term.
Link?

[jplan2008]

I believe McCain has said if elected, he would only serve for one term.

He was supposedly going to say that, but didn't, and nothing has been said about it recently. Some Republicans had suggested that should have been a strategic move in September -- saying he would only serve one term and focus on the economy without worrying about re-election, but he hasn't done it. And too late now -- it would seem like a desperate move.

http://marcambinder.theatlantic.com/archives/2008/06/exclusive_mccain_almost_took_o.php

[atszyman]

He was supposedly going to say that, but didn't, and nothing has been said about it recently. Some Republicans had suggested that should have been a strategic move in September -- saying he would only serve one term and focus on the economy without worrying about re-election, but he hasn't done it. And too late now -- it would seem like a desperate move.

http://marcambinder.theatlantic.com/archives/2008/06/exclusive_mccain_almost_took_o.php

Wonder how much his VP pick influenced the decision on whether or not to campaign on a platform of a one termer. If he were only going for one term, it would have brought more attention on Palin due to the typical trend of the VP running for President after the President has finished their term(s).

[solvs]

Giuliani: ‘God Forbid Somebody Would Do Some Reporting On Barack Obama’s Use Of Drugs’ (http://thinkprogress.org/2008/10/20/rudy-obama-drugs/?xid=rss-page)