Analysis of the Republican Race.

Jarod

Jarod

Well-known member
Contributor
Here is how I see it shaping up, there is a real horse race for the Non-Rudy canidate, that is the alternative to Roudolph Gulianni. There is only enough room in just about any such race for a front runner and one serious challanger. I dont know if its the shortness of the average American's attention span or the desire to keep things in simple choices, but these races are almost always narrowed down to two.

Rudy is clearly the front runner and has been for some time. THe shake up seems to be between Romney and newly popular Huckleberry. Its a question of who the evangelicals will support. The one Republican credential Rudy does not have is a social conservatism. Many Republicans like this, as is evidenced by Rudy's popularity. It seems many are sick of the ideas of smaller government being corrupted on the social side by the tie of religen to government. Rudy is the more libertarian of the canidates.

So the question is, do the rest of the Republicans want a hard core social conservative like Huckleberry or are they willing to compromise there principals and go with the more polished Romney who will at least give them lip service. Once they have made there choice, the real question will be, can they express enough influence to remain relevant and get the nomination to the non-Rudy?
 
He is a warmongering foreign policy interventionist, a long-time opponent of civil liberties, and a supporter of torture. He does not believe in the protections of the Bill of Rights, notably the Second Amendment. He fully supports illegal wiretapping and "enhanced interrogation".

Rudy Guliani is by no sensible definition a libertarian.

I admit that I was once very ignorant about what Guliani stood for, and heard only "social liberal, economic conservative" and figured he would be my kind of guy. I was dead wrong.

Guliani, like Hillary, represents what is worst in both parties: Spineless, unprincipled calculation over genuine action.
 
Last edited:
All of that is true, but that doesn't change that other than Paul, he is more libertarian than the other candidates.
 
Young Libertarian said:
He is a warmongering foreign policy interventionist, a long-time opponent of civil liberties, and a supporter of torture. He does not believe in the protections of the Bill of Rights, notably the Second Amendment. He fully supports illegal wiretapping and "enhanced interrogation".

Rudy Guliani is by no sensible definition a libertarian.

I admit that I was once very ignorant about what Guliani stood for, and heard only "social liberal, economic conservative" and figured he would be my kind of guy. I was dead wrong.

Guliani, like Hillary, represents what is worst in both parties: Spineless, unprincipled calculation over genuine action.
Click to expand...



Maybe you are correct about Rudy, but my analysis still stands because it is based on people's perception, and in politics perception is what counts.
 
Damocles said:
All of that is true, but that doesn't change that other than Paul, he is more libertarian than the other candidates.
Click to expand...

If Ron Paul did not have some way out there different ideas, and if he "looked more presidental" I think he would be in the consideration.
 
Damocles said:
All of that is true, but that doesn't change that other than Paul, he is more libertarian than the other candidates.
Click to expand...

That's like showing me a race between Hitler, Stalin, and Pinochet; and I'm supposed to choose Pinochet because he's "more" libertarian than the others.

It's bullshit and I won't ever cast a vote for Guliani. I'm sorry that you would be willing to trade your principles to do so. It's an understandable but unfortunate development of our political system that forces voters to forsake values for electability.
 
Damocles said:
All of that is true, but that doesn't change that other than Paul, he is more libertarian than the other candidates.
Click to expand...

Oh my God, you are backing Rudy now? How is he the more libertarian of the candidates? Because of abortion? Because he shacked up with a couple of gay guys? How can you not recognize the single most dangerous candidate on the stage, in either party, bar none?
 
Darla said:
Oh my God, you are backing Rudy now? How is he the more libertarian of the candidates? Because of abortion? Because he shacked up with a couple of gay guys? How can you not recognize the single most dangerous candidate on the stage, in either party, bar none?
Click to expand...

Yeah that's some bullshit.

He's fine slamming Hillary but as soon as it turns on his party's Hillary he gets really defensive.
 
Submitted for your approval, two presidential candidates, both from the Empire State. One wants to tax you for every utopian ideal she has ever thought up and the other would have a more stringent Patriot Act. The signpost up ahead, The Authoritarian Zone.
 
Damocles said:
All of that is true, but that doesn't change that other than Paul, he is more libertarian than the other candidates.
Click to expand...

How is Rudy more libertarian? I swear, sometimes it seems all somebody has to say is "cut taxes", and they're given honorary membership in the Libertarian club.

Rudy is pro-Iraq war, pro-Iran war, pro-Patriot act, pro-torture, pro-domestic spying, and his record in NYC is not something civil libertarians would be proud of at all.

In short, he's George Bush on steroids.
 
He was a certifiable fascist in NYC.

Rarely do I find myself agreeing with Cypress but you are off it here, Damo.

Lip service commitment to cutting taxes does not make a libertarian.
 
Cypress said:
How is Rudy more libertarian? I swear, sometimes it seems all somebody has to say is "cut taxes", and they're given honorary membership in the Libertarian club.

Rudy is pro-Iraq war, pro-Iran war, pro-Patriot act, pro-torture, pro-domestic spying, and his record in NYC is not something civil libertarians would be proud of at all.

In short, he's George Bush on steroids.
Click to expand...
He is more socially liberal than any of the other candidates. Such as pro-choice. Not "Abstinence Only", not against Gay Marriage...

You know, the freedom side of things.
 
Young Libertarian said:
He was a certifiable fascist in NYC.

Rarely do I find myself agreeing with Cypress but you are off it here, Damo.

Lip service commitment to cutting taxes does not make a libertarian.
Click to expand...
I never said he was Libertarian. He is a republican. However on the personal freedom side of things he is more libertarian than the other candidates. Name one, other than Paul, that doesn't care about the whole gay marriage issue.
 
You're assuming that

1) I consider gay marriage a remotely important issue (I don't) and

2) I am constrained to casting a vote for a Republican candidate. (I'm not)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top