A Sea Of Red

That sounds a lot better than whatever alternative we're going to get.

Of course, Guiliani is pro-choice, but that issue will really come down *not* to his personal views, but to the judges he picks to the Supreme Court.
Of course, Guiliani is pro-civil unions, but that issue really comes down to individual states, state legislature, and 67 senators (if it's a Constitutional issue).
Of course, Guiliani is pro-embryonic stem cell research, but then again, so is 70% of this country, and anyone who opposes it will get the Michael J. Fox smear-campaign levied against him.

IMHO, Guiliani is the only electable GOP candidate. With Vice President McCain.

There is no way McCain is willing to play second fiddle. He's licking his lips figuring that he's the next GOP candidate. Rudy has way too much personal baggage in his past. Once the gloss of Nine-Eleven gets coverage, the media will quickly jump to his personal life and it's not pretty. Besides the three things you mentioned he can't win a republican primary nationally at this point.

All he needs is to be our commencement speaker this year

If you're talking about personal lives, so what? Barack did coke and Hillary is a walking freak-show.

And I only put McCain as veep because there is absolutely NO ONE in the wings for 2012 or 2016, barring the unlikely resurgence of Rick Santorum or George Allen.

i would take rudy over mc cain. but to be honest, if mc cain is the chosen one, the GOP will not win IMO.

Ed Dantes wrote: there is absolutely NO ONE in the wings for 2012 or 2016, barring the unlikely resurgence of Rick Santorum or George Allen.

JEB He just needs time for poeple to calm down when the hear the name.

Just a thought: If Hillary is elected in '08 (heaven forbid) and Jeb makes a run after that, the Presidents chart in my class will look pretty funny- Bush, Clinton, Bush, Clinton, Bush. Do you think Chelsea will be available in 17 years? We have already gone through 20 years of having a president named Bush or Clinton. There is a legitimate shot of extending that to 36 years.

(This is what I do on my lunch break)

In my lifetime, there has never not been a Bush or Clinton in the White House.

SuperJon wrote:In my lifetime, there has never not been a Bush or Clinton in the White House.

And I am now officially an old man.

I'm young. I'm a junior who just turned 20 three months ago. I'll graduate at 21.

01LUGrad wrote:Just a thought: If Hillary is elected in '08 (heaven forbid) and Jeb makes a run after that, the Presidents chart in my class will look pretty funny- Bush, Clinton, Bush, Clinton, Bush. Do you think Chelsea will be available in 17 years? We have already gone through 20 years of having a president named Bush or Clinton. There is a legitimate shot of extending that to 36 years.

(This is what I do on my lunch break)

Funny note....rumors i have read says the Hillary would not go by President Clinton....but would like to be addressed as President Rodham.

Rudy G is great. As for the personal baggage, it is already out there. People know his wife was a lesbian and that he was dating his Administrative Assistant (who I believe is ALOT younger). That is a GOOD thing. Obama is in a similar situation. They have already had their dirtly laundry aired, and tthere won't be any more suprises or the press will just focus on those and not dig for more.
The number one issue of our time is NOT civil unions or abortion. It is the war on Terror. The image of him on 9/11, his tough stance on crime his ability to clean up a mess (NYC) will IMO trump his "personal" baggage. He can EASILY "evolve" his abortion/civil union issues, good pols do it all the time! JF doesnt have the pull he once did so his threatened "boycott" of Rudy won't hold that much sway, and seriously on election day do you REALLY think JF is either gonna stay home or vote Democrat or Libertarian?
As for Veeps' McCain is a no go. (Sec Def?) I like what's his name in Ark. that is running or the guy from Colorado who is running. That would be a nice North/South combo with the Ark guy (Huckabee?) or an East / West thing with the guy from Colorado. Even maybe Warner? Are to REALLY pander to the Right wing (and my choice of heart) NEWT!!!!

Rudy sucks. I always here how great he is with 9/11 and how he'd be tough on terror. But did he do anything that was so great besides have the title of mayor during the attack? I guess you could say he could have screwed everything up afterward but do we make him president because he didn't? Down with Rudy.

wow

a little East-coast hate going on there.

Yea, Rudy's whole war on crime in NY and bringing the crime rates down to record lows wasn't much of anything.

SJ...you were born when Reagan was President. FWIW, I'm also in the "Graduating at 21" club-May is only 5 months away

I didn't say president. I said "in the White House."

SuperJon wrote:Yea, Rudy's whole war on crime in NY and bringing the crime rates down to record lows wasn't much of anything.

Well despite your sarcastic remark I was referring to how great he was during 9/11. Not anything else. But since you want to bring up his whole war on crime, I'm on the edge of my seat for you to tell me how that makes him a good candidate for president. I don't think the national crime rate is a real big issue at the moment.

I didn't say he'd be good. I was just answering the "what else did he do?" question. Sorry that I missed your point with the question.

Rocketfan wrote:

01LUGrad wrote:Just a thought: If Hillary is elected in '08 (heaven forbid) and Jeb makes a run after that, the Presidents chart in my class will look pretty funny- Bush, Clinton, Bush, Clinton, Bush. Do you think Chelsea will be available in 17 years? We have already gone through 20 years of having a president named Bush or Clinton. There is a legitimate shot of extending that to 36 years.

(This is what I do on my lunch break)

Funny note....rumors i have read says the Hillary would not go by President Clinton....but would like to be addressed as President Rodham.

And she's also mandating that Bill be known as "The First Lady".

Not that anyone cares, but John Kerry announced today that he will not be running for President this time around. Wheew.

Here's my 'educated' guess on the 2008 tickets:
-The Dems won't be able to win with Hillary. I don't think she will make it past South Carolina in the primaries. Barak Obama is the sexy pick right now, but I think he will get ripped in the early debates for his lack of experience. (By the way, I think he will be our first African American president even if he doesn't pull it off this time around.) The dark horse in all of this is John Edwards. He isn't getting a lot of press right now, but he is a 'Dixiecrat.' These guys did really well in the mid-term elections (ie: Rep. Heath Shuler!?!). I see a Edwards/Obama ticket as one that would attract a lot of voters.

-The Republicans' strategy should be to stay as far away from Bush as possible (if things don't turn around in Iraq in a hurry). The two big-time names right now are McCain and Rudy G. If the GOP wants to move a little more towards the center to pick up all the pieces from '06, a McCain/Rudy ticket might just do it.

Keep in mind that we have a LONG way to go on this one. I don't normally buy green bananas, so making a prediction like this is a little out of character.

LUconn wrote:Rudy sucks. I always here how great he is with 9/11 and how he'd be tough on terror. But did he do anything that was so great besides have the title of mayor during the attack? I guess you could say he could have screwed everything up afterward but do we make him president because he didn't? Down with Rudy.

I lived right down the river from Guiliani (NJ) during his term, and he was an amazing mayor. Just before you say how much he sucks, you really have to consider how much of a crap-hole NYC was when Dinkins was the mayor. Rudy helped lower crime, cracked down on the homeless, helped out with urban reconstruction, was *brilliant* with the media, and was one of those that wouldn't tolerate that no common-sense liberal mumbo-jumbo.

And then there was 9-11, which shouldn't be dismissed by saying "so what". To see how great of a leader he was during that period, contrast him with New Orleans mayor Ray Nagin -- who KNEW that a catastrophic storm was coming and still played his fiddle. At a time when we all thought that the world was literally about to end, Rudy couldn't have handled the situation any better.

ED You make great points. TO compare how to handle disasters it is a good thing to look at how New Orleans fared with their leader and how NYC fared with theirs. Also, you can NOT underestimate this: Rudy was a Rebublica, albeit liberal one, in a City Hall system FULL of life long dems, also Liberal. AND HE GOT STUFF DONE. Sometimes over their kicking and screaming (OK MOSTLY over their kicking and screaming) but it got done. Times Square is a great tourist destination now. You say the nationwide crime rate isn't a big issue right now but you know what, safety is. I see a paralel. It shows that he can get stuff DONE. He can lead in the face of opposition (OHHHHH if GWB could do that) And considering NYC is larger than a lot of COUNTRIES, it is a heck of a lot better training ground than the Senate.

Ed Dantes wrote:
And then there was 9-11, which shouldn't be dismissed by saying "so what". To see how great of a leader he was during that period, contrast him with New Orleans mayor Ray Nagin -- who KNEW that a catastrophic storm was coming and still played his fiddle. At a time when we all thought that the world was literally about to end, Rudy couldn't have handled the situation any better.

But this is exactly what I'm talking about. He did such a greath job because he didn't Nagin the situation? You probably couldn't have made the situation any worse than our chocolate city friend did. And because Rudy didn't foul it up like that, he did a great job? I'm not talking about the rest of his mayorship really becuase I know he did some good things but I'm not too familiar with the overall body of work. I just don't like to hear that he was so great in the face of crisis because he didn't screw it up.

Ed Dantes wrote:If you're talking about personal lives, so what? Barack did coke and Hillary is a walking freak-show.

And I only put McCain as veep because there is absolutely NO ONE in the wings for 2012 or 2016, barring the unlikely resurgence of Rick Santorum or George Allen.

You do realize that Dubya did coke and had a serious drinking problem. That didn't seem to hurt his chances.