›
This forum is in permanent archive mode. Our new active community can be found here.

Rudy for President?

JasonJason
edited November 2006 in Everything Else
Considering how many of us are from New York and our unique political cross-section, I was wondering how we all feel about Rudy Giuliani forming an exploratory committee for a 2008 presidential bid?

I, for one, welcome our new Italian overlord.

Comments

  • tuttle88tuttle88
    I think he would make a good president but after a discussion on betting on elections in my politics class I put my money on John McCain, who I also think would do a good job.

    Hillary Clinton would be a disaster, she is a populist who believes in nothing (but I also loathe Bill Clinton so that may be clouding my judgement somewhat)

    I can actually vote in the presidential election if I get off my arse and organise it.
  • JasonJason
    edited November 2006
    Even with the massive leftist sentimentalism currently gripping the U.S., I can't see Hillary getting the DNC's nod for a 2008 bid. She is too divisive a figure with far too much opposition from the centrist swing voters. She does not have a magnetic pull that candidates like McCain seem to have; she appears cold and opportunistic. She also has splatter from Bill all over her (in a very un-Monica's dress manner).

    Rudy, meanwhile, has massive bipartisan appeal in much the same way that McCain does. It would be interesting to watch them go head-to-head for the GOP nomination. They are both sympathetic characters that have crossed the aisle to make common-sense legislation work, and they both have good track records where results are concerned -- Giuliani with crime and post-911 disaster management, and McCain with civil rights advocacy and criticism of far-right ideology.
    Post edited by Apreche on
  • tuttle88tuttle88
    Maybe they'll combine on the ticket? Rudy may accept the VP and make a run in 4 or 8 years.
  • AprecheApreche
    Rudy isn't the best candidate I can think of, but he isn't the worst either. It all comes down to who the opponents are. I'm still hoping for Obama at this point.
  • tuttle88tuttle88
    Rudy isn't the best candidate I can think of, but he isn't the worst either. It all comes down to who the opponents are. I'm still hoping for Obama at this point.
    Just looked him up on Wikipedia, he's pretty hot for a politician I'd vote for him, but I doubt a black man of 'mixed race' would win.
  • ThaedThaed
    edited November 2006
    My dream ticket in '08: Giuliani /Schwarzenegger.

    Also, Jason, you're underestimating both Hilary and the leftist sentiment. She could well come to power and bring back Bill as the first man.
    Post edited by Apreche on
  • tuttle88tuttle88
    Also, Jason, you're underestimating both Hilary and the leftist sentiment. She could well come to power and bring back Bill as the first man.
    You're just saying that to freak me out.
  • HMTKSteveHMTKSteve
    I'm finding it funny how many media outlets have begun referring to Hillary as a "centrist" or "moderate" politician...
  • JasonJason
    edited November 2006
    My dream ticket in '08:Giuliani/Schwarzenegger.

    Also, Jason, you're underestimating both Hilary and the leftist sentiment. She could well come to power and bring back Bill as the first man.
    I hope you're kidding. You know Arnold can't run for VP. I should find a frickin' link to a copy of the Constitution, but I'm too damned lazy....

    On the subject of Obama, "hotness" shouldn't have anything to do with it. I'm a fairly conservative American who has consistently voted Republican, but Obama has a lure even for me. I might consider a swing vote as long as he promises fiscal conservancy and not to expand entitlements. I would rail against tax-and-spend Democrats here, but the right hasn't been doing much better in recent years.
    Post edited by Jason on
  • HeavyCruiserLostHeavyCruiserLost
    edited November 2006
    On the subject of Obama, "hotness" shouldn't have anything to do with it.
    I wouldn't underestimate the power of "hotness." If anything, the landmark, televised Kennedy-Nixon debate taught us the power of being a stud and looking good on TV. Hotness aside, I'm with Scott, I'm also counting on Obama.
    Post edited by HeavyCruiserLost on
  • tuttle88tuttle88
    On the subject of Obama, "hotness" shouldn't have anything to do with it.
    Yeah it shouldn't but I'd bet you any money you like it would improve voter turn out.
  • CorbinCorbin
    I wouldn't underestimate the power of "hotness." If anything, the landmark, televised Kennedy-Nixon debate taught us the power of being a stud and looking good on TV. Hotness aside, I'm with Scott, I'm also counting on Obama.
    Actually Kennedy only won by a razor slim margin, so hotness isn't that landmark, although it certainly does help.
  • HeavyCruiserLostHeavyCruiserLost
    edited November 2006
    I wouldn't underestimate the power of "hotness." If anything, the landmark, televised Kennedy-Nixon debate taught us the power of being a stud and looking good on TV. Hotness aside, I'm with Scott, I'm also counting on Obama.
    Actually Kennedy only won by a razor slim margin, so hotness isn't that landmark, although it certainly does help.
    You're right, Kennedy won by a slim margin. But historically it is understood that the majority of those who listened to the debate via radio thought Nixon won while those who watched the debate thought Kennedy won. The explanation given for this discrepancy is Kennedy's composure and appearance on camera. Nixon did not wear makeup, looked somewhat under the weather and generally looked uncomfortable while Kennedy was well composed and had "teh hotness"--ultimately tipping the debate in his favor.

    This debate is actually very important (or landmark debate) in American political history because it marked the beginning of a era where public appearance, via televised coverage, could make or break a politician to a level previously unrealized. As much as it pains me to say it, don't ever underestimate the power of television. The televised coverage of the Vietnam war is probably the best example of said power.

    Edit: Correct me if I am wrong but wasn't makeup mandatory in such televised debates after this case?
    Post edited by HeavyCruiserLost on
  • tuttle88tuttle88
    JOHN! What are you doing to me! I defended you, a Republican! Now you do this to me! I can only hope that since the website appears to be pretty biased it was taken out of context. Don't make me come over there!
  • AprecheApreche
    JOHN! What are you doing to me! I defended you, a Republican! Now youdo this to me! I can only hope that since the website appears to be pretty biased it was taken out of context. Don't make me come over there!
    I thought John McCain was cool maybe 5-7 years ago. Now I realize he's just a nutty old man.
  • JasonJason
    Not as nutty as this Democrat seems. I ain't fightin' no war, buddy.
  • PilitusPilitus
    I think he was trying to make a point. You know, political posturing and making a statement?
  • AtheriShadowAtheriShadow
    At least this draft bill allows you to opt for public service instead. I mean I'm against mandatory conscription for any reason but I foresee a massive surplus of public servants if this thing actually makes it through.
  • tuttle88tuttle88
    This comes up in Australia every now and again and it is always from politicians never from the army. Australia has a highly professional and very talented defense force, in general they oppose National Service since it brings a bunch of people who don't want to be there into the service. Who the army have to spend large sums of money training them and get nothing back since they usually leave after their time is up.
  • JasonJason
    I think he was trying to make a point. You know, political posturing and making a statement?
    He's obviously not, since he's tried to push the same bill through every year since 2003. If I wasn't so scared of polar bears, I'd think about moving to Canada.
Sign In or Register to comment.