Monday, April 16, 2007

Giuliani needs to stop doing this

Somebody somewhere needs to have a talk with Rudy before he blows his opportunity before it even gets started.

From the Des Moines Register:

Republican presidential candidate Rudy Giuliani warned GOP activists in Des
Moines on Saturday that if they insist on a nominee who always agrees with them,
it will spell defeat in 2008.

“Our party is going to grow, and we are going to win in 2008 if we are a party characterized by what we’re for, not if we’re a party that’s known for what we’re against,” the former New York mayor said at a midday campaign stop.

Republicans can win, he said, if they nominate a candidate committed to the fight against terrorism and high taxes, rather than a pure social conservative.

“Our party has to get beyond issues like that,” Giuliani said, a reference to abortion rights, which he supports.

There is a right way and a wrong way to express these types of sentiments, if you truly believe them. But calling out your would be supporters and belittling their deeply held beliefs is definately NOT the way to do this. This also could work as an equal opportunity offender for other Republicans who hold dear issues that Rudy is opposed to, such as gun rights activists.

The part that I wince about is that I looked at Rudy as a "great communicator" type. With MAJOR unforced errors such as these taking place almost weekly, I am starting to revise that initial impression, especially as the heat from the media gets a little brighter and more intense.


Anonymous said...

About the only good thing regarding the NRA's stance vis-a-vis every American's god-given right to own enough weaponry to take over half of Central America is it does provide folks like Giuliani (and his counterparts on the other side of the aisle) access to machine guns they can aim at their feet.

AZAce said...

That was good, sirocco! :)

Anonymous said...

Think about it.....Flexibility and Compromise are NOT dirty words!!!!
Incidentally, indefinItley (with an I)....that's at least twice you've hung an A in there!!!

Framer said...

I have my home office firefox spellcheck set remind me to correctly spell Giulinai, unfortunately I used a different computer to post. I'll get that fixed.

And I am all about having a big tent. There are, however, ways to accomplish this as a candidate without offending what will be a large part of your base.

He just told a preponderance of Republican voters that what they consider a big issue for them personally is unimportant. At least agree that is is an issue, attempt to "feel their pain," and find a little common ground.

What he just attempted to do is remove abortion completely off the table for the primaries, which smacks of arrogance and a certain tone deafnesses to the makeup of the party. There was no "compromise" intended.

If Giuliani don't want to talk about abortion, fine. To tell others they are stupid to do so was complete foolishness.

And I am not normally a big Giuliani critic. Imagine what those who are will do with this.

x4mr said...


We split here, Framer, although you might be right. The language you react to are general election words whose impact in the primary is unclear.

Republicans have some tough choices in an election that seems to have a blue sentiment. Go ahead, nominate Brownback or Gingrich. I think McCain is falling apart, literally.

I don't know if it is a working strategy to already talk to the general before the primary, but it is a plausible strategy.

If LD 26 is any indication, Giuliani is making a huge mistake. Your party will nominate kooks like Jorgensen when you had a sure thing in Somers.

McCain will not win the general election. This Romney thing, however, is interesting, if he stops telling us about his shotgun adventures with bunny rabbits and rats.

Giuliani, like Giffords, is going to talk center, not kook. While there are some skeletons I really don't understand, women stuff, I think he is the strongest GOP in the general, if the GOP is smart enough to choose him.

If the GOP were smart, they would just jettison abortion, prayer in school, and this intelligent design stuff.

Abortion plummets with sex education, which conservatives oppose. Is it really abortion that they oppose? Instead you drop $176 M telling teenagers to refrain from sex. If folks were serious about eliminating abortion they would have contraceptive and sex education at every high school and university with a support center offering safe sex resources.

The abortion is a lie.

Watch polytheism erupt if you give the nod to Romney, and if I'm not mistaken we have fresh footage of his pro-choice assertions.

Anonymous said...

Different topic: I note Giffords raised 320K this last quarter, and has 415K or so in the bank.

If I am not mistaken (I haven't gone back to check), isn't that amount more than any candidate other than Giffords raised for any quarter in the runup to last year's elections? If that rate holds up (there's no guarantee it will, but no reason it wouldn't either) she will enter 2008 with over a million in her campaign warchest ... and before the heavy donation drives begin.

I would think, given that number, anyone who hopes to make a serious run at her would want to declare and start digging in pretty quickly.

Framer said...

Very interesting. I looked at the numbers. It appears that she raised about $167,000 from individual donors, about $53,000 from donors earmarked through Emily's List, and the remainder from PACS.

As it turns out all signs point to the Republican primary being a dud, as it looks more and more like it will be Tim Bee, essentially unopposed. I would suspect that there will be quite a bit of funding thrown his way when he announces as well. I don't suspect he will announce for a while yet as it would probably be a distraction from his current duties.

Anonymous said...

I agree Bee would want to postpone any declaration as long as feasible should he opt to run, but the question is who late is feasible? If Giffords raises a similar amount by teh end of August, I think there would be a lot of pressure for him (or any candidate, D or R) to declare in Sep. and start fundraising.

How sure are you about Bee running at all? I heard through the grapevine recently that he was favoring not running, as he considered his position as head of the AZ Senate a better one than junior congressional member for the AZ delegation. It's entirely possible that's just wishfu; thinking, however.

Framer said...

I may be wrong, but isn't Bee term limiting out? He's been in since 2001. Everything that I have heard is that Bruce Ash is now more interested in getting and keeping the National Committeeman slot, which he has a better than even shot at getting, and that Paton has been convinced his time will come later. He may even be waiting to see what happens with redistricting.

Bee just spoke at the district 26 meeting, which could also be a slight indicator. I believe something drastic would have to happen for him to bow out.

Anonymous said...

US President Tim Kalemkarian, US Senate Tim Kalemkarian, US House Tim Kalemkarian: best major candidate.