Can Rudy Beat Hillary?
It seems that a substantial portion of Rudy Giuliani's support is composed of people who are convinced that he is the only one who can take on Hillary Clinton. (The other primary reason for Giuliani's support is the fact that he is seen as tough on national security). While Rudy is many things, he is not a Hillary's silver bullet.
Many seem to forget that he already ran against Hillary in 2000- and lost. Just before the Republican primary (which he would certainly have won hands down), Giuliani dropped out of the race. In fairness, his prostate cancer played a major role in his decision. But so did his affair with Judy Nathan, who he later married. (Question: why is it anathema for Bill Clinton to have an affair while in office, but perfectly okay for Giuliani?) So that is Clinton 1, Giuliani:0.
People often seem to forget 2004 as well. The story of the 2004 elections was the importance of the "values" issue in deciding the election. Kerry lost by three points, and the conventional wisdom was that he might have won if not for those single-issue nutso value voters. Whole books were written by Democrats on this topic, wondering if maybe they could sell the environment or taxes on the rich as values issues. (This strategy worked about as well as you would think it would).
So which voting bloc are the Republicans casting off? Values voters. Is it that hard to see the flaw in this plan? Does the GOP think that there are enough voters who are passionate about staying in Iraq or keeping taxes low to make up the difference as evangelicals and conservative Catholics flee the GOP?
Some commentators have pointed out the general dissatisfaction in the Republican party with the current candidates as a obsession with finding the perfect candidate. They forget that the Republicans have historically been based on three issues- traditional morality, small (comparatively, anyway) government, and an aggressive foreign policy. None of the frontrunners are strong on all of these issues. Is it too much to ask for a candidate who can cover all the conservative bases? (In 2000, we found two-- the pre-amnesty John McCain and George Bush. So it is not impossible). I will vote the Republican nominee, as a Hillary victory would be a distaster. But if the Republicans nominate Giuliani (by far the most liberal of a liberal group of Republicans), they will almost certainly lose.
That's the end of that post, but just a random rant here. Would it kill Sean Hannity to once, just once, question any Republican candidate conservatism? Would it be possible for him not to ask a Republican a softball question? Why does he have to act as though all of the GOP candidates are alike. They aren't Sean. Some are better, some are worse, and Hannity should point out their flaws.
Sorry if I offended any Hannity fans, but that has really been bothering me.