Lots of comments about RG as a candidate but it's the political equivalent of fantasy football. The GOP will find an empty shirt they can control. The current empty shirt is barely literate; he makes Reagan and Bush I look like bloody geniuses. With that as the bottom of the Republican barrel they can undoubtedly find an equally unqualified candidate and puff him up into something he's not. "Bush redux" as mentioned above with spin by Rove. Just imagine how well they might do if they can find an empty shirt who is also a war veteran or had some role in the 9/11 response?

With or without the warts mentioned in the above posts, Rudy ISN'T the one for the GOP.

haha. roo, the missing data has probably met up with Abu Gonzales' rationale for NSA spying in a cyber dimension too complex for human understanding.

"I had no idea that posting stats from the DOJ website would cause system meltdown ;)"

Apparently they cause some sort of a 'reality matrix paradox' in analytic computer systems.

Bizzarre.

Thanks for reposting RMill.

Would be nice if WaPo would acknowledge the error. ESPECIALLY if there are "content problems" as you suggest. I had no idea that posting stats from the DOJ website would cause system meltdown ;)

There must have been content problems in the last batch because it failed to meet preconditions.

More Backposts

Speaking as a Dem, I hope against hope that the Republicans nominate Rudy (or for that matter, McCain) in 2008. I have little doubt that the radical right will respond with their own far right candidate (a Roy Moore type) in the general election, split the center-right vote and give the presidency to the Democrat.

Posted by: adam | Feb 8, 2006 12:01:33 PM | Permalink

I love all the clueless liberals in here telling how Rudy was a terrible mayor and how Bill Clinton did the job better. Bill Clinton was mayor of New York??? But I digress. Rudy single handedly rescued the city from its downward spiral of utter decay brought about by 30 years of liberal police and social policies. Did any of you live in New York during Dinkins's tenure? Back then, rather than merely threatening riots (this is for you, FairAndBalanced?), Sharpton (yes, arson master at Freddies in 1995 and your party's keynote speaker in 2004) & Co. actually did riot in Crown Heights and rampage in Washington Heights, what was the Dinkins administration response? First they told the police to step back and let the rioters do their thing, leading to a couple of murders and lots of property damage, then Dinkins personally came out to comfort the rioters and assure them of his support.

Guiliani by contrast let it be known that he would not tolerate riots, and suddenly they were no more. Did Clinton end the open air drug markets in Harlem, rescue the subways and streets of just about every NYC neighborhood from crime ridden after dark to among the safest in the world? And maybe it was Clinton or Dinkins who cleaned up city finances in the early 1990's without raising taxes? Was it the failed liberal social policies spanning from Mayors Lindsay through Dinkins that made NYC the most desirable, in, place in the country? You folks crack me up.

Sure, Guiliani will have trouble in Republican primaries over his stance on social issues. McCain got trouble over his in the Carolinas in 2000, and he is not a social liberal. But was Guiliani unquestionably the best mayor New York has had in over 50? Absolutely!

Posted by: True NYer | Feb 8, 2006 12:03:35 PM | Permalink

THough many in the middle may vote for Giuliani and McCain, or Feingold or Warner, the problem is the primaries, the average American doesn't have a strong enough vote in who they actually get to choose for president.

That to me, is the problem with all these Polls, they ask who people will vote for, but, unless the people the polls mention have the backing of their party and finacial support, they have no chance of getting out of the primaries.

I think that Howard Dean is a good example of this. Many poeple liked that he had a backbone and said what is actually thought, but it scared the Democrats. The media played the scream over and over while commenting that is was bad--Known Liberals and Known Conservatives. What if their comments were different? Like "Wow, this guy is excited to work for the people of this country."

My point is, the media which is basically controled by 6 companies, will also have a say in who even wins a primary.

Posted by: Kasche | Feb 8, 2006 12:09:55 PM | Permalink

To NYer:

100% accurate. When Rudy took over, the city was actually called "ungovernable". The city was utterly transformed in 8 years. A lot of his detractors despise him for his no-nonsense, kick-ass demeanor; this gets folded into the 'racism' narrative. Fact: in drastically reducing the homicide rate, the overwhelming beneficiaries were residents in black neighborhoods.

Posted by: Jersey Independent | Feb 8, 2006 12:17:50 PM | Permalink

>>> WHen a man marries his mistress, he is merely creating an opening for the position

Hahaha. I dont know if you intended this or not, but you reminded me abt how he got his lover a cushy job that she was not qualified to get.

Actually, given the current Administration's penchant for blatant cronyism, he appears fully qualified for the GOP nomination.

Posted by: FairAndBalanced? | Feb 8, 2006 12:20:09 PM | Permalink

I am not from States,and We wonder who will be your next president.Because Bush was a total failure after Clinton's government.
I hope you are not gonna elect Giuliani.Whhile I was reading I learnt some new words like panderer etc.That doesn't sound good for a president.Choose somebody whom we will be able to name our streets his name afterwards.Roosevelt has a street in almost every city in Europe.

Posted by: Nabeca | Feb 8, 2006 12:26:19 PM | Permalink

It might be remembered that it was Rudy who recommended to Bush that Kerick be appointed head of Homeland Security. He worked with the guy closely and didn't seem to get it that he widely reported to be on the take for favors from contractors while Police Commish. Rudy has also cashed in on his 9.11 fame by selling his services to the highest bidders. A dubious recommendation for the presidency. paul

Posted by: paul r. dunn | Feb 8, 2006 12:32:10 PM | Permalink

"True NYer": read what I wrote about Bill Clinton and then get back to me.

Other comments on what some have written: I never said I liked Dinkins. I never said I supported Sharpton. And I did write that Giuliani was tough on crime.

True NYer, Im going to assume that you went back and read my reference to BC, and that you can read English enough to realize that all I said was that he was tough on crime.

But my central point in bringing this up is that for one to think that the ramifications of Bill Clinton's 1) efforts to reduce inner-city crime (100,000 more cops on the streets, etc), and 2) economic policies, had NOTHING to do with the drastic improvement of NYC in the '90s is to be completely ignorant of reality.

Posted by: FairAndBalanced? | Feb 8, 2006 12:36:57 PM | Permalink

Clinton came to NYC during the Diallo episode and said 'this wouldn't have happened on a street on the upper east side'.

Well, duh, the upper east side does not have out-of-control gang-bangers shooting up the streets, and the Street Crimes Unit using COMSTAT would not be there. But, it adds to the racism narrative, so go with it.

Clinton rode the tech bubble and co-opted the Repubs. Rudy cleaned up Dodge City.

Posted by: Jersey Independent | Feb 8, 2006 12:47:49 PM | Permalink

Rudy Giuliani and John McCain are not gonna cut it for the presidential race.
This nation has a lot of work to do, which these "Yes Men" cannot fathom.
Under the Bush stewardship, we have seen the rise of a dangerous new /old threat in Red China. That is because men like Bush and McCain cannot recognize the many faces of war. They continually enable invasion of this country by lax border policies, which are in opposition to the will of the American people.
The clock is ticking, as Red China prepares for total nuclear war against this nation.
Our enemies laugh at us, because the president lacks the geopolitical will to secure our borders from invasion.
This president calls Red China "Our Chinese friends," showing his complete lack of awareness of the true political agenda of the communists.
The only logical presidential choice is a Buchanan/Tancredo ticket.
The current GOP darlings for the race are simply not strong enough to save this country.

Posted by: Revolutionary | Feb 8, 2006 12:57:56 PM | Permalink

JI, you sound about as independent as my right ass cheek.

>>>>Well, duh, the upper east side does not have out-of-control gang-bangers shooting up the streets

Was Diallo guity of anything other than being a dark-skinned, African immigrant?

Pow. Pow. Pow. Pow. Pow. Pow. Pow. Pow. Pow. Pow. Pow. Pow. Pow. Pow. Pow. Pow. Pow. Pow. Pow. Pow. Pow. Pow. Pow. Pow. Pow. Pow. Pow. Pow. Pow. Pow. Pow. Pow. Pow. Pow. Pow. Pow. Pow. Pow. Pow. Pow. Pow.

thats 41 shots by 4 white cops (do the math, abt 10 shots PER COP). versus 1 unarmed African man (who probably didnt understand english very well) in a poor, ethnic neighborhood. Rudy wouldn't even condemn the killing. racism "narrative"? gimme a break.

Posted by: FairAndBalanced? | Feb 8, 2006 1:03:29 PM | Permalink

No one said that Clinton was Mayor of NY. I only asked what did Giuliani do after 9/11 that Clinton didn't do after Oklahoma City?

What did Giuliani do specifically after 9/11 that was so heroic.

You guys never can answer.

And as I stated earlier, a lot of Giuliani support is based in racial antipathy.

He's seen as the great white knight who stood up to those awful blacks in NY.

Tell me why did he award the family of Yankel Rosenbaum $1 million dollars of city money.

Did Yusef Hawkins' family get a million bucks?

How about Michael Stewart? Patrick Dorismond?

Willie Turks?

Let's not forget little Gavin Cato, the 6 year old who was killed by a vehicular murderer which was the event which started the Crown Heights riots.

Did his family get anything from Rudy?

Posted by: To NYer and Jersey Independent | Feb 8, 2006 1:07:04 PM | Permalink

Dearest Commenter,

I applaud your truthfullness in acknowledging that there were riots in Crown Heights, rather than the "disturbances" often cited by the media. Many of us living in NY at the time actually knew them as pogroms; or to keep it simple, a Black mob using a traffic accident as an excuse to murder their Jewish neighbors and destroy their property.

"Let's not forget little Gavin Cato, the 6 year old who was killed by a vehicular murderer which was the event which started the Crown Heights riots." Let's not forget that he was killed by traffic accident, by someone who ran a red light. Murder is with premeditated intent to kill. Sort of like what the mob did to Yankel Rosenbaum and Anthony Graziosi (he looked Jewish). The riots were not started by the accident, they were started by mobs shouting "Kill the Jews!" And they were sustained by encouragement from Rev. Sharpton and fellow clergymen along with coddling by the Dinkins administration for the next few days.

Why did the Guiliani administration settle with the Rosenbaum family? To avoid losing a long public trial retelling all these painful details.

Better question: why did the Dinkins administration pay the funeral expenses of the armed drug dealer who was killed by police before the Washington Heights riots?

Oh, and FairAndBalanced? - I appreciate your stooping to silly snide remarks about my proficiency in English. It only further detracts from your ridiculous arguments. Clinton stopped street crime? (Interstate commerce, no doubt) I suppose he won the Cold War and reformed welfare as well. Merely increasing federal spending on what should be local government issues does not count.

Posted by: NYer | Feb 8, 2006 1:28:42 PM | Permalink

Backposts from Old Site:

Rudy has a problem on his hands once he voters are informed of his gay rights, gun control, and prochoice stance as Mayor, but it doesn't mean that he can't change his stance to these issues, but when he gets to the general election Democrats will make every GOP conservative voter to know about his past. The far right will either not vote then, not pledge money to him, or just stay home and skip the election. This would hand the Democrats the Presideny, even if Rudy wins over the Independent vote. In 2004 the only reason Bush won was because he was able to get these cultural mad far right conservatives that usually not vote to come out and support him. They will stay home with Rudy.

Posted by: Josh | Feb 8, 2006 11:13:26 AM | Permalink

So I assume his "health issues" which was his excuse from running from HRC and the Senate race are all better now? Should be easy to get his ex to speak out again....

Posted by: JoeyD | Feb 8, 2006 11:14:28 AM | Permalink

WHen a man marries his mistress, he is merely creating an opening for the position.

Posted by: KAS | Feb 8, 2006 11:14:32 AM | Permalink

I recently saw a clip on some news show of Rudy speaking in some conservative Christian forum. He closed by saying something along the lines of, "So is some of these ideas--these lessons--will help you bring people closer to God, help them to know Jesus, it would make me very happy."

Talk about pandering! It made me ill. He sounded totally inauthentic. In 2004, Howard Dean paid a call on Jimmy Carter in hopes of burnishing his religious bona fides, but it didn't work. Whenever he spoke about religion, he sounded like what he is---a secular intellectual who was taking on a persona that didn't fit in hopes of winning votes. Rudy sounded even worse, perhaps because he went further w/ the Jesus language.

I'm not a fan of Christian conservatives, but at least some of them believe what they say. Rudy doesn't. His listeners will be able to see this. I hope.

Posted by: THS | Feb 8, 2006 11:15:20 AM | Permalink

I don't think Guiliani runs, he is making great money on the speaking circuit, and while I do want to like him considering he appears to be a moderate on a number of social issues I have problems with some of his decisions.

I would love to see McCain vs Warner, I don't think America could lose in that election. I fear we will see an Allen Vs Clinton, in which case America can't win.

Posted by: D~ | Feb 8, 2006 11:16:58 AM | Permalink

Beholden to no party, I find it amusing to watch the Right stomp all over the Left with their bullying, self-righteous nonsense. And then, watching the Left sit there and take it. Again, and again. It's high time some Dems stand up and be counted or they're gonna be crying - again - in November '06... and '08. I hope not... 'cuz I can't stand what BushCo is doing to my country... but as days pass and still no (well, not nearly enough) Dems sticking it to the Repubs when there has never been a better time to blast them on their corruption and incompetence on every issue. Why the Delay? (pun intended.)

Posted by: MG | Feb 8, 2006 11:18:20 AM | Permalink

Guilani also has skeletons in the closet from his tenure as Mayor. Let's not forget about the problems his police chief had and even before 9/11 the city was in a fiscal mess. Bloomberg fixed much of Guiliani's mismanagement as mayor of New York.

http://www.intrepidliberaljournal.blogspot.com

Posted by: Intrepid Liberal | Feb 8, 2006 11:21:04 AM | Permalink

Once Repubs know his positions thanks to their own "Truth Squads" and his star statuw wears off he will not carry a primary south of Pennsylvania.

Posted by: Peter L. | Feb 8, 2006 11:40:40 AM | Permalink

Giuliani can't get past the conservative base, McCain might not either, although millions of independents would vote for either in a minute. Instead we'll get some form of Bush Redux and a shrill, soft-on-National-Security Democrat who appeals to their base. Never changes.

As far as '41 Shots', Rudy is detested by the left in New York for not caving to the race-baiters (read: Sharpton), not buying that these Street Crimes cops, whose primary goal was eliminating gun violence in high crime areas, intentionally murdered Diallo and supporting the not guilty verdict of a racially diverse (though non-Bronx) jury.

For vintage Rudy, check out his speech to the U.N. about ten days after 9/11. Unequivocal and explicit. No one has ever stated America's case better.

Posted by: Jersey Independent | Feb 8, 2006 11:44:23 AM | Permalink

Today's analysis drastically understates his problems with the average Republican.

Giuliani not only opposes the Constitutional amendment protecting traditional marriage, he has supported civil unions in NYC. Nobody has mentioned his position on gun control, of which he is an enthusiastic supporter. During his Senate run in 2000, he refused to support a ban on even partial birth abortion.

Are these problems he has with just the Conservatives, or with mainstream Republicans and even mainstream Americans?

What about his personal life? He's been married three times, and dumped his second wife on TV. He is a serial adulterer.

Giuliani's popularity is totall superficial, and he has no chance at all of being the nominee, or even of being a running mate.

Posted by: Chris | Feb 8, 2006 11:48:02 AM | Permalink

I doubt any nefarious conspiracy and it was not selective. It appears that every post after 11:03 AM was lost when I presume the switch was made to the new URL.

From then on, concurrent posts were taking place at the old site and the new one. I am sure it is a simple matter to re-insert lost posts from the old site to the new.

JI, I was going to say that you and True NYer have every reason to be as miffed as I am. To be honest, I've come to expect shenanigans like this from The Fix. It is truly sad.

Well, for once I'm in agreement with Fair and Balanced

Thanks for selectively deleting half the thread.

Is there an explanation for this?

It has always amused me to hear talk of Giuliani as a national candidate. As was mentioned above, very few people can give specific examples of his "heroism" and "leadership" post 9/11.

What he did do, in fact, was give some nice speeches. His rhetorical effectiveness was amplified by the dearth of coherence coming out of the president. Although Bush eventually found his voice (via bullhorn) on top of the Ground Zero rubble, Giuliani cemented his image as a heroic leader in those first few days.

Following that, however, Giuliani then turned Ground Zero into his personal photo op zone for celebrities and political supporters. The elected Manhattan Borough President, an African-American woman and not a political supporter of Giuliani's, was denied access to the site (ostensibly because it was "too dangerous"), all the while Hizzoner was giving personal tours.

For a look at the real heroes of 9/11 and Ground Zero, I strongly recommend William Langewiesche's "American Ground: Unbuilding the World Trade Center."

Giuliani will never be elected to national office.

A poll of New York City voters in the week after 9/11 asked New Yorkers whether they would vote to reelect Guiliani mayor (he was ineligible to run because of term limits) and, even then, when he was at the peak of his popularity, fifty-three percent said that he should NOT run.

I am not sure that Guiliani could win a national election because of many of the reasons cited above. I certainly hope he would NOT win, also for many reasons. I, for one, will never forget Guiliani's speech at the RNC in 2004 in which he thanked God that Bush was president in 2001. I was stunned. Either he was lying or simply stupid. Few New Yorkers would thank God for Bush for anything. And I do not think we will vote for Guiliani either.

"Giulani's basic appeal comes from his authoritarian image, antipathy toward blacks, and enthusiastic support of police violence."

Guilani has always totally creeped me out and it's reassuring to see that many others agree.

Another possible problem Rudy has is that he has no experience running a real national office. Governors can get by with it since they have to deal with State issues, but a mayor? What does he really have to do. Not much since the State deals with the major budget issues, education, healthcare, etc. Basically he has to try and keep crime down and the Subway running, the rest takes care of itself. That being said a McCain/Guiliani ticket is pretty inviting for the centrists in this country.
When is someone going to tell McCain (and Rudy for that matter) to avoid the dog fight of a primary and run as an independent.

For a while, Rudy G. kept his mistress under the same roof (Gracie Mansion) as his family.

What a slimebag - he will never win Republican primaries in the Bible Belt or other conservative areas!

Chris,
Other people have pointed this out to you before, but the term is not "pro-abortion rights", it's pro-choice. Just like it's not anti-abortion rights, it's pro-life. The only people who are actually pro-abortion are the strawmen used by the extreme right. Seriously man, you've got to change your terminology.

All any opponent has to do is show far-right GOP primary voters one of those famous photos of Rudy in drag. End of candidacy. End of story. (Which is a shame, really -- he's got great legs!)

Can Giuliani win? Maybe. Probably, if he gets the nod from the Republicans.

Personally, I'm not sure if that will happen. All that's needed is a large media buy with his 2004 clip from the Today Show, where he pretty much told Matt Lauer that the troops on the ground in Iraq were to blame for not finding WMDs and why over 380 tons of explosives went missing from a site in Iraq after the invasion, not their commanders:

GIULIANI: "The president was cautious. The president was prudent. The president did what a commander in chief should do. And no matter how much you try to blame it on the president, the actual responsibility for it really would be for the troops that were there. Did they search carefully enough? Didn't they search carefully enough?"

That was hot. Blame the troops for following orders, not the commanders for not giving the right ones.

As a New Yorker who lived through Hizzoner's administration in the 1990s, I agree with Permalink. Once people start scrutinizing our former mayor's record with an eye towards his potential as a national leader rather than a figure of casual hero worship, they'll quickly realize the degree to which he's abrasive, authoritarian, self-interested, uncompromising (in a bad way) and generally unfit to lead.

I'm from New York. This emperor has no clothes, and as a serial adulterer, that's frequent.

Rudi won't run.

He is a paper tiger that, when held to real scrutiny, won't pass the smell test and he knows it.

Enamoured with current popular opinion polls, he will toy with the idea but will be content to try and play kingmaker (much like another wildly popular NY pol of the 1990's, Mario Cuomo) and finnagle a cabinet post (Attorney General) or Supreme Court. I think he might also be willing to be VP for someone like McCain or Allen.

He bailed early on his first match with Hillary and don't think he could even beat her for US Senate in NY right now.

Giuliani's handling of the aftermath of the terrorist attacks of 9/11???

What exactly did he do that was so extraordinary?

What did Giuliani do that we would not expect any leader to do?

What did he do that Clinton didn't do after Oklahoma City?

I've asked this question many times of Giuliani synchophants and you never get a straight answer.

Giulani's basic appeal comes from his authoritarian image, antipathy toward blacks, and enthusiastic support of police violence.

Doesn't anyone find it amazingly curious why conservative republicans who made their bones on the issue of character and morals are willing to compromise their principles on those issues when it comes to keeping a republican in the Oval Office?

Rudy Giuliani's character problems have consistently been a hot subject in the tabloids and his dalliances with mistresses are well known. Yet republicans who continue to insist that they are the party of values and character are fully willing to give any republican a pass, notwithstanding their questionable moral character.

Rudi seems phony for me. I'm not really sure what he stands for--especially since he seems to be courting the right wing. He would have to do a major about face to get their vote, yet I think he's willing to give them what they want in order to get their blessing (judges and Supreme Court nominees, for example). He was a Dem once and moved to the GOP in order to get away from losing in the Dem primary.

I suppose his slogan can be, "hey, at least I married my mistress!"

>>>Giuliani is pro-abortion rights and is on the record in opposition to President Bush's call for a ban on gay marriage

Interesting that it seems as tho the two most popular candidates for the GOP in '08 are pro-choice. Rice and Rudy.

Where's Dobson on these two? Where's Fallwell? Where's the Middle America Christian GOP?

The hypocracy of the Right never ceases to amaze me.

Btw, Giuliani was a horrible mayor (I do admit he was tough on crime in the '90s, but so was Bill Clinton). But his handling of the Amadou Dialo case is enough for me to hope that he never gets elected to ANY office ever again. 41 shots, but No justice. The disgracful the way he handled the situation almost led to race riots in NYC.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/nation/specials/aroundthenation/nypd/

If you scratch the surface of the Giuliani appeal, you will uncover some rather unsavory material that will not go over well in Middle America: how he dumped his wife, some of his political cronies (Kerik's problems trying to become DHS Secretary is a good example and the tip of the iceberg), his perceived racial insensitivity. McCain would have a better time surviving a primary season, and he's been tested.

Another problem with centrist/moderate Republicans that conservatives don't have to face is that they are forced to become something they are not...social conservatives, and when they reach out to social conservatives, they tend to sound like panderers. Any of them: Giuliani, Pataki, etc., would have that problem and it would put them in a bad spot in the general election.

Can Rudy beat Hillary? Yes. Can he beat Mark Warner, not sure. Can he beat McCain or Allen or even Frist (god help us), don't know.