Page 16 of 16
Posted: Sat Feb 24, 2007 4:15 pm
by Penelope
criddic3 wrote:Guiliani was portrayed by James Woods in an even-handed TV movie
Combining Guiliani with James Woods is about as far from even-handed as one can get.
Posted: Sat Feb 24, 2007 4:07 pm
by criddic3
I really don't think that a public divorce or Guiliani's abortion stance will stop him from gaining a lot of votes. The marraige dissolved years ago and changing an abortion stance didn't stop George H. W. Bush from either the V.P. slot in 1980 or the Presidency in 1988.
Guiliani was portrayed by James Woods in an even-handed TV movie a few years ago, which many saw and was nominated for an Emmy. So I doubt that having a few "warts" will stop him. People know Hilary Clinton by now and will likely not change their opinions of her on either side. I voted for her the last time around, because her opponent offered nothing to us and she was steady in taking responsibility for her vote on Iraq. Too many people, for political reasons, had begun apologizing for their vote and running away from their responsibility. She didn't. However, she'd make a horrible President.
As for Obama, I still haven't seen enough of him and can't make a final determination on whether he'd make a good President. Recent spats with the Hilary camp don't help him, but this early in the game they won't matter much in the end unless they get uglier.
Edwards was a better candidate in 2004 than Kerry, but he's got little to offer since he's been out of office for two years now.
Posted: Fri Feb 23, 2007 5:32 pm
by Akash
Greg, I know, it's amazing. I didn't live in Giuliani's NY but many New Yorkers can tell you he was anything but "heroic" or a "social liberal."
It's sad really that America has become so conservative that "liberal" here just means slightly left of the far right.
Posted: Fri Feb 23, 2007 2:39 pm
by Greg
Here's an interesting piece on dailykos debunking Rudy and his "heroism" re: 9/11.
http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2007/2/23/11431/2093
Posted: Tue Feb 20, 2007 1:30 pm
by Big Magilla
I saw something on the news last night while half asleep that a new poll (Time? Gallup?) found that 97% of the electorate would vote for an African-American male and 91% would vote for a female, that after Bush white males were no longer seen as the ideal Presidential candidate.
I've never liked Giuliani, but he'd be preferable to santimonious, wishy washy McCain. Still, it's likely to be the Dems next time out, whether it's Obama, Clinton, Edwards or someone else who gets teh nomiantion.
Posted: Tue Feb 20, 2007 11:45 am
by Greg
What I find ironic is how people are labelling Giuliani as a "social liberal" when, before 9-11, his biggest issue was shutting down porn shops.
Posted: Mon Feb 19, 2007 7:32 pm
by Akash
Eric wrote:Giuliani will probably seem "too ethnic" for many U.S. voters.
lol, I love this comment given all the talk lately about whether Obama is "black enough" (I won't go into that again since I already brought it up in the Obamamania thread). It's funny to think that it was only a few decades ago that America "decided" that Italians, Irish and Jews were white.
BTW, upper middle class light skinned Cuban Americans and upper middle class Japanese Americans who don't look too "ethnic" are TOTALLY the next white.
Posted: Mon Feb 19, 2007 7:29 pm
by Akash
Damien I feel the same way you do about Giuliani (and the surprisingly electable Edwards) - but my goodness, among my age group (including the so-called liberal college crowd), Giuliani and McCain remain maddeningly popular. This would be fine if not slightly annoying since my age group is notorious for not voting but sadly, when I did canvassing for the college Dems in the midterm election last year, many older voters were rapturous about these two wankers as well. And of course odler people vote in larger numbers.
I fear not everyone is going to feel the way we do about Ghouliani
Posted: Mon Feb 19, 2007 6:32 pm
by Damien
OscarGuy wrote:Are you so sure, Damien? I mean after four years of pretty apparent incompetence, Bush still managed re-election...
If he has the right spin firm, Giuliani won't lose any of his luster...after all, it took HOW LONG for Bush to be exposed to the public for what he is?
Giuliani's flagrant adultery and the cruel way he publicly humiliated his wife is going to be scrutinized and repulse a lot of people.
There's a very good documentary which was released last year called Giuliani Time, pinpointing many of his egregious actions (both while in office and before). I was at a Q & A with the filmmakers, and they said the DVD version would be expanded and contain even more material.
The bottom line about this creep is the more you know about him the more you dislike him.
Posted: Mon Feb 19, 2007 6:29 pm
by Damien
Akash wrote:...on the Democratic side we have a woman and a "black" man.
Wow, can you say Game Over?
The ironic thing is that the most progressive of the "major" candidates is a white Protestant man (John Edwards).
Posted: Mon Feb 19, 2007 4:38 pm
by Eric
Giuliani will probably seem "too ethnic" for many U.S. voters.
Posted: Mon Feb 19, 2007 10:27 am
by Penelope
But Guiliani doesn't have that down-home appeal that Bush had. I honestly can't imagine the evangelical Republican base embracing Rudy, and not even their hatred of Hillary may be enough to get them to the polls.
Posted: Mon Feb 19, 2007 10:05 am
by OscarGuy
Are you so sure, Damien? I mean after four years of pretty apparent incompetence, Bush still managed re-election...
If he has the right spin firm, Giuliani won't lose any of his luster...after all, it took HOW LONG for Bush to be exposed to the public for what he is?
Posted: Mon Feb 19, 2007 3:58 am
by Damien
Giuliani is such an odious individual, and that odiousness will not be able to withstand the scrutiny of a national election. The rest of the country will learn what we New Yorkers already know about this loathesome creature -- that he is a man completely devoid of compassion and empathy, that his attitude towards civil liberties make George Bush look like a card-carrying ACLU member, that he has complete disdain for the poor and down-trodden, and that he's been a toady for Bush's Iraq policy. He's already back-pedalling from his established stance on abortion, and this can only hurt him when the public is sick of the lies and mendacity of the Bush White House and pine for a straight shooter.
I'm glad the rotten bastard is running for President because the end result will be that he's stripped of the absurd 9/11 deiification he has exploited so ably for his (trememndous) financial gain.
Posted: Mon Feb 19, 2007 2:14 am
by Akash
Yep...Giuliani just joined the race. So hmm let's see. On the Republican side we have McCain and Giulaini - two men who are billed as "moderates" (even if that is just a media creation) in a country that 1) loves riding the fence on any issue 2) likes old white men and 3)
deified Giuliani after 9-11 even though he was a rotten mayor and a lousy man and....
...on the Democratic side we have a woman and a "black" man.
Wow, can you say Game Over?
Unless the Dems find a picture of McCain and Giuliani making out with each other (response from Michael Moore's office: we're on it!) so they can show it to the Bible Belt and say "Look! GAYS! They're running GAYS for President! Sure we have a woman and a black man, but even those two trump GAYS!" - unless that happens the Dems are pretty much screwed.
I think many of us knew this was coming but we were hoping it wouldn't. The deification of Giuliani after 9-11 continues to amaze me! I'm hoping the Republican base will find him too moderate for their tastes, but I'm not optimistic. In our current political climate, being seen as a "moderate" is somehow a plus. It might be the reason Lieberman won easily in CT.
How fitting that the Dems will become to the Presidential Election what Scorsese was to the Oscars....in the same period that Scorsese actually wins his Oscar.