Pat Robertson and Rudy Giuliani

[Sisyphus]

Pat Robertson, televangelist and southern baptist who proclaimed 9/11 God's punishment for tolerance of gays and abortion, has given his official endorsement to Rudy Giuliani: non-practicing Catholic, thrice-divorced, conspicuously Italian-American, New Yorker, supporter of gay marriage, abortion rights, and harsh gun-control laws.

 

Thoughts?

[iNow]

It shows that Pat Robertson, who has regularly been very black and white about his issues and stance on topics, with no gray area (the homos are going to hell approach) is lightening up to ensure he can maintain some power during the next cycle. Rudy has regularly and openly gone against issues that helped Pat Robertson make his name, so it's odd that Robertson is letting go of the strength of several of his previously unshakable convictions by supporting the Rudester.

[DrDNA]

Rudy and Robertson deserve each other! This just shows how out of touch with fundamental Christianity Robertson really is..... I think that this is going to backfire.

 

Rudy is trying to take advantage of circumstances that he had absolutely NOTHING to do with. He has experience as being mayor of NY during 911, so he lays claim to being the "anti terror senator". Well, big whoop!

 

If it comes down to Hillary and Rudy, that would be a mess. Between those two, there is no choice! They could be clones of each other. I kind of hope it does come down to Rudy and Hillary, because then Ron Paul might actually stand a chance if he runs on a third party ticket.

 

Hillary Clinton and Obama may actually be even more conservative than Rudy. I have no idea what he doing on the so called "conservative leaning" ticket.

[Sisyphus]

Yes, obviously he's hedging his bets, but it's just that it's so extreme. I'm not surprised that he would do so (my opinion of Robertson as a ridiculous and amoral con man hasn't changed) but I am surprised he's willing to do so publicly.

 

I guess it's related to Rudy's ascension as a whole, which I don't think could ever have happened even a few years ago. In the past few years it's been Democrats who have picked candidates specifically to appeal to conservative-leaning independents: "tough," church-going Southerners, mostly. Now the roles are reversed and the Republican party is in such trouble that many are desperately seeking out anyone they think can win, even if it means compromising much of what they stand for. Hence Rudy, who is not even really a Republican but a "New York Republican," is courted because he's viewed as a "Hillary slayer."

 

Weird times...

 

EDIT: Just a note, Rudy really is quite conservative in several areas. He's among the most hawkish candidates in foreign policy, for example. And as mayor of New York he was quite authoritarian in weird areas. He tried to shut down several art exhibits he deemed offensive, and was quite harsh on crime. He also had a "war on the homeless." No, not homelessness.

 

Also, it should be noted also that he has already run against Hillary Clinton, for the Senate. He dropped out of the race, however, due to health concerns. (I guess he's not worried about his health anymore.)

[DrDNA]

EDIT: Just a note, Rudy really is quite conservative in several areas. He's among the most hawkish candidates in foreign policy, for example. And as mayor of New York he was quite authoritarian in weird areas. He tried to shut down several art exhibits he deemed offensive, and was quite harsh on crime. He also had a "war on the homeless." No, not homelessness.

 

Also, it should be noted also that he has already run against Hillary Clinton, for the Senate. He dropped out of the race, however, due to health concerns. (I guess he's not worried about his health anymore.)

 

That is not "conservative".

As you insinuate, it is just plain wierdness.

Just wait a couple of months and you will watch Rudy drown in his own muck. The sooner the better for the rest of the field.

[Pangloss]

Many political observers saw this story as further evidence that Christian conservatives appear to be fracturing on the issue of which Republican candidate to support. It's starting to look like they're going to be a much less important factor next November.

 

(The general consensus is that the most interesting political voting block this time may be women, especially amongst moderate-conservative 30-50-somethings with children, who usually vote Republican but appear to be shifting Democrat in droves.)

[iNow]

(The general consensus is that the most interesting political voting block this time may be women, especially amongst moderate-conservative 30-50-somethings with children, who usually vote Republican but appear to be shifting Democrat in droves.)

This seems more closely tied to the fact that there is a very plausible female candidate who happens to identify as Democrat, and that women tend to support being part of the potential election of the first female US president.

 

My guess is that this was already taken as given in your mind when you posted, but hey, who knows, eh?

 

 

Thank god the christian voting machine is fracturing. Thank god.

[Pangloss]

I think Hillary is part of it, and there seems to be a general feeling amongst some observers that there's also a widespread sense of disilluionment amongst "mommy" voters who cast ballots for Republicans in 2004 and 2006. ABC News did a piece the other night interviewing a couple of Republican female voters who were planning to consider Democrats this time. (A poor statistical sample AND a completely non-binding statement! Don'cha just love the media?)

 

But as you say (and as Brian Williams explained to everyone recently on Saturday Night Live), the media has already decided that Hillary will win, so yeah there's a certain amount of spin going on here.

 

Regarding the Christian conservatives, they could well come back once the candidate has been chosen, but I hope not. I have a cousin who works directly for James Dobson, I'm sorry to say (as a secretary). She's a genuine sweetheart and loving mother of two wonderful boys, with not a hateful bone in her body, and I can just never bring myself to bring up politics with her! But I think it's best that these people be put back in their place for a few years so the adults can get back to work. My two bits, anyway, though not for familial ears at the turkey table.

[ecoli]

That is not "conservative".

As you insinuate, it is just plain wierdness.

Just wait a couple of months and you will watch Rudy drown in his own muck. The sooner the better for the rest of the field.

 

Though I dislike Rudy's foreign policy, I don't think I'd want any other GOP frontrunner in the race either.

At least with Rudy, we don't have to worry about Roe v. Wade being overturned, and changing the constitution to redefine marriage. And Rudy essentially has the same foreign policy as McCain, Romney, Thompson and Huckabee. All of whom (with the exception of Huckabee, perhaps?) have morals I don't want legislated on me.

If Paul wasn't running, I would most likely vote democrat, but I'd probably prefer Rudy or possibly Huckabee over the other guys.

[CDarwin]

Though I dislike Rudy's foreign policy, I don't think I'd want any other GOP frontrunner in the race either.

At least with Rudy, we don't have to worry about Roe v. Wade being overturned, and changing the constitution to redefine marriage. And Rudy essentially has the same foreign policy as McCain, Romney, Thompson and Huckabee. All of whom (with the exception of Huckabee, perhaps?) have morals I don't want legislated on me.

If Paul wasn't running, I would most likely vote democrat, but I'd probably prefer Rudy or possibly Huckabee over the other guys.

 

I think you might be confused over who Huckabee is. Rudy's foreign policy is most certainly not the same as that of the other Republicans, either. He alone is embracing the Neocons like Podhoretz exiled from the halls of power in the party.

[ecoli]

I think you might be confused over who Huckabee is.

No, I am just unaware of the specifics of his foreign policy. I thought it was a bit softer than other neocons.

 

Rudy's foreign policy is most certainly not the same as that of the other Republicans, either. He alone is embracing the Neocons like Podhoretz exiled from the halls of power in the party.

Meh... to me, it seems like comparing Granny Smiths to Golden delicious apples. They may have differing views on how long to stay in Iraq and specifically which countries would be best to meddle in. It's all bad to me.