Reason Magazine
- reason.com
- reason.tv
- reason.org
- Donate
- Site Search:
Reason on Facebook
Reason on Twitter
Reason on YouTube
Reason RSSGet Reason E-mail Updates!
Manage your Reason e-mail list subscriptionsadvertisements
Giuliani Time
No wire
story yet (UPDATE: Here it
is) but the networks are reporting that Rudy Giuliani has
entered the 2008 presidential race. Which means the official
Republican field contains:
- Rudy Giulani
- John McCain (senator from Arizona)
- Sam Brownback (senator from Kansas)
- Ron Paul (libertarian congressman from Texas)
- Tom Tancredo (congressman from Colorado)
- Duncan Hunter (congressman from California)
- Tommy Thompson (former governor of Wisconsin)
- Mitt Romney (former governor of Massachusetts)
- Mike Huckabee (former governor of Arkansas)
- Jim Gilmore (former governor of Virginia)
Without a doubt, the party's strongest field since 1980. And if the election were held today, none of them would win.
Tim Cavanaugh's 2005 review of the best Rudy biography is this hour's required reading. Coming up next: Giuliani gives an exclusive interview to Sean Hannity (tonight at 9) and Chris Matthews literally explodes from an overdose of testosterone and bliss (sometime after 7).
|2.5.07 @ 2:26PM|#
Are the Republicans front-loading their primaries like the Dems
are doing?
I hope so. As a Democrat, I really hope Guiliani locks up the
nomination before his inevitable, televised flame-out.
Two guys with a camera phone and a smart mouth, and we get to see
America's Mayor turn into the Hulk.
|2.5.07 @ 2:34PM|#
Speaking as someone who is not a member of either party, and has
no intention of joining either one anytime soon, I think the GOP
primary field is more diverse in terms of political views than any
other I have seen: Guiliani vs. Brownback, Hagel (still a
possibility) vs. McCain, Paul vs. everyone else.
I look forward to seeing the primary debates on TV and how the
candidates will rip one another apart. At the risk of sounding like
an overenthusiastic sportscaster, this looks like it will be a
bloody fight for the nomination.
Bhh|2.5.07 @ 2:44PM|#
Dude's to the left of Hillary on the abortion/ghey stuff. So I still don't see how he makes it past the radical clerics.
|2.5.07 @ 2:46PM|#
I wonder how much of the global warming in 2007 and 2008 can be attributed to incredible amount of bloviating from all these presidential candidates?
|2.5.07 @ 2:46PM|#
Dude's an authoritarian with one tool in the toolbox. He should find another city to be mayor of, not President.
|2.5.07 @ 2:52PM|#
And hey, just because it feels good to give a big ol' man hug to
a guy in a fisherman's knit sweater, doesn't make a man gay.
Right, guys?
John Norris Brown|2.5.07 @ 2:58PM|#
It'll be interesting to see if the paleos and the libertarians
unite around Ron Paul. If so, he could make a run, although I doubt
he'll stand much of a chance. Having both Hunter and Tancredo in
the race will draw some paleos away from Paul, though.
Of the "major" candidates, Rudy would be my personal favorite, at
the moment.
|2.5.07 @ 3:01PM|#
It kinda looks like he's got a weapon stuck in the back of the
guy with the white sweater.
One way of getting people to speak out for you, I guess.
|2.5.07 @ 3:23PM|#
Ugh. Out of that crowd, Rudy I guess.
I was hoping for maybe Bayh from the Dems, but he was smart in not
joining this circus.
My vote hinges on who will mess up healthcare the least and leave
me alone on guns.
|2.5.07 @ 3:23PM|#
It'll be interesting to see if the paleos and the
libertarians unite around Ron Paul. If so, he could make a run,
although I doubt he'll stand much of a chance. Having both Hunter
and Tancredo in the race will draw some paleos away from Paul,
though.
All of which is immaterial because Paul would never get anywhere
close to the nomination.
|2.5.07 @ 3:28PM|#
For those who don't know, the guy in the white sweater is former
NYPD Comish and Benard Kerick. You might know him from his failed
bid to become head honcho of Homeland Security.
He plead guilty last year, something about the mob and remodeling
his apartment.
|2.5.07 @ 3:30PM|#
the party's strongest field since 1980.
Define "strongest." I mean, it's the biggest, but that's mainly
because the Republicans have almost always had a consensus
candidate since then ('84,'88,'00), sometimes with one spoiler to
compete with ('92,'96).
I don't want to vote for any of these jokers.
|2.5.07 @ 3:31PM|#
"Without a doubt, the party's strongest field since 1980. And if
the election were held today, none of them would win."
This Left-wing websight rocks my socks of everyday!
|2.5.07 @ 3:36PM|#
"Vote for Douche Bag!"
"No, vote for Turd Sandwich!"
Just getting ready for the upcoming campaign.
|2.5.07 @ 3:40PM|#
"Tim Cavanaugh's 2005 review"
Wow! I'd forgotten what an uneducated self-important writer Tim
Cavanaugh was. Thanks for the trip down Memory Lane!
David Weigel|2.5.07 @ 3:45PM|#
It's very strong. Three of the candidates have been stars since
the mid-90s - McCain, Giuliani, and Thompson. In 1996, 2000 and
2004, McCain and Thompson might have been better candidates than
the guys the party put up. They obviously had more experience than
the guy the GOP nominated in those last two elections. Hell,
Giuliani and Thompson have some of the most impressive records of
any Republican governors or mayors.
Once you get past those guys, three of the candidates are bona fide
leaders of wings of the party - Tancredo on immigration, Brownback
on "compassionate conservatism," Paul on all things libertarian.
Seriously, Paul is the most credentialed libertarian candidate for
the nomination since... well, for a long time.
|2.5.07 @ 3:53PM|#
"This Left-wing websight rocks my socks of everyday!"
I nominate this as the Official Right Wing Whine About Reason Being
Too Hostile to Republicans, to be re-posted every time such a
complaint is posted on any comment thread.
"This Left-wing websight rocks my socks of everyday!" is the new
Corn Syrup.
|2.5.07 @ 3:54PM|#
Wow.
First McKang, now Giuliani.
And thus the Republicans again show that they truly wish to
alienate me.
|2.5.07 @ 4:14PM|#
I don't know, thoreau. "Left-wing websight?" "rocks my socks of
everyday!"
It's got a cool, "All your base are belong to us" vibe going.
A Naughty Moose|2.5.07 @ 4:32PM|#
Treavor - impressive. Most impressive.
Do you happen to be giving a "meletary lawyer" (sic) a reach around
right now?
joe is absolutely right - that should be an addition to the
Drinking Game. Dr. T: do you still have the rules? We'll add a
round of autoerotic asphyxiation for each mention like that, if
that would be most appropriate. RPG can do that. Or if you get
tangled up in the Noam Chomsky blowup doll that can happen, as
well!
|2.5.07 @ 4:35PM|#
Regarding the pic, Giuliani is just looking for the right place the stick the knife into that man's back.
|2.5.07 @ 4:54PM|#
A guy I used to think might have been an up-and-comer for 2008 for the Repubs is former Montana governor Marc Racicot. I guess he's mostly out of politics now, though.
|2.5.07 @ 5:43PM|#
After Bush, almost any list of candidates has a certain
appeal.
The phone book would produce ecstasy for me.
But I would enjoy Rudy paying a visit to Bob Jones U.
|2.5.07 @ 5:45PM|#
Without a doubt, the party's strongest field since 1980. And
if the election were held today, none of them would win.
Unless the Dems nominate Hillary!...
Giuliani or McCain would win for sure- Romney(possibly a loser due
to the 'underwear') or even a 'Pawlenty'('moderate', 'Executive
experience', 'outsider', 'realist', blah, blah, blah...) would have
an outside chance- Tancredo, Brownback, and Newt have no chance at
all.
I still think that it's AlGore's race to lose...
|2.5.07 @ 6:35PM|#
Without a doubt, the party's strongest field since
1980.
Strongest field...FOR ME TO POOP ON!!!!
|2.5.07 @ 6:52PM|#
And if the election were held today, none of them would
win.
Don't know about that.
In any event, while Ron Paul will get my vote in the primaries,
Giuliani will likely get it in the general.
He isn't the worst possible choice in a field of sorry candidates,
all the way around. He'll get my vote not so much for what he is,
but for what he isn't. He isn't a liberal, and he isn't a social
conservative, and he isn't a complete asshole.
In times like these, that's about all you can reasonably
expect.
Eric Dondero|2.5.07 @ 8:05PM|#
Already "Libertarians for Giuliani" is in the works.
The NY Times called him a "privatizing, budget-slashing Ayn
Randian."
National Review compared him to libertarian hero Pim Fortuyn.
The London Times recently called him a "libertarian
conservative."
I think we've never had a more high caliber libertarian-leaning
candidate for President of the United States since Jefferson.
Go Rudy!!!
|2.5.07 @ 8:12PM|#
Aw, you guys are kidding, right? Giuliani is a 99-cent-store Mussolini. He happens to be OK with teh ghey, but that's not a sign of an accepting nature, it just happens not to be something that pushes his buttons. (And you can't get elected in NYC on an anti-gay platform anyway, so...) He is not remotely libertarian. Two words: cabaret law.
|2.5.07 @ 8:45PM|#
"Who is that poor guy that Rudy's about to use the Sleeper
on?"
The next Attorney General of the United States.
|2.5.07 @ 9:13PM|#
And, as we all know (and I'm not saying this as a fan, just
pointing out reality) that nobody could possibly be worse than
Giuliani. I guess this is going to be yet another election cycle of
voting against, rather than voting for, someone for president, and
nobody on this board (except for joe and David Weigel, if a Dem
gets elected) being satisfied.
Unless Feingold repudiates CFR, and gets elected, in which case we
all get to go home happy, until about 2 weeks after the
inauguration.
Because nobody is ever happy after the inauguration.
|2.5.07 @ 9:50PM|#
Mike Savage in 2008!
At least according to the blowhard's radio show tonight. Wouldn't
THOSE be fun debates!
|2.5.07 @ 10:18PM|#
I think we've never had a more high caliber
libertarian-leaning candidate for President of the United States
since Jefferson.
And I think Guliani has more in common with you than with
Jefferson.
|2.6.07 @ 9:35AM|#
"and we get to see America's Mayor turn into the Hulk"
I would love to see that, with the dome head and the comb-over in
the back. My only question is, would Rudy be a wimpy Bill Bixby
Hulk, or an earth-shaking Savage Hulk?
But let's be honest... you got some scary characters on your side,
too. Get Rodham pissed off? She would be on you like an Alien brood
queen.
Robert|2.6.07 @ 11:54AM|#
Eric Dondero, isn't there enough in Giuliani's history as fed
att'y and NYC mayor to demonstrate to you how silly the appellation
"Ayn Randian" is when applied to him? The only budgets he'll slash
are those of opponents he wants to punish. Give him the opp'ty to
install his man to head a dept., no way he'd cut that dept.'s
budget.
You're right, Pig Mannix, he isn't a liberal, he isn't a social
conservative (on both counts -- he's anti-social and not
conservative). But he is an asshole, as much so as
McCain but with a better sense of humor. On policy, McCain is bad,
but there are some policy areas in which I have insufficient
evidence of his badness, while I already know Giuliani is bad on
those things.
|2.6.07 @ 12:17PM|#
Can someone tell me why Guilliani is Mussolini?
He's a free market believer and a non-theocrat. Considering he had
to be mayor of freakin New York he's probably more fiscally
conservative then he's been in the past.
Why shouldn't we be praying that this guy wins over Hillary,
Edward, McCain or Obama? Somebody please make the case that he's
not the best candidate for libertarians, taking into account that
Paul would be lucky to get two percent of the vote.
|2.6.07 @ 2:31PM|#
The latest poll since he has formally announced his candidacy shows him rising above McCain at a wide margin. He would probably put New York in the Republican column in the general election. Although not perfect, I like him compared to the other candidates with the exception of Ron Paul. He is pro-choice on abortion, more tolerant of gays, more open immigration. I don't like his hawkishness on foreign policy, but I don't think he is quite as bad as McCain in that respect. I don't like his position on gun control either, but all in all he is not such a bad choice for libertarians. This is coming from me, a person who used to not like him because of what he did to Michael Milken.
Greg|2.6.07 @ 2:55PM|#
I went to Ron Pauls congressional web site and he is pro-life. What the hell kind of libertarian is that? It's not OK to steal weath but forced parenthood is just fine.
|2.6.07 @ 3:30PM|#
I feel that Ron Paul might be moving more in the direction of being a paleoconservative, if he isn't already because of his pro-life stance on abortion and his hard line on immigration. Still, because he is free market, antiwar, and anti drug war, he's my first choice. Unfortunately for me, there is nobody running on the "Herb Schaffler" platform.
|2.6.07 @ 3:51PM|#
I see Mike Huckabee as the dark horse for the GOP nomination. He's got all the attibutes that conservative primary voters love.
|2.6.07 @ 5:52PM|#
Herb writes: "He would probably put New York in the Republican
column in the general election."
I don't buy it. I see him as William Weld, the popular Republican
ex-gov of Massachusetts who lost a Senate race to John Kerry.
The overwhelmingly Democratic constituency was willing to put a
"moderate Republican" in charge, only because they wanted him to
check the all-powerful Democratic machine. In races of national
significance, New York is still deep blue.
Chris Peterson|2.6.07 @ 6:08PM|#
I believe you can make a reasonable libertarian argument for Pro-Lifers. They believe fetuses are human and should be protected against violence from others. Would you allow a new born baby to be aborted? An 18-year old teenager? An eight-month fetus? It's all shades of gray.
|2.6.07 @ 7:10PM|#
OK, Giuliani fans, tell me what he did in NYC that shows how
firmly free-market he is. I won't hold my breath.
Although I probably shouldn't get riled up about this anyway. He
has only a faint chance of getting the nomination, and none of
winning the general election, IMO. His pro-abortion-rights,
pro-gay, anti-gun views will not sit well with many Republicans,
and his law-n-order stance will not sit well with many Democrats.
Plus, he's got a weird foreign name, and we like our presidents to
have good old Anglo-Saxon names.
Rhywun|2.6.07 @ 10:05PM|#
OK, Giuliani fans, tell me what he did in NYC that shows how
firmly free-market he is. I won't hold my breath.
Not a fan, exactly, but there's some interesting stuff here.
And keep in mind that Giuliani was utterly reviled by the Left so
he must have been doing something "right". I don't know if he's
electable... but he'd probably steal a lot of votes from the
Democrats if they were interesting in doing that.
Eric Dondero|2.6.07 @ 10:47PM|#
I hope the good folks at Reason will permit me this one minor
plug. If anyone here is interested in helping me to form a
"Libertarians for Giuliani" effort please contact me, either at my
email or website.
Now, back to regularly scheduled programming.
|2.6.07 @ 11:14PM|#
I hope the good folks at Reason will permit me this one
minor plug. If anyone here is interested in helping me to form a
"Libertarians for Giuliani" effort please contact me, either at my
email or website.
I'm interested. I'm bad with computers and have no money or
experience, but I promise to do what I can!
On an unrelated note, your site lists Jon Stewart as a libertarian.
What's the source for that?
|2.7.07 @ 8:57AM|#
"none of winning the general election"
Every poll I've seen where he is matched up against every major
Democratic candidate, including Hillary, shows him winning. The
problem is getting past the religious right in the Republican
Party, but even the most recent poll with a matchup against McCain
shows him handlily winning. In the general election, he would take
New York which would be a big boost in winning the general
election.
Eric Dondero|2.7.07 @ 7:13PM|#
Grand Chalupa, please contact me at ericdondero@yahoo.com. I
don't want to use Reason's property here to discuss "Libertarians
for Rudy."
Source on Jon Stewart: His response to Bill Kirstol on his show in
December saying he was a "downtown libertarian." It was reported
here at the Reason.com site too.
Site comments/questions:
Media Inquiries and Reprint Permissions:
(310) 367-6109
Editorial & Production Offices:
3415 S. Sepulveda Blvd.
Suite 400
Los Angeles, CA 90034
(310) 391-2245