2008?
A Marist Poll indicates that 40% of Democrats would like to see Hillary Clinton run for President in 2008 and 25% of Republican would like Rudolph Guiliani to do the same.
But I've got to ask, what do either of them bring to the table?
Hillary seems to toe the line and preach DNC talking points a majority of the time, which is to say she stands for just about nothing and is easily swayed by the polls. That's not meant to be an insult to anyone out there who votes Democratic, it's just what it is... as previously discussed, the DNC is rudderless at the moment and in the midst of an identity crisis. Remember that last time Hillary was given carte blanche to quarterback a national inititive? It was the failed attempt to socialize our healthcare system. You can be sure this will be tops on her agenda if she receives her party's nomination. I can tell you that in the real world, it doesn't work. I've lived it, been cared for by it, and felt the pain of this type of health care system. I agree that our current system is costly and we need to look at outside-the-box ways to improve it. You can't run healthcare like you would a defense spending project. Lowest cost isn't always the best, and that's exactly what you'll get if our government is running healthcare.
I don't see all that many redeeming qualities about Rudy either. Sure, in general he says all the things that make me warm and fuzzy inside as any "conservative" would. From most accounts, he had a great record as a federal prosecutor, and he did a fine job as mayor of New York City, particularly after Sept. 11th. But does that make one Presidential? No more or less than George W. Bush or Ronald Regan I guess, but he brings a lot of baggage to the table. The DNC hates just about anyone who makes a small fortune, and Rudy has done that with his consulting company and public speaking tours. All of this will put on display and picked over for anything that will hurt him (as it should). He'll be dragged through the mud over his relationship with Bernard Kerick, the former NYPD Commissioner. And there is also that whole affair and messy divorce from his wife. None of those issues would kill his nomination, but what else does he bring to the table? I don't think anyone really knows for sure.
But I've got to ask, what do either of them bring to the table?
Hillary seems to toe the line and preach DNC talking points a majority of the time, which is to say she stands for just about nothing and is easily swayed by the polls. That's not meant to be an insult to anyone out there who votes Democratic, it's just what it is... as previously discussed, the DNC is rudderless at the moment and in the midst of an identity crisis. Remember that last time Hillary was given carte blanche to quarterback a national inititive? It was the failed attempt to socialize our healthcare system. You can be sure this will be tops on her agenda if she receives her party's nomination. I can tell you that in the real world, it doesn't work. I've lived it, been cared for by it, and felt the pain of this type of health care system. I agree that our current system is costly and we need to look at outside-the-box ways to improve it. You can't run healthcare like you would a defense spending project. Lowest cost isn't always the best, and that's exactly what you'll get if our government is running healthcare.
I don't see all that many redeeming qualities about Rudy either. Sure, in general he says all the things that make me warm and fuzzy inside as any "conservative" would. From most accounts, he had a great record as a federal prosecutor, and he did a fine job as mayor of New York City, particularly after Sept. 11th. But does that make one Presidential? No more or less than George W. Bush or Ronald Regan I guess, but he brings a lot of baggage to the table. The DNC hates just about anyone who makes a small fortune, and Rudy has done that with his consulting company and public speaking tours. All of this will put on display and picked over for anything that will hurt him (as it should). He'll be dragged through the mud over his relationship with Bernard Kerick, the former NYPD Commissioner. And there is also that whole affair and messy divorce from his wife. None of those issues would kill his nomination, but what else does he bring to the table? I don't think anyone really knows for sure.
posted by Mark at 7:12 PM
3 Comments:
To be fair, what did George W. bring to the table? Family name and a warm gool-ol'-boy smile.
The way things stand right now, Hilary is definately the woman to beat. Which kinda sucks to be her. Her seat is up next year, so she could be campaigning non-stop for the 40 months.
The big thing that she brings to the table is the shadow of her husband. She's be a terrible pick for the Democrats. People tend to like a centrist, but she's not charismatic to pull it off.
I used to be a big fan of Guiliani. I liked him when liberals and other lefties were laughing at him for trying to clean up New York.
Guiliani cleaned up New York. Who's laughing now?
He slipped in my eyes a bit when the sordid details of his personal life got paraded in front of us a few years ago.
But, oh my god, he was a titan after 9/11. He was compassionate. He was resolute. He was America's rock.
I remember the morning of 9/11. We were lost and alone and confused and frightened. W was plane-hopping all over the south. Rudy was on TV, grimly telling us how many firefighters were missing. Rudy set his jaw and went to work. And we all watched him do it live on CNN.
Rudy was my hero. I'd have voted to make him Emperor for life if I could.
But that was then. Rudy proved himself a capable city manager and a determined leader. And then he left office and let the Republican party pimp him out. I'm not a big fan of "party men" of either stripe.
But in any case, the big thing he brings to the table is his post-9/11 leadership. Rudy might be a solid choice for the GOP, but he's got to work on being more than a one-trick pony.
Well, I think George W. Bush brought two sucessful terms as Gov. to the table along with his name and smile.
That's a quality I like in people running for President. It's worked for W. Bush and Clinton, and Reagan. Historically it might not be accurate (haven't bothered to check honestly) but it's a trend that I like. Former Governors have the experience setting an agenda, having to work with two legislative bodies, etc. Seems like members of Congress who run are specialized in obstruction, can be loved or hated for their voting record-perhaps both in the same day, and seem to be more political than any other potential candidates.
I agree that Hillary brings her husbands shadow. I just don't find that a voteable quality. Beyond that, I think a vote for Hillary is a defacto vote for Bill to a certain degree. Hillary would be running things as she saw fit, but I think it would be with a lot of influence from her husband and his "people".
I guess my biggest fears about Hillary are that I generally don't agree with anything that comes out of her mouth, except on days where she is trying to work the centrist angle, and if she did get elected she wouldn't receive much support from Republicans and they would start doing all the things I'm currently pissed at the Democrats for doing, such as holding up judicial nominations.
Rudy has some administrator experience, and NYC certainly is a huge city, but nothing else runs quite the same as things do in Washington. I'm sure he had some great ideas for an agenda, but I also feel like he's a one trick pony too.. and he needs about 5 more tricks before he will be taken seriously by me.
I really wanna see who is gonna run I can't wait to be honest the anticipation is killing me I like Rudy he is very sincere and it appears a easy person to work with which are good qualities. But I kinda wonder about how tuff he is , I know he went after the mob and all in NYC as the DA but he doesnt strike me as someone that would say fuck it bomb the hell out of those bastards ........... anyone feeling me on that ?
Post a Comment
<< Home