So does Giuliani have a legit shot at the nomination?
 

He's currently the only Rep being poled (yes its spead poled, it is the past tense of pole) who can beat Hilary in a general election. But I hear from a lot of people that they don't think that he will be able to win the nomination.

So, 2 questions, does he have a legit shot, and if he does, aassuming Hilary wins for the Dems, would this literally be the worst election ever? This would be MUCH worse than Bush/Kerry in 04, where I voted for write in candidate "NO."

Re: So does Giuliani have a legit shot at the nomination?
 

He has a non-zero chance of getting the nomination.

I certainly wouldn't bet on him, even if I liked him. I think he's the whipping boy for the Republican party. They'll put him out in the spotlight as one of their "big" candidates, and let the media and the democrats focus their vitriol on him, and let the candidates they REALLY want to nominate remain relatively unscathed until much closer to the primaries.

Re: So does Giuliani have a legit shot at the nomination?
 

As for the second part of your question, I don't think the republicans could find a candidate who COULDN'T beat Hillary.

I don't think Giuliani would be worse than Bush (But that's not saying ANYTHING). I don't think he COULD be worse. He might be as bad.

Hillary would be way worse than Kerry. Unlike Kerry, Hillary might actually, you know, DO some of this stuff she spouts off.

Re: So does Giuliani have a legit shot at the nomination?
 

[ QUOTE ]

I don't think Giuliani would be worse than Bush (But that's not saying ANYTHING). I don't think he COULD be worse. He might be as bad.

[/ QUOTE ]
Yeah, a more liberal, corrupt, and smart Bush in favor of putting everyone in prison for minor offenses and take away everyone's guns "for their own safety" sounds fantastic.

Re: So does Giuliani have a legit shot at the nomination?
 

He has an excellent shot at winning the election. He has a 13% point lead in the polls and as the GOP candidate furthest to the left, he is well positioned for the general election. Among the major candidates, he is probably the friendliest to moderate Libertarians as well: tough on national defense and law enforcement, liberal on social issues.

A Guiliani-Hillary matchup wouldn't be anywhere close to the worst election ever. The most recent pairing that was worse was Reagan-Mondale (Reagan drags that down a lot). Hillary and Guiliani are probably the two most moderate candidates in the field.

Re: So does Giuliani have a legit shot at the nomination?
 

[ QUOTE ]
He has an excellent shot at winning the election. He has a 13% point lead in the polls and as the GOP candidate furthest to the left, he is well positioned for the general election. Among the major candidates, he is probably the friendliest to moderate Libertarians as well: tough on national defense and law enforcement, liberal on social issues.

[/ QUOTE ]ya because it is one of the libertarians main ideological beliefs that the government should be "tough on national defense and law enforcement."

[ QUOTE ]
A Guiliani-Hillary matchup wouldn't be anywhere close to the worst election ever. The most recent pairing that was worse was Reagan-Mondale (Reagan drags that down a lot). Hillary and Guiliani are probably the two most moderate candidates in the field.

[/ QUOTE ]If you mean "moderate" as in "have the same ideas as each other about big government, foreign policy, and authoritatarianism," then I agree.

Re: So does Giuliani have a legit shot at the nomination?
 

The Republicans are the party of morals. I don't think anyone who divorced his wife while she had cancer, cheated on her with his secretary, and is estranged from his son is fit to be the nominee.

Re: So does Giuliani have a legit shot at the nomination?
 

[ QUOTE ]
ya because it is one of the libertarians main ideological beliefs that the government should be "tough on national defense and law enforcement.

[/ QUOTE ]
Actually, it is.

[ QUOTE ]
The Libertarian Party's anti-crime plan would do what the Democrats and Republicans have not done:

Respect the victim's rights and make criminals pay full restitution.
Hold all criminals responsible for their actions.
Double the police resources available for crime prevention without any additional government spending.
Reduce the number of criminals at large on our streets.

[/ QUOTE ]

A brief perusal though the LP website does not indicate that one of their beefs with our current leaders is our defense budget. While they advocate getting out of Iraq, they aren't exactly pacifists.

Re: So does Giuliani have a legit shot at the nomination?
 

Giuliani's best shot at winning the nomination (and I'll admit to being a supporter) is to convince the Republican electorate that the nominee should be someone who can win the general election, not an ideological purist who is one faction's wet dream, but will be crushed by the opposition in the general election. I know a number of people who like the guy, but think he can't win because of the religious right. I point out that if you like the guy, stand up and say so, we might have a chance to take the party back from the fringe. The religious right is really a minority in the party, though a noisy one. It's time to stand up to them and say it's not just about you. Have some balls, people.

Every one of the front-runners for the Republican nomination (or potential front-runners) has some flaw. The real key is, what flaw do the voters choose?

Re: So does Giuliani have a legit shot at the nomination?
 

Perhaps the party of imposing-silly-morals-on-everyone-because-we-tricked-dumb-people-into-voting-for-us, just morals doesn't really get the whole idea out...

Re: So does Giuliani have a legit shot at the nomination?
 

[ QUOTE ]
The Republicans are the party of morals. I don't think anyone who divorced his wife while she had cancer, cheated on her with his secretary, and is estranged from his son is fit to be the nominee.

[/ QUOTE ]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/media/images/4..._reagan300.jpg

No Cancer, but close.

Re: So does Giuliani have a legit shot at the nomination?
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
ya because it is one of the libertarians main ideological beliefs that the government should be "tough on national defense and law enforcement.

[/ QUOTE ]
Actually, it is.

[/ QUOTE ]

Except that Guiliani's idea of "tough on crime" is much different than the Libertarian idea. Need I say War on Drugs? There's a reason that they say "real" crime in that link.

Re: So does Giuliani have a legit shot at the nomination?
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
ya because it is one of the libertarians main ideological beliefs that the government should be "tough on national defense and law enforcement.

[/ QUOTE ]
Actually, it is.

[/ QUOTE ]

Except that Guiliani's idea of "tough on crime" is much different than the Libertarian idea. Need I say War on Drugs? There's a reason that they say "real" crime in that link.

[/ QUOTE ]
Seriously lol, especially since Giuliani's idea of a criminal is a panhandler or a homeless guy with a dirty squeegee on the corner or a drug user. Yeah, real "tough on crime" there.

Finally, nearly one half of all police resources are devoted to stopping drug trafficking, instead of preventing violent crime. The bottom line? By ending drug prohibition Libertarians would double the resources available for crime prevention, and significantly reduce the number of violent criminals at work in your neighborhood.

Re: So does Giuliani have a legit shot at the nomination?
 

[ QUOTE ]

A brief perusal though the LP website does not indicate that one of their beefs with our current leaders is our defense budget. While they advocate getting out of Iraq, they aren't exactly pacifists.

[/ QUOTE ]
Also, "tough on national defense" is code for "lets have an interventionalist foreign policy" as well as "lets spend a fuckton of taxes on deploying troops all over the world in support of that policy."

I frequent that site a lot, and one comment made by a guy fits this perfectly: we are for national defense, not for international offense, which is what being "strong on national defense" means in political jargon. Seriously i mean wtf @ that phrase anyways, what politician would say he is "weak on national defense" or "against defending our country."

Re: So does Giuliani have a legit shot at the nomination?
 

[ QUOTE ]
Hillary and Guiliani are probably the two most moderate candidates in the field.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is incredibly frightening.

Re: So does Giuliani have a legit shot at the nomination?
 

[ QUOTE ]
Seriously lol, especially since Giuliani's idea of a criminal is a panhandler or a homeless guy with a dirty squeegee on the corner or a drug user. Yeah, real "tough on crime" there.


[/ QUOTE ]

You need to read "The Tipping Point". There's a reason why going after these seemingly minor problems actually has a much larger effect on the overall crime rate. I don't live in New York, but you don't here New Yorkers clamoring for the return of the squeegee men, do you?

Re: So does Giuliani have a legit shot at the nomination?
 

[ QUOTE ]

You need to read "The Tipping Point". There's a reason why going after these seemingly minor problems actually has a much larger effect on the overall crime rate. I don't live in New York, but you don't here New Yorkers clamoring for the return of the squeegee men, do you?

[/ QUOTE ]
Sure, if we imprison 1/2 the population I'm sure the overall crime rate would also drop.

Re: So does Giuliani have a legit shot at the nomination?
 

God I hope not.

Re: So does Giuliani have a legit shot at the nomination?
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

I don't think Giuliani would be worse than Bush (But that's not saying ANYTHING). I don't think he COULD be worse. He might be as bad.

[/ QUOTE ]
Yeah, a more liberal, corrupt, and smart Bush in favor of putting everyone in prison for minor offenses and take away everyone's guns "for their own safety" sounds fantastic.

[/ QUOTE ]

Wait, did I make it sound fantastic?

Or are you agreeing with me in a......strange fashion?

Re: So does Giuliani have a legit shot at the nomination?
 

As a Libertarian, I find the idea that Giuiliani represents my views utterly repulsive. The whole point of Libertarianism is that there should be a small government that doesn't interfere in people's lives. Giuiliani wants to make the government as large as possible under the guise of security and then spread war across the world until eventually the United States occupies the entire Middle East.

Looking at the election, Hillary scares me a little. McCain scares me a lot. Giuiliani scares me a [censored]-ton. I think both McCain and Giuiliani are > 80% to start a war with Iran when elected (if Bush hasn't done so already) and I wouldn't be surprised if a draft wasn't far behind. McCain at least seems to have some concept of civil liberties, but under Giuliani's "surrender to the state, authority is freedom" schtick, I wouldn't be the least bit surprised to see him forcing young men to go off to war to defend the freedom to be completely controlled by the state.

Re: So does Giuliani have a legit shot at the nomination?
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Seriously lol, especially since Giuliani's idea of a criminal is a panhandler or a homeless guy with a dirty squeegee on the corner or a drug user. Yeah, real "tough on crime" there.


[/ QUOTE ]

You need to read "The Tipping Point". There's a reason why going after these seemingly minor problems actually has a much larger effect on the overall crime rate. I don't live in New York, but you don't here New Yorkers clamoring for the return of the squeegee men, do you?

[/ QUOTE ]

Read Freakonomics or a lot of other Journal articles that specifically debunk the "Fixing Broken Windows" theory.

And your last point is stupid. Of course New Yorkers don't the squeegee guys back. The issue is whether getting rid of the squeegee guys had any effect on reducing other crimes. Most studies suggests that it did not.

Re: So does Giuliani have a legit shot at the nomination?
 

Rudy G definiately has a shot. Arnold has shown people that socially liberal republicans can succeed

Re: So does Giuliani have a legit shot at the nomination?
 

[ QUOTE ]
Rudy G definiately has a shot. Arnold has shown people that socially liberal republicans can succeed

[/ QUOTE ]

...in California.

Re: So does Giuliani have a legit shot at the nomination?
 

[ QUOTE ]
I wouldn't be the least bit surprised to see him forcing young men to go off to war to defend the freedom to be completely controlled by the state.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'll be ice-fishing in Canada by the time they come knocking on my door.

Re: So does Giuliani have a legit shot at the nomination?
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I wouldn't be the least bit surprised to see him forcing young men to go off to war to defend the freedom to be completely controlled by the state.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'll be getting very high off of home grown, non government monopoly marijuana in Canada by the time they come knocking on my door.

[/ QUOTE ]

Re: So does Giuliani have a legit shot at the nomination?
 

Can Giuliani win? Why not? He's leading in the polls now and it's not like his divorces or socially liberal positions aren't common knowledge.

Bottom line is, people will vote for who they see as a genuine leader, and who they are most inspired by. Giuliani's position as mayor of NY after 9/11 gives him an authority when discussing the war on terror that other candidates can't complete with. He needs to keep hammering the national security angle, cause that's what will get him elected.

He's also the only Republican who could actually win the general election, I think, because his more moderate position on social issues will play better than yet another opponent of Roe v. Wade who only appeals to the Jesus freaks.

Re: So does Giuliani have a legit shot at the nomination?
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Seriously lol, especially since Giuliani's idea of a criminal is a panhandler or a homeless guy with a dirty squeegee on the corner or a drug user. Yeah, real "tough on crime" there.


[/ QUOTE ]

You need to read "The Tipping Point". There's a reason why going after these seemingly minor problems actually has a much larger effect on the overall crime rate. I don't live in New York, but you don't here New Yorkers clamoring for the return of the squeegee men, do you?

[/ QUOTE ]

Read Freakonomics or a lot of other Journal articles that specifically debunk the "Fixing Broken Windows" theory.

And your last point is stupid. Of course New Yorkers don't the squeegee guys back. The issue is whether getting rid of the squeegee guys had any effect on reducing other crimes. Most studies suggests that it did not.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'll admit it's controversial, but it's not been "debunked". Obviously, a lot of factors come into play, but IIRC, New York expereienced a bigger reduction than did comparable cities during the same period. From 1990 to 2000, murders dropped by 2/3rds, felonies were cut in half, crimes on the subway were reduced by 75%. Clearly SOMETHING happened, probably a lot of somethings, and since New York had a bigger drop than anyone else, they probably did something right.

Re: So does Giuliani have a legit shot at the nomination?
 

He has no chance. Romney > Rudy and Thompson > Romney or Rudy.

Re: So does Giuliani have a legit shot at the nomination?
 

[ QUOTE ]

And your last point is stupid. Of course New Yorkers don't the squeegee guys back. The issue is whether getting rid of the squeegee guys had any effect on reducing other crimes. Most studies suggests that it did not.

[/ QUOTE ]

No the issue is whether getting rid of squeegee guys, homeless people sleeping on the street, panhandlers, etc. was good economically for the city. If you look at tourism/real estate values/revenues pre- and post-Giuliani, there's no question it was.

BTW the idea that all these squeegee guys and homeless people were tossed into prison or otherwise "made to disappear" is silly and paranoid. Many of the homeless were sent to shelters or psychiatric centers, which is where they are supposed to be, not sleeping on Madison Avenue.

More importantly Giuliani challenged the prevalent idea that petty crime was something that was out of the mayor's or the police's control, just something we'd all have to live with in a big city. Whether this led to the drops in major crimes is debatable, but either way it vastly improved the quality of life in NYC.

Re: So does Giuliani have a legit shot at the nomination?
 

Read Freakonmics and The Tipping Point..of course Gladwell wins the argument. Think of Broken Windows theory practically, not theoretically, and it makes sense. A place where petty crime is allowed to go on unabated encourages more serious crime. NYC in the the 80's was undergoing their coke epidemic. Nothing wrong w/people shooting up if thats their wont, but when their are disputes between dealers and customers there is no possibility of legal recourse (since both are involved in a crime), so the disputes are settled in "turf wars". The correlation between drugs and crime is too strong to ignore. Too bad Rudy wont shut up Ronald Reagan. As Bill Maher says, "The Republicans love Reagan so much its kinda gay"

Re: So does Giuliani have a legit shot at the nomination?
 

[ QUOTE ]
Read Freakonmics and The Tipping Point..of course Gladwell wins the argument. Think of Broken Windows theory practically, not theoretically, and it makes sense. A place where petty crime is allowed to go on unabated encourages more serious crime. NYC in the the 80's was undergoing their coke epidemic. Nothing wrong w/people shooting up if thats their wont, but when their are disputes between dealers and customers there is no possibility of legal recourse (since both are involved in a crime), so the disputes are settled in "turf wars". The correlation between drugs and crime is too strong to ignore. Too bad Rudy wont shut up Ronald Reagan. As Bill Maher says, "The Republicans love Reagan so much its kinda gay"

[/ QUOTE ]
Wow, you think that might be because possession of drugs is a crime?

Also lol @ quoting Maher.

Re: Broken windows in practice
 

I agree that it doesn't reduce other crimes much. I live in a crime ridden area of Los Angeles and can tell you that I hated Bratton's implementation of broken windows. However, and this is a big however, the practical affect is that police no longer have to concentrate on some minor crimes. For instance, when Bratton came in as chief of LAPD, there was lots of streetwalkers in various locations throughout the city. LAPD cracked down hard on it. And now there is really only 1 or two areas that still have that problem. Its something police are forced to address because people in the community call and complain. Now, in a roundabout way, it has a greater impact on other crimes because more officers can now be re-assinged from specialized units to patrol units. Bleah...its a really roundabout way....a new state law will force the officer to make certain financial disclosures so many of them want out of the specialized units. Those requests will be granted and the officers will be assigned to patrol and the vice units will shrink or disolve. Same thing with narco. By clearing the homeless in downtown and pushing narco arrests hard, there will be less need for officers to patrol downtown and babysit the homeless. These officers can then be assigned to rougher areas of the cities with gangs and stuff.

So bottom line is I don't think broken windows directly reduces serious and violent crime, but by eliminating small stuff, it eventually frees up more officers to target the more serious crimes.