Jon Henke
Bruce "McQ" McQuain
Dale Franks
Bryan Pick
Billy Hollis
Lance Paddock


Recent Posts
The Ayers Resurrection Tour
Special Friends Get Special Breaks
One Hour
The Hope and Change Express - stalled in the slow lane
Michael Steele New RNC Chairman
Things that make you go "hmmmm"...
Oh yeah, that "rule of law" thing ...
Putting Dollar Signs in Front Of The AGW Hoax
Moving toward a 60 vote majority?
Do As I Say ....
QandO Newsroom

Newsroom Home Page

US News

US National News

International News

Top World New
Iraq News
Mideast Conflict


Blogpulse Daily Highlights
Daypop Top 40 Links


Regional News


News Publications

Is Rudy Toast?
Posted by: mcq on Thursday, January 24, 2008

He seems to be using the reverse Fred Thompson ploy, and it seems to be working about as well:
Rudy Giuliani has hit the skids in a Florida freefall that could shatter his presidential campaign and leave a two-man Republican contest in the state between John McCain and Mitt Romney, a Miami Herald poll shows.

Despite hovering over Florida voters for weeks, Giuliani is tied for third place with the scarcely visible Mike Huckabee in a statewide poll of 800 likely voters.
As I said, I think Huckabee crested in SC and his campaign is broke. So if Rudy is routed in FL, that leaves McCain and Romney.

McCain and Romney. Clinton and Obama.

Anyone else depressed (and yes, I'd be equally depressed if Giuliani, Huckabee and Edwards were viable candidates too)?

Return to Main Blog Page

Previous Comments to this Post 

I think Thompson has become an unintentional spoiler with some unintended consequences. Guiliani’s strategy and its likely outcome may be one of those consequences.
Written By: jpm100
URL: http://
Anyone else depressed...?
I’m no longer paying much attention to the race. If it turns out to be Romney vs the leftist to be named later, then I’ll have a mild interest in the campaign. Otherwise, I’ll be sitting the whole thing out.
Written By: Billy Hollis
URL: http://
The worst part of it all is, no matter who gets chosen, it’ll be another year of bitter partisan behavior.
Written By: looker
URL: http://
Anyone else depressed
Yep. I’m holding to my statements from 2 years ago.
From now on, if a candidate has an R or a D after his/her name, they are automatically disqualified as far I am concerned. No more “voting for the individual.” That ship sailed long ago. When a candidate declares as being a member of one party or another they have declared, in my mind, that they have no sense of honor or decency. Such candidates have no greater purpose in mind than their own aggrandizement....

So, in short, I’m done with them. When statesmen and servants of the people are allowed to play again, that’s when I’ll vote for another mainstream candidate. Until that time, I simply won’t vote or I’ll vote for myself.
I’m not really feeling up the job for this coming term, so I’m not going to vote for myself. And although I can think of purely strategic reasons to vote Hillary, I’ll probably just write in Fred and let it go at that.
Written By: MichaelW
As I said, I think Huckabee crested in SC and his campaign is broke. So if Rudy is routed in FL, that leaves McCain and Romney.

McCain and Romney. Clinton and Obama.

Anyone else depressed (and yes, I’d be equally depressed if Giuliani, Huckabee and Edwards were viable candidates too)?
Ummm... you guys have heard of Ron Paul, haven’t you? The sole Constitutionalist in the presidential race?

I am just assuming that the Constitution and the idea of limited government means something on this site, of course. If those things don’t matter here, then never mind.
Written By: Rob Davidson
Rob, this site is a pro-military "neo"-libertarian site, so they react pretty negatively to the traditional libertarian perspective which sees militarism as one of the more dangerous ways to empower government (in fact, I get the impression that they give the military and foreign policy a pass on big government concerns, which they never quite explain).

To the larger question: I am not certain how much it matters who the President is. I think once the full weight of the economic situation hits home, we’ll see that we can afford neither adventurism abroad such as Iraq or Iran, nor adventurism at home, such as national health care or new government services. We’re looking at a real crisis here. Maybe extensive interest rate cuts and more deficit spending can create a short term spurt in consumer spending that pushes the full weight of the crisis off a year or so, but I think the promises and the like are irrelevant.
Written By: Scott Erb
nor adventurism at home, such as national health care or new government services.
Certainly that’s what the Elections of 1932 and 1936 showed..Oh wait.....Are you SURE you teach Poli Sci?

Yeah Rob we’ve heard of Ron Paul, and Dennis Kucinich and Mike Gravel...what’s your point? I’m going to vote for a guy that’s going to return us to the Gold Standard, defund the FBI and CIA and defend the nation at the 12 Mile Limit...but at least we’ll have good dope, right? Oh Lew Rockwell can be the Press Secretary...and the whole "who wrote my news letttres for ten years?" thing is an impressive demonstration of organizational and management talent? I can only imagine how Dr. Paul will do when managing the White House...
Written By: Joe
URL: http://
Certainly that’s what the Elections of 1932 and 1936 showed
What on earth are you talking about? Back in the thirties we didn’t have a debt 70% of GDP, and the economic issues were fundamentally different. We certainly weren’t involved in foreign policy adventures, despite a rivalry with Japan over Asia. Are trying to compare the present to 1932? What was the national debt then? I’ll help you out here. When the great depression started it was below 20%, at the zenith of public spending it was 40%, far less than our starting point now. By the end of WWII it did hit 120% of GDP, and started to decline from that point on. I suppose you could argue that a jolt of public spending to hit a debt of 120% of GDP might jolt the economy alive, if we had the discipline to decrease it afterwards (which we did, until it hit its low of 30% before it started climbing again in the 80s as we lost fiscal discipline), but I think that’s a very weak argument. The global economy was structured completely differently, global capital was not as mobile as it is now, and...well, Joe, it’s a very different world. We’re financing this debt with Saudi and Chinese money as they buy more and more of our assets. We’re selling the country to maintain our addiction to oil.

Nope, at this point with this debt I think we’ve made the Keynesian solution all but impossible. It can provide a short term jolt, but at the price of more debt and more external control of US assets (and a weaker dollar). Unless we address the structural problems, we can only buy a little time. We need fiscal discipline and low interest rates. I’m not holding my breath.
Written By: Scott Erb

McCain is the only one I’ve ever given even a passing thought out of the whole lot in either party. I don’t agree with him on everything, but he is clearly a man of integrity and votes with his conscience. That makes him a ’renegade’ to some party politicos, sadly.
Written By: J
URL: http://
Is Rudy toast? This has been such a bizarre cycle in both parties that I wouldn’t speak too soon. Six months ago the conventional wisdom was that McCain was done.
Written By: huxley
URL: http://

Add Your Comment
  NOTICE: While we don't wish to censor your thoughts, we do blacklist certain terms of profanity or obscenity. This is not to muzzle you, but to ensure that the blog remains work-safe for our readers. If you wish to use profanity, simply insert asterisks (*) where the vowels usually go. Your meaning will still be clear, but our readers will be able to view the blog without worrying that content monitoring will get them in trouble when reading it.
Comments for this entry are closed.
HTML Tools:
Bold Italic Blockquote Hyperlink
Vicious Capitalism


Buy Dale's Book!
Slackernomics by Dale Franks