This just out of the rumor mill.



I, personally, would LOVE to see this happen, but I want to know what you think.

Questions for debate:

Would a Bush/Giuliani ticket be appealing to independents? How so?

Would those staunch conservatives here at AD be upset by this ticket? Do you feel it would affect the election (as in the far right may not vote)?

Im not sure how it would appeal to independants, but being about as far right as they come, a Bush/Guliani ticket makes me drool. Nothing could be more perfect.

Giuliani is not "as far right as they come"

He is pro-choice, and does not favor a partial birth abortion ban. (isn't abortion the one issue that defines "far right"? )
He is for a written test for gun permits (gun control is another "right wing nut issue" isn't it?)
He is against a ban on gay marriage (strike three for being a "right winger").


On other issues, he is solidly conservative:

pro-vouchers for schools
lower taxes
Welfare recipients should work, if they are able.
combatting drugs is a foreign policy

Rudy Giuliani on the Issues

Personally, he has had some morality issues

I think he would be a good choice, simply because it would dispel the silly notion that Dick Cheney is running things at the White House. Guiliani is about as moderate as a serious Republican candidate is going to get.

Rudy actually commented about this in March: Rudy opposes gay nups ban

In 1988 Lloyd Bentsen killed Dan Quayle "the potatoe guy" during debates and yet it didn't help Michael Dukakis during general elections. People elect the president, not the vice-president, so I don't think that Bush's choice for vice-president is that important. Besides Giuliani got health problems of his own, so dismissing Chaney for that reason may seem a bit... artificial.

Definetly. Why? Because Rudy is a famous figure coming out of the 9/11 attacks. That and he has been credited to cleaning up New York City of crime. he would definetly bring in the votes from those in the middle such as myself


I doubt it would upset conservatives. Cheney has been a hot potato since the beginning of the Iraq war. I think some far rights would not be upset for the most part

Yes, it would be more appealing to some independents who think that Cheney is the major problem in the Administration. Guiliani would be able to project a competent leadership style, which can't hurt during the campaign. He's also a decent public speaker and clearly understands how to run a large government, which are all plusses when compared to Kerry + many of the possible Democrats being interviewed for the job of "Funeral Attendee and Bunker Resident in Chief".

That said... it'll never happen. Guiliani has a... (cough) ... "family values" issue that is a giant sucking sound on his popularity in many social conservative areas of America. For them, he'll be a turn-off. They're ok with Cheney as long as he doesn't support his gay daughter's "lifestyle" in public. But supporting someone who cheated on his wife and brought his mistress into the mayor's mansion?? Not a chance.

Dumping Cheney IS actually a good idea and would diffuse some (but not all) of the ABB crowd's complaints about this Administration. As such, it would lower some of the volume and put more voters in play for the upcoming election than current polling trends suggest.

Selecting Sen. McCain or even Colin Powell would actually be a smarter choice.

Would a Bush/Giuliani ticket be appealing to independents? How so?

I think definitely yes. Anything that broadens appeal will likely attract independents..and as Amlord points out, Guiliani definetely broadens the base, as he is 'moderate' on several key issues.

Would those staunch conservatives here at AD be upset by this ticket? Do you feel it would affect the election (as in the far right may not vote)?

I think it would definitely affect the election, but not for the reason specified (ie, far right not voting). Historically, VP's are frequently chosen to carry key states....



One of Guiliani's key strong points would be his potential effect on New York voters. I think the real key question here would be:

Would adding Guiliani to the ticket help Bush carry New York?, which leads directly to:
If so, can the Democrats win without New York?

I think this would be one of the primary motivations behind the change, as well. Exactly which voting block is Dick Cheney bringing to the ticket? I don't see him helping to carry any key area, although he probably did appeal to the far right (but I don't think that's why he was chosen). I see it breaking down this way--the far right is going to vote for Bush anyway, and probably won't keep from voting just because of the VP choice, while Guiliani could certainly bring in potential swing voters and help carry (or at least make competetive) a very key state.

Would a Bush/Giuliani ticket be appealing to independents? How so?
Being an independent and only speaking for myself I would say no. I have no doubt Cheney is a key part of my angst against the current administration but I don't see it going away entirely with his removal. Giuliani certainly is more affable than Cheney and would make for a nice debate with Edwards but I still plan on voting against Bush in November.

It would be a very interesting move for key swing states like Florida and Ohio, however. That kinda scares me, to be honest.

I'll just pray it stays in the rumor mill only.

Doc

For "health issues," huh? Well, at least it's not the overly used "to spend time with my family" excuse.

If I thought this would happen (and I don't), I would see replacing Cheney with Giuliani as a very positive step toward having Bush in office another four years. Independents would probably recognize the level-headed leadership and inspiration Giuliani provided in the midst of the 9/11 chaos.

Some of the strict moralists would oppose Giuliani for bringing his mistress to Gracie Mansion while still married and for his pro-choice stance, but this might well be cancelled out by those who appreciate that Giuliani is not tainted by association with Enron and oil interests.

(A note to those who would not vote for a Bush/Guiliani ticket because of Giuliani's pro-choice stance: Those who use pro-life as the only criterion for voting for a candidate would not be happy. I would suggest that they also check to see which "pro-life" candidates favor stem cell research, which involves the use of human embryos. The Catholic Church in particular is shooting itself in the foot on this issue. Come election time, those who follow the edicts of the bishops to the letter might as well stay home--there might not be anybody quite good enough to vote for.)

Would a Bush/Giuliani ticket be appealing to independents? How so?

I view myself as an Independent, so NO.

Would adding Guiliani to the ticket help Bush carry New York?

Outside of the handling of post 9/11, most New Yorkers have a negative feeling towards Rudy. Clinton might help Bush carry that state, Rudy won't

All this talk about replacing the VP, and the President is NOT talking to McCain?

I don't think the Mayor of any city is qualified to be a heart beat away from the Presidency.

The big question here is that this administration is running on "Don't change ships midstream" and that their opponent Flip-Flops...........This rumor flies in the face of that message, and the pot is indeed black.

If New York City were a state, it would be bigger than about 38 states.

Its annual budget is over $45 billion dollars.

In contrast, Arkansas's budget (Bill Clinton's state) was only $11.4 billion last year.

Managing New York City is akin to managing one of the largest states in the Union.

I don't know English-Horn. While Giuliani as VP might not win him the election on it's own merits, it would definitely help Bush win New York. Giuliani would be a tough guy to debate, he won't be "Quayled" by any means. Attack Bush on terrorism in front of him? How hard would that be!

And if NYC was a state, you would have a point.

I can't believe that you consider the responsibilities of a Mayor on the same level as that of a Governor.

I would be happy to hear your thoughts on the other points that I was quoted on.

And I still don't think that being a Mayor qualifies one to be that close to the Presidency.

Would those staunch conservatives here at AD be upset by this ticket? Do you feel it would affect the election (as in the far right may not vote)?

I have to agree with English Horn that people vote for the president and not the vice president. For that reason I would have no problem with a Bush/Giuliani ticket. The only potential problem is how a vice president becomes a viable candidate for the job of president. I know that some conservatives would prefer a more morally minded candidate for president than Giuliani in 2008. I personally would prefer to see Alan Keyes run for vice president this year and then president in 2008.

I think this is would be an issue of potential gain or potential loss. Rudy has more appeal (but no, I don't think even his former popularity could persuade the anti-Bush vote of New York) than Cheney, but it also shows that Bush will drop his running mate for the chance of an advantage.

How exactly does a rumor show this? This thread is speculative.



And what, exactly is so magical about being a governor? It is simply a bureaucracy. In most instances, being a governor means that you have a larger budget and more responsibility than a mayor. But not in the case of New York City.

For example, New York City has more policeman (over 50,000) than most cities have people. The bureaucracy is huge. Being mayor of of New York is more difficult than being the governor of most states, a majority of which have "part time" legistlatures.

Besides which, he would be Vice President. How is being mayor of the world's largest cities as a political background any worse than being a Representative from Michigan (Gerald Ford) or CIA director (George H. W. Bush), Representative from Wyoming and Sec. of Defense (Dick Cheney)?

I can only speak for myself, but I like Giuliani. If he could deliver New York, it'd be a no brainer, but New York is so heavily Democratic that I have a hard time seeing it. Cheney isn't too popular himself, so I don't see how replacing him with Giuliani could hurt.

McCain would be a better choice, since he has proven popularity with independents and is still acceptable to core Republicans.

For most voters, the question is really between Bush and Kerry. If G were on the ticket with Bush, then I'd still be voting for Bush, and praying that nothing happens to him. If G were running against Kerry? That would be REALLY tough.

I'd probably go 3rd party unless it were a really close election, in which case I MIGHT vote for G, only because Kerry would be, in my opinion, an unmitigated disaster. G's moral shortcomings are too great. His competence comes from the same place as Bill Clinton's, a desire for power, not from his character.

If Bush were to switch running mates, I would like to see J.D. Watts. An experienced legislator who can bend a few arms in Congress, without sacrificing any Congressional seats to do it. A strong conservative, and he'd be the first Black on the ticket.

(I'd also like to see Alan Keyes as Secretary of State or Homeland Security, but both of those are unlikely, since I don't see eithe Powell or Ridge vacating.)

Leave it to a republican to base everything on dollar amounts and law enforcement. I feel that there are many other important issues involved in leading a group of people.

How experienced is the Mayor of NYC at dealing with wildlife issues? Every governor deals with issues of wildlife and or forrests. Keeping Central Park clean doesn't count.

The governor of every state deals with the Reserves, division of our military. Issues such as deployment, sending a soldier away from his family to possibly die. I can't put deploying police officers on that same level of responsibility.

Is there a City tax? There might be, but I know a governors responsibility include State taxation.

Rudy ran NYC by attending every Yankee game and providing a face for NYC pr campaign.

I am unable to defend the qualifications of Ford, Cheney, or Bush I. I consider them all failures. One NEVER one an election, another is 1-1, and it looks like the other isn't even going to be asked back. Not sure if you meant to strengthen my point, but thanks.

Oh yeah, 9-11 happened while Bush was in charge of D.C. and Rudy was overseeing NYC. Two wrongs don't make a right.

So what exactly DO you consider a good qualification for Vice President?

Governorship of a State? I guess Spiro Agnew is your ideal Veep?
Senator? Gore, Mondale, Lyndon Johnson were all Senators. Which would you consider a success?

The Vice President is a largely symbolic position, with few Vice Presidents having much influence on either policy or politics. That being said, the choice of Vice President indicates something about a President: either where his weaknesses lie or where his sympathies lie.

Giuliani would satisfy (at least partially) the first, but I don't think he satisfies the second.

Amlord, I hear your roar, and I have to admit, that I do agree with you on this one.

As far as what I DO think qualifies an individual, I'll give it a rip.

A progression through the ranks of State Government and local government. Someone that has repeatedly accepted increasing responsibility, and has vast experience with International issues and dealing with the Federal Government.

As I mentioned in my first post, Bush is considering a replacement of Cheney, and the name JOHN MCCAIN is not being mentioned???? I think that McCain would be the best choice, but also that there are a number of more qualified Republicans than Rudy, and for the sake of our country, in the event that W wins, I would like to see the most qualified individual on his ticket, not neccessarily one that will attract the most votes.

What is the purpose here? To beat Kerry or build the best administration possible. I would hope the latter.

Personally I don't have any problem with Dick Cheney remaining on the ticket, and I think he will unless health reasons force his withdrawl. He's an outstanding VP, one of the strongest we've ever had, and I think he and President Bush make a good team. It may cause some problems for the Republicans in 2008 when we are looking for a new candidate for President and I don't think it will be Cheney, but then again, other than the first President Bush, it's been a long time since a sitting VP was elected President anyway.

So, I say we stay with Cheney and go on to win in November.

I think such a ticket would be quite appealing to independents, although I hesitate to say it would be decisive.

While I agree that Giuliani is a towering political figure after 9/11, I believe that this election is first and foremost a referendum on George W. Bush. Dick Cheney could certainly be a drag on the ticket because of the public perception that President Bush's failures were all his ideas. But if this perception holds, dumping Cheney would indicate to undecided voters a repudiation of Bush's entire first term. No matter what excuse Cheney used to leave the ticket (except perhaps a fatal coronary), Bush's opponents would seize on his exit as a massive Bush waffle. They could portray the President either as trying to pawn off his own mistakes on someone else, or as a pawn himself, thereby citing "proof" of his "incompetence."

Rudolph Giuliani crossed paths with Bush on television shortly after 9/11, but had nothing to do with the President's successes or failures, domestic or international, since then. His presence on the campaign trail would bolster Bush against further criticism about his actions immediately following 9/11, but he will likely have that effect anyway as a prominent speaker at the Republican National Convention.



I think that any change in such a closely-contested election could have an impact, but the support of independents who were inspired by Giuliani's example after 9/11 will far outweigh any conservative reservations about his character.


On another note, I would like to comment on the dispute between Government Mule and Amlord about Giuliani's qualifications for the post of VP. I believe that, while discussions regarding the Mayor's previous experience may be relevent if he were running for President, he is only running to be the President if Bush dies or is removed from office. He would not have experience directing many of the departments of the federal government, but I think that most of Bush's cabinet (quite an experienced bunch) would be at the new President's disposal. I must also admit that I wholheartedly support Ralph Nader, a man with no experience in elected office. Nader's lack of hands-on experience doesn't worry me; I believe President Nader would surround himself with cabinet members and advisers who shared his overall philosophy, but who had the know-how to efficiently implement his policies in their respective departments. The same would go for President Giuliani.

Questions for debate:

Would a Bush/Giuliani ticket be appealing to independents? How so?

Would those staunch conservatives here at AD be upset by this ticket? Do you feel it would affect the election (as in the far right may not vote)?


I would reconsider my position of not voting for Bush 43 if Giuliani was on the ticket. Although I was not completely happy with all of Giuliani's policies during his terms I did vote for him both times. The main reasons I did was I felt he had candor, said what he thought, turned NYC from a dump into a beautiful city, had a plan and a vision. While I felt he was authoritarian and also egotistical I can't complain about the outcome of his service. I think he could pull in more of the independents but he may upset the ultra conservatives. The thing is, I think the ultra conservatives would loose more if they stayed home. I would think that they would fear the possibility of Kerry as President more then Giuliani as a VP.

John Mcain or Ron Paul are other possibilities that could sway this slightly liberal, libertarian leaning, moderate independent from not voting for a Republican President. Until then this will now be my first Presidential election that a Republican Presidential candidate will not get my vote.


editted: typo