Has Time's Joe Klein lost his marbles? He writes:
Romney now has to be considered a strong favorite for the Republican nomination. Giuliani may give him a tussle—and who knows about Thompson?—but in the end, Republicans will probably prefer a squeaky-clean Mormon with a totally focus-grouped pitch to a thrice-married pro-choice New Yorker who didn't attend his son's high school graduation. And another prediction: if nominated, Romney will be formidable in the general election.
A kazillionaire bought a thousand more votes than some other guys in an Iowa cornfield, and this makes him "a strong favorite?" I'm not sure what hustings are, but I'm pretty sure Klein has spent too much time out in them.
Dear Joel Klien,
Brer Rabbit called; he wants his briar patch back.
Yours,
Walt Disney Corp.
I'd say you're downplaying the significance of Ames a bit too much, but nowhere to the degree that Klein's overstating it. Heck, I'm currently a Romney fan, but until someone other than Rudy is leading in the national polls, Rudy's the favorite.
You're presupposing that Klein had any marbles to lose.
Don't forget when you're talking about the pundits and reporters from the big media outlets based in New York, Giuliani Derangement Syndrome predates any initial outbreak of Bush Derangement Syndrome among the left by about a decade. They've been deoonizing Rudy since his 1989 run for mayor against David Dinkins, and his success after beating Dinkins in the 1993 rematch has driven them up a wall ever since.
As much as they would hate a conservative Mormon businessman who was a successful governor of another normally liberal outpost in the White House, there's nobody they would like to see in there less than the man who threw out all the liberal beliefs about governance in their hometown and made the city livable again -- it's the urban equivalent of Reagan's policies bringing down the Soviet Union and proving the left wrong there (liberal will still tell you it was Gorbachev who was the main reason the USSR fell and that Reagan just happened to be in the right place at the right time).
He's a man out standing in his field.
Faced with a choice between an intelligent man with Cary Grant good looks like Mitt Romney and an intelligent man with James Woods balding & average looks like Rudy Giuliani, most conservative women will vote for Mitt.
Uh oh. Sheryl probably preferred Clinton to Dole too.
Only idiot conservative women vote for a candidate based on looks.
Dear Funky Chicken,
Wrong, voted for Dole. Your analogy is lacking anyway, neither man in your scenario is good looking.
Also you missed my point entirely (now if that makes you the idiot so be it. I will not get into a name calling conversation with you). Mitt Romney and Rudy Giuliani are both very good candidates and would make fine presidents. But because Mitt Romney is so handsome, a lot of the conservative women I’ve talked with are gravitating towards him.
Mitt’s combination of intelligence, proven leadership, positive outlook on life and drop dead gorgeous looks is persuasive to women.
Between Rudy Giuliani or the handsome John Edwards or the handsome Barak Obama, no contest Rudy Giuliani gets my vote.
