You know, I like the endorser, and I think he means it, but I still don't think I could trust Rudy on this one. Plus my wife hates Rudy (she grew up in NY, I'm just a reluctant transplant), she's pretty moderate to slightly left (not as left as she thinks she is and every time I show her how blatantly wrong most things she reads or sees on TV the less left she becomes - I still can't believe how distraught she became when I started to tell her about the whole Silent Spring reality). I'm just not sure he's electable, I don't see him firing up conservative turnout in any way, liberals are going to get whatever turnout they get (we'll be told how many 18-26 year olds are going to vote and barely any of them will) and Rudy won't be getting them, and how many moderates are like my wife - they don't trust him. Or is it just a familiarity breeding contempt sort of thing with her? Personally I'm willing to go with a socially less-than-conservative candidate as long as they're not going to cave to nutballs in turbans or the UN and understand that less taxes means more revenue if done properly, and I think Rudy fits that bill. Anyone more conservative would just be icing.

If Hillary is the nominee, I think conservatives would still get out the vote for Rudy. Whatever the downside of Rudy would be for them, Hillary would be all downside, including Bubba loose at the White House interns again.

It is certainly a major boost for Guiliani. Olson is widely respected among conservatives.

Nominations are won with the base, elections are won in the middle. Falze's wife notwithstanding, Rudy is still "America's Mayor," and would appeal to a broad spectrum of voters if he can get through the conservative gauntlet in the primaries. I doubt he would win New York state, but then, he wouldn't have to.

Jim Addison: "America's Mayor..." *eyeballs rolling*

Jim, I agree that conservatives will turn out for him if the Democrat is someone as liberal as Hillary. My concern is that, with all the trouble she's already having, will the nominee be a socialist like her? Is the time ripe for a 3rd party? or at least a 3rd party candidate again deciding the election as Perot and Nader did?

I still maintain that moderates aren't going to fall for him in the end, he's got way too many skeletons in his closet and with vicious smearers like Hillary in the campaign and the press taking care of the disinformation campaign for free, I don't know that he'll survive. We have yet to see a candidate lately take the high road, Obama is actually the closest. If someone hits you with something not that important, maybe embarrassing, you acknowlege it, smile, shake your head, and repeat your own agenda while asking what your opponent's is. I don't know him well enough to know how damaging all his skeletons are. The personal life stuff can probably be treated as I just described - eventually people should be able to ignore them, especially with the campaigns starting so damn early, but only if he stays out of the gutter. It's only Feb 2007 for crying out loud. Frankly I think anyone that stays out of the gutter has an excellent shot in 2008, but I don't know that any of them can - even Obama - look how ticked he got about the thing with his ears! Wait til Carville really goes after him. Any candidates out there that you think can stay above the fray?

The Presidential election in '08 is shaping up (at least by this point, could change and I hope it does) to be a repeat on a national scale of the California state Gubernatorial one: vote for a Liberal or vote for a Marxist.

Either vote, Conservatives and many Republicans among them lose -- put another way, are coerced into compromises of issues that are the most important as to voting determination (thus, they/we lose).

Guiliani is a Liberal. Same with John McCain and many others like them. I also think Bush is a Liberal.

Thus, we get the sizzle but not the steak. We get the campaign energy and buzz and stage heroics and deliveries but not the substance afterward.

Regardless of who the Democrats hoist -- Clinton, Obama, Richardson, Edwards -- everyone not in the Marxist Left will feel uncomfortable. But Democrats will vote for the Democrat and Republicans will vote for the Republican, even if the Republican is a Liberal such as is Guiliani.

If Romney becomes more clear (and I hope that he does) and more resolute about his views on key issues...well, he's still got a big hurdle with his theology but in comparison with Guiliani, well, I don't think Guiliani would pose much thunder to Romney as to personal convictions.

I'm worried about Guiliani, to be blunt. I'd vote for him if he was the only option -- the RNC seems to know that, as to voters such as myself (to quote Rove, "where else are [we] going to go") -- but this methodology of manipulating an ever increasingly Liberal Republican Party only serves to encourage disgruntlement and lack of faith in the current configuration of the GOP.