Rudy on WGST

GOP Presidential hopeful Rudy Giuliani was on WGST this morning (click here to listen) with Randy & Spiff. Among the things Rudy said was that compared to the leading Democrats (Clinton, Obama and Edwards) he is the only one with executive experience. This of course is true and when compared with the other leading GOP candidates, only Giuliani and Romney have executive political experience (Huckabee does as well of course – he’s climbing but I’m not sure he’s risen to the top tier just yet).

How important is executive experience to the Presidency? The last Senator elected was Kennedy IIRC, the country having elected Governors and one VP since that time. Giuliani was a Mayor not a Governor, but he argues New York City is larger than many States.

What about all this?


  1. drjay says:

    not that i’m a rudy supporter–but i have had this discussion w/ other folks and think its fair to say 8 years as mayor of nyc or frankly any large city (roughly a million+) w/ a strong mayor form of gov’t would be as adequate prep for the presidency as being governor of vermont or montana or any of the 42 states that are “smaller” than nyc or the dozen or so w/ smaller budgets…esp. when added to other gov’t or business experience–rudy had been a fairly high profile US attorney as well–for instance

  2. drjay says:

    having said all that i think its easier for a guv than a senator b/c a senator votes on thousnads of things and any little vote can be dissected and argued over–unless you are a senate leader you kinda have to go along to get along w/ your senate colleagues and “superiors”

    a guv has a bully pulpit can veto things — present an agenda that never even has to be considered by the legislature–but you have it out there–reagan was regarded as a great leader but his budget was always “doa” on tip o’neil’s doorstep–so i think the 2 are just perceived differently regardless of the value of the actual experience…

  3. John Konop says:

    The message of his executive experience is not working with voters.


    Rudy’s Support Slipping In Multiple Polls

    The bad polling news is hitting Rudy in waves right about now. There’s the new Washington Post poll, which finds him at his lowest point this year:


  4. drjay says:

    John Konop // Sep 12, 2007 at 3:53 pm

    The message of his executive experience is not working with voters.

    that may be starting to happen w/ rudy at this time–but i was speaking of big city mayors in more general terms as far as potential viability b/c its something i geek out on–i esp. think they can be attractive v.p. candidates though they are rarely ever considered

  5. GOPeach says:

    Okay who do we have now?

    The Mayor
    The Mormon
    The Actor
    The Preacher
    The Doctor

    Then there is …

    The Wife
    The Black
    The Pretty Boy

    This is all so interesting.

  6. rightbeforeleft says:

    In practical terms Rudy does have the most experience and a relatively strong record, along with possibly Romney. I’m not denigrating the service of any of the senators, actors, or lobbyists running, but they do not spend their time managing huge bureaucracies and steering the helm of a ship. They spend their time instead being lobbied, taking orders, and doing district relations, not really elements necessary to gain real leadership bona fides.

  7. rightbeforeleft says:

    And to Mr. Konop’s point about polling, you have to remember that Rudy is not so much losing support in the polls as Fred Thompson is gaining. And while that may seem obvious, remember that no poll respondents really knew who Fred Thompson was in June/July, so it is more a function of his raising profile than anyone deciding to vote against Rudy.

  8. CHelf says:

    As long as you mention the polls, keep in mind that the same dissatisfaction the base had with the candidates BEFORE Fred jumped in still exists even AFTER he jumps in. Fred and Rudy have flipped numbers in many polls but the undecideds and dissatisfied are still the same. Perhaps this is why Newt’s still toying with us all on jumping in. He said he might if Fred didn’t take hold and his big entry didn’t overwhelm anyone. Actually it was about the same as when his name first came up as exploring.

  9. Buzz, I think this kind of thinking/statistic is true until it is no longer true. Not long ago, I could have argued that you have to be a Democrat to get elected Governor of Georgia and my sample size was larger and went back much further than 1960.

    If this election is about the war, which lets not kid ourselves, it probably will be, I’m not sure that being a senator is a bad thing. Members of Congress, particularly senators have foreign policy experience and credibility in a way that governors do not.

    Take Virginia, for example. The conventional wisdom says that Mark Warner would prefer to be Governor, not Senator. But I suspect Warner knows that with gubernatorial experience already under his belt, a term or two in the Senate will flesh out his resume in a way that another term as governor simply can’t.

    That doesn’t necessarily answer the question, but I would also point out that John Kerry who is essentially the “ultimate” Senator for this electability argument got 48% of the vote and came about 50,000 votes shy of actually winning the Presidency. I suspect the conventional wisdom may be shattered come November 2008, in a way that conventional wisdom often is.

  10. joe says:


    Clinton was a Governor, GHW Bush had so much experience that it wasn’t funny. To get back to a President that did not have executive experience, see Kennedy. What is your point? Are you saying that the only good Presidents are those without experience? Get real.

  11. GodHatesTrash says:

    I won’t speak for him, but he probably just means that George W. Bush is by far and away the most inept incompetent imbecilic ignoranus ever to be President of the USA.

    Which cannot be denied.

  12. debbie0040 says:

    God Hates Trash, you must have Jimmy Carter and W confused.

    Anyone would be hard pressed to find a more incompetent imbecilic President than Jimmy Carter.

    You bleeding heart, left wing nuts jobs really hate W don’t you? Is it because he defeated you guys twice after you had pulled out all the stops to defeat him?

    I hope W nominates Olson for AG. That will really tick you left wingers off.

  13. John Konop says:


    I was no fan of Carter as a President. I do think he has done wonderful work helping the poor after being president.

    As for Bush it would hard not to put him as one of the worse. Why do you think he is such a great President?

    Out of control spending, open borders, out of control debt, out of control trade debt, incompetent staff from Iraq, imported food, Katrina

  14. shelbinator says:

    Debbie, we hate W so much because he’s used the constitution as toilet paper and got us into an unnecessary war that distracted us from the real fight against terrorism (making MORE terrorists) and has never actually admitted to or apologized for screwing our national security over. Contrition usually comes before forgiveness, no?

    And it’s not just the left-wing nutjobs.

    I have to wonder why more of y’all aren’t taking a more serious look at Huckabee, who as far as I can tell, actually IS a conservative! I don’t agree with the guy on hardly anything, but I respect his convictions. That Mitt Romney, the slickest, say-anything used-car salesman of the bunch, has so much support in these parts is just mind-boggling.

  15. debbie0040 says:

    I don’t think he is a great President, but I don’t agree with him being the worse either .

    Jimmy Carter has done a wonderful job of bashing this country while speaking abroad and of siding with the Palestinians against Israel.

    Remember the economy under Carter, remember his dismemberment of our armed forces, remember the Iran Hostage crisis,etc…?

    The good part of Bush? Judge Alito, Judge Roberts, tax cuts, his leadership after 9-11

  16. debbie0040 says:

    I support the decision to take out Sadam. He was a threat and I would rather do it than wait for my grandchildren to have to do it when he had nuclear weapons. I think we have been too politically correct in fighting the war.

    I don’t have an issue with Huckabee but don’t think he can beat Hillary. I believe Fred can

  17. John Konop says:



    According to intelligence reports from the CIA, Military, Military experts and Dick Cheney via the first Iraq war all said that taking out Iraq to get Saddam was a bad idea. And all predicted the issues we are facing today. Also most experts and Generals agree we are creating more terrorist not less with this policy.

    Why do you think you know more than experts? Do you not trust the military experts? How were the expert

  18. debbie0040 says:

    John, John, John, there are also military experts that think it was the right thing to do. When you say most generals and experts, who are you referring to? The ones that agree with you? When you say most how many are you considering you arrive at your plurarity number to be able to say most?

    Their assessment was from the first Iraqi war and before 9-11 so don’t give out misleading information that does not hold true today .

    I had a cousin that served 18 months in Camp Anaconda in Iraq and he is schedule to go back next year. He believes we did the right thing.

    We have not had a terrorist attack in this country since 9-11 when Great Britain has had one.

  19. GodHatesTrash says:

    Debbie, the enemy of your enemy – the ‘libruls’ – is not always your friend.

    And George W. Bush is friends to no one, especially silly stoopid ignorant Georgia voters.

  20. debbie0040 says:

    GHT, you keep talking about W and mentioned that “that George W. Bush is by far and away the most inept incompetent imbecilic ignoranus ever to be President of the USA. ‘

    You libs pulled out all the stops to defeat Bush and he still out smarted you and won. So what does that make you in the fact you let an “inept incompetent imbecilic ignoranus ” out smart you and win?

  21. GodHatesTrash says:

    Debbie, that just proves my point that the American electorate is dumber than dogdoo, especially in the red states.

    Democracy in action – ignoranuses elect ignoranuses.

    Trash elects trash.

  22. John Konop says:



    Former Top Commander Condemns Pentagon Officials Over Iraq War

    In the book, Zinni writes: “In the lead up to the Iraq war and its later conduct, I saw at a minimum, true dereliction, negligence and irresponsibility, at worse, lying, incompetence and corruption.”

  23. John Konop says:


    I can give you more from the CIA, NIE… bottom line they all said bad idea before the Iraq war.

    Why do you think you understand the Middle East better than General Powell, Zinni, Scowcroft, Schwarzkopf…..?

    Powell tried to talk Bush out of war

    TOL-The former American secretary of state Colin Powell has revealed that he spent 2

  24. rugby_fan says:


    I’m not sure where to begin with your comments.

    I will however, point you in the direction of the NYTimes $elect (I hope you have a subscription. If not, get one.):

    Great, Bush implemented tax cuts, but he is spending more than almost every other president. That is good for anyone how?

    Alito? Wonderful, a bombastic ideologue in the Supreme Court.

    Damaging the conservative movement for a generation and destroying whatever credibility the Republican Party had for at the minimum a decade and losing support everywhere in the US except for the South?

    No, Bush may not be the worst president, but he is far from being even a good president.

  25. debbie0040 says:

    GHT, just can’t handle the fact that you left wingers are not in the majority so you try to make excuses why your liberal ideas lose that the ballot box.


    There are differing opinions on the subject and you know it. H ow can you quote a few and asy most of? Get your facts straight and quit trying to mislead by saying most.

    So basically you are saying that if the military operation is not going to be easy then we should not defend our interests and ignore it.

    Gee, I bet you would have told that to Roosevelt and Truman in WWII.

    I would like to see the exact quotes, please provide the link. “But he wasn

  26. John Konop says:


    If you read anything about the war you would know all the Generals I post were very out spoken about the issues with invading Iraq. In fact Scowcroft wrote an article (“Don’t Attack Saddam”) printed in WSJ and many other major papers warning lawmakers and the people why invading Iraq was a bad idea.

    Please show me quotes from the Generals who were experts in the region agreeing with Bush

  27. rugby_fan says:

    No but your wholesale dismissal of liberalism is a joke.

    I think there was a poll that showed more Americans identified as liberals. If I can find it, I will post it.

    And you do know bin-Laden has stated that the removal of US forces from Saudi Arabia is one of his key goals.

  28. debbie0040 says:

    Most of the Democrats that unseated Republicans in November ran as moderate/conservative. They did not run as liberals.

    Excerpt from this article:
    Ideology: Were Republicans too conservative for the nation? One could be tempted to say that Republicans were voted out because of their conservatism. But the House results suggest that this would be a mistake: The races of 2006 did not contain clear signs that America is no longer the center-right nation it was in 2004.

    Of the 18 or so Republican House incumbents to lose in 2006, seven (it could be as many as nine of 20 losses, pending two counts) were unmistakably moderate Republican members. Moderate Republican Representatives Sue Kelly (N.Y.), Jeb Bradley (N.H.), Charlie Bass (N.H.), Nancy Johnson (Conn.), Jim Leach (Iowa) and Clay Shaw (Fla.) were defeated. Rep. Rob Simmons (R-Conn.) hangs by a thread, and the jury is out on Rep. Dave Reichert (R-Wash.), whose district was flooded on Election Day. Moderate Rep. Joe Schwarz (R-Mich.) was ousted in a primary.

    As a side note, moderates’ further problems in the 110th Congress are complicated by the retirement of Representatives Sherwood Boehlert (R-N.Y.) and Jim Kolbe (R-Ariz.). Moderate Rep. Mark Foley (R) was forced into retirement when his scandal erupted. This amounts to an enormous bloodletting for the moderate GOP caucus. It will leave Rep. Mike Castle (R-Del.), the moderates’ leader, with a much more limited role in the House, even beyond the limitations of being in the minority. (Castle suffered two strokes during the campaign but was re-elected easily.)

    On the opposite side, Democrats cleverly recruited candidates who were conservatives or who would at least run as conservatives. This includes pro-life, pro-gun candidates such as businessman Joe Donnelly (D), who defeated Rep. Chris Chocola (R-Ind.), Vandenburgh County Sheriff Brad Ellsworth (D), who defeated Rep. John Hostettler (R-Ind.), and former NFL quarterback Heath Shuler (D), who defeated Rep. Charles Taylor (R-N.C.), all as we had anticipated.

    Also in this category are several of the Democrats’ losing candidates, who nonetheless made their races competitive and kept the NRCC guessing — including former Rep. Ken Lucas (Ky.), Lt. Col. Mike Weaver (Ky.), and rancher Scott Kleeb (Neb.).

  29. John Konop says:


    This is all widely known. Do you have any facts from any real military experts at the level of Powell, Zinni, Clark……?

    From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

    Scowcroft was a leading Republican critic of U.S. policy towards Iraq before and after the 2003 invasion of Iraq, which war critics in particular have seen as significant given Scowcroft’s close ties to former President George H.W. Bush. [1] [2] [3] [4]. Scowcroft supported the invasion of Afghanistan as a

  30. Romegaguy says:

    In the interest of fairness and to just stir the pot a little here…

    Debbie, how about all of the things your ilk threw at Clinton. How was it you put it “…he still out smarted you and won.” Oh and the economy was great then, too. That has to really grate on your nerves.

    Oh and I am still waiting for that steak dinner from the primary election for Lt Gov last year. God blessed Georgia last year and we got that one right.

  31. rugby_fan says:


    What’s your point about the freshman legislators? That’s not the majority of Democratic lawmakers so I’m not sure what you are trying to prove.

    Moreover, George Bush has killed conservatism. If you continue to say he stands for conservative principles you are lying to your self or conservatism has morphed into a philosophy of big government and spending.

    And when will you pay for Romegaguy, Jace, and my dinner (I’ll take Steak and Shake at this rate)?

  32. IndyInjun says:

    Well, Bush probably has done us an even bigger favor by destroying the fake conservatives of the GOP.

    It will take DECADES for the party to recover after what is about to happen in 2008.

    CONSERVATISM is not ‘dead’ , just the party of liars, thieves, and deceivers who called themselves Republicans.

Comments are closed.