Comments on: Rudy’s Wrongs

by: Todd Seavey

Fri, 30 Nov 2007 15:58:20 +0000

My position’s been exactly the same throughout. Get back to me when the convention rolls around and we can reassess. _It will still be true then_, though, as it is now, that Paul is better than Giuliani, who is in turn better than Clinton, as are (marginally) the other GOP candidates. And with that, I’m done for now.

by: Eric Dondero

Fri, 30 Nov 2007 13:32:50 +0000

Yes Todd, you’ve got it. A “future reality scenario.” But some of us know the real score. You’re backpeddaling a bit. Your original post was more Pro-Giuliani. Then you got a concerned call or two, or maybe a couple emails, from a certain Congressional office on Capitol Hill. This certain someone, pointed out that such an endorsement for Giuliani, even if it was a back-handed endorsment, would prove hurtful to a certain “other” Presidential candidate. Thus, the new explanations.

No problem. I understand how this game works. Remember, I used to work for that “certain Congressional office.”

by: Christopher

Fri, 30 Nov 2007 03:21:38 +0000

“Todd joins a growing list of Libertarians for Giuliani. Granted Todd is not yet a LFG. ”

I am beginning to understand the logic necessary to be a Libertarian for Giuliani.

by: Todd Seavey

Fri, 30 Nov 2007 02:35:58 +0000

So that picture of me (in anarchist black standing in front of the DC Comics building) is not so much a picture of the actual present-day Todd revealing his “STUNNING!” allegiance to Giuliani but more like a Todd from _one possible future reality_, an alternate timeline to the one in which I remain a Ron Paul loyalist. Yeah…yeah…I can see that — and I’d be able to see it even more clearly with the help of certain substances that Paul would legalize and Giuliani would not, so paradoxically, the more real the Giuliani-timeline Todd becomes, the less we are able to perceive him.

Still, anything that makes me more like a Michael Moorcock character is OK with me. If all the alternate-future versions of me team up, though, watch out, because an army that size can afford to demand complete control of its PR rollout.

by: Eric Dondero

Fri, 30 Nov 2007 02:12:20 +0000

And for good reason. So many hardcore Libertarians have been blasting Giuliani as “not a real libertarian.” This despite the fact that numerous prominent libertarians have endorsed his candidacy.

Todd joins a growing list of Libertarians for Giuliani. Granted Todd is not yet a LFG. As he says, he’ll wait til after the primaries shake out. But when it’s Hillary vs. Rudy, we’ll be proud to have Todd as an official LFG. Maybe we’ll even send him a plaque or something?

by: Christopher

Fri, 30 Nov 2007 00:57:52 +0000

“And just to be clear, once more, in case the Dondero comment above is taken too seriously…”

Um, it’s not the “comment above” you have to worry about. You appear to be the lead article on Dondero’s website with a picture of you and the headline “Top Libertarian Activist from New York backs Giuliani.” The article begins, “Todd Seavey, a Radical Libertarian from Manhattan, has gone on record in support of Rudy Giuliani for President.”

by: Eric Dondero

Thu, 29 Nov 2007 23:36:12 +0000

That’s a bit convaluuted Todd, but I think we’ve got it. Once again, I am aware of your problems with Rudy, but I still most definitely appreciate you going on record in support of him, however back-handed your endorsement was.

How’s this for convaluuted:

If Ron Paul, or Mike Huckabee win the GOP nomination, I’m voting for the Libertarian Party candidate no matter who that may be; even the Dweeb George Phillies. Though, I’m hoping Wayne Root gets the LP nod.

If McCain is the GOP nominee I will vote for him against all LP nominees except Wayne Root.

If any other GOP candidate gets the nomination - Giuliani, of course, Romney, Thompson, Tancredo, Hunter, I will vote for them over any and all LP nominees.

So, Paul or Huckabee? My vote goes LP.

McCain? My vote goes LP unless it’s Root.

All others? My vote goes GOP! Even if the LP nominates Root.

by: Todd Seavey

Thu, 29 Nov 2007 20:13:43 +0000

And just to be clear, once more, in case the Dondero comment above is taken too seriously: I plan to vote for Ron Paul in the NY primary if he’s in it, not Giuliani, and I indeed prefer Ron Paul to Giuliani.

Above, I’m merely describing the Rudy pro’s and con’s that would be weighed in my mind _if_ he rather than Paul becomes the nominee. The pro’s and con’s of a fallback plan, in other words, if Paul, who I heartily endorse (not that he’s perfect either, of course), doesn’t win the nomination, as of course he may not.

And perhaps Rudy won’t either. Nor even Romney. Perhaps we’ll all be reduced to picking between godawful Huckabee and Hillary come November, at which point one must reluctantly return to the bosom of the Libertarian Party, I think.

by: D------

Thu, 29 Nov 2007 15:16:34 +0000

The day of FDR/Eisenhower/Johnson/Reagan landslides are over. Both the Democrat and the Republican presidential candidate will get at least 200 Electoral votes. It will come down to a few battleground states. A shift of several thousand votes may be enough to tilt the election. On the basis of Bush’s unpopularity, I think he will drag down the Republican candidate. (Paul would be the exception since he has opposed the president on many issues from the libertarian right.) Also, if the economy slumps before next November, that will also help the Democrat.
In Congress, many Republicans are leaving retiring. I think Democrats could pick up many of these open seats.

So I think, for the Democrats, it will be 1992 all over again when they won the White House and made gains in Congress.

The good (and bad) thing about elections is that they “settle” things only until the next election.

So we’ll see if the GOP can rise from the ashes in 2010 like they did in 1994.

by: Todd Seavey

Thu, 29 Nov 2007 05:15:01 +0000

Jacob, as a political scientist you must, I would think, have some reservations about your sweeping GOP loss prediction given that the leading Dem candidate, in the latest polls, is behind _all_ the leading GOP candidates. She may well win, but surely we’re roughly at the now-routine break-even point for presidential elections, right (though Hillary may well be polling better up there in Canada)?