Skip to main content

4 years ago, Rudy Giuliani appeared to be a shoo-in for the Republican presidential nomination.  He had high name recognition, lots of money, and a big lead in the polls.  I knew from the get go that he wouldn't get the nomination, but I was wrong about what brought him down.  I knew that Republican voters wouldn't like his socially liberal positions.  I knew that people of all political stripes would hate Giuliani if they knew that he blamed the troops for the 380 tons of stolen explosives in Iraq in an October 2004 Today show interview while shilling for Bush's re-election.

I was SHOCKED to learn that Rudy Giuliani as mayor was having an affair with a mistress and then had the NERVE to charge the related expenses to New York City taxpayers.  I was even MORE SHOCKED to learn that Rudy Giuliani chose to build the emergency command center INSIDE the World Trade Center (instead of in Brooklyn as suggested by his advisors) SOLELY for the convenience of having wild, orgasmic sex with his mistress.

I knew from the get-go that Giuliani wouldn't get the nomination, but I was wrong on the reason.  I was hoping that he would get the nomination, because he would have been the easiest Rethug to beat.  The conservatives would have hated him for his socially liberal positions, and that would have given rise to a Third Party right-wing kook.  Footage of him blaming the troops for the stolen explosives in Iraq would have led to across-the-board hatred of him.  If Giuliani had been the nominee in 2008, he would have lost in ALL 50 states, including Utah, Idaho, Wyoming, Oklahoma, and Texas.  He would have had trouble winning a single county, even the 90%+ Bush counties of the Nebraska panhandle.  The third party right-wing kook would have had more votes.

I think Mitt Romney is the Rudy Giuliani of 2012.  Everyone thinks he'll be the nominee, but I still feel certain that he won't get it.  Romney isn't as loathesome as Giuliani, but I thought Giuliani was the most loathesome of all of the 2008 Rethug candidates.  At least Romney hasn't bad-mouthed our troops, and at least Romney didn't cripple emergency response so he could have wild. orgasmic sex with a mistress.

I want Mitt Romney to get the nomination.  This would guarantee a right-wing third party candidate.  Romney's relentless flip-flopping is the worst of both worlds (for Rethugs): he won't fire up the Tea Party or the religious right, yet he also won't appeal to moderates.  It would be so much fun to watch the Rethugs try to reconcile their 1988 and 2004 talking points about Massachusetts with the case for electing Mitt Romney.  They'll have to admit that Massachusetts is part of Real America and isn't a corrupt and lawless state where married gay couples lynch heterosexuals, every street corner has a drive-thru abortion clinic, and everybody has wild, orgasmic sex in the middle of the street.  It would be John Kerry's revenge!  Romney would win Utah.  If he's lucky, he could win Idaho as well.  Like Giuliani, Romney is one of the few Rethugs who would have difficulty winning in the Nebraska panhandle.

Alas, I feel certain that Romney won't get the nomination, which means that Obama won't stand a chance of winning Wyoming, Nebraska (other than one or two districts), Kansas, Oklahoma, Texas, or Alabama.

The big question: What will be Romney's "Sex On The City" factor (not necessarily a specific scandal) that will bring him down and prevent him from getting the nomination?


What will bring down Romney's candidacy for the nomination?

3%1 votes
3%1 votes
0%0 votes
21%6 votes
17%5 votes
10%3 votes
3%1 votes
0%0 votes
39%11 votes

| 28 votes | Vote | Results

Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags


More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  Tip Jar (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    You might be a Rethug if you join forces with the tobacco lobbyists but condemn abortion, birth control, and gay marriage as crimes against humanity.

    by jhsu on Wed Nov 09, 2011 at 05:14:57 PM PST

  •  I think the flip-flopping will bring him down (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Gooserock, deepeco

    All it takes is to show footage of Romney saying one thing and then more footage of him saying something else.  Republican voters especially learned perfectly well in 2004 that flip-flopping is a crime against humanity.  I'm sure that if there was a Romney sex scandal, it would have already been unveiled by now.  A money/financial scandal would be too difficult for the average person to follow.  (Just think of Whitewatergate vs. Lewinskygate.)

    You might be a Rethug if you join forces with the tobacco lobbyists but condemn abortion, birth control, and gay marriage as crimes against humanity.

    by jhsu on Wed Nov 09, 2011 at 05:19:07 PM PST

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site