So, may I ask if you would agree that your comparison of the two candidates so far is:

1.) Rudy is more likable.
2.) Hillary should be barely more likeable to you based on the issues.
3.) You're pretty much 50/50 if it came down to these two?

No need to respond, unless I'm way off. Perhaps I'm projecting my feelings on it, because I just read what I wrote, and that's how I feel.

I haven't compared my own ratings carefully, but I would say that sounds right. I'm usually more on "the government can be part of the solution" end of the scales, so on alot of issues I lean slightly toward the Dems. I see Hillary as one of the more conservative of the Dems, and Rudy as one of the more progressive of the Pubs, so it makes sense that they would be very close on my spectrum.

I see the same thing you guys saw. I find myself standing right slap in the middle on most issues.

I have to eat my words about never ever voting for Giuliani. I might. However, the things that worry me about him are his support of the Patriot Act and domestic surveillance. The libertarian in me would rather be left well enough alone.

His stance on immigration is fair enough. I'd rather not be a one-issue voter but for the sake of my family, this is the deciding factor for me.

I don't find Giuliani very likable. One big thing for me is that his successful "cleaning up" of New York included policies of arresting homeless people for sleeping in parks or obstructing sidewalks. His public comments surrounding this issue demonstrated that he is callous at best to these people and thinks of them as less human than the rest of us. The majority of homeless people have mental health issues, plus addictions often fueled by self-medicating with what they can afford for their mental health problems. Giuliani's comments make it seem that he thinks that the primary problem is that they are lazy and would just rather sleep outside during the NY winter than get a job and work for a living. He never gives a comment that reveals compassion or alludes to some kind of effort to address the root of the people's problems. I feel just as uncomfortable as the next person when I walk by someone sleeping on the street or when I am confronted by a beggar, but it bothers me that Giuliani is praised for his crackdown on homeless people as if being homeless were a willful crime. Many city officials across the nation herald Giuliani as their model when they talk about their efforts with "the homeless problem."

It also frustrates me that in previous elections one of the best tools of the Republican party to get evangelical Christians to the polls to vote Republican was labeling itself the party of family values, and now the situation appears that the Republican frontrunner is Giuliani, and Pat Roberson is endorsing his candidacy. While I'm not weighing in on how a candidate's personal life should affect your vote, I do think this situation seems inconsistent at best. So a few years ago, family values were super-important, but now the best person for leader of the free world got an annulment from the Catholic church to get out of his first marriage by revealing that his wife was his cousin, married his second wife, cheated on her and had a very messy divorce while mayor of NY during which a judge denied him joint custody of his children and had to forbid him to have the children over when his girlfriend was spending the night, married a third time, and now is so estranged from his own children that both of them refuse to take part in his campaign? I appreciated Miles and others' point about HR Clinton not sticking up for women who are cheated on by philandering husbands, but I find a philanderer no more likable.

Well said!!! I let that one right past me! BOO ON ME FOR SUPPORTING A DOUBLE STANDARD!!!

I've heard the points about arresting homeless people too, but I didn't come across anything that could really backup the complaints about Giuliani's treatment of the homeless. In fact, most of what I did find on him seemed to say that he was tough on common poor people crimes (like fare skipping on the subway), but he was actually sympathetic to the plight of the poor. I'll admit that I did not look specifically for this info, so I'll do some more research and post an addition to the report card.

Well said Elizabeth. You make a very valid point on the willingness to highlight or ignore the family values angle based on what works best for the political machine.

You bring up very good points, Elizabeth.

I for one am really sick of folks like Pat Robertson (and others) insinuating that you aren't a Christian or don't have values unless you vote Republican.

Did Pat Robertson insinuate that?

Back in the days of the "Christian Coalition," there was certainly a feeling that if you weren't part of the Coalition, you should check your faith.

Good 'nuff. Just wanted evidence of the "insinuation."

I'm here... sorry. Amen to what Elizabeth said! I'm personally not in love with Rudy. I'm pretty sure I won't be voting for him in the primaries.

I know this is getting even further off topic, but I'd like to weigh in on the discussion about "if you don't vote Republican, then you're not a Christian." THAT IS TOTAL CRAP! If Jesus is in your heart then you are saved... and you should just go on and vote whatever you think is right! Living in Braggdad, I come across this opinion A LOT! Especially at my church! One Sunday, our pastor had one of the candidates running for judge in our local area come to our service. The pastor introduced him to the congregation, and basically said, "Vote for this guy!" I thought it was COMPLETELY inappropriate! Even in Sunday School (well, my old SS class, not my current one) politics was talked about a lot. It made me very uncomfortable. Plus, I just thought, what if a visitor came and was totally turned off by all of this? I was turned off, and I'm a Republican! Anyway, I digress. Needless to say, these kind of opinions are just stupid. And that's MY opinion!

Back to Rudy... Is it just me or does this lisp annoy anyone else?