Poll: Rudy and Condi top choices for Republicans in '08

Rasmussen Reports ^ | 11/14/06 | Rasmussen

[Rawlings]

Former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani (R) made it official on Monday, filing paperwork to launch a 2008 Presidential campaign.

The action comes as Giuliani is the top choice of Republican voters nationwide earning support from 24% of likely GOP voters. Senator John McCain (R), considered by many insiders to have the early advantage, and Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice are close on Giuliani’s heels.

In General Election match-ups, Giuliani is tied at 46% support with New York Senator Hillary Clinton (D). However, Giuliani leads when matched against Senator Barack Obama (D) and former Vice President Al Gore (D). Clinton, Obama, and Gore are currently leading the Democratic nomination field.

Giuliani, often referred to as America’s Mayor for his leadership following the 9/11 terrorist attacks, is exceedingly popular nationwide. He is viewed favorably by 63% of voters and unfavorably by just 27%.

Still, he faces many challenges on the road to the White House. Despite his high favorables, Giuliani displays a consistently weaker performance than McCain when matched against Democratic contenders. Also, while many Americans are aware of the Mayor’s role following 9/11, not as many are aware of his standing on a variety of social issues. The Mayor’s views are closer to those of New York City than to the conservative Republican base. Some suggest that it is impossible for anyone with Giuliani’s views to win a Republican nomination. However, in light of the “thumping” received by Republicans during Election 2006, Republicans may apply a different set of criteria as they select a nominee for 2008.

Last summer, Rasmussen Reports surveys found that Giuliani and McCain were seen as closer to the political center than either President Bush or Democratic contenders. The challenge for both men is that their stands create tensions within the party—both Giuliani and McCain are seen as closer to the Democrats’ political center than to that of the GOP.

[Arizona Carolyn]

What do you know about her?

[Graybeard58]

She has NEVER held an elected office and has NO wish to do so.

Condi has stated repeatedly that she aspires to the office of Comissioner of the NFL. I believe her.

[mylife]

superstar?

Heck we just need a conservative.

Barak Obama is a superstar....and he's an empty suit.
Let the Dems have the empty suits

[lawdog]

NO Lynn Cheney. Newt Gingrich and Lynn Cheney...not gonna happen but ...

[Arizona Carolyn]

If the candidate isn't a household name already, it's a week too late.

[miliantnutcase]

lmao Condi, Rudi, or McRhino for '08. We're screwed.

[ZULU]

Condi would make a great President - but someone has to convince her to run.

PENCE was on the Laura Ingraham Show and sounded pretty good. He also seems to have taken a tough line on illegal invaders.

Romney MIGHT be a good candidate.

Gingrich would make a great President.

Giuliani = pro-abortion + anti-gun + prohomosexual + pro-illegal alien + pro affirmative action = LOOSER!!!!!!!!

[Dustbunny]

Ditto to that!! That is why we lost in November.

[nopardons]

If you're expecting an ultra Conservative white knight to appear, you are going to be sadly disappointed, I fear. And as to "superstar", there isn't one! Though there ARE highly competent Conservatives, such as Haley Barbour ( who AFAIK, says that he is NOT going to run in '08 ), who would do well, there aren't many.

[nopardons]

He is NOT going to run; stop being silly!

[samadams2000]

Amazing what passes as a leader of the free world these days.

[nopardons]

Newt is NOT electable at all.

[mylife]

Wow we agree! Barbour is a good choice

[batter]

Romney - Condi in 08?

I doubt it, but it would make things very interesting.

[nopardons]

Yeah...your answer to everything FACTUAL. LOL

[mylife]

Barbour could go a long way on his "can do" attitude

[nopardons]

Yes she has done and I believe her as well. We must be the ONLY two people on this site who do.

[AnnaZ]

I think she's a brilliant and phenomenally competent individual. Self-made, from a very difficult background, which she overcame. She is poised and elegant, tough to denigrate, and has a greater grasp of international relations than anyone else whose name has been floated.

She is also adamant on the principles of the Second Amendment, an issue that happens to be my personal line in the sand.

[HitmanLV]

A major problem with Rudy is that he is pro-abortion, which butts heads with many pro lifers who won't budge on the issue, for understandable reasons.

But what happens as the country moves more liberal on this issue? I have been very critical of the pro life movements leadership and tactics in the last 30+ years. They have been beaten back on almost every front and show no signs of adapting to a new political/cultural climate.

I had more than a few Freepers tell me how SD would be a great victory for the pro life cause, and I told them not so fast. On election day, SD (a fairly conservative state) wanted to keep abortion legal by a healthy 10 point margin. Does that mean nationally a similar referendum would get beat 2-1? I think there is more evidence to support that than to refute it. In a related note, California beat back parental notification laws by solid margins 2 years in a row, bewildering pro-life fans. The truth is, it was expected.

My point is the 'all or nothing' posture on abortion, at this time, is getting us more of 'nothing' and none of 'all.' It's ok for Freepers and other social conservatives to nix Rudy on the issue, of course. The question is, as that mindset's appeal is clearly waning, as as pro-life advocates continue to lose the big battles, the question has to be asked: if most of the country wants abortion to be legal, what's a sound, practical way to approach the pro-life cause (and activist conservative courts isn't the answer)?