Posted on 11/24/2006 8:29:23 AM PST by Milltownmalbay
Conventional wisdom indicates that if only Rudy Giuliani could clear the insurmountable hurdle of the Republican primaries and convention, he could be a formidable presidential candidate.
Polling data indicates that the opposite is true. Whether Republicans eager for a win after a bruising midterm election will reluctantly nominate Giuliani is one thing. The fact that he cannot win the general election is quite another.
Gallup polling prior to the 2004 presidential election confirms what many previous polls have indicated: a pro-life position helps Republicans. When factored into a close election, that help is the difference between winning and losing.
When asked by Gallup simply whether they regard themselves as pro-life or pro-choice, pro-choice wins by a margin of 52 – 41. When asked whether they would vote for a candidate who was pro-life, only 10% of pro-choicers said no. When asked the same question in reverse, 30% of pro-lifers said no.
In other words, while pro-choicers outnumbers pro-lifers, pro-lifers vote are three times as likely to vote the issue. When Gallup factored those numbers back into presidential categories, they found that 25% of the people who were planning to vote for Bush were self-described single issue pro-life voters. Only 11% of Kerry’s supporters were committed firmly to voting for a pro-choice candidate.
If we factor those numbers into the number of people who actually voted for Bush, it means that about fifteen million (out of sixty million) Republican voters have said that they would not vote for a pro-choice candidate. Admittedly, many when faced with the possibility of Hillary, might feel compelled to vote for Giuliani.
But when the President only won by four million votes, any Giuliani strategist needs to consider that his position on abortion will alienate fifteen million Republican voters. Add to that his positions on guns, gay marriage, and partial birth abortion, and you have a recipe for disaster.
In the 2004, Osama bin Ladin released a threatening video tape aimed at influencing the American elections the weekend before the election and the top concern of voters in election polls was moral issues.
Giuliani Republicans are counting on the fact that pro-lifers will reluctantly support Giuliani rather than allow another Clinton presidency. What they fail to realize is that many pro-lifers may just sit this one out, believing that they have no horse in the race.
Even worse for Giuliani, many pro-lifers may believe that it would be better to lose one presidential election than to end up with both major national parties supporting abortion on demand.
In any case, Giuliani has a problem with fifteen million of the voters he needs to win the in 2008.
look to the existing governors of the 50 states. Senators do not make successful candidates. Historically, they (senators) die in office, or are assasinated.
We aren't picking RINO's. The left wing media is picking rudy. Just like they helped destroy Allen. They want rudy so they can win even if hiltlery loses.
My point is if you leave your right flank exposed you are open for attack from the Dems.
Whoever wins has to get Base plus 40% of the mushy middle.
I cover this in response to another poster in #63.
Very perceptive :)... I've also noticed a lot "diversity" on FR in the last six months. But hey, would you not do the same? If you want to affect the views of Republicans/Conservatives, what do you do? You go the source and pound your ideas day in and day out, and who knows you may change minds. I do it! So I would not be surprised to find a lot of them passing as "Liberal-Republicans?" - LOL.
(after all I am already hearing of "Conservative-Democrats!" - what is the world coming to? :)
When you say it's not about abortion, you reveal yourself as a pro-abortion person. Which is fine - it's your right - but the problem is, millions of people who came into the Republican party via Reagan don't agree with you. If the GOP abandons Reagan's pro-life position - by nominating a pro-abort - it will lose. Not because people of your persuasion will abandon it, but because pro-lifers will.
and to antisocial ... what I think is troubling you most is the realization that many Republicans are not on the far-right.
Duncan Hunter BUMP
I'm a libertarian Republican myself, who has worked co-operatively with social conservatives for 42 years of working in GOP politics.
I'm for a ban on partial birth abortion, or any late term abortions.
But besides that, what is the legislative agenda that social conservatives want to present the soccer moms/Yuppies who are voting Democrat now in the Upper Midwest, who did and would still vote Republican if it weren't for the religious right? They're not pro-Democrats, they're for limited government and low taxes. They're anti-religious right.
Does the GOP just abandon those states and try to squeak out victories holding the South and West? And now, we're in danger of losing Colorado, New Mexico, and Virginia to the Democrats too.
What's the 20 year plan for social conservatives in the presidential arena in such an evenly divided electorate?
What bothers me is the ideological purge that some in the GOP want to pursue.
I miss the lively intelligent debate...too much echo chamber at times....
Republicans don't own anyone's votes.
I keep reading this claim that Giuliani would fight the war correctly. What has he said regarding how Bush is fighting the war? Has Giuliani criticized the current operations in Iraq? What would he do differently than Bush is doing? I havent's read any statement by him that takes issue with what Bush is doing. But maybe I missed it.
Jesus Camp, I suppose.
That is only partially true. In fact the voters REJECTED the raw liberal taxing and spending gimmicks on the November ballot. What passed were the massive so-called infrastructure bonds advanced by our very liberal governor.
HE has been the main driving force behind these massive ballot bonds, they ARE his fiscal bastards. Additionally he has been carrying over billions in debt in each budget year (in order to avoid spending cuts) and borrowing from one fund to pay last year's borrowed billions. It's a house of cards ripe to come crashing down, and certainly not what Californians thought they were voting for when they voted for a so-called Republican in the Recall.
"It's about keeping the country safe.
It doesn't matter what the next President's views are with respect to abortion. It's going to be up to the Supreme Court now.
There is simply no way gun control will become a national issue in the forseeable future. It was settled on 9/11 for a good long time, and it won't be on anyone's platform any time soon.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.