Posted on 12/08/2006 5:19:56 AM PST by areafiftyone
Hillary may have the buzz, but Rudy has the better poll numbers - at least for now. A new WNBC/Marist College survey yesterday found that while Sen. Hillary Clinton (D-N.Y.) is the most popular presidential option among Democrats, a whopping 47% of all voters say they would "definitely not" vote for the former First Lady if she runs for President in 2008. By contrast, a full two-thirds of voters say they remain open to voting for former Mayor Rudy Giuliani - who would best Clinton, 49% to 43%, if the 2008 race were held today. The numbers suggest that the Republican Giuliani - whose pre-9/11 record remains a blank to most voters - has room to grow, while Clinton begins with nearly half the electorate aligned against her, experts said.
"The bottom line is that there is very little room for error in a Hillary-for-President campaign," says Marist College pollster Lee Miringoff. Not that Giuliani is without challenges. The poll found that while Giuliani remains the top pick among GOP voters, a full 47% of those voters - when told that Giuliani is pro-choice, pro-gun control and pro-gay rights - say such issues could be a "major factor" in their eventual decision. Aides to Giuliani declined to comment on the numbers, but Clinton pollster Mark Penn argued that Clinton has consistently proven she can expand her base of supporters. "When she started in New York, many people said they'd never vote for her - and she just won reelection with 67% of the electorate," said Penn.
Originally published on December 8, 2006
YOU CAN READ THE WHOLE MARIST POLL HERE CLICK
No intimated. For example I pretty well explained why you are wrong on why Republicans lost in 2006 in an earlier post. As far as to how much weight we should place on a candidate's position on abortion, especially considering the president's power to affect abortion, we've been through that already. We're not going to get anywhere. I've tried to agree to disagree but with your rude, obnoxious personality, you can't do that. We may not be debating personalities but that's no reason why you can't be a respectful person. I admitted I lost my cool and apologized. Everyone does occasionally. But that was 3 weeks ago!!! I haven't lost my cool with you tonight I'm sorry your terrible personality problems won't allow you to accept the apology and move on and keep you continously harping on repentant people's mistakes like you've never made a mistake before. But I forgive you, you probably can't help it. You're mother probably didn't give you enough love as a child.
"No intimated. For example I pretty well explained why you are wrong on why Republicans lost in 2006 in an earlier post."
This should read, "No I'm not intimidated. And we did debate earlier.....
I certainly can in good conscience vote for a liberal Republican running against the ultraliberal Hillary Clinton.
Certainly a large percentage of historically Republican voters will disagree with you.
Historically Republican voters? Or, could you have meant Hysterical? My friend they don't come much more historically Republican than I. Have been voting for and helping Republicans get elected in every election for the past 46 years. I'm old enough that you had to be 21 years of age to register to vote.
When will Duncan Hunter and Richardson be on CNN to debate? Would really like to see it! Thanks!
If it comes down between Rudy and Hillary and Hillary wins I'm sure OBL will send you a thank you card.
Sorry, I wish I knew when, I read about it on another freepers post the other day, but there were no dates.
"You obviously don't remember how badly he was spanked in the last poll here."
And we know that all polls on here are scientific./sarcasm
Feel better now. Your mother and my mother have no place in our debate.
You owe me an apology.
You apologize for your rude behavior and agree to disagree amicably and I will.
>>>For example I pretty well explained why you are wrong on why Republicans lost in 2006 in an earlier post.
What you offered was only partially right. The GOP lost control of Congress in 2006 because they ignored their conservative base. Democrats never stood with Bush on Iraq, and independents abandoned Bush on Iraq in 2005. If Bush had kept his eye on his conservative base during 2005&2006, the GOP could have weathered the gathering storm better, and probably would have held the Senate, if not the full Congress. There were obvious warning signs on the horizon and many conservatives spoke out, but they were ignored. From outrageous federal spending and expanding the welfare state bureaucracy, to illegal immigration, the nomination of Harriet Miers to the Supreme Court, the overall response to Hurricane Katrina and the outrageous Dubai Ports World deal. Not to mention the overall poor handling in the battle for Iraq. Bottomline. The President is ultimately responsible. Bush failed Republicans. Hastert, Frist, Boehner, Blunt... they all failed the GOP. Devastating loss. An historic loss. End of story!
>>>>As far as to how much weight we should place on a candidate's position on abortion, especially considering the president's power to affect abortion, we've been through that already. We're not going to get anywhere.
You sound like a good pro-choicer. I can understand liberals agreeing with the current abortion law. I don't know of any conservatives who agree with the current abortion law.
Giuliani believes a woman has every right to kill her unborn child, under any and all circumstances. Not just the exceptions for rape, incest, or the life/health of the mother, but all circumstances. That is called supporting abortion on demand. For any decent person, its morally repugnant. Most Americans don't agree with Rudy that abortion under any circumstance is right. Giuliani also opposes a ban on partial birth abortion. Again, a repugnant medical procedure that most Americans don't agree with Rudy on. Taking a partially born child, and sucking its brians out, is something right out of the Third Reich!
You say a President has no control over the abortion issue. I disagree. Bush signed into law, a ban on partial birth abortion. The courts overruled that Presidential decision. Instead of standing with millions of other pro-lifers against the killing of 47 million human lives since 1973, you'd rather stand with someone like Rudy Giuliani. Someone who has no problem whatsoever with killing the unborn life. Pathetic!
Here's Pres Reagan's official record on the abortion issue. Aside from the ban on PBA, Pres Bush`s record is about the same.
*Reagan supported legislation that would allow for a challenge of Roe vs. Wade, while promoting a Right to Life amendment to the US Constitution.
*Reagan adopted the "Mexico City Policy" halting federal aid to private groups promoting abortions abroad.
*The Reagan admin cut off funding to the United Nations Fund for Population Activities because the global agency violated U.S. law by participating in China's mandatory abortion program.
*The Reagan admin adopted regulations prohibiting federally funded "family planning clinics" from promoting abortion as birth control.
*Reagan himself introduced the issue of fetal pain into the public debate over abortion.
*The Reagan White House blocked use of federal money for research using the tissue of aborted babies. A forerunner to banning partial birth abortion.
*The Reagan admin helped win approval of the "Danforth Amendment," which said federally funded educational institutions could not be guilty of "sex discrimination" for refusing to pay for abortions.
*The Reagan admin was key in enactment of laws protecting the right to life of handicapped newborns.
*Reagan designated a National Sanctity of Human Life Day, to recognize the value of life at all stages.
*Reagan was the first Prez to address the annual WashDC March for Life. An annual event Reagan always spoke at.
Reagan was America's first pro-life President, post Roe v Wade. His essay, "Abortion and the Conscience of a Nation" spelled out Reagan's strong pro-life position. Rudy Giuliani doesn't support Reagan's agenda on abortion or Bush`s agenda on abortion. Rudy says, you wanna kill your unborn child... GO FOR IT!
You still owe me an apology.
Your disrespectful and disagreeable personality had no place in it either. If it wasn't for your personality, I would have never brought mothers into it. I already apologized once and will again once you do.
You earn respect on Free Republic. You aren't granted respect just for being here.
You apologized for nothing.
You still owe me an apology. Better yet, you owe my Mother an apology. Don't act like a punk.
You don't be disrespectful to people just because you disagree with them. Ok, let me reword it. Your obnoxious and disagreeable personality and your open hosility toward people that disagree with you has no place on a public forum. You need to apologize for that. Yes, I did apology for something. I apologized for losing my cool three weeks ago. Now you need to. When you do, I will.
In your mind, being disagreeable is being disrespectful. You've got a lot to learn about life. Politics isn't for the faint of heart, or the thin skinned. We are debating political issues. I didn't call your Mother into this debate. You called my Mother into this debate. While I may not respect you on a personal basis, I will defend your right to speak out.
You didn't apologize for acting like a fool in public. What's so hard about apologizing for a simple faux pas?
Be a man, apologize and move on.
"In your mind, being disagreeable is being disrespectful."
It is!!!
"You've got a lot to learn about life."
You do to, like manners!!
"Politics isn't for the faint of heart, or the thin skinned."
Really? I didn't know that/sarcasm. I do know that your hero Ronald Reagan got along personally with Tip O'Neill despite the fact they disagreed on almost everything. If you really are "Reagan Man" you will follow his lead.
"We are debating political issues."
And everyone should debate in a mannerly, respectful manner no matter what the debate is about.
"While I may not respect you on a personal basis"
Its alright, I can't respect a jerk like you.
"You didn't apologize for acting like a fool in public."
Yes I did!! Many many times for what I did 3 weeks ago. Saying I didn't is a flat out lie. Now you're a lying jerk.
"Be a man, apologize and move on."
I was a man and apologized and I've offered to move on and agree to disagree man times but you just can't seem to stop being a jerk and do so. Until you do and apologize I will not apologize to you. You started it and now you must start the metaphorical handshake to end it. Otherwise, I have nothing else to say to you.
I agree, no way will I contribute to a MSM/DNC victory in 08.
>>>>>It is!!!
You won't find many FReepers, or many people outside of FR who would agree with you on that premise. With FR being the internets premier conservative website, I'm in my right as a conservative, to disagree with your support for a liberal politico like, Rudy Giuliani. Period. You've offered nothing to substantiate why any conservative should agree with you and support your idea of the perfect GOP candidate for 2008.... a leftwinger like, Rudy Giuliani.
I'm not about to throw my conservative principles away, just because you've lost your mind.
>>>>I was a man and apologized ....
WTF! Where on this thread have you apologized for dragging my Mother into this debate? Never happened. You still owe me an apology.
All about you again, Reagan Embarrassment? Amazing how you attract this nonsense.
I'm not going to shoot the country in the foot by voting for someone who names judges like Ginzberg to the courts -- which Hillary would do since Ginzberg was her choice. Until we get our courts back into the conservative column, it won't matter who we elect or what laws we try to pass and we need a conservative court to take the ACLU and the 9th Circus in hand.
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.