In NY state I give Giuliani a 50/50 chance of beating Hillary, and I don't believe she (or any Democrat) can win without NY's 31 electoral votes.
The one thing about Giuliani that bothers me is not so much his social liberalism, but his ability to extend that liberalism through his Supreme Court nominations. It's the one area where the President really has power to shape social change. I'd like to hear from him about his judicial philosophy and what kind of judges he'd be willing to support.
You couldn't have had a more conservative Prez than Reagan, and look at his appointees.
I think we have to stop trying to pack the judicial oligarchy and get the legislature to reign it in via populism.
The letters to Chris Wallace FNS today from people cheering how wonderful and nice Breyer's interview was scares the crap out of me.
"I'd like to hear from him about his judicial philosophy and what kind of judges he'd be willing to support."
Rudy has been clear that he supports strict constructionists and refers to Chief Justice Roberts as the ideal jurist.
Giuliani has said, repeatedly, that Alito and Roberts are "promises kept" and refered to them as great picks.
That's the thing that makes me think I 'might' be able to support him, although I still have serious reservations.
I think this is the way Giuliani can win over pro-lifers, including myself, is by credibly saying something along the lines of:
"I personally think abortion should be legal, but there are some cases about it at a judicial level that have given far too much priority to the federal government and not enough to the States. As President, I wouldn't sign a law banning abortion, but I would support justices who would judge fairly, from an original intent perspective. the Constitution like Alito and Roberts (hint, hint)."