We will just have to wait and see who motivates and who doesn't, won't we.
Posted on 02/01/2007 2:30:56 PM PST by Dark Skies
More voters say they would be comfortable with former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani as president than other top 2008 contenders, though majorities would also be comfortable with other leaders from both parties, according to the latest FOX News Poll. In addition, of all the 2008 hopefuls — announced or frequently mentioned as a possibility — voters want to hear more from one candidate specifically: Illinois Sen. Barack Obama.
Opinion Dynamics Corporation conducted the national telephone poll of 900 registered voters for FOX News from January 30 to January 31. The poll has a 3-point error margin.
(Excerpt) Read more at foxnews.com ...
TAXES: Giuliani did cut the marginal city income tax rates, reducing taxes by some $2.0-billion from 1996-2001, but those cuts only offset the $1.8-billion increase in city income tax rates put in place by Mayor Dinkins a few years earlier. In the end, taxes were actually cut by a modest $200-million. Freezing the 12.5% surcharge on high wage earners was good, but Giuliani didn't attempt to abolish that surcharge. Nor did Giuliani abolish the city income tax. The primary reason Rudy and the City Council agreed to cut taxes, was to make NYCity more appealing to new businesses thinking about locating/relocating to the Big Apple. A smart move, however, overall, Rudy left office with NYCity the highest taxed big city in America, with some of the highest income taxes, property taxes and ultility rates in the nation.
GOVERNMENT SPENDING: From 1997 to 2001, spending under Giuliani went up 32%. More then double the rate of inflation. Rudy left NYCity with a $2.0 billion deficit and a $42-billion debt. Second largest debt after the federal government. Giuliani also added 15,000 new teachers to the city employment rolls. Increasing the membership of two major liberal organizations, the National Education Association (NEA) and the American Federation of Teachers (AFT).
From the Manhattan Institute for POlicy Research:
"The scope of government was not reduced at all. The mayor abandoned his most visible initiative in this sphere—the proposed sale of the city hospital system—after a struggle with the unions and defeats in the courts. He did cut costs in social services; even before the new federal welfare reforms took effect in 1997, the city had begun to significantly reduce caseloads. But money saved on social services has only helped to subsidize big increases in other categories. Today the array of social services sponsored and partially funded by the city—from day care to virtually guaranteed housing—is as wide as ever.
"In the final analysis, Mayor Giuliani sought to make the city deliver services more efficiently—not to make the city deliver fewer services. Gains in efficiency were offset, however, by a spike in the costs of outsourced contracts (see point 2 below). Thus, in two areas where inroads might have been made, the city instead failed to reduce spending."
"1. Personnel Increases. In 1995–96, the city entered into a series of collective bargaining agreements with its public-employee unions. In addition to granting pay increases that ended up roughly equaling inflation, the city promised not to lay off any workers for the life of the contracts. These agreements were expected to add $2.2 billion to the budget by fiscal 2001. But that estimate didn’t reckon with renewed growth in the number of city employees. After dipping in Giuliani’s first two years, the full-time headcount rose from 235,069, in June 1996 to over 253,000 by November 2000. Thanks largely to this growth in the workforce, the total increase in personnel service costs since 1995 has been $4 billion.
2. "Outsourced Services. The failure to shrink the scope of city government made it all the more imperative that Mayor Giuliani vastly increase its efficiency. In the attempt to increase productivity, the mayor farmed out some city services to private contractors. But as the number of outsourced contracts doubled under Giuliani, contractual expenses also nearly doubled—from $3 billion to $5.8 billion. While it may be argued that the city saved money by outsourcing these services, the net savings turned out to be marginal at best. In practice, outsourcing proved to be more of a bargaining chip in negotiations with unions than a serious means of pruning expenses."
Once again, hard evidence that Rudy Giuliani was NO fiscal conservative. Another run-of-the-mill NYCity liberal.
That's cool, bro. Like I've stated all along, nobody here is forcing Rudy down anyone's throat. If you don't like Rudy you simply vote for someone else in the primary. I don't understand all the hyperventilating against Rudy here.
Maybe she can phone up Jim Robinson?
I agree wholeheartedly. She is a liability. Her articles read like a satire of the right.
I love these "Rudy: Threat or Menace" posts. You guys crack me up.
We will just have to wait and see who motivates and who doesn't, won't we.
You go finnman
good post
Ross Perot caused Bill Clinton not anything else.
Sure. Whatever.
>>>>>if the GOP can come up with a better, and MORE VIABLE candidate than Rudy Giuliani, I'd love to see who it is. The key word is VIABLE, and I've not seen that yet.
Its early and the current field of candidates isn't finalized yet. In the current FR poll question, Freepers think Rudy is the third best choice behind Newt and Cong Hunter. You may not like those two candidates, but they're viable choices for conservatives.
I'm not surprised at the poll, it represents what I hear from people in my area. Of course according to some around here being New Yorkers probably disqualifies them!!!
They are all the same to me: 'Fake but accurate'
Rudy Giuliani has the San Francisco Values of the liberal left communist dems and the ignorarant, arrorgant slimeball liberal rino pubs will run the stupid fool.
I will vote 3rd party conservative.
Rudy Giuliani has the San Francisco Values of the liberal left communist dems and the ignorarant, arrorgant slimeball liberal rino pubs will run the stupid fool.
I will vote 3rd party conservative.
Hillary has wide support from Dims. But still suffers big negatives especially among independents.
Rudy has good support among Republicans and surprisingly little to moderate negatives among Republicans, Independents and Dims too.
I don't either. People can vote for who they want to to ... Mitt or Duncan, whoever. But these people congregate HERE!
WHO ARE THESE VOTERS?!!?!?
Overwhelmingly the people I talk to like Rudy. But then, I'm disqualified too.
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.