Posted on 02/12/2007 6:43:36 AM PST by areafiftyone
MANCHESTER, N.H. - New Hampshire residents likely to vote in the Republican presidential primary a year from now think more highly of former New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani than any of his rivals, a poll released Tuesday shows.
| ADVERTISEMENT |
Giuliani's net favorability rating — the proportion of people viewing him favorably minus the proportion viewing him unfavorably — was 56 percent, well ahead of Sen. John McCain (news, bio, voting record), 32 percent, and former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney, 26 percent, in the University of New Hampshire poll for WMUR-TV in Manchester.
"He's the lesser-known candidate, but he has that rock star quality," poll director Andy Smith said of Giuliani. "He has a charisma that was built after 9-11."
This long before an election, political professionals pay more attention to favorability than voters' choices if they had to vote today. McCain and Giuliani were essentially tied at about 27 percent on that question among likely GOP primary voters, followed by Romney at 13 percent and former House Speaker Newt Gingrich at 9 percent.
The GOP portion of the telephone poll reached 311 likely voters from Thursday to Monday and had an error margin of plus or minus 5.6 percentage points.
Former Sen. John Edwards and Sens. Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama (news, bio, voting record) had net favorability ratings ranging from 61 percent to 55 percent, too close to be statistically significant.
When asked for whom they would vote, 35 percent of likely Democratic voters picked Clinton, 21 percent Obama and 15 percent Edwards. Eight percent chose former Vice President Al Gore, who is not running.
The Democratic portion of the phone poll reached 353 likely voters and had an error margin of plus or minus 5.2 percentage points.
Independents may vote in either primary, and 68 percent of them indicated they planned to vote in the Democratic primary compared to 32 percent leaning toward the GOP contest.
"This will hurt Republican candidates who try to appeal to more moderate, independent voters," Smith said.
One thing I'd like to see but of course never will is the exact % of registered FR members who ever voted for Perot.
Yeah, the Rockefeller Republicans were so good at winning until that damn Ronald Reagan came along. /sarcasm
A newbie tells the GOP to run leftward and insults conservatives on a conservative website. You're as subtle as a fart in an elevator.
Should I remind you that John McCain beat GW Bush by 20 points in NH in 2000....These mythical conservative stalwarts who are pro-life and pro-gun dont exists anymore in NH..this isnt 1980....Most likey they are social moderates who are conservative on taxes....While NH is more to the right than other NE states, it isnt Utah or Mississippi as some here are trying to protray it
So what is your ETA for Duncan Hunter to have been elected Governor of California twice, and then barely lose the Republican nomination, and then run again for President?
OK fine...but Peyton's still an a$$.
Evangelicals WILL stay home rather that vote for a scumbag like Rudy! Some will even be voting for OBAMA!
Fair weather friends, as I've always suspected.
Dear TommyDale,
"If he loses 25% of the GOP vote, and the Democrats gain 15 to 20 million new liberal voters, the GOP will be doomed to defeat."
If he loses 25% of the base, the Dems don't need to sign up any new liberal voters.
"To top off all of this, if Giuliani is nominated the churches that signed up millions in 2000 and especially in 2004 will not lift a finger to help him. They brought out a huge vote in 2004."
Yet, the Dems nearly kept up with us in terms of registering new folks and GOTV efforts. A lot of Republicans look proudly at the fact that Mr. Bush took over 62 million votes, more than any other candidate in history.
But they forget that Mr. Kerry took over 60 million votes, more than any other candidate in history but one.
To spot the Dems 8 - 12 million votes by alienating a chunk of the social conservative part of the base is asinine, insane.
There just aren't enough pro-war folks who voted for Mr. Kerry to make up even half that amount, or even a fourth of that amount.
Of course, the whole effort to position Mr. Giuliani as the candidate who is the most hawkish on the war truly begs the question of whether that's actually a winning position in the general election.
From what I can see, one of two things will happen between now and 2008.
The war will go well, and success will relegate the issue to a lower standing. Folks who hang their candidacy on being the most hawkish on the war will not have an advantage.
The war will go poorly, and the issue will still be a hot one. Folks who hang their candidacy on being the most hawkish on the war will not have an advantage.
sitetest
ROFLMAO! Well thanks for admitting what we Rudy people have been trying to say for a long time. That the Evangelicals will put a Socialist in office just to spite themselves.
One can only hope..........:-)
I think you are making a serious miscalculation here. Why do you think they call it the "Bible Belt"? Evangelicals are a HUGE influence in the South.
Last Congressman elected president: 1880.
Last mayor elected president: Never
So perhaps you could ask the same of Rudy - when will he win a term or two as governor of New York, and THEN run for president?
Dear Scarchin,
"I'm a NH resident and I'll probably vote Rudy..."
"I will never forgive McCain for his role in the anti-constitutional campaign finance law."
Does it matter to you that Mr. Giuliani endorsed McCain-Feingold?
sitetest
Check the signup date. Must be some Rudy operative dissing conservatives on a conservative website.
You are correct. The problem for the GOP is that the Democrats ARE signing up between 15 and 20 million new voters. I cannot see how the GOP could win even with NO defections by the social conservatives. The GOP party leadership is weak.
When you have been on FR awhile longer, you well realize just how much the Republican base is made up of Evangelicals.
Calling people names that do not agree with you is not nice.
Look - I'm not enamored with any of these but, as I said in my post, I think Rudy is best equipped for the job itself.
That said, I'm very happy to engage with fellow Freepers on this subject.
Gee, Gene, Giuliani gets 56% of Republicans polled and greatly outdistances all other contenders, and you say we need someone with a 100% rating. Have any names in mind?
If you're a political consultant, let's hope you're working for the dems.
He'll probably pick a pro-life, pro-gun and pro-marriage running mate if he gets the nomination.
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.