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.
Looks like someone should ping the New Hampshire message board and start trying to influence the GOP up there to support a conservative candidate like Hunter.
No, I was referring to the portion of the article that references social conservatives, not to Rudy supporters. I don't CARE what Rudy supporters do. I am only concerened with the social conservatives' opinions.
Giuliani privatized a huge number of city services....
google "Giuliani privatization"
Main point is it's tiresome how people throw around terms randomly that they don't actually understand. Socialist does NOT mean "someone who I dislike."
Give me a break. Reagan avoided or minimized these issues in the campaign. He emphasized, patriotism, defense and economic conservatism.
His positions were quite clear, so no break given.
And massively increased NYC's debt load. And massively increased the number of teachers and thereby the teacher's lobby. And...
Sure. I will publish a list of all his known enemies here. Are you insane? Here -- share this!
As the sitting VP president Gore would have had to have worked pretty hard to NOT get the nomination. Bradley had already shown himself to be an inept candidate, even before he lost Iowa. The New Hampshire primary was almost a formality for Gore in 2000.
As for your irrelevant point about NH not being the state it was in 1980...so? What state hasn't changed in the past quarter century? However, having living here since 1994 and having been involved in conservative activist politics on and off during the years, I feel I have a decent grasp of what the conservative activists are thinking, as well as the more rank-and-file GOPers. Certainly I have more direct knowledge about what's going on in the state than some newcomer to these threads who shoots his mouth off with little to back up his comments.
A good part of the reason Free Republic exists is to attack liberalism and in the process, trash any liberals who get in the way. Rudy is a liberal. What do you Rudy backers expect? LOL Therefore, its only logical for a conservative FReeper who sees an opening to take advantage of that opportunity and trash Rudy. Liberals are always in the cross-hairs on FR.
In the ten years FR has been around, there has never been a time when a liberal has been promoted by FReepers around this conservative forum, like Rudy has been for the last 5-6 months. Arnold came closet in the recall race of 2003, but that really pales in comparison to the promotion and propaganda being employed to build up Rudy`s conservative credentials. Which right now, are invisible. Btw, using historic facts and the truth of his own record isn't bad mouthing Rudy. Its exposing Rudy for what he really is. A liberal, who happens to have an "R" next to his name. Some FReepers see that "R" standing for Republican, others see it standing for RINO! I'm in the ladder contingent.
Will you please add me to the Rudy ping list? :-)
He said we want to give free abortions to the poor...cant you read?
When Giuliani was mayor, he did not have control over the NYC school system, unfortunately.
my point about NH is not being the same state it was in 1980, is not irrelevant when posters here are saying Rudy's popularity will plummet in the state once the pro-lifers get out in force...my point is they are not a force anymore.
Reagan was far from militant in his abortion position. He was politically astute in how he handled the issue; unlike the militants who would prefer losing elections by rubbing voters faces in the issue.
Neither pro-lifers or pro-choicers are the force either imagine themselves to be, anywhere. They're not political kingmakers.
It's one thing to be astute. It's another to be obtuse. Rudy has a LONG history of being actively pro-choice, to the point of getting awards from NARAL. No comparison to Reagan.
Your chart is far from complete.
I can selectively pick issues and make anyone look good or bad.
For example:
Marriage - Clinton -- one marriage. Reagan -- DIVORCED and remarried.
Reagan -- signed liberalizing abortion law as governor. Clinton -- Stated abortion should be rare.
Reagan -- presided over hugh and series budget deficits. Clinton - ran first budget surpluses since 1969.
Reagan -- campaigned for welfare reform but didn't get it done. Clinton -- signed welfare reform bill.
Reagan - From liberal west coast blue state. Clinton - From conservative southern red state.
Reagan -- Bad relationship with biological kids who disrespected him. Clinton - Close with his only child who adored him.
Clinton -- Wife assisted his political career. Reagan - Wife used astrologer to set husband's calendar.
Now I am sure I will be accused of "attacking" Reagan, but in fact I voted for him twice, greatly admire him and despise the ground Clinton walks on. The list above shows how one can selectively take a few facts and grossly misrepresent people. Reagan was a great and true conservative, Clinton was a liberal until it suited his political career to do a few moderate or even conservative things (when he had time away from the intern) -- but that does NOT mean everything Reagan ever did was perfect or everything Clinton did was evil.
We're talking about two politicians here, not Jesus and Satan. Same with Rudy, Hillary and other candidates. Politicians are not, with VERY rare exceptions, Holy Men.
In Rudy's case, we don't need a Spiffy chart to know he is not a social conservative. That's clear. Bulletin for you: Not every voter will make that a litmus test. If it was a litmus test Rudy wouldn't have been invited to The Citadel.
"1) Strong Defense and opposition to Communism
2) Lower taxes
3) Reducing the size of the welfare state and government handouts."
He also had no record of supporting homos and gun control.
You are aware Communists support gun control and homos and abortion? Ya reckon that is just a coincidence?
That might have been the best post I've ever seen here.
Wish you hadn't reminded me of the astrology stuff and the Reagans :-) - wasn't old enough to vote for him (have voted Republican in every National and State election from 1988 on) and I would have voted for him twice...but astrology really makes me vomit.
1. It appears in subsequent posts that she *was* being serious.
2. It is common courtesy to ping someone when bringing them up.
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.