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.
That's my point. I SUPPORT Gingrich. I was pointing out that he, too has personal life/marriage issues but their no worse than Rudy's and Newt's other positions are FAR better.
In fact, I'm leaning towards Newt right now out of all of them, I still worry if he could beat Her Heinous or the Halfrican Candidate Osama-Obama.
Selective excerpting by a Hunterbot...how typical. You totally omitted the fact that Rudy is tapping into Papa Bush's network, i.e. more than just southern business interests.
And if you think Hunter has a chance of being the GOP nominee, you better put down the crack pipe and check yourself into rehab.
YOU ARE THE ONE who made the claim. Not me.
And Rudy tapping into Bush 41's network? The same Bush 41 who was a one-term president who ran left and lost the White House to a nondescript governor who was DOA earlier in the year? Boy, that makes me feel warm and fuzzy.
The Rudy boosters are clutching at straws now.
You do understand that the profile of a Reagan Democrat is a socially conservative Democrat right?
Nonetheless, you always make me laugh. I'm sure a lot of Reagan Democrats crossed over because Reagan was once a Democrat, 30 years before he ran.
This is the kind of Rudy Two-Step we've come to expect from you guys.
Make some kind of claim that proves how strong Rudy is - that does the opposite.
And then insult those supporting a principled conservative because we haven't sold out like you have.
I haven't committed to voting for Rudy (I will in the general election if he is the GOP nominee).
Clutch at straws? You're funny. This coming from someone who calls himself "dirtboy" and thinks Hunter stands a chance.
The nominee cannot afford to lose ANY of the party. It will be very difficult to pick up votes in the middle.
Dear Peach,
The Gallup poll quoted in another thread shows 18% definitely not voting for him, and another 25% with a reduced likelihood of voting for him.
One can conclude that Mr. Giuliani would easily lose 20% (or perhaps much more) of the folks who nearly always vote Republican, in the general election.
That translates to somewhere around 10,000,000 votes.
Of course, even your 16% translates to roughly 8 million votes.
If anyone thinks that Mr. Giuliani can win the general election while losing 8 - 10 million votes from the base, that individual is self-deluded.
sitetest
Ah, and now the last refuge of scoundrels. Making an issue of my screen name. Lame, lame, lame.
"Do you remember the Reagan Democrats? Reagan got a lot of votes from Democrats (probably because he was a Democrat for a time) and he got a lot of votes from moderates."
Reagan got a lot of support from people who felt that the Democratic party had left them. (Just like it left Reagan)
He won their support by expressing CONSERVATIVE values. With Republican leading candidates trying to move the GOP to the left, how is that going to attract conservatives?
Wrong. the thing about Newt is his misadventures can be more easily summarized in a very damaging way among women in a beauty salon.
"You hear that Newt Gingrich guy divorced the wife that put him through graduate school while she was recovering from cancer?"
"Damn Girl, that's Wrong!"
Of course, the salient difference is that most of the country actively hates Gingrich, and they don't hate Giuliani.
Start polling a little North and West of MA and ME, you'll find the 2nd Amendment is alive and well. They know Rudy is a gun grabber... Remember Porter-Shay from the eastern boarder, full blown commie, got elected over a conservative.
Link please.
Rudy has been polling well in southern states right now. That is for now
First Buchanan...then Hunter. You probably supported Perot too.
Anyone who passes your ideological purity test garners 1% of the vote unless he's got Perot's bankroll.
And to repeat, since you're intentionally ignoring it, I am not supporting Rudy right now.
You sure have a lot of nerve. First you spend weeks trying to trash Reagan's legacy. And now you raise the specter of Reagan Democrats to make a case for RUDY?
Hint: Reagan did not win over those Democrats by being pro-choice and pro-gun-control.
Social Conservatism as it's understood today was hardly a focus of his campaigns. I'm sure you can produce a huge number of speech statements and written material with Reagan supporting an assortment of Social Con views, but it really wasn't what he was campaigning on, which was:
1) Strong Defense and opposition to Communism
2) Lower taxes
3) Reducing the size of the welfare state and government handouts.
Of course the nominee cannot afford to lose any of the party.
That's why Giuliani is not the wise choice to really win in 2008.
Due to an influx of Mass liberals NH has been moving to the blue for a while now.
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.