Posted on 02/12/2007 12:49:15 PM PST by Reagan Man
Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton is poised to trump all comers in New York's presidential primary and general elections in 2008, according to a Crain's New York Business poll.
The survey of 600 registered voters across the state also found that Rudy Giuliani would handily win a Republican primary but lose the state in a final race for the White House. In addition, the results show that Mayor Michael Bloomberg, if he runs as an independent, would be little more than a long shot.
The results reflect the advantages enjoyed by Ms. Clinton, who is fresh off a $30.8 million re-election campaign in which she drew 67% of the vote and is the only New Yorker to have announced a presidential bid. In a prospective Democratic primary, the second-term senator was favored by 54% of party members, far ahead of Sen. Barack Obama, D-Ill., at 18%, and John Edwards, a former North Carolina senator, at 5%.
In one-on-one matchups with Republicans, Ms. Clinton outpolled Mr. Giuliani 53% to 32% and Sen. John McCain of Arizona 55% to 26%.
The poll is a snapshot of the present, not a forecast, and does not guarantee an easy ride for the state's junior senator.
"For Clinton, her strength is broad and impressive, but the real question is, How deep is it?" says Craig Charney, president of Charney Research, which conducted the poll from Jan. 22 to Jan. 25. "How well will it hold up in the give-and-take of a presidential campaign?"
Experts say that early polling favors Ms. Clinton because it is heavily influenced by name recognition, and that the Democratic race in New York will get tighter as voters become more familiar with Mr. Obama. By the same token, Mr. Giuliani has less potential to gain support because he's already well-known here.
Mr. Giuliani would trounce Mr. McCain in a state Republican primary, according to the poll. But in a hypothetical general election he lagged not only Ms. Clinton, but also Mr. Obama — by 42% to 31% in a head-to-head matchup.
"I'm surprised; I thought Rudy would actually do better," says Jerry Skurnik of Prime New York, a Manhattan company that crunches election data. "It just shows what bad shape Republicans are in in this state."
Blue state Analysts attributed Mr. Giuliani's poor showing to Democrats' dominance in New York. In the poll, twice as many respondents identified themselves as Democrats than as Republicans. Mr. Giuliani did win two mayoral elections in heavily Democratic New York City, but voters tend not to cross party lines in presidential races. Nonetheless, one commentator who believes that Mr. Giuliani could win the presidency notes that the former mayor's focus has been elsewhere.
"Rudy has been very active politically, but not in New York state. He's been traveling throughout the country," says Steven Malanga, a fellow at the Manhattan Institute, a think tank close to Mr. Giuliani. "If Rudy were ever to face Obama in a general election, he would do much better once the actual campaign began in New York. Once he reacquainted himself with New Yorkers in a campaign, his numbers would rise."
Lately, though, Mr. Giuliani has been moving to the political right to head off red-state criticism that he's too liberal on gun control, abortion and homosexuality. That may be backfiring in New York, a solidly blue state where even Republicans tend to be moderates. "Rudy has worked to associate himself with Bush and the national Republican Party," says former Democratic pollster Mark Blumenthal, editor and publisher of Pollster.com.
The Crain's poll does not augur well for a run by Mr. Bloomberg. In a hypothetical three-way race, Mr. Bloomberg tallied just 7%, compared with 49% for Ms. Clinton and 27% for Mr. Giuliani. "The mayor is focused on continuing to move the city forward, not polls on a race he has no plans to enter," says a spokesman for Mr. Bloomberg. Rumors of his candidacy were triggered by comments from a former campaign adviser and by his appearances in California and Washington, D.C.
The poll results were particularly discouraging for George Pataki's prospects, and may explain recent signals from the former governor that he won't enter the race. A meager 7% of Republicans said they would vote for him in a primary, while Mr. Giuliani was favored by 54% and Mr. McCain by 16%. "If I were hired to offer advice, I might ask, `What is your base?' " Mr. Blumenthal says.
Packing up
Mr. Pataki has closed his New Hampshire office, postponed a decision on joining the race, and told supporters to consider other candidates if they didn't want to wait for him.
Ms. Clinton, in contrast, has no shortage of fans. One TriBeCa resident, Eric Oatman, 67, says he answered the poll questions, "Hillary all the way" because "she seems to be more committed to universal health care than the other candidates. Certainly she knows more about it."
What about Mr. Giuliani? "He was good after 9/11, but before that he was not my man. He just appears to be a very unpleasant man," Mr. Oatman says. "He's liberal enough, but for the national stage I just don't think he's proven himself by his actions here."
GETTING AN EARLY JUMP
If the 2008 general election for president were held today and the candidates were Democrat Hillary Rodham Clinton, Republican Rudy Giuliani and independent Michael Bloomberg, for whom would you vote?
Hillary Rodham Clinton 49%
Rudy Giuliani 27%
Michael Bloomberg 7%
Additional results:
1% Would not vote
2% Other
14% Don’t know/No response/Refused to answer
Based on 600 responses. Source: Charney Research
RUDY TRAILS
If the 2008 general election for president were today and the candidates were Democrat Barack Obama andvRepublican Rudy Giuliani, for whom would you vote?
Barack Obama 42%
Rudy Giuliani 31%
Additional results:
5% Would not vote
2% Other
19% Don't know/No response/Refused to answer
Based on 600 responses. Percentages do not add up to 100 due to rounding. Source: Charney Research
Hillary is the best example of the HL Mencken quote that I include in my tagline: “The demagogue is one who preaches doctrines he knows to be untrue to men he knows to be idiots.”
Now that she's getting into the race and focusing on winning the Dem base, she is turning to full demagogue mode... and she knows she is speaking to people she considers to be idiots (and unfortunately, most Dems ARE!). It's the only way to explain Democrat politics.
As a New Yorker, this poll is probably pretty accurate. the vast majority of NY'ers just don't get it. They saw 3,000 of their neighbors brutally murdered on 9/11 and have no recollection of it.
I'd add another -
Do you really want to have to listen to THAT VOICE for four to eight years?
America is an increasingly liberal country. I noticed it started in the early 1990s probably is response to the 1990-91 recession which, unlike previous recessions, hit white collar workers hardest. But I think here it is:
1. People dont remember liberalism, we really havent had it since 1980. We will probably be forced to go thru a decade or so of real liberal policies, that will result in a poorer weaker america circa 1980.
2. Conservatives have stopped articulating conservatism
Periodically thru american history, the country has experienced periods where the country moved sharply leftward. The Progressive Era, New Deal, Great Society. It seems we are on the threshold of another era of liberalism.
Frankly, if the GOP candidate is going to lose no matter who they are, it might as well be a RINO.
New Yawkers never fail to live down to my expectations.
Trouble is, I don't think we're going to survive the next liberal swing, at least not as the Republic we know. If it's Hillary! in '08 (likely), we'll probably get blown up or taken over by a hostile power or perhaps radical Islam. If it's Obamalamadingdong, there will probably be a domestic revolt, albeit of the Jacobin variety.
Democrats were two to one in this poll so it is not too shocking.
It is pretty simple really. Beat Guiliani and your worry goes away. WHOSE fault is it that you cannot?
The Rudyphobes have left no name uncalled.
I always suspected that Giuliani carrying NY against Hillary was a long shot but I never expected (1) Obama to be leading him and (2) the margins of seperation so large.
If you support and promote candidates like Rudy Giuliani to be the next POTUS, that is exactly what you're gonna get. I'm for telling liberalism to go take a hike and I'm for telling liberals, whether they be Democrat or Republican, you won't be getting my vote. Not now, not ever.
If we are on the verge of a new era of liberalism in American politics, my vote will not be part of the destruction of America to those ends. I'll stick with voting for the best conservative candidate available. Someone who supports and promotes traditional American values of mainstream Constitutional conservatism.
But if we are on the verge of a new liberal era in American history, it would be better for the RINO to lose.
I think we are on the verge of a new era because:
1. Weakness in the WOT isnt hurting the DEMs
2. Even with a RINO, NY polling numbers are no different than against a conservative like GHW Bush, indicating that NYers are voting D regardless of who the candidates are.
I believe that the 2008 election will be much like the 1968 federal election was in Canada in terms of importance and permenent realignment to the left.
Wonder if Rudy would poll better against Hillary if they both ran as dems in the NY primary? That might be his best shot.
"I can't believe the power this woman has. It's mind boggling. There must be something in the water that makes people stupid."
No, New York is just a far-left state that NO republican, including Giuliani despite the delusions of his hardcore fan base, will win in 2008.
Rudy Ping
any union workers among this un biased poll???
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.