Posted on 02/14/2007 7:14:04 AM PST by meg88
Giuliani is Best GOP Hope in Florida February 12, 2007
(Angus Reid Global Monitor) - Republican Rudy Giuliani holds an early lead in the Sunshine State, according to a poll by the Quinnipiac University Polling Institute.
47 per cent of respondents in Florida would vote for the former New York City mayor in the 2008 United States presidential election, while 44 per cent would support Democratic New York senator Hillary Rodham Clinton.
In other match-ups, Rodham Clinton leads Arizona senator John McCain by four points, and holds an 18-point advantage over former Massachusetts governor Mitt Romney. McCain leads former North Carolina senator John Edwards by one point, and Illinois senator Barack Obama by two points.
In 2004, Republican George W. Bush carried Florida’s 27 electoral votes, with 52 per cent of all cast ballots. In 2000, weeks of recounts and court injunctions concluded in a 537-vote victory for Bush over Democrat Al Gore. Since 1972, the only Democrats to win the Sunshine State in a presidential election are Jimmy Carter in 1976 and Bill Clinton in 1996.
Bush is ineligible for a third term in office. The next United States presidential election is scheduled for November 2008.
Polling Data
If the 2008 election for President were being held today, and the candidates were (the Democrat) and (the Republican), for whom would you vote?
Rudy Giuliani (R) 47% - 44% Hillary Rodham Clinton (R) John McCain (R) 43% - 47% Hillary Rodham Clinton (R) Mitt Romney (R) 34% - 52% Hillary Rodham Clinton (R) John McCain (R) 43% - 42% John Edwards (R) John McCain (R) 42% - 40% Barack Obama (R)
Yet another BS poll. They are totally useless. Amen.
Liberals WILL maintain party loyalty as you say. They DO NOT necessarily back the most liberal candidate -- if they did, Dennis Kucinich would have been the nominee in 2004. Bill Clinton was certainly not the most liberal nominee in 1992; Carter was not the most liberal nominee in 1976.
Parties generally nominate the candidate from within their ranks that has the best chance to win. The idea that some ideology is the overriding criterion for the primaries is ludicrous. Think GHWB was the most conservative in 1988? Dole in 1996? Bush in 2000? Ford in 1976? Nixon in 1968?
Also, many liberals in 2000 did NOT vote for the guy with the "D" next to his name. They voted for Nader. Dumb, dumb move on their part -- but I'm glad they did such a foolish thing.
Guiliani's views on those issues are not far from those of most American voters. This is a crucial element in electibility and something you Rudyphobes try and ignore.
I notice you missed the point that more kids were killed by this procedure each year than persons who died in the WTC attacks.
You are truly shameless.
So "the base" = "the center-right"? Why would the center-right be so hard to "hold together" in the face of possibly losing to Hillary?
Gee, I couldn't tell from the posts on FR about the various elected Republicans supporting Rudy.
I'm not sure who you're talking about, exactly, but just so I understand, if some elected Republican out there comes out in favor of Rudy Giuliani, that's "pushing Rudy"? Ohhh-kay.
Are elected Republicans entitled to have opinions and voice them?
No, center-right is the winning position for the GOP nominee.
Why would the center-right be so hard to "hold together" in the face of possibly losing to Hillary?
You win elections by giving your party something to vote for, not against.
"defective"? LOL. No. Defectors. People who defect, are called defectors, in the English language.
This is America. We have a freedom of conscience in this country. The political party is supposed to courting my support, not demanding it. It's a market-based system. If the "leadership" of the GOP thinks they can sell Rudy, let them try. Don't be surprised, though, when market share declines due to lack of market research.
All this is true. You have freedom of conscience. I am simply questioning - as is my right - the wisdom of a conscience that would lead one to defect and opposte/not vote for Rudy Giuliani in a hypothetical election against Hillary Clinton. And you're not defending that choice/threat either, because you can't.
Consider our "mouthing off" in the primaries a desperate shout of market research.
I totally agree. "Desperate" being the key word.
Rudy propaganda tactic #6. Emulate the Dixie Chicks and act like valid criticism is somehow censorship or repression of views.
You have every right to support Rudy. And I have every right to point out that his nomination, given GOP electoral history over the last 30 years, would be a train wreck for the party.
There will be no conservative third party just the typical collection of fruits and nuts who make up the five or six Turd parties already in existence. The <2% Implacables will do what they always do: threaten, criticize and sulk.
Meanwhile the REAL party will go on, evaluate the reasons for the Conservative wipeout last fall and try for victory.
You really have your head in the sand. How low is voter turnout for elections? It's pathetic in a representative republic. What is the number one reason cited when people are asked why they don't vote? Their vote doesn't matter. There's no difference between the parties or the politicians. Politicians of both parties see themselves as our betters, not our employees.
GW's poll numbers were never higher than when he simply did the right things (after 9/11). His poll numbers fell sharply when he got back to playing politics.
There is a mass of voters out there not being represented and they are largely on the conservative side of the argument. They don't want socialism but don't see any hope for change in what they have to vote for.
Going "moderate" will ensure a GOP loss because the conservatives will be disgusted and the liberals will be delighted.
That's my two cents and I've verified it many times in conversations across the country. Your pollyanna approach to politics doesn't match reality. Whether or not "it's dumb of them" to be apathetic about elections, it's reality and should be factored in political decisions.
Conservatives are being marginalized in this country... and not to the benefit of our country.
Giuliani polls the best out of any likely candidate and so these predictions of a "train wreck" have no factual basis. But you have every right to make assertions with no factual basis, true.
see #114 re: assertions you have every right to put forth
My gawd, you are using polls almost two years before the general election to predict the election.
Howard Dean led John Kerry 40-12 in New Hampshire the month before the primary. We all know how that one turned out.
Meanwhile, over the last 30 years, the GOP has won when it runs center right, and lost when it drifted leftward. THAT is demonstrable history.
You make my point for me. Our last landslide victory was the most conservative candidate.
"I guess it doesn't occur to many in the GOP leadership that the best way to avoid a conservative rift is to NOT push a guy at the far left of the party as the nominee."
If there is any real "GOP leadership" it is NOT "pushing" Guiliani or anyone else. You have NO evidence for such a claim. The FACT that people know who he is has nothing to do with any pushing except that from Rudy himself.
This poll was not produced by the GOP.
Plus, conservatives where wiped out last fall they cannot even protect their own much less nominate a candidate.
Margin of error is 3.1%
Rudy Giuliani (R) 47% - 44% Hillary Rodham Clinton (R)
John McCain (R) 43% - 47% Hillary Rodham Clinton (R)
Mitt Romney (R) 34% - 52% Hillary Rodham Clinton (R)
John McCain (R) 43% - 42% John Edwards (R)
John McCain (R) 42% - 40% Barack Obama (R)
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.