Foxnews Poll: Giuliani Leads McCain 56% - 31%

http://www.foxnews.com/projects/pdf/021507_release_web.pdf ^

[MittFan08]

Rudy Building Lead Over McCain... [Rich Lowry]

...according to the new Fox News Poll. Asked who would they support in a Republican primary if the choices were McCain or Giuliani, 56% of Republicans said Giuliani, and 31% said McCain. 50% of Independents said Giuliani, and 27% said McCain. This represents a big bump for Giuliani since early December. Then, 42% of Republicans said they would pick Giuliani, 40% McCain, and 35% of Independents said they would support Giuliani while 41% said they would go with McCain.

02/15 05:34 PM

[justshutupandtakeit]

Come on Jim this is not a matter of "toughness". It isn't my wish that there be no credible hard conservative to challenge Giuliani nor is it the wish of any of us speaking favorably about him. We are not a coven of closet liberals as some have claimed but are some of the longest standing and most prolific posters around.

Most of us had hopes that Allen or Santorum would be challenging for the nomination from the Right. That hope was ended when the conservative leadership in the Senate was wiped out by EVERY conservative running getting beat. This was the core of conservative talent.

We simply see no alternative to Giuliani given the last election but to making a tactical retreat from what is considered by the American voter to be a too extreme position. You know it isn't and I now it isn't extremist but the Treason Media has convinced the voter that this is what it is. A Giuliani candidacy undermines that attack.

My real worry is that the far Right will marginalize itself through vicious attacks on a candidate who looks to me like he will be the candidate. Whereas attacks based upon principle would not be so marginalizing but Giuliani is ridiculed as a Drag Queen, Julianne, Ruby, his cancer mocked, his sexual potency made joke of. This does nothing but damage to conservatism.

There is a very good chance that, should he earn the nomination, his running mate will be as conservative as you would like. If so, this sets up future leadership potential and a reinvigoration of the conservative movement. Sometimes we must take a step back after taking two forward.

His antagonists should adopt the approach of Gingrich in speaking respectfully of the man even if they do not praise him as fulsomely as Newt did. Of course, the course insults never came from you so that was meant only as a general comment which does fit many here.

[justshutupandtakeit]

"You're talking entirely too much sense. No stop it :-)"

Don't worry it will pass.

[Luis Gonzalez]

"Good grief, Luis. Do you honestly believe that Rudy Giuliani is the ONLY man in America that can win the war in Iraq?"

No I don't.

But he IS the only man in America right now both running for President and showing the possibility of beating the DNC's front runners also running for it.

[justshutupandtakeit]

So if I don't agree with YOU that means I don't want a conservative to win? OR I am a coward. Could anything be more absurd? Of course, it is a LIE as well.

I could care less if my evaluation of reality does not earn your "respect" it does not mean I will accept the LIES you are telling wrt my views.

There is no rational argument for a man coming from utter obscurity to get the nomination. That would require a MIRACLE. Now miracles do happen but you cannot base a political fight on that expectation.

Nor do I care if a probablistic analysis produces the LIE that I am "shoving" my views down anyone's throat.

Commenting that someone's candidate is a loser is not disrespectful to anyone. It might make a little girl cry but is nothing an adult would believe to be disrespectful.

If Hunter truly believes he is doing anything other than getting a conservative viewpoint out then he is too delusional to be in the Congress. But he knows very well it would take a miracle for him to get the nomination. Or at least a plane crash. My disdain is not so much arrogance as the recognition of the True Believers gullibility.

Apparently you are so used to lying about Giuliani and his advocates you don't even recognize them. Kinda like not smelling your own stink.

[Jim Robinson]

Can't agree with you, sorry. Democrat light will not win against Hillary Clinton. The liberal leaning voters will go for the real deal, and the pro life, pro liberty voters can't stand his liberal pro abortion, pro gay, anti-gun, weak on illegal immigration positions and don't trust the man. He's going to split or chase off the conservative vote and it'll be 1992/1996 all over again. We need someone who can unite all the conservative voters and ignite the grassroots with a passion. Rudy is the wrong man for the job.

[justshutupandtakeit]

"You can't even get through one disingenuous claim without insulting them." I am tired of seeing the same crap crawling out every couple of years. First it was the Buchananites then they went underground and were resurrected as other critics of the President and the GOP. They will not be convinced and will always work against the GOP. I don't really care if they are insulted.

"Either you're prone to hyperbole, or you've lived a very sheltered life." It has been anything but. I have had experiences which most will never have: good and bad. My life has been produced by my efforts coming from a large family with no wealth. I have worked in dozens of jobs paying for my education: factories, driving cabs, working in labs, doing scholarly research, menial jobs, good jobs. My life has been anything BUT sheltered.

[justshutupandtakeit]

"We need someone who can unite all the conservative voters and ignite the grassroots with a passion." I agree and my primary vote will reflect this need but I don't see anyone with a chance of doing this becoming a serious candidate. Do you? I just don't see Newt subjecting himself to more character assassination when he knows his chance of winning the nomination is low. It would be very good if he was willing to take it on.

And I don't believe most Americans consider Rudy to be Hillary-lite though I am sure she does outweigh him.

1992 was just insanity. 1996 was totally predictable but there simply no one who could beat Dole for the nomination.
Most of the men I would like are simply unelectable: Rumsfeld and Chaney are my favorites but they are less popular with the voters than Vlad the Impaler.

[Jim Robinson]

The only man in America that can beat a liberal is another liberal? You gonna out liberal the liberals? How far we have fallen. I wonder how much further to the bottom? With Republicans with your confidence level leading the charge, I'm sure we'll find out sooner than later.

[Luis Gonzalez]

Who do you support Jim?

[william clark]

I suspected that objective rationality would have no impact on you, and you've more than confirmed that assessment, so I won't waste any more time on you. Enjoy your self-confidence for as long as you can.

[Jim Robinson]

I don't know yet, but I guarantee you he will not be a gun grabbing abortionist.

[Kryptonite]

The liberal leaning voters will go for the real deal, and the pro life, pro liberty voters can't stand his liberal pro abortion, pro gay, anti-gun, weak on illegal immigration positions and don't trust the man. He's going to split or chase off the conservative vote . . .

I've found it fascinating that Wilson was the only candidate to win the Presidency and lose his home state and he did it as an incumbent who benefitted from a split among his competitors.

More and more each day I doubt that Rudy will beat Hillary.

[BunnySlippers]

But two top candidates from the same state is exceedingly rare.

The last time two top tier contenders for the presidency was 1904. So the usual paradigm does not apply.

[Kryptonite]

I'm not talking about paradigms, I'm talking cold hard facts.

If you want to explain to me what happened in 1904, please go ahead and cite me some useful references. But understand from the get go that I don't like the idea of pinning all of my hopes on NY.

[truth_seeker]

"Social Conservatives are left out in the Cold in 2008."

Actually they are represented in these poll numbers.

If they are a strong as many would claim, perhaps the polls would reflect different results.

[Luis Gonzalez]

You better than most people are aware of the political landscape in this country, and you haven't found a candidate to support.

Are you expecting that someone will come out of complete obscurity and be able to challenge the political machines of the candidates already in place?

I wish life was a Frank Capra movie Jim, but it isn't.

[okiejag]

ping

[BunnySlippers]

Oh, stuff it. No need to be so confrontational.

Here's your story about 1904. This might be instructional for you.

http://www.opinionjournal.com/columnists/pnoonan/?id=110009641

[onyx]

Hiya Kryptonite and Bunny S

Can we play the same fun game again tonight?


Hunter carry CA = NO

Mitt carry MA = probably not

McCain carry AZ = probably

Guiliani carry NY = probably not

Brownback carry KS = I reckon

Huckabee carry ARK = I guess so

Tancredo carry CO = I have no idea

Paul carry TX = not a chance

Newt carry GA = ?

[Kryptonite]

you forgot Tommy Thompson carrying Wisconsin. LOL