Posted on 02/21/2007 11:03:00 AM PST by BunnySlippers
In a move to increase its relevance in the presidential selection process, the Golden State is set to jump up its primary from June of 2008 to February 5th, less than a year away.
This may benefit New York's presidential aspirants, and especially its Republican one.
Last week I noted Giuliani's electric support at the California Republican Party convention. A recent poll has resoundingly brought forth the same message. This morning, the Wall Street Journal's John Fund notes the following numbers:
With California moving its presidential primary to Feb. 5 of next year, what Golden State voters think about White House politics has actually begun to matter. A new poll of likely primary voters by San Diego-based Datamar, Inc. shows the two current frontrunners to be Hillary Clinton and Rudy Giuliani. The poll shows Ms. Clinton with 34% of the vote, leading Barack Obama's 24% and John Edwards' 16%. Given Ms. Clinton's enormous name ID advantage, her lead is not compelling. On the GOP side, pundits were startled to see former New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani with 41% support, John McCain with only 17% and Mitt Romney trailing with 11%.
It is early, and a great deal can happen in a year, but those are stunning numbers for the former Mayor. If present trends in California continue, the Golden State's primary move may just be Giuliani's golden ticket to the nomination.
deflection.
Not really...Ct. has more registered Indies than Dems or GOPers and since the Southwestern portion of the state is populated by a lot of people who work in Manhattan, they'll probably vote for Rudy.
You're doing your assumptions on emotion, NOT on a fact based guesstimate.
It is you and the people in your group, on FR, who are underestimating, blindly so, what the American populace will do, re voting for Rudy; especially in the general election.
Some people here do; sadly.
How do you get a "fact based guesstimate" based on whom people say they will vote for? Isn't that inherently based upon their own emotions?
Desperation is hilarious when he executes it correctly ;)
I don't really care what you think. I know how many GOP voters comprise the religious right.
Why doesn't he take it as a message from God that he was not meant to be President?
Thanks for the great news about Hunter. Just a couple of weeks ago, he was under 1%; then 2% and now 5.9%. Man is he ever gaining momentum FAST!
Watch for Rudy to burn out.
The same people, who were here in the primary/election season of '99 and 200, who are part of this group, very, VERY, vocal and adamantly opposed to "W"!
I am a member of the religious right.........I simply disagree with what you are saying. I hope to do so respectfully.
FR and its small but VERY vocal anti-Rudy group is NOT in the least representative of the American populace.
Oh, of course - every Internet community is. But there have been many articles about how mainstream social conservative groups are considering sitting the next one out in protest, in part because they do feel W has let them down. Given the relatively slim margin of victory, won't take many people staying home to elect a Dim.
If it was, there would have been a PRESIDENT BUCHANAN and a PRESIDENT KEYES ( or at least a SENATOR KEYES ) and there never has been.
Keyes was widely ridiculed and denounced on the threads that I read at the time. But I was a mere lurker then, maybe I was missing something.
Not to dampen your enthusiasm, but be careful not to mix up national polls with those conducted state-wide.
That's fine. Obviously you are not as "religious right" as most of the others, who are deeply concerned with abortion, partial birth abortion, embryonic stem cell research, homosexual marriage and/or civil unions, or his personal character. Many of us oppose his viewpoints merely because our faith calls it repulsive. Christians, Jews, Catholics, all.
I for one will not longer engage those who slam our party's candidates.
I agree with most of your post. It's important for the candidates to start running, answer tough questions, go through the year, and then for us to make the best decision about who will best beat the Dem who they put up. Once we as voters decide on the R candidate, I for one am going to donate to, and work to elect that person.
This is too important a time to start eating our own, look what happened in 06. I don't want to repeat 1992-2000 either, it's too sickening just remembering what that man did.
Yes, just like that other guy the Republicans ran about 27 years ago...
Um... what was his name, again.... Reagan, or something?
Rudy does indeed have the charisma of optimism about him. And also the sense that - regardless of his personal social attitudes, he is a natural _leader_, fit for the job. His post-World-Trade-Center aura boosts that image even more.
Regardless of how conservative we wish our candidate to be (I kind of like Tom Tancredo, myself), we need a WIN in 2008. The alternative - LOSING - is worse than unacceptable, it is catastrophic.
I don't expect the social/Christian conservatives to embrace Rudy right away. They all have the right to support who they believe in, in the primaries.
But I hope they're willing to at least give him a chance to reconcile his differences with their wing of the party as the candidate debates unfold.
I think Rudy will absolutely shine in them.
As he will in a one-to-one debate with Hillary.
- John
I will fight for them as best I can, and I would recommend you start thinking about who to fight against. It's the Dems that are your # 1 opponent. They are the ones you need to fight..........and beat.
How do 3 more Ginsburgs sound to you? Gonna help your fight with the courts? That's an honest question, now please think a bit before you respond.
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.