The problem with these types of "definitely vote for" and definitely vote against" polls are that with the race already so hot, people are answering based on their own game theory of how to help their candidate.
For example, I can't believe that only 52% of republicans would, in the end, for for Giuliani -- I'd expect at least 70% to do so. But I can't believe that the same or more real republicans wouldn't vote for Hunter, or Romney, or any other candidate other than McCain who a lot of people think is crazy.
So why do so many republicans insist they can't vote for one candidate, or that they aren't sure?
Well, Rudy is the only liberal candidate in the race. So of those republicans who vote liberal, there's no other first choice. Thus the 52% who definitely would support him. Meanwhile, a conservative backing Romney or Hunter would probably want to keep down the other's numbers by NOT saying they'd vote for him, and instead saying they would definitely vote AGAINST them.
But still, why don't all the conservatives say they'd be against Giuliani?
First, because a lot of them don't want to torpedo the guy who they are told will probably be the nominee. Easier to kill off the low-lying fruit in the hopes of elevating your candidate, than trashing the front-runner.
Second, each of them wants THEIR candidate to be the one who is the "only salvation" from Rudy. To sell that, they need Rudy to look dangerous, thus voting FOR Rudy to inflate him is helpful to their cause of scaring the electorate.
The Rudy people understand this, which is why their number one attack on Thompson is to scare Thompson supporters with the idea that it only helps McCain (as you can see in the FR poll, McCain is one of the few candidates that Rudy can beat on FR).
For conservatives, Rudy was the placeholder, the guy that we knew couldn't really win, but who could suck the life out of the other moderates, and be a good "placeholder" so our candidate, whoever that was, had a chance to gain traction.
Let's face it -- Duncan Hunter supporters believe he can overtake Rudy if he's the only choice, but they also knew that if Romney was also above 30% Hunter was sunk, and they knew that if Rudy got knocked down to 10% those votes were going to McCain or Romney.
So it was in their interest to keep Rudy up until the "right time".
Now they are panicking because they (not just Hunter's group, I think a lot of the groups did thi) did too well, and people are thinking Rudy can win and that's going to be bad for their candidates.
This left an opening for a guy like Fred Thompson, who in the absense of a Rudy lead probably wouldn't be considering a run. But because conservatives are scared of Rudy, Thompson is getting remarkable traction -- which isn't good for the 1%ers in the race.
I also wonder how many independents and democrats are saying they are republican to build up Rudy. If there was a democrat running that had traction and was as conservative as Rudy is liberal, I might do that to get a better opponent in case we lost.
Interesting theory but it is too complex to be true. Very few poll takers would follow your line of thought. Occam's Razor produces a much different conclusion than your Machiavellian thesis. The simplest and most correct answer is that only a few of the extremist Right do not like him but the vast majority of Republicans DO.