Posted on 10/04/2007 9:38:23 AM PDT by TitansAFC
If Rudy Giuliani wins the Republican nomination and a third party campaign is backed by Christian conservative leaders, 27% of Republican voters say they’d vote for the third party option rather than Giuliani. A Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey found that a three-way race with Hillary Clinton would end up with the former First Lady getting 46% of the vote, Giuliani with 30% and the third-party option picking up 14%. In head-to-head match-ups with Clinton, Giuliani is much more competitive.
Over this past weekend, several Christian conservative leaders indicated they might back a pro-life, third-party, candidate if Giuliani wins the nomination.
The latest poll highlights the potential challenges for Giuliani, but the numbers must be considered in context. A generic third-party candidate may attract 14% of the vote in the abstract at this time. However, if a specific candidate is chosen, that person would likely attract less support due to a variety of factors. Almost all third party candidates poll higher earlier in a campaign and their numbers diminish as election day approaches. Ultimately, of course, some Republicans would have to face the question of whether to vote for Giuliani or help elect a Democrat.
The telephone survey found that 17% of Republicans believe it’s Very Likely conservative leaders would back a Pro-Life candidate if Giuliani is nominated. Another 32% believe it is Somewhat Likely. Among all voters, 22% think a third party approach is Very Likely and another 33% say it’s Somewhat Likely.
Most Republican voters consider themselves Pro-Life on the issue of Abortion. Most Democrats and Unaffiliated Voters are Pro-Choice.
The bigger question for Giuliani might be how this possible challenge from the right might affect perceptions of his electability. Currently, Giuliani is seen as the most electable Republican candidate which helps overcome concerns that some have about his ideology. A survey conducted earlier this month found that 72% of Republicans think Giuliani is at least Somewhat Likely to win the White House if nominated. However, the current survey finds that number falling to 58% if Christian conservatives back a third-party option.
With a third-party option on the table, only 18% of Republicans believe Giuliani would be Very Likely to win the election if nominated. That’s down from 31% in a two-way race.
Among all voters, 49% say Giuliani is at least Somewhat Likely to win a two-way match-up. That falls to 43% with a third party candidate in the mix.
Electability is a crucial issue for Giuliani because two-thirds of Republican voters seen him as politically moderate or liberal. That is a challenge unto itself in a political party where most primary voters consider themselves politically conservative. Fred Thompson is currently viewed as the most conservative candidate in the field.
Three of the last four Presidential elections have seen a candidate win with less than 50% of the total votes cast. If Hillary Clinton wins the Democratic Presidential nomination, there is a very reasonable possibility that neither major party candidate would top the 50% mark in Election 2008. With such a scenario, third party candidates on either side of the political spectrum could play a significant role by peeling away one or two percentage points of the vote.
Clinton is currently leading the race for the Democratic Presidential nomination, but her victory is not inevitable. Among Republicans, Thompson and Giuliani lead in the Rasmussen Reports daily Presidential Tracking Poll.
Crosstabs available for Premium Members only.
Rasmussen Reports is an electronic publishing firm specializing in the collection, publication, and distribution of public opinion polling information.
The Rasmussen Reports ElectionEdge™ Premium Service for Election 2008 offers the most comprehensive public opinion coverage ever provided for a Presidential election.
Rasmussen Reports’ Election 2006 coverage has been praised for its accuracy and reliability. Michael Barone, Senior Writer for U.S. News & World Report and co-author of The Almanac of American Politics, mentions, “One clear lesson from the Republican victory of 2004 and the Democratic victory of 2006 is that the best place to look for polls that are spot on is RasmussenReports.com." And University of Virginia Professor Larry Sabato states, “In election campaigns, I’ve learned to look for the Rasmussen results. In my experience, they are right on the money. There is no question Rasmussen produces some of the most accurate and reliable polls in the country today.”
Rasmussen Reports was also the nation's most accurate polling firm during the 2004 Presidential election and the only one to project both Bush and Kerry's vote total within half a percentage point of the actual outcome.
During both Election 2004 and Election 2006, RasmussenReports.com was the top-ranked public opinion research site on the web. We had twice as many visitors as our nearest competitor and nearly as many as all competitors combined.
Scott Rasmussen, president of Rasmussen Reports, has been an independent pollster for more than a decade.
When the Third Party is mentioned, they neglect to mention who. Who is this as yet un-named candidate? Put a name on it or it doesn’t exist.
No, I do not believe that Roe v. Wade will ever be reversed and have never said I did. BTW because Rudy is an unabashed baby killer is only one reason why I would never vote for him if he were running unopposed!
I disagree. Even if 1/3rd of the deserting pro-lifers decide to stay home and not vote at all and the others held their nose and voted for Rudy, Rudy still loses.
When you have 46% in the Hillary camp (very believable), the others are carving up 54% of the electorate. That means just a 9% bleedout and the GOP surely loses. Consider some of the 9% will be independents, libertarians, Bloombergers, Green Party and other fringe groups, the GOP has a very small room for error and any candidate who drives away 1/5th of the party base, on ANY issue, is killing any chance of winning the election.
Not going to vote R because R is a liberal and would effectively turn both parties into pro-abortion parties hostile to pro-life legislation.
And, you don't seem to grasp the fact that liberal Republicans are FAR more likely to get liberal legislation passed than a Democrat. Republicans would stop liberal legislation advanced by Hillary Clinton and do nothing to stop it if Giuliani was pushing it.
And, a Hillary Presidency if far more likely to result in a Republican majority in Congress than a Giuliani one, which guarantees Republican will remain in the minority for likely another decade.
From Christie Todd Whitman to Michael Bloomberg to Arnold Schwarzenegger, electing RINOs to office is a proven disaster.
Exactly right IMHO. It's entirely possible that this next election will be decided in the primaries, and the November election will be just a pro forma exercise.
If any of the top rank GOP candidates other than Thompson is nominated there will be a falling away of some degree by social/religious conservatives that will seriously threaten the Republican nominee. But if Rudy is nominated, no matter who the Democrat nominee may be there will be an open revolt by religious right voters and the Democrat will win. With the electorate as evenly divided as it has been in the last two elections, the loss of even a small part of a significant voting bloc such as the social conservative wing of the GOP would mean losing the election.
I am repulsed by the very thought of Hillary in the White House again, but if the rapidly developing leftward slide of the Republican party is not stopped here and now we will in effect have a one party system within one or two more election cycles. There will still be two competing party labels and two separate organizations of course, but the philosophical dividing line will be so lightly drawn that it will be virtually invisible. I would rather suffer through another 4 long and painful years with a Clinton as president than to see that happen, therefore I will not vote for Rudy if the primary voters are stupid enough to nominate him.
Now I really gotta call BS. If you’re willing to turn the country over to LIBs because of this issue, then you’re a LIB who is Pro-Life.
You are ignoring the political reality. There are a vast number of people that don't fit neatly into the left or right, for variety of reasons. Like it or not, that is the group that ultimately decides elections. That's not saying a conservative can't win, only that a conservative also needs moderate support to win.
>>If Hillary wins, she will push the SCOTUS so far left that conservative social issues will be history for at least a generation. I would much rather take my chances with SCOTUS appointees from Rudy than from Hillary.<<
Of course you would, you’re rational.
If you look at RG’s judicial advisors, they’re all on the Right - Federalist Society types. If he gets two judicial appointments, the odds that at least one will vote to weaken or overturn Roe is very high. If Hillary is in, the odds of course are zero. (And, yes, there are other issues in this race besides abortion).
I’ve made this point over and over until I’m exhausted — what difference does it make what a candidate’s personal views on abortion are unless you just want to feel good?? It all comes down to judicial appointments. With Hillary you are dealing with a known commodity - she will appoint extreme leftists like Ginsburg who are rabidly pro-abortion as well as horrible on everything else. With RG, you are dealing with someone who is likely going to give you at least a moderate conservative, maybe better. In addition, he is pro-defense and pro-free market. How is this a difficult choice??
“Here we go again. Conservative third party puts another Clinton in the White House.”
When did that happen before? Social conservatives did not vote for Perot, who was pro-abortion.
What planet are you living on? LOL! After he gets the undying affection and votes of the "Christian right" as you call them, he'll be endorsed by the NRA. ROFLOL! Whatever you're smoking, could you send me some?
“I am a conservative and when the Republican party stops being the conservative party...”
So being “conservative” or a “conservative party” means total subjagation to a single issue? Being conservative means you subscribe to a certain positions on a wide range of issues, even though you may rate them in personal importance.
There are many issues that can make one a conservative, pro life one of them. Just because some, during this specific point in out history, elevate the issue of terrorism to a higher level than before on their radar does not mean your issue is any less important than theirs, but one has to balance competing issues and blend them into a strategy that can win at the ballot box or the enemy slips into positions of power and sets your entire movement back decades.
I understand the abortion issue is the most important to many people, and for good reason. But IMHO elevating it to the point where any and all other issues become funtionally irrelevant does not make one a “conservative”.
Conservatives judge and balance all issues before them and know the strategic importance of any one can vary depending on the realities of the political, social and economic scene at the time. IMO, those that aren’t willing to allow their most important issue to take a secondary position occasionally and for shoret periods of time when the political realities demand it are not conservatives, they are ideologues.
So let me just clarify the “One issue” thing:
If, say, a candidate Conservative on 50% of the issues won the GOP nod, then revealed themselves to be rabidly anti-Israel and possibly outright anti-Semetic, you’d be all on board to stop Hitlery, right?
And there are many issues that make Rudy a Liberal, being rabidly Pro-abortion is just one of them.
So what? So-called fiscal conservatives did.
Same principle.
I wouldn’t put much stock into this poll for now. But come June 2008, if the poll shows the same result, then it would be significant. The Rooty Campaign may file lawsuits to boot any 3rd parties off the ballot that detract any potential votes from him.
I’ve no doubt that Rudy would try to sue his was into the Presidency. He’s sued just about everyone else.
But I’ll die trying to make the Third Party option available, if need be.
And you know this to be a fact because...?
The republicans will suddenly grow a spine and fight her appointees?
The sitouts will suddenly sit in on the next election because all the congressional repubs will be forced to retire and new conservatives will take their place in droves??
Hillery will simply bask in the afterglow of her win and do nothing more to further her agenda??
No Judges will be appointed to the supreme court for eight years??
Gun confiscation will be placed on hold??
She will announce a prolife bill, and the congress will vote for it??
Just exactly what will be the motivation and the drive to suddenly change the congress (because after all the voting public will have seen the light that have yet to see)and become part of a colossal change of heart and start voting hard right??
DSo you think pubbies will pull the lever for Rudy, and yet pull the lever for dems further down, as opposed to dems pulling the lever for Hillery and voting R further down?/
Just exactly where is the guarantee?
>> 46-44 is a statistical tie, with 10% still outstanding. He very much could win.
Not according to the most current polls I’ve been seeing. Rudy doesn’t have a chance against Hillary.
If he really cared about conservatism, he’d drop out. But of course, he doesn’t care, since he is actually a liberal.<<
No, sorry. All polls are showing that he’s the strongest Republican candidate against Hillary. Using your logic, then every Republican would have to drop out.
If you really cared about conservatism, you’d at least be open to supporting the candidate most likely to defeat HC, instead of just ruling someone out who wasn’t perfect. At least let’s agree to support whoever we want in the primary and support whoever wins. My God, don’t consign this country to that woman for 8 years ...
If we have no one to get behind, Hillary wins. I fear there is too many on our side falling for the person the media throws down our throat. They tried McCain at the start now it is Rudy.
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.