Rudy Giuliani: Because Beggars Can’t Be Choosers

NY Observer ^ | 3/14/07 | Steve Kornacki

[areafiftyone]

If pragmatism prevails in the Republican primaries and caucuses next winter—a questionable proposition for a party that once dutifully lined up behind Bob Dole—then Rudy Giuliani will roll to the G.O.P. nomination.

 

Simply put, the former Mayor would flip to the Republican column several deep, dark blue states that the G.O.P. has barely bothered to contest in recent election, gobbling up territory that is pivotal to any Democrat’s hopes of corralling 270 electoral votes. And he could do this without ceding an inch of safe G.O.P. turf to the Democrats. Sure, they may loathe his social liberalism, but will Mississippians really hand their six electoral votes to Hillary Clinton over Rudy?

 

As it stands now, Republicans are in grave danger of losing the White House in 2008. There is a pattern to American politics that has prevailed, almost unblemished, since the Second World War: One party controls the Presidency for eight years, then the other party does. It was the Democrats’ turn in 1992 and 1996, the Republicans’ turn in 2000 and 2004, and—well, you see what that means for ’08.

 

And it’s not as if voters are inclined to buck history: Fatigue with the national G.O.P. is unusually high—and, with every passing, seemingly futile month in Iraq, growing. Against such a backdrop, a Republican Presidential nominee who appeals to the usual G.O.P. cheering sections and antagonizes the familiar Democratic constituencies is going nowhere.

 

To win next year, Republicans need to nominate a map-changer—a candidate who can attract support in unlikely areas and overcome the significant built-in handicaps.

 

Enter Rudy. Say what you will about whether he truly deserves them, but his Sept. 11 tough-guy hero credentials position him perfectly to lead election-swinging Reagan Democrats back into the Republican fold.

 

Consider the electoral map, which has subtly shifted in the Democrats’ favor in the last two years due to Republican bumbling on the national and state levels.

 

Ohio, for instance, famously put Mr. Bush over the top in 2004. Months later, though, that state’s Republican governor, Bob Taft, pleaded guilty to four criminal misdemeanors in an ethics case, precipitating the total collapse of Ohio’s G.O.P. establishment. Now, early polls show Mrs. Clinton, Barack Obama and John Edwards poised to turn Ohio blue in ’08.

 

Against Rudy’s G.O.P. rivals, the Democratic front-runners would have little trouble doing so. John McCain’s fortunes will be tied to public opinion of the war he has so tirelessly promoted. And Mitt Romney’s politics of convenience—now a conservative, he built his political career in liberal Massachusetts by telling wrenching personal stories about his commitment to keeping abortion legal—will only remind Ohioans of the double-talking governor who until recently occupied their own Statehouse.

 

But Rudy can run as a leader and a hero, the man who stood tall on America’s darkest day—just as the President went into hiding for a few hours. He can call himself a results man too, the mayor who made New York safe for suburbanites again. That appeal frees him from the liabilities of his party or from the kind of single-issue identification that figures to doom Mr. McCain.

 

And Ohio is only one example.

 

Look at Mr. Giuliani’s home region. He’d have a hard time, perhaps, in New York itself. But he’d be favored in New Jersey, a state filled with blue-collar, ethnic Catholics who loved him even before 9/11. At the same time, his social liberalism won’t scare off the state’s affluent, educated suburbanites like George W. Bush’s religious rhetoric has. The same is true of Connecticut, another bedroom state that has turned on the national G.O.P. as it has morphed into a party for Christian conservatives from the South.

 

Between them, Connecticut and New Jersey have 22 electoral votes, and neither has voted Republican since 1988. Before he’s even left his backyard, then, Rudy could produce a 44-vote swing in the electoral math, potentially decisive in itself. And that’s not even touching Pennsylvania, whose blue-collar masses have lined up with the Democrats for four straight elections. And so on.

 

We’ve been down this road before, of course. In 1996, Lamar Alexander, then a likable and somewhat moderate former Tennessee governor, donned a checkered shirt and told Republicans that his campaign was as simple as ABC: “Alexander Beats Clinton.” No one short of Colin Powell could have defeated Mr. Clinton that year, but surely Mr. Alexander would have fared better than the soporific Mr. Dole, who Republicans nonetheless tapped. Similarly, had the G.O.P. simply nominated Mr. McCain in 2000, it would hardly have taken a Supreme Court decision to hand the White House to the party.

 

Maybe, given his well-documented history as a social liberal, it’s naïve to think that Mr. Giuliani will be able to count on Republican support in 2008. But if Hillary Clinton ends up defeating Mitt Romney, the G.O.P. will have no one but itself to blame for the Clinton restoration.

 

Steve Kornacki works as an organizer for Unity08, a group that advocates a bipartisan Presidential ticket in 2008.

[areafiftyone]

Yup! He's the only one of the top three who has it.

[Fierce Allegiance]

Just take a good look at all your posts and the posts of the other Anti-Rudy people - they are all the MSM trashing Rudy.v

But it all comes from sources you say are not credible. Wait until the alphabet tv networks start trashing him. You ain't seen nothing yet. Rudy is going down, and if he gets the nod, he'll take the whole republican party with him.

Republicans safest course of action is to abandon him now, and rally around an acceptable candidate. Rudy is not acceptable.

[ichabod1]

I would let the country crash and burn before I vote for another RINO, liberal republican for president. We may not be able to rise from the ashes until we do.

[Gracey]

Yep. I believe Rudy will sway most of the conservative right also, because no one else can carry the ball to victory.

[dirtboy]

I guess it wasn't enough for the Rudy boosters to trash Reagan's legacy. Now they are turning on Bush.

But that comes naturally to supporters of a guy who endorsed a Dem in 1994.

And I REALLY love your raising the immigration issue. Rudy defied federal law and federal court orders to keep NYC a sanctuary city, and supports shamnesty.

[freedomfiter2]

We're going to vote FOR a Conservative this time rather than be forced to choose between two liberals.


It only makes sense. When you prostitute yourself for a candidate, they'll only treat you like a whore in the end.

[Buck W.]

I disagree. I believe that he will keep every red state.

[areafiftyone]

Republicans safest course of action is to abandon him now, and rally around an acceptable candidate.

That will not happen. Republicans like Rudy and won't abandon him. I think in the end it will be Romney against Rudy. That should be very interesting.

[Gracey]

I agree with you regarding immigration. You're right. We have a problem there.

However, he wouldn't be in Mexico apologizing to their government, promising to do better. We've turned into a wimpy country. Where's our backbone? The Gonzales goes and apologizes and fires his deputy, over firing prosecutors which is their right. Where's the Republican SPINE?

[ichabod1]

If Fred Thompson would split the party then I say the party has need of splitting.

[capt. norm]

I'm voting for a conservative no matter who our niminee is.

Now's the time to do it, in the primaries, where we actually have some choice, but if it's down to (any Republican) vs. Hillary I will crawl over broken glass to vote for the Republican.

I would never consider "sitting on my hands" and letting Hillary take it by default.

[paudio]

Thank you for the list. I still think Rudy can carry those states, providing he choose a strong Southern conservative as VP--which I think if he's the nominee, he will.

[Gracey]

BTW, Duncan Hunter is an awesome man. However,he's polling around a few percent. Can't win that way... And he has no money. He's a wonderful man.

[dirtboy]

However, he wouldn't be in Mexico apologizing to their government, promising to do better

Nah, he only defied FEDERAL LAW and FEDERAL COURT ORDERS to maintain NYC's sanctuary city policy.

[freedomfiter2]

BTW, Duncan Hunter is an awesome man. However,he's polling around a few percent. Can't win that way... And he has no money. He's a wonderful man.

I wonder what he'd be polling if professing conservatives weren't bending over for Rudy?

[Fierce Allegiance]

The why are you freaking out about Thompson entering the race. You call it splitting the party, IIRC.

Talk about splitting? Isn't that exactly what rudy and the rest of you left winfg republicans are doing? Clearly, rudy doesn't support the base of the republican party with his sickeningly liberal social views. The base will nt suppport that, either.

Mark the day. I say Rudy has peaked. In less than a month, his numbers will take a doiwnward slide. Romney will slide, too, as more people wake up and research this stuff.

Rudy's worst nightmare is more people finding out who he really s. For now, he's the guy who gave a kickass speech at the convention. In time, he'll be the gungrabber abortion-loving homo-hugger nobody will want in the whitehouse, except his base in the leftwing media.

[TYVets]

Which red state would Guliani lose? (Especially if he picks a mainstream Pubbie VP) Florida, Tennessee, Missouri, etc.

Essentially, all of the close ones.

Florida, Tennessee, Missouri ( where I live ), Ohio?

How many Blue states could Guliana turn Red?

That is ass uming he got the nomination.(/sarc)

[neocon1984]

With Jimmy Carter as POTUS it just seemed like 8 years.

[b9]

Terrific post. Terrific points ~ "shamnesty" indeed.
Bashing Bush and Reagan to boost Rudy. What a screed.

[freedomfiter2]

Rudy's worst nightmare is more people finding out who he really s.


You're right and it's not a coincidence that the Dems use the same MO.