Giuliani’s Lead Shrinks ("It was cold in the pool")

Moderate Voice ^ | 4/19/07

[Mr. Brightside]

Giuliani’s Lead Shrinks

By Michael van der Galien

Bad news for Rudy Giuliani: his lead in the polls is shrinking quite dramatically. The main cause seems to be… (growing) support for Fred Thompson - who still has to announce his candidacy. Where, in February, “44 percent of Republicans and Republican-leaning independents preferred” him for the nomination, “that figure is [now] down to 33 percent.”

McCain, meanwhile, holds steady at 21 percent, Fred Thompson “ran third in this poll, with 9 percent, tying him with former Massachusetts governor Mitt Romney.”

Romney, in other words, is rising in the polls. To be frank, I find it surprising that his numbers are still, relatively, low. Romney is a terrific CEO, became Republican Governor of a Blue state and handled himself well. He saved the Olympic Games in Salt Lake City, which made him popular among quite some people (and gave him experience useful for a presidential candidate, to say the least).

Romney is, in my opinion, a good candidate. Better than most.

Support for him rising, and I am sure that it will continue to rise.

That being said, he has one major problem: 44% said they would definitely not vote for him.

44%.

Considering his resumé on the one hand, and the fact that most people don’t know much about him on the other, leads me to believe that these individuals have a problem with Romney… because of his faith. That, I have to say, is something I find quite appalling. He is a Mormon: so what?

McCain has a major problem as well in this regard: where he was first popular among Republican leaning independents and, yes, even among Democrats, that has now changed: 47 percent of those asked said that they would definitely not vote for him.

This means that McCain is now a more-polarizing figure than Hillary Clinton: 45% of Americans said that they would definitely not vote for her.

Talking about Hillary Clinton: as said, she still - easily - leads the pack in the polls. Her numbers remain the same: 37 percent (against 36% in February) of Democratic voters say they intend to vote for the former First Lady. Barack Obama is falling behind with 20% - down from 24%. Al Gore - who has not announced his candidacy yet - received the support of 17% of Democratic (leaning) voters. John Edwards is in fourth place with 14%.

[massadvj]

CNN and Amer Res Group 4/10 had Rudy at 27, probably in reaction to the public funding of abortion revelations. Now that this is behind him, both Gallup and Fox have Rudy at 35 this week, evidence that the predicted erosion is not coming. If someone is going to beat Giuliani, he had better put forth something positive rather than counting on attacks.

Thompson's high water mark was LA Times 4/9 at 15. Today Fox News has him at 8.

[massadvj]

On top of that, the polls, like yesterday's Gallup, continue to show Republicans are unsatisfied with the current candidates

This is total spin. If you are going to a restaurant and someone asks you if you'd like a bigger menu, are you going to say no? Who doesn't want more choices, in anything? It's a silly game being played by the MSM to try to gin up some controversy.

[ellery]

Put simply, I do not let my political ideology cloud my political judgment.

Nor do I. And my political judgement says that long-term it would be more damaging to the issues that are important to me to have those issues become irrelevant to both major US parties.

As far as strategy goes, here's how I see it playing out if Giuliani wins the nomination: a third party emerges on the right and siphons off enough votes to let the donks win. Have you noticed that despite Giuliani's baggage, the NY Times and its ilk have been holding their fire? I haven't seen stories such as "Leading Republican Candidate Has Shady Past" splashed from coast to coast detailing his more, er, unusual proposals such as seizing property from those acquitted of a crime, or collecting DNA from all newborns, or setting his mistress up with taxpayer-funded security from city detectives. Do you think they're just trying to play fair? Or could it be that they're keeping their powder dry until after he's nominated? If they feared Giuliani as a candidate, we'd be hit with wall-to-wall Giuliani scandal to rival the Anna Nicole Smith coverage.

[massadvj]

The vast majority of members in this forum are not buying that argument.

The vast majority of scientists believe in man-made global warming. That does not make them correct. And it certainly does not justify shutting down a minority view.

[JustaDumbBlonde]

"Put simply, I do not let my political ideology cloud my political judgment."

Or, put simply, you do not have any core beliefs that you are not willing to compromise for the sake of winning a political race.

[lesser_satan]

Maybe he can find a fat-free frozen yogurt scandal to hitch his wagon to?

[Petronski]

Or, put simply, you do not have any core beliefs that you are not willing to compromise for the sake of winning a political race.

Amen.

[Graybeard58]

The vast majority of scientists believe in man-made global warming.

Do you really believe that?

[massadvj]

I don't see any viable candidate running as a 3rd party candidate. Maybe Ron Paul. But certainly not Hunter or Thompson or anyone else with mainstream credibility. Rudy's Veep will be plenty conservative, as will his stable of supporters.

You cannot change the culture by changing politics. You can only change politics by changing the culture. The culture is not conservative anymore. Period. We can lament it until we are dinosaurs, but it is a fact. All of the data out there, including and especially the 2006 election results, say so.

I am a businessman. As such, I assume the macro environment is something I cannot change. I must operate within the parameters as I find them. Most professional politicians approach their occupation this way, which is why people like Specter and Schwarzenegger have longevity whereas Santorum and Allen did not.

In my heart, I wish it were not so. But it is. The sooner we all figure out how to come to grips with it, the better. If a conservative emerges who can demonstrably beat the Dims in the general, I will rethink it. But I am convinced that will not happen.

And I will support my party's nominee whoever it is, whether I think he can win or not.

[massadvj]

Do you really believe that?

Well, I have a PhD myself in business, but I guess I wouldn't qualify as a scientist. But I have sat in numerous faculty lunchroom discussions with environmental science PhD's, geographers and the like. And I would say based on that, the majority seem to believe in man-made global warming, though they disagree on the severity, time line, effects, etc.

But whether they do or not, the point is that the majority is not always right, in court cases, democracy, or anything else. In fact, I dare say that in my business I thrive because I do not subject my decisions to committee, as many of my competitors do.

Within the framework of whatever is discussed, a minority view should be welcome. My credentials as a conservative are established, and I accept I am in the minority at FR. But that will not stop me from posting my observations.

[Beagle8U]

“He will have milk and chocolate chip cookies waiting for you.”

No doubt baked and served by one of the queers he lived with.

[massadvj]

Or, put simply, you do not have any core beliefs that you are not willing to compromise for the sake of winning a political race.

I did not say that. If this were true, I'd have supported Clinton over Dole. My purpose is simply to get back to the point that the most relevant discussions in politics are occurring within the Republican Party. Once that happens, you will find me vociferously opposed to anything anti-conservative Giuliani proposes, just as I have vociferously opposed much of GWB's agenda including Prescription Drugs for seniors, McCain-Feingold, Ted Kennedy's Education Bill, Harriet Miers, Amnesty for Illegals, and so forth.

None of these political skirmishes would have been relevant without power. Today we have no power and the relevant discussions are at DU. When to surrender, now or next year. Great. We have to get the power back, and Giuliani is the only vessel capable of getting us there.

[Beagle8U]

“If you spin, twist, gloss and lie enough you could make a conservative case for Howard Dean.”

Dean is a leftist nutball, however he is just to the right of Ghouliani.

[massadvj]

No doubt baked and served by one of the queers he lived with.

Hopefully, the person with the, shall we say, alternative lifestyle, will be welcomed into the fold so that we can get to a majority. But we'll have the cookies tested for various communicable diseases just to be on the safe side.

[Fitzcarraldo]

He could make a handsome living modeling women’s clothes?

[HANG THE EXPENSE]

I think you nailed that one.Pretty obvious when one thinks about it.

[TAdams8591]

Ping!

[Hatband]

Rooty could have caviar, old whiskey and a thousand dollar hooker waiting for me and its still no sale. You nominate him, you elect him, end of story.

[Rick_Michael]

"The culture is not conservative anymore. Period. We can lament it until we are dinosaurs, but it is a fact. All of the data out there, including and especially the 2006 election results, say so."

Come-on, chief. The philosophy of conservatism hasn't dominated the political movement of this country for a long-time. To say we lost 2006 due to conservatism...haha. We lost primarily due to perceived corruption, Iraq, and scores of bad PR.

I could tell you right now had we not went in Iraq, kept our mouths shut a bit more, and threw-out a few bad apples before they turned moldy....ohh, and actually acted conservative *whatever that is!?*....we'd dominate the country! I have no doubt of that. Conservatism isn't the problem, it's the constant comprimising of ideals to 'praticality'. There has to be a boundary.

Ideally it's an even view among the two, but I tend to view our demise as a continual comprimise.
___________________________________________________________________
Best quote on my thoughts:
I don't know who went to this place--William Howard Taft, William Jennings Bryan, William Tell--whoever. Their spirit is dead; if they ever had one, it's gone. You're building a rat ship here. A vessel for sea-going snitches. And if you think your preparing these "minnows" for manhood, you better think again. Because I say you are killing the very spirit this institution proclaims it instills! What a sham! What kind of show are you guys puttin' on here today? I mean, the only class in this act is sittin' next to me. And I'm here to tell you, this boy's soul is in tact. It is non-negotiable. You know how I know? Because someone here--I'm not gonna say who--offered to buy it. Only Charlie here wasn't selling.....

I'm not finished! As I came in here, I heard those words...cradle of leadership. Well, when the bough breaks, the cradle will fall. And it has fallen here, it has fallen! Makers of men, creators of leaders, be careful what kind of leaders you're producing here. I don't know if it's the Charlie's silence here today is right or wrong; I'm no judge or jury. But I can tell you this; we won't sell anybody out to buy his future! And that, my friends, is called integrity. That's called courage. Now that's the stuff leaders should be made of. (pause) Now I have come to the crossroads in my life. I always knew what the right path was. Without exception, I knew. But I never took it. You know why? Because it's too damn hard. Now here's Charlie; he's come to the crossroads. And he's chosen a path. It's the right path. It's a path made of principle, that leads to character. Let him continue on his journey. You hold this boy's future in your hands, committee! It's a valuable future. Believe me! Don't destroy it...protect it...embrace it. It's going to make you proud some day...I promise you.--- Scent of a Woman


Embrace conservatism!

[ellery]

I don't see any viable candidate running as a 3rd party candidate.

I didn't say it would be a viable third party candidate. I said it would be a third party candidate that would siphon off enough votes to throw the election to the donks. Given how close elections are these days, and how energized the dems are (i.e., less likely to vote third-party in '08 than we are), it wouldn't take a whole lot. And there are a LOT of social conservatives who will not vote for a pro-abortion candidate, and a LOT of libertarian conservatives who will not vote for an anti-Constitution authoritarian.

You cannot change the culture by changing politics. You can only change politics by changing the culture. The culture is not conservative anymore. Period. We can lament it until we are dinosaurs, but it is a fact. All of the data out there, including and especially the 2006 election results, say so.

First, I think most culture changes should happen via persuasion, not through government force. That said, I think your assessment is incorrect. Transient polls aside, we know from at least the past 15 years that our culture is very evenly divided. Elections may swing one way or another based on issues of the day (and I agree that many pubbies shot themselves and us in the feet over the past handful of years), but actual cultural change does not occur over the span of two or four years. It happens over generations. If 50% of American voters were culturally conservative enough to vote for W. in 2000; that has not fundamentally changed in six and a half years. People are certainly angry at republicans for their behavior (I know I am), but they're angry because Republicans departed from various conservative ideals, not because they fulfilled those ideals.