Posted on 10/08/2007 9:32:02 AM PDT by finnman69
The Rasmussen Reports daily Presidential Tracking Poll for Monday Rudy Giuliani back on top in the race for the Republican Presidential Nomination. Twenty-five percent (25%) of Likely Primary Voters say they will vote for the former Mayor of New York City while 23% support Fred Thompson. Mitt Romney is the top choice for 14% while John McCain slipped back into single digits at 9%. Mike Huckabee earns the vote from 6% (see recent daily numbers).
Polling over the past three weeks has shown a clear decline in support for Thompson, but its not clear that Fred is fizzling. As noted last week, the GOP race is getting murkier.
A recent commentary by Douglas Schoen helps explain why Rasmussen Reports shows a closer race for the nomination than some other polls that focus on interviews with all adults. Dick Morris also touches on this subject in a recent column.
In the race for the Democratic Presidential Nomination. Clinton attracts 42% support followed by Barack Obama at 26%. John Edwards is at 12% and Bill Richardson is a distant fourth with 4% support from Likely Democratic Primary Voters (see recent daily numbers). Obamas support steadily declined from April through August, stabilized in September, and may have begun to turnaround this month. Clinton remains the frontrunner but the former First Ladys nomination is not inevitable.
(Excerpt) Read more at rasmussenreports.com ...
Is the invective necessary? Will that help your cause, or exacerbate an already bad situation?
The GOP was able to form majorities prior to Reagan. Eisenhower and Nixon are two good examples.
Granted, they were never able to put together a congressional majority between Hoover and Clinton...but much of that was due to "blue dog" dems...who were mostly social conservatives...refusing to join the GOP, until Reagan.
The point I am making is that social conservatives are NOT party loyalists. They can easily vote for either party, depending on the platform. They vote the issues near and dear to their heart. And, the GOP is capable of building a winning coalition without social conservatives.
Thank _ You!
GOP “revenge” voters scare the bee-geezers outta me
Thank You. Its bad enough we have to fight against ignorant Democrat voters.
To add childish “revenge” GOP voters to that list is downright scary~
Why would you assume he would nominate conservative judges when he nominated liberal judges by an 8-1 margin in New York, has praised Ruth Bader Ginsberg and has tried to redefine what a strict constructionalist is by saying one could uphold Roe?
Even Reagan gave us Sandra Day O'Connor and Anthony Kennedy when dealing with a Democratic Congress. Do you really believe Giuliani, who will be dealing with a shrinking Republican minority in the Senate, is going to fight Democrats for conservative judges that he doesn't even want to nominate?
Me? I don’t see the need to vote for a Grand New Party if the Grand Old Party decides Liberalism is the wave of the future. That’s not revenge, that’s refusing to aid and abet a Liberal coup of the GOP.
If Rudy911 wins the GOP nod, then the war is pointless anymore, because the terrorists have won. The terrorists will have succeeded in turning one half of the body politic in this country into a strictly anti-terrorism party with no resemblance to the principles of its expressed platform. Fear will be the only driving factor of the entire party, and I will have no part of it. At that point, the war really is over, and we have lost - regardless of how many battles we can keep fighting for another Presidential term. They will have altered our way of life so drastically that fear of terrorism will be the expressed driving force behind every move we make as voters and as politicians. They might as well celebrate the Great Satan’s defeat on the streets of Damascus at that point, because they’ve won and we’ve lost, period. Their way of living will remain unaltered despite our best efforts, and our way of living will be so drastically altered as to bear no resemblance to the Shining City on a Hill.
Before 9/11, Rudy911 was a joke no Republican would ever take seriously. Have the terrorist really won so resounding a victory that he could be crowned king based on his mere presence in NYC during the attacks? Have they so altered the GOP that the traditional coalition now means absolutely nothing anymore, and only war matters - only war and nothing else?
I'll have no part of a Grand New Party, none. I will not help terrorist change the party and the country into a body that gives them exactly what they seek: a full compromise of our values for the World to see, and the undivided spotlight to prove that they have changed our culture and our way of life forever.
I'll not surrender my values to terrorism, even if the Democrats win one damn election because I won't give the terrorists what they want - a sellout of my values and principles at the end of a sword. The alternative is that the terrorists win the war, though Rudy911 fights some more battles, and the Liberals win the party and the country for generations to come.
No thanks, I'll keep fighting on as many fronts as needed.
WOW what a genus you are...you don’t want to take the CHANCE that some RINO may appoint a liberal judge so your plan is to get Hillary elected and ASSURE we get a leftest pro abortion USSC judge!~eye-roll Youre right we need Hillary
We need over 12 million illegals allowed to gain the vote (& more tax funded services) We do need the fairness Doctrine We do need Felons to have the vote. We do need more taxes. We do need 100% criminals like William Jefferson, Sandy Berger, John Murtha & John Kerry in prominent power positions. We do need more America bashing schools that teach the art of masturbation instead of math. We do need Gay marriage to become legal. We do need abortion on demand and NO age limit on the girls receiving them (without parental consent) We do need more filth on cable TV ~ My God I’ve been blind! Hillary Clinton as president will enhance my Christian values, promote traditional Families and take care of our open borders. Good Plan!!! Instead of getting at least 50 to 60% of what we want lets cripple America with Hillary and get ZERO % of our agenda!
Giuliani was FILING LAWSUITS on behalf of illegals in New York and did nothing but coddle them. What don't you understand about that? He criticized Bill Clinton signing immigration laws that were too tough. Giuliani with the last couple of months has been discussing a legal path to citizenship illegals.
If he was running as a Democrat, you'd be telling us how liberal he is. But, because he is running as a Republican, you want to fool yourself into thinking he somehow isn't.
Conservatism isn't advanced by electing liberals of either party and it is advanced for more by electing liberal Republicans.
And, Hillary and Giuliani will give us the same judges. But, if Giuliani is elected, it will be eight years before a conservative could assume office and starting nominating conservative ones.
Well said, FRiend.
“oh, and that might be President Rumpranger to you next year”
I seriously doubt that also. If Mayor Guiliani is the GOP nominee, I have no doubt that a quarter - but not less than 1/5 - of the party’s faithful (AKA the Morale Conservatives) will either not vote or vote third party. So, unless Guiliani can appeal to independents or crossover Dems, he can’t beat Senator Clinton because she will hold the Dem faithful and will get the minority votes. Senator Clinton will easily beat Mayor Guiliani.
Revisting the issue of Governor Huckabee, he wouldn’t join a Guiliani ticket. He may not run as an independent, but I’m pretty certain he wouldn’t sell out and ally himself directly with Guiliani. I don’t think Representative Hunter will either. However, although I’m only luke warm in regards to Senator Thompson, I can see Governor Huckabee or Representative Hunter being his VP. I’m not sure he would pick either of them.
In summary - If Mayor Guiliani is pitted against Senator Clinton then the next POTUS will be Hillary Clinton.
BTW - Once a candidate, no matter how much I may personnally loath them, is elected to office - they will receive the appropriate respect due to that office from me. I would have no problem saying President Guiliani or President H. Clinton, although I would rather it be someone else. I’m a veteran and still a member of the military reserves....I learned a long time ago that I salute the rank/office/position not the person holding it. However, the person holding it will be treated with respect by me, even when I disagree with them.
America is a center-right country. Giuliani is a center right candidate. Watch him appeal to independents, centrists, conservatives, and liberals who cant stand Hillary.
“Watch him appeal to independents, centrists, conservatives, and liberals who cant stand Hillary.”
Senator Clinton has been classed as a “centrist” also. Plus, her base will support her. Mayor Guiliani will lose, at a minimum 1/5 of the base Republican vote. There are already more Democrats than Republicans, and independent voters could go either way. Besides, Senator Clinton’s “negatives” are starting to go down, while Mayor Guiliani’s are going up.
Mrs. Clinton will easily beat Mr. Guiliani. Of the top tier Republicans, although I’m not that keen on him, only Fred Thompson might be able to beat Mrs. Clinton.
I am one Republican that cannot vote for Mayor Guiliani because of three biggies that mater to me:
(1) Abortion (ending it)
(2) Homosexuality (suppressing it)
(3) Gun Rights (protecting the 2nd ammendment - including the “assault weapons” he formerly comdemned.
On those three issues he is no better than Mrs. Clinton, so I cannot support him in a general election. Of course I won’t vote for Mrs. Clinton either.
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.