Posted on 12/14/2005 7:00:30 AM PST by areafiftyone
(Angus Reid Global Scan) – Many adults in the Empire State want a former New York City mayor to run for president in 2008, according to a poll by Strategic Vision. 62 per cent of respondents say they would like Rudy Giuliani to launch a White House bid.
Giuliani—a Republican—garnered national and international attention in the aftermath of the 9/11 terrorist attacks. The former mayor currently heads Giuliani Partners, LLC—a consulting firm.
Last week, Newsday reproduced the comments of John Dennehy—a strategist during the 2000 presidential run by Republican Arizona senator John McCain—on Giuliani’s possible presidential bid. Dennehy declared, "In my humble opinion, Rudy wouldn’t get out of the gate."
Support is lower for New York senator Hillary Rodham Clinton at 33 per cent. Rodham Clinton—a Democrat and former first lady—was elected to the United States Senate in 2000, defeating Republican Rick Lazio by 12 per cent. She ruled out a presidential bid in 2004.
A prospective candidacy by current Republican governor George Pataki garners the backing of 31 per cent of respondents. In July, Pataki announced he would not seek a new term as governor. In August, an advertisement discussing his possible White House bid began airing in Iowa.
No Republican has carried New York in a U.S. presidential election since Ronald Reagan in 1984.
Polling Data
Do you want former Rudy Giuliani to run for president in 2008?
|
|
|
|
Yes |
62% |
|
No |
18% |
|
Undecided |
20% |
Do you want George Pataki to run for president in 2008?
|
|
|
|
Yes |
33% |
|
No |
49% |
|
Undecided |
18% |
Do you want Hillary Rodham Clinton to run for president in 2008?
|
|
|
|
Yes |
31% |
|
No |
57% |
|
Undecided |
12% |
Source: Strategic Vision
Methodology: Telephone interviews with 1,200 registered New York voters, conducted from Dec. 2 to Dec. 4, 2005. Margin of error is 3 per cent.
You know, there are probably hundreds of legitimate complaints against Rudy. However, saying that he's politcally closer to Teddy Kennedy than the president is just an outright lie. Rudy is everything that Kennedy is not.
If he's the GOP candidate, then this Texan will vote for him.
This is good to see...hillary ain't $hit!!
I have a strong hunch that those who constantly threaten to bolt, weren't solid party voters to begin with.
I am not a member of the party anyway. I left in 2003. I am a conservative independent.
I will absolutely guarantee that he'll do better in the primaries than here. The real base of the Republican party isn't nearly as militantly partisan as the average Freeper, never mind the more vocal Freepers who fly on the wingtips.
The irony there is that's exactly how whole sections of the country feel about the South.
Ah, so geographic bigotry should rule the day? Get real.
You're not being overly sensitive. You can bet your last dollar that SR50, who hails from North Carolina would have taken great offense if you had the same thing about the South that he said about New York.
Roy Moore has absolutey ZERO chance of ever gaining the GOP nomination. Or any party's nomination for that matter.
I thought as much. Pretty much exposes your threat to vote CP instead of GOP as an empty one, as you weren't like to vote with the GOP anyway.
The REALity is, like another poster pointed out, it appears that those that live in the northeast corridor, whether "Republican" or democrat, are brought up in an environment of big government, with severe limits on their Constitutional rights (i.e., the anti-gun Sullivan Laws), and liberal leaning on all sorts of social issues (abortion, gays, etc.) - to the point that these people actually THINK their way of life is NORMAL.
To the rest of us out in "Red State" America, it most assuredly is NOT normal, or acceptable in any way.
That is why we will do our utmost to prevent RINO's and democrats from becoming President.
I put my conservative priciples ove the party.
Clearly incorrect. He could have the Constitution Party nomination for sure.
>I live in Queens and take the #7 which means if I need to get into Manhattan on Christmas I have to walk.
Wow, sorry to hear that, it does look like the strike is going to happen at this point, but I doubt it'll last past the weekend. I think they'll have to keep negotiating, but after causing inconvenience on one business day to make a statement, the union will understand the seriousness of the situation & not wish to incur additional penalties once they feel they've made their point. At least that's what I hope. As dumb & criminal of them as it will be to strike, keeping it going for 10 days is a scenario I really cannot see happening at all.
As I stated above, there are portions of public property in which security concerns have led to the authorities cutting off access to parts of streets and sidewalks. So my Constitutional Right to peaceably assemble has been taken from me.
Is that an example of how us Northeasteners have gotten used to living in a way that does not avail us of all of our Constitutional rights?
I'll live with it. Common sense tells me that my need to peacably assemble any closer to the NYSE than I can already get, or to walk up Park Row instead of Lafayette Street or St. James Place, is less important than the security concern. Given that I live at the center of arguably the biggest bullseye on the planet outside of Israel.
What an outrage. Yawn.
There is such a thing as thinking outside the box. Never mind. You wouldn't care. Some of us actually like living in NYC, and don't even care to denigrate other parts of the country, in spite of seemingly commonly-held attitudes about the stereotypical rudeness & judgmental nature of NYers who look scornfully upon the rest of the country.
But I will say I get AWFULLY tired of hearing from red-staters (and some blue-staters too) who go on about New York being Socialist. On the thread about the impending transit strike some nice soul said something about how it couldn't happen to a more socialist bunch of azzhats, or something to that effect. Real nice. Maybe they don't care what its impact on business will potentially mean for the rest of the country--probably themselves included--and maybe they don't care that for some it'll literally be a matter of life & death. It's the problem of us socialist azzhats.
I suppose we're supposed to maintain terrific attitudes about the rest of the country when those are the sorts of things directed at us. Maybe I'm just not conservative enough for people like that. Maybe because my idea of advancing the conservative agenda doesn't include spiking a thread about a politician with ridiculous labels like babykiller & faglover.
Perhaps Mike Long or Thomas Ognibene is reading this, though probably not. Regardless, this sort of thing is what I thought conservatives were supposed to leave to the undignified, and mostly on the left. You people are doing wonders for my estimation of what conservatism means to the people who seem to be more interested in hating liberals--an obvious exercise if ever there was one--than having discussions about how to come up with solutions to problems, particularly problems caused by faulty & shortsighted liberal policies. From where I sit, Rudy Giuliani was a mayor whose record is an example of that. But you can't please everyone, especially those, apparently, who would seemingly have had a problem with any NY politician merely because that's where they served.
If there's a more capitalist place on the face of the earth, please tell me where it is. The CAPITALIST nature of NYC dwarfs any Socialist aspects of our local government, entitlements, high taxes, etc. etc. If you need to think of us as Socialists, I cannot dissuade you. But perhaps you'd care to perk up yr ears whenever you hear the term "Wall St." It's not just a term. It's a place. It's here. A couple of blocks from where I live, thank you very much. And I tire of hearing about what Socialists we are.
We are nothing of the kind. Sorry to have this appear to be directed at you personally since I'm not sure that you were one of the posters who made this reference, but you have sure made some that are very much in line with the attitudes of posters who have said such things.
And if there's anyone who has any ideas about how we could be more capitalist than we already are, I'm all ears.
If nominated Allen will lose to Hillary.
After Bubba and W the country will take a pass on another good ol boy....from either party.
Gulliani is the only one who can beat Hillary.
He was a great mayor who significantly brought down the crime rate.
He is an excelent manager and believes in a strong America. He stood up to foreign dipolmats and the UN.
Altough I oppose most Gun Control laws his position is a good one for a large city like New York. As for abortion that is an issue best left between a woman and her physician. It is not the business of the state.
So which is better pick a President with whom you agree on most issues especially the really important ones or go with someone who you argree with 100% and is unelectable?
Giulani would be a great President and is much more electable than any other potential candidate.
He'll try and take our guns away. Not the right job for him...
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.