Giuliani leads GOP race

Newsday ^ | April 12, 2007 | CRAIG GORDON

[veronica]

A new Republican presidential poll shows former mayor beating McCain; Clinton tops the Democratic roster

WASHINGTON - Rudolph Giuliani navigated the first choppy waters of his campaign to sit atop a new Republican presidential poll yesterday that shows him easily beating one-time front-runner John McCain, the Arizona senator who tumbled to third place over Iraq.

But the Los Angeles Times-Bloomberg poll also suggests conservative skeptics are still casting about for an alternative to the moderate Giuliani, with a second-place showing by someone who isn't even in the race - actor and former Tennessee senator Fred Thompson.

On the Democratic side, New York Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton still leads comfortably over Illinois Sen. Barack Obama and former senator John Edwards among Democratic primary voters.

But in a New York head-to-head faceoff for the White House, Clinton trails Giuliani, 48 percent to 42 percent. And she only barely beats a weakened McCain.

Giuliani won support from 29 percent of Republican primary voters surveyed, followed by Thompson with 15 percent and McCain with 12 percent.

[Pistolshot]

For that reason, Thompson's second-place finish shows how unsettled the Republican field is, with conservatives still feeling they lack a standard-bearer.

In a nutshell the real reason behind Rudy's top-of-the-heap showing. Fred is not in, yet. What the poll doesn't show is the undecideds.

[dforest]

Rudybots live for polls, even this early in the race. Its is all they have.

They try very hard to get conservatives which, of course, Rudy does not need, to move left and vote for the very liberal Rudy. Won't be long before everyone knows that Rudy is just in the imagination of the Rudybot, and will soon be a forgotten dream.

[N3WBI3]

I could see myself going with the Libertarian or Constitution party depending on who they pick and the party platforms. Or Ill just leave that vote blank if I really have no choice.

Look if we want to pursue this experiment of picking a pro choice, gun grabbing guy for the republican party lets do it and see what happens. Frankly if the republics were too stupid to realize ‘elect us or get pelosi’ did not help them one bit in 2006 and want to try the same in 2008 they deserve whatever happens to them

[greasepaint]

I’m for Rudy, unless Fred Thompson decides to run.

[neocon1984]

What conservative in his or her right mind would vote for Queen Hillary? I can understand (but not support) sitting home or voting for a fringe theird party candidate (e.g., Ron Paul), but voting for Hillary? That makes no sense unless you think there is a sizable contingent of really stupid conservatives.

Wait a minute! You are not talking about pissant and his posse are you?

[massadvj]

I guess the fact that he is losing to Obama and his lead over Edwards is within the margin of error means we should work like hell to make sure Hillary gets the nomination.

Hillary and her high negatives would be preferrred. But Obama will always poll high because people want to sound fair and tolerant to the pollsters. You can take about 5 points off of his expressed poll support based on that.

[wagglebee]

Maybe we should try this again, since in all the times I've posted it, none of the Rudy Rooters has been able to answer it:

If I referred to an anonymous candidate and I did not give you their party affiliation but gave you the following information:

- The candidate believes in the "right" to abortion, including partial birth abortion and that taxpayers should pay for some abortions.
- The candidate believes in the "right" of homosexuals to have a legal union that resembles marriage.
- The candidate believes in the "right" of illegal aliens to illegally enter and remain in our country.
- The candidate believes government has the "right" to modify the Second Amendment of the Constitution at will to curtail the right to keep and bear arms.

If this was the ONLY information you had, would your conclusion be that this unnamed candidate was a conservative Republican or a liberal Democrat?

[PSYCHO-FREEP]

You also said that as soon as Fred gets into the race, even without a formal announcement, Rudy will be finished because most of Rudy’s supporters will jump over to his side.

The truth is, it has only taken what little support Hunter, Brownback, Paul and Romney had. Rudy’s numbers have actually become stronger.

During the short dip that Rudy had at the end of March, when Thompson first became a candidate, many declared that Rudy was finished then. But it is actually Fred’s numbers that have taken a dip. (Source, Rasmussen.com)

[wagglebee]

"But in a New York head-to-head faceoff for the White House, Clinton trails Giuliani, 48 percent to 42 percent. And she only barely beats a weakened McCain."

Then why didn't Rudy run against her for the senate last fall? If he had defeated here there she would have been out of politics for good. THAT would have shown some party loyalty on Rudy's part.

[Titus Quinctius Cincinnatus]

29%? Wait a second, I thought Rudy was at 44% a while ago, and that the on little blip that showed him back up in the upper 30s was evidence of a Rudius Resurgens?

Load the torpedo tubes, Seaman, it's time to put this one on the bottom!

[JohnnyZ]

Frankly if the republics were too stupid to realize ‘elect us or get pelosi’ did not help them one bit in 2006 and want to try the same in 2008 they deserve whatever happens to them

Oh, you noticed that 'platform' in '06?

They've been saying about the Democrats for years that they had no platform, and so they couldn't beat the GOP's something with nothing.

Well, Republicans started standing for nothing in 2004, and got there by 2006, and what a surprise! we lost.

[JustaDumbBlonde]

"The truth is, it has only taken what little support Hunter, Brownback, Paul and Romney had. Rudy’s numbers have actually become stronger."

Funny ... because you would not know the truth if it walked up and shook your hand. You make assertions and then disappear when others ask you to back them up. Thanks for the laugh though.

[Pistolshot]

Rudy went from 31% to now at 29%...Fred moved up from a distant third at 8% to now at 15%. Fred STILL hasn't announced, but his interview with Cavuto leads me to think he will, when HE is ready.

You can parse the numbers any way you would like, but the fact is, there is not a lot of conservatives happy with the candidates we have now. This indicates a vast majority has not committed to any candidate until there is someone worth committing to.

There are so many issues with Rudy, it's not even funny anymore. Those that drum beat for him have one or two issues guiding them, the WoT, and name-recognition. Socially, his views fly against the grain of many, many social conservatives. Gun-control, the gaffe on abortion, gay-rights turn off a lot of the people he NEEDS to win against Hillary.

Now, the other issues have been relegated to 'back-burner' status because the Rudy supporters are focused on the WoT. Fact is, ANY of the GOP candidates will deal with the WoT emphatically. There is not one who doesn't understand what defeat and victory mean for the US and the world.

The other social issues that hold back a lot of conservatives is the influence of a Guliani presidency on legislation.

Now, the President does not make the legislation, but he does promote it with his positions. Pro-abortion activists in Congress would use his stance to further the unwarranted, government paid murder of the unborn and try to have that made law of the land, because Rudy would sign it. Anti-gun advocates in Congress could dream up any Draconian legislation as 'reasonable' and know Rudy would sign it because he has made it clear that regulation is a good thing.

His position on gay-rights is also dangerous, because it takes a segment of society that has cross-sectional race lines and made a new 'minority' class with special privledges. That in itself is dangerous, because, unless you are openly flamingly gay, there is no way to distinguish the gay from the hetro. And using legislation to further divide the nation would be introduced.

Rudy says he would appoint Constructionist judges to the USSC, but his record in NYC is one of many, many liberal judge appointments and very few conservative. It indicates he would rather have some judges legislate from the bench and not have a court that interprets the Constitution, but decides social issues on its own without comment or vote from the general public.

These are my primary reasons for not supporting Rudy, and I am pretty sure a lot of other true conservatives feel the same way. Rudy NEEDS this wing of the party to beat Hillary, to say he doesn't is naive.

[Gop1040]

“With McCain fading and many GOP primary voters still looking for an alternative to Rudy the conditions couldn’t be much better for Thompson to jump in.”

Don’t count on it. Most of McCain’s supporters are loyal to him going back to 2000. They were committed to him before Rudy set up his exploratory committee. McCains strength is with the independents who are ideologically open to a candidate like Rudy. He'll get his share if McCain drops out.

[EnigmaticAnomaly]

"I will nver vote for him, I will go third party."

Agreed.

[EnigmaticAnomaly]

"Maybe we should try this again, since in all the times I've posted it, none of the Rudy Rooters has been able to answer it: If I referred to an anonymous candidate and I did not give you their party affiliation but gave you the following information: - The candidate believes in the "right" to abortion, including partial birth abortion and that taxpayers should pay for some abortions. - The candidate believes in the "right" of homosexuals to have a legal union that resembles marriage. - The candidate believes in the "right" of illegal aliens to illegally enter and remain in our country. - The candidate believes government has the "right" to modify the Second Amendment of the Constitution at will to curtail the right to keep and bear arms.

If this was the ONLY information you had, would your conclusion be that this unnamed candidate was a conservative Republican or a liberal Democrat?"

Best post on this thread, PERIOD. Very Poignant.

[PSYCHO-FREEP]

With a plus or minus error factor of 3%, the 2% drop you declare as something astounding, is not considered a valid argument by most standards. My point was, that Rudy still maintains the lead and has done so since the beginning. Thompson’s numbers have been level and tapering off slightly. Particularly, since it is doubtful Fred will run after his announcement yesterday.

But then, standards have never been an issue here lately.

[dirtboy]

But zarf is right that he's stumbled over the abortion issue.

Rudy, IMO, has to quit trying to straddle two logs that are drifting apart.

He's either pro-choice or pro-life. And his history and recent statements strongly show he's pro-choice without equivocation. The standard pro-choice line is "I'm personally against abortion, but..."

All he's doing now is coming off as wavering.

[Corin Stormhands]

I will nver vote for him, I will go third party.

I'll alert the media.

[nctexan]

"I will nver vote for him, I will go third party."

Why not cut out the middle man and vote DEM directly?

Then you could have your cake and eat it too!