Posted on 05/28/2011 8:57:19 AM PDT by yoe
Back in early May, former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani said he “can probably be talked into” running for the Republican presidential nomination in 2012. A new poll has done some “talking.”
Mitt Romney is second with 15 percent, followed by Sarah Palin (13 percent), Ron Paul (12 percent), and Herman Cain (10 percent). The other potential candidates had single-digit percentages.
“Call it a sign of how unsettled the GOP presidential field remains: Two of the three people at the top of a new national poll in the battle for the Republican nomination may not even run for the White House,” CNN observes. Romney is set to announce his candidacy next week, while Palin and Giuliani’s intentions remain unclear.
When asked who would be respondents’ second choice for the nomination, Giuliani remained strong with 14 percent, trailing only Romney’s 15 percent.
But respondents in general aren’t thrilled with the field of Republican candidates. Only 16 percent of those polled said they are “very satisfied” with the potential candidates, while 45 percent are “fairly satisfied” and 39 percent are “not very satisfied” or “not satisfied at all.”
As for Republicans who have stated that they will not run, 48 percent of respondents say they would like to see Rep. Paul Ryan run, 45 percent favor the candidacy of New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie, 40 percent would like Texas Gov. Rick Perry to run, and 39 percent want former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush to seek the White House.
(Excerpt) Read more at newsmax.com ...
CNN...???? Do your own research!!!
I’m all for it. Bring him on in to split the swish vote with Slick Willard.
But he probably won’t jump in. He simply doesn’t have the stomach to follow a campaign through to the end.
For instance, did they ask anybody outside of the CNN newsroom?
Oh brother, with polls like this it looks like another 4 years of Obama. What is there a list of losers the R party has to go through : McCain, Romney, Giuliani ?? The MSM loves these folks.
The Republican Party could avoid a lot of this confusion with a simple rule: If your state did not vote for the Republican candidate one time in the last three elections, you are not eligible to run. Having candidates, who are marinaded in Leftist politics in their home states, challenging conservatives from Republican states is counterproductive.
As I recall, he was the frontrunner in February 2008 also. How’d that work out for him?
Guiliani is wasting his time like he did in 2008. However, let him stay in the race to suck up RINO votes that would otherwise go to another poser.
On the current field, it is looking like a Palin/Cain or Palin/Bachman might be the most plausible choice for true conservatives.
However, I am not in the Sarah Palin fanatic club...so don’t hammer me those that dislike Palin or agree with me those that are Palin fans. I’m probably wrong about the best picks. That is an individual choice....I’m staying away from telling others how to vote this time. I’m simple stating a weakly held opinion.
That's a fabulous idea! But how about this one:
If your state didn't vote for the GOP candidate in the last three elections, you don't get a voice in picking the candidate: your state gets one (1) delegate to the GOP National Convention, and one (1) vote in selecting the nominee.
>>> The George Soros Machine
Seriously? Do you think Soros is hiding under your bed too ready to spring out and grab you ?
Nothing described in the poll sounds out of line with what can be observed. Including that no one candidate has a significant advantage over the field. Sixteen per cent isn’t much of a mandate. Up to this point none of the candidates are really taking off.
CNN has a population it uses for all its polls - Barney Franks voting district.
Now....if Huntsman and Rudy both came in that would split the swish vote to smithereens.
Of course, the Left is trying to pick their opponent. Unfortunately for them—and Giuliani—that ploy’s been tried once too often. Tea Party conservatives will not support a RINO, so-called moderate or a libertarian. Hence, in the absense of a genuine Tea Party conservative pres. candidate, the demrats win.
Several decades of voting history show that RINOs will not vote for conservative candidates. They are, afterall, demrats. Moderates and libertarians cannot sit out this election if they want to see The Usurping Onada and his commie buddies sent packing.
In the interest of generating some adult conversation, I would like to know specifically what moderates and libertarians might find so objectionable about conservatives that would cause them not to vote, vote for a splinter candidate or vote demrat. I’m not considering any particular GOP or conservative candidate. I’m talking about conservative philosophy.
Uhhh... Scuze me... "cNN observes"??? Who cares what cNN thinks about anything? No, it is NOT a sign of unsettled pres field; it IS a sign of where the myriad of candidates and near-candidates stand A LONG TIME from when the campaign starts really rolling, and only is the result of a limited number of American citizens paying attention at this point (but more likely just a push-poll of what "cNN observes" wants the candidate to be.
Ruddy thought he would launch his POTUS campaign last time, starting with a primary win garnered from all the New York snow-birds in Florida. It didn’t happen and no tactic he tries this time will be anymore successful.
I’m sorry for him, that he is currently out of the lime-light he seeks. Boo hoo, boo hoo. /sarc
If this is true, just blow my f-ing head off with a Winchester now
I can’t believe the Giuliani people are trying to fly this lead balloon...again.
WARNING: FReepers who support Giuliani will be kicked to the curb, just like last time.
He is a bum.
Running car in a closed garage for me...no mess, no fuss. :-)
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.
