Skip to comments.Poll; Rudy Leads All Potential Challengers in N.J.
Posted on 04/19/2007 7:28:41 PM PDT by LdSentinal
TRENTON, N.J. -- New Jersey hasn't supported a Republican for president for nearly 20 years, but a new poll released Thursday shows former New York City Mayor Rudolph Giuliani leading all presidential challengers in New Jersey.
The Quinnipiac University poll found the Republican with similar leads over the three leading Democratic presidential candidates.
Giuliani leads New York Sen. Hillary Clinton 49 percent to 40 percent, the poll found. He leads Illinois Sen. Barack Obama 48 percent to 38 percent, and 2004 vice presidential candidate John Edwards 48 percent to 41 percent.
New Jersey hasn't supported a Republican for president since 1988.
``It makes no difference who the Democrats put up, Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama or John Edwards, former Mayor Giuliani continues to knock out all challengers in the New Jersey presidential race,'' said Clay F. Richards, assistant director of the Quinnipiac University Polling Institute.
The poll found other Republicans wouldn't fare so well in the Garden State, although Arizona Sen. John McCain was running about even with the leading Democrats, trailing Clinton by 4 points, Obama by 2 points and Edwards by 1 point.
Former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney trails Clinton by 19 points, Obama by 24 points and Edwards by 25 points, according to the poll.
``The good news for Sen. Clinton is that for the first time she is now the clear favorite over a weakened Sen. John McCain in New Jersey and her favorability rating is up slightly,'' Richards said.
Giuliani leads a New Jersey Republican primary with 49 percent, down from 58 percent March 1, followed by McCain with 18 percent, compared to 15 percent March 1. Former U.S. senator and Law & Order actor Fred Thompson gets 6 percent, with 5 percent for Romney and 4 percent for former House Speaker Newt Gingrich.
``Giuliani has lost some support among Republicans, but no other member of his party comes close to challenging him for the GOP nomination in New Jersey,'' Richards said.
Clinton leads a New Jersey Democratic primary with 38 percent, followed by Obama with 16 percent, former Vice President Al Gore with 12 percent, Edwards with 9 percent and Delaware Sen. Joseph Biden with 3 percent.
Clinton was recently endorsed by Democratic New Jersey Gov. Jon S. Corzine and several leading New Jersey Democrats.
Corzine recently signed a law moving New Jersey's presidential primary to Feb. 5, grouping it among the first states to hold primaries in 2008. The poll found that New Jersey voters approve of the change 54 percent to 19 percent, but only 37 percent said the earlier date will make them more likely to vote in the primary.
The poll surveyed 1,424 voters from April 10 to 16. It included 460 Republicans with a sampling margin error of 4.6 percent and 504 Democrats with a sampling error margin of 4.4 percent.
Does he really differ that much (or will he govern that different) from Hillary?
Ok, let’s see:
1424 voters total.
Yep, I see where Rudy is getting his support!
Take guns? CHECK
Kill Babies? CHECK
Loves Illegals? CHECK
Hilliani looks good.
I got it. We want a candidate that would get no cross over DEMS and none of the 'Unknowns'.... It would be a moral victory at least.
Keep selling out, the R’s had 40 years in the political desert.
Wow! I’m shocked that Rudy Julie Annie is making such a strong showing in a dyed-in-the-wool, Conservative State like New Jersey. /s
He was leading in a poll this morning in New Jersey as well.
if Rudy is the nominee, its NJ and PA that will be the “difference” in the electoral strategy to get to 270.
I don’t think any republican candidate can win Ohio, the republican “brand” there is so tarnished - we need to flip some Kerry states as an offset.
Selling out isn't the answer, but it would be great to nominate a candidate that pulls over a few DEMs from Hillary/Obama and wins some 'unknowns'.
I don't support Giuliani, but would hope we nominate someone who would only get the declared Republican vote. Otherwise the math won't work.
On that we agree.
It’s numbers like this that makes Rudy the only viable candidate to win the WH.
Unless there is a major stumble, I cannot find a scenario in which a challenger beats him.
I know as a principled conservative you won’t accept Mr. Giuliani because of his views on abortion (among his other character failings). That’s fine. Feel free to support the candidate of your choice, one who more closely reflects your views.
But, you cannot in good conscience compare Hillary Clinton and Rudolph Giuliani--and by making that comparison dismiss the fine job Mr. Giuliani did as Mayor of New York—a city of major importance to the American economy.
As the Republican mayor of a liberal city he succeeded in implementing a conservative agenda; one that focused on lowering and eliminating taxes, reducing crime, privatization, welfare reform, neighborhood revitalization— by employing conservative principles.
It seems that somehow Rudolph Giuliani has been thrown into a political death grip with Hillary Clinton...and we, all of us American’s, are bound to see this battle play out to finality.
Sick, ain't it?
No matter who gets the nomination, in the end, the Guillani candidacy will give the R’s a shot in the arm in the NE.
“Yep, I see where Rudy is getting his support!”
Same as President Ronald Reagan, from whom the term “Reagan Democrat” originated.
Consider: The Nov. 2006 congressional losses by Republicans resulted from a significant shift of independents from Republican to democrat.
Therefore to win requires Republicans to win votes from independents and even some democrats.
Rudy connects with the independents, moderates and disaffected democrats as well as lots of real republicans.
Comparing Rudy to Reagan?
“Comparing Rudy to Reagan?”
Comparing who voted for Reagan (democrats and independents) to who is apparently inclined to vote for Guiliani.
Ought to look at the difference between the reasons while you’re at it.
I doubt Reagan had very many gun grabbing abortionists voting for him.
These polls don't mean jack.
They're not going to vote for Rudy they're going to vote for the RAT. You cannot out-lib a lib.
You people salivating over these artificial polls for Rudy truly have been brainwashed.
The Rudy Rooters seem to think that ‘Rats will vote for Rudy just like they voted for Reagan. They don’t seem to understand that there was a distinct difference between Reagan and Carter. There is no real difference between Rudy and any of the ‘Rat contenders.
The media WANTS Rudy to be nominated because that way there is zero risk that any pro-life moderate Democrats will vote Republican and there is a good chance that many conservative Republicans won’t vote.
If poll numbers like this meant a damn thing, then our list of former presidents would include:
Thomas Dewey, Mo Udall, Scoop Jackson, Paul Tsongas and Howard Dean.
I think you can put CT, PA, ME, RI, and for that matter, DE and NH into the Giuliani column. Ditto for FL. However, I don’t see where a white Catholic Northeasterner would have any overwhelming advantage in the three West Coast states. His strongest appeal is to the blue collar, white Catholic voters, once called Reagan Democrats, who abound in his native Northeast, and Chicago and WI as well, although he is not as alien as a white evangelical Southerner, like George W. Bush or Fred Thompson, is to the heavily secular, lifestyle liberals on the West Coast. I think, however, he can give Hillary or Obama a run for their money in CA, OR, and WA. By forcing the Democrats to spend money in the region (and IL as well, with the large number of white Catholics in Chicagoland) and NY/NJ/CT as well, that will drain Democratic resources that would otherwise be used in light red states like WV, VA, KY, TN, AR, LA, and MO, where Giuliani will suffer some vote loss due to evangelical and conservative indifference or hostility. With Giuliani, the Karl Rove playbook has to be scrapped.
either you did not read what I said, or you are so full of yourself that it went right by you. Talk about brainwashed!
“I doubt Reagan had very many gun grabbing abortionists voting for him.”
I made no claim that he did.
You seem incapable of commenting on the substance of my first claim; namely a Republican needs votes from independents and democrats to win.
Or on the claim of the article; namely Guiliani might put states like New Jersey into play for Republicans.
Are you capable of discussing how to win? Do you care about winning?
I don’t care about winning if it’s with someone I disagree with. THAT’S A LOSS!!!
I said you need to take a look at the reasons others would support Rudy and reasons others supported Reagan.
There is a HUGE difference and you know it.
>These polls don’t mean jack.
Any other polls that show any other Republican candidate whipping a Democrat in the state of NJ?
The sooner the better. The playbook is outdated.