Skip to comments.Giulianiís Lead Shrinks ("It was cold in the pool")
Posted on 04/19/2007 7:49:28 PM PDT by Mr. Brightside
Giulianis Lead Shrinks
By Michael van der Galien
Bad news for Rudy Giuliani: his lead in the polls is shrinking quite dramatically. The main cause seems to be (growing) support for Fred Thompson - who still has to announce his candidacy. Where, in February, 44 percent of Republicans and Republican-leaning independents preferred him for the nomination, that figure is [now] down to 33 percent.
McCain, meanwhile, holds steady at 21 percent, Fred Thompson ran third in this poll, with 9 percent, tying him with former Massachusetts governor Mitt Romney.
Romney, in other words, is rising in the polls. To be frank, I find it surprising that his numbers are still, relatively, low. Romney is a terrific CEO, became Republican Governor of a Blue state and handled himself well. He saved the Olympic Games in Salt Lake City, which made him popular among quite some people (and gave him experience useful for a presidential candidate, to say the least).
Romney is, in my opinion, a good candidate. Better than most.
Support for him rising, and I am sure that it will continue to rise.
That being said, he has one major problem: 44% said they would definitely not vote for him.
Considering his resumé on the one hand, and the fact that most people dont know much about him on the other, leads me to believe that these individuals have a problem with Romney because of his faith. That, I have to say, is something I find quite appalling. He is a Mormon: so what?
McCain has a major problem as well in this regard: where he was first popular among Republican leaning independents and, yes, even among Democrats, that has now changed: 47 percent of those asked said that they would definitely not vote for him.
This means that McCain is now a more-polarizing figure than Hillary Clinton: 45% of Americans said that they would definitely not vote for her.
Talking about Hillary Clinton: as said, she still - easily - leads the pack in the polls. Her numbers remain the same: 37 percent (against 36% in February) of Democratic voters say they intend to vote for the former First Lady. Barack Obama is falling behind with 20% - down from 24%. Al Gore - who has not announced his candidacy yet - received the support of 17% of Democratic (leaning) voters. John Edwards is in fourth place with 14%.
“It shrinks ?”
“Like a bashful turtle.”
The ascension of Fred combined with a steadily increasing number GOP voters now hip to Rudy's liberalism. It's all downhill for Giuliani from here.....
The truth is, in the past week, Giuliani has gained about 8 points even after exposing himself on abortion and guns. Here are the polls if you want to see them:
If you want to know why all the anti-Rudy tirades on FR tonight, I suggest you take a look at the today's Fox News poll showing Rudy at 35 and Thompson at 8. All of the buzz Thompson is trying to generate has born little fruit as he has lost 7 points in the past few weeks.
I think some good and decent conservatives are reaching the tipping point. The realization is sinking in that the political center has indeed shifted away from us, yet again. And yet again we are confronted with having to choose between ideology and relevance.
Even if Rudy Giuliani is not welcome in your house, I am sure all conservatives will always be welcome in his. He will have milk and chocolate chip cookies waiting for you.
The Republican party conservative base is hungry for an electable CONSERVATIVE. Fred Thompson is just that man.
I have to wonder what will happen when McCain and Romney start running ads pointing out Giuliani’s previous record of liberalism, his chumminess with Clinton, etc. This could cause him to fall.
Having said that, if RG is the GOP nominee anyway, I would support him over any Democrat. I would just be wary after he became president. :-\
I think all these polls are meaningless until and unless Fred Thompson announces and begins campaigning. Right now he has very little name recognition nationally. When he spends as much time in the public eye as McCain and Giuliani do, we can compare apples and apples.
Yeah, I have been reading them. I thought I could lighten things up a little.
With Giuliani gaining 8 points in the last week in spite of numerous MSM hit pieces attacking him, I think the guy is pretty much immune from attack. He was inoculated the day his city was devastated by terrorists, and any hits targeted at him will backfire on the attacker. We are already seeing evidence of that.
Whoever wants to beat Rudy will have to generate some positive reasons to support the alternative, not the least of which will have to be a demonstrated ability to beat the Dim nominee in the general. I don't believe it will happen.
I find it amusing that all these conservatives are so excited about someone whose biggest achievment while Governor was instituting Hillarycare statewide.
Romney’s Mormonism doesn’t matter to me. Mormons may have some odd religious ideas (IMHO) but many of them are reliably conservative.
But Mitt Romney has a lot of strikes against him. He seems willing to say whatever it takes to please people, and then to shift and change as soon as people want to hear something else. I just don’t trust him.
Giuliani could have been the best candidate IF he had changed his positions on abortion, guns, and a few other things. He didn’t. I think he blew it. I hope Fred Thompson has got what it takes when the heat is on, because he’s the last one left at this point.
That's very disturbing if true. Got links?
To what? The 8 point gain? It is at realclearpolitics.com. I linked it. Fox News today has him at 35, as did Gallup yesterday. Last week he had fallen to the mid 20's. Exposing himself on guns and abortion? There must be 100 threads at FR alone.
There's simply no one on the Republican side who inspires interest in the general, non-hardcore right public.
I know that you didn’t miss JR’s words today on continuing to pimp for Rudy. Why do you continue?
realclearpolitics.com is not a link to a poll, foxnews.com is not a link to a poll. Do you have a direct link to the polls? Are they online polls or actual polls?
You're the band that's continuing to play while the Titanic is going down.
I had a private discussion with him. As I understand it, he does not object to my supporting Giuliani, but to my criticizing conservatives. So I have agreed to refrain from criticizing conservatives or conservatism, which is not hard for me to do since I am quite conservative myself, as JimRob well knows. I have been around these parts for 9 years and if you want to traverse my thousands of posts going all the way back to Clinton's impeachment, you will find that I have been consistently a hard-line conservative constitutionalist.
In fact, in Rudy's house, conservatives will be offered a warm blanket, hot chocolate and oatmeal cookies. I am a conservative, and I am in Rudy's house, and I tell you it's nice and warm and the future is bright and free of negativity.
Here is the Fox News poll. Real poll. It is a pdf file. You'll need Adobe Acrobat to read it. The results are nearly identical to Gallup yesterday.
>>I don’t think Romney’s Mormonism is the issue: I think people simply don’t see any reason to vote for him. No need to ascribe bigotry—just because some of us see him as great, doesn’t mean one’s anti-Mormon for not voting for him.
I find it amusing that all these conservatives are so excited about someone whose biggest achievment while Governor was instituting Hillarycare statewide.<<
First of all, Romney’s healthcare solution is the single most workable, best attempt to fix healthcare that I’ve seen presented. This is not state run healthcare. It is mandatory insurance, much like that supposedly required to drive a car. It forces EVERYONE to pay into the system—even the poor. The state is picking up at least part of the tab on these bills for years. And frankly, doctors and nurses shouldn’t be doing work for free, particularly given the long hours they put in. Take a look at his plan. It’s a heck of a lot different than Hillary’s, and it still ties the system to the market.
Second, Romney has been an exemplary executive, no matter what position you put him in. When working for an investment company, he rises to the top. When put in charge of the Olympics, he cuts out all the crap, overcomes a sagging deficit, and turns a profit on the games. Now, tell me, how many other Olympic Games do you know of that have generated revenue for the host city? Barcelona is still paying off debts. So is Athens. Atlanta ran a debt. On top of that, he donated his salary for that job to charity.
In Mass, he balanced the budget and turned a deficit into a surplus, despite a massively liberal legislature. Without raising taxes.
Romney is also the only candidate in this race to have vetoed a measure (well, multiple measures) on the grounds that it was a far cry from socially conservative. Unlike Bush, he hasn’t been afraid to veto bills. At all.
When I see someone who is willing to address the problems we’re going to face down the road in competing with Asia, who is interested in providing not only a viable fix to the illegal immigration problem but provide a much-need fix to our legal immigration system, my ears perk up. And yes we have problems. Big problems. I have friends in Eastern Europe with masters degrees in engineering and PhDs in the sciences, and they can’t get over here after trying for years—some all but giving up. But George Bush, Rudy Giuliani, and John McCain want to legalize Jose the poolboy, who is going straight onto the public dole, having waltzed across the southern border, breaking the law.
If conservativism is about small government and the market economy, there isn’t a candidate in this race more qualified to lead than Romney, and certainly not one with half the experience.
The Titanic went down in 2006. We are trying to get it a new ship on the water so that the most relevant discussions in politics are again held here at FR instead of at DU.
"FR will not be used in an attempt to turn the Republican party into a liberal party or to elect a socialist abortionist pig to the White house. Get used to it!!"While I genuinely appreciate the fact that you are not overtly criticizing conservatives, you are still using FR to further Rudy's path to the White House, right? Any cheerleading for Rudy is not advancing conservatism in any way, shape or form.
Stay snug and don't eat too many cookies.
Well, then, you should take it up with JimRob. It is his site, and his ground rules. I agreed to his rules, as he privately conveyed them to me. I will abide by my word, as I always do, and I am certain he will abide by his, as he always does.
A conservative case for Giuliani can be made, and I have been attempting to make it. It is based on the assumption that the Giuliani path is the only path to Republican victory, an assumption that has yet to be disproven by a single poll or any other evidence whatsoever.
If I was cynical I might think the mis-statement was intentional, but that couldn't be.
Attention objective lurkers: Here is the link. You decide who is up and who is down:
I don’t feel the need to take it up with him ... I was having a discussion with you. I asked a question and you answered it.
Freep-mail me to get on or off my pro-life and Catholic Ping List:
Please ping me to all note-worthy Pro-Life or Catholic threads, or other threads of interest.
Archives of Rudolph W. Giuliani, 107th Mayor
Opening Remarks to the N.A.R.A.L. "Champions of Choice" Lunch
The Yale Club, Thursday, April 5th, 2001
Thank you very much for inviting me to say a few words of welcome. This event shows that people of different political parties and different political thinking can unite in support of choice. In doing so, we are upholding a distinguished tradition that began in our city starting with the work of Margaret Sanger and the movement for reproductive freedom that began in the early decades of the 20th century.
As a Republican who supports a woman's right to choose, it is particularly an honor to be here. And I would like to explain, just for one moment, why I believe being in favor of choice is consistent with the philosophy of the Republican Party. In fact, it might be more consistent with the philosophy of the Republican Party. Because the Republican Party stands for the idea that you have to restore more freedom of choice, more opportunity, more opportunity for people to make their own choices rather than the government dictating those choices. Republicans stand for lower taxation because we believe that people can make better choices with their money than the government will make for them, and that ultimately frees the economy and produces more political freedom. We believe that, yes, government is important, but that the private sector is actually more important in solving our problems.
So it is consistent with that philosophy to believe that in the most personal and difficult choices that a woman has to make with regard to a pregnancy, those choices should be made based on that person's conscience and that person's way of thinking and feeling. The government shouldn't dictate that choice by making it a crime or making it illegal.
I think that's actually a much more consistent position. Many Republicans support that position, but you don't hear that as often. For example, in a recent poll by American Viewpoint, 65 percent of Republicans supported changing the plank in the Republican platform that calls for a constitutional ban on abortion. That's 6.5 out of every 10 Republicans. And over 80 percent of Republicans believe that the decision with regard to an abortion should be made by a woman, her doctor, and her family rather than dictated by the government.
In any case, I just wanted you to know that many of my fellow Republicans stand with you on this issue. So I thank you, I thank NARAL for taking the lead in establishing freedom of choice for all of us, and as the Mayor of New York City, I thank you for being here in New York City.
# # #
Oh, please. If you spin, twist, gloss and lie enough you could make a conservative case for Howard Dean. The vast majority of members in this forum are not buying that argument.
"... the assumption that the Giuliani path is the only path to Republican victory,..."
Winning at any cost is not a widely-held conservative principle.
How do you reconcile your Constitutionalism with Giuliani’s dismal record on the Constitution and Bill of Rights?
It still demonstrates that the guy is teflon, since the last few months have not been particularly favorable to Giuliani from a conservative point of view. The guy is a fighter. He takes a lickin and keeps on tickin.
It's certainly not in either the Fox or Gallup polls.
I don't. If I were to vote strictly based on my principles, I would support Ron Paul. But voting is a strategic act. It requires political judgment in addition to conviction.
I have a PhD in marketing, and am very experienced in political consulting as well as market segmentation and brand positioning. Viewed through that prism, it is very clear to me that Rudy is the only candidate capable of winning the general election in 2008.
There is no point to having an education if you let your hopes and dreams get in the way of your ability to objectively assess information.
Put simply, I do not let my political ideology cloud my political judgment.
Well then, we should celebrate the right to terminate children under the age of eighteen. You see, they aren’t really full persons until they can legally sign contracts enforced by law. Therefore, non-persons under the age of eighteen are legally subject to being mutilated by a mother’s doctor without anesthesia for whatever reason upon demand by the mother.
A modest proposal. Doctors will, of course, happily provide this service to prevent the “products of conception” from being an inconvenience in the life of said mother.
In 1999 Bush showed steady growth in the polls breaking the 40% mark in February, 50% in May and 60% by June. Just for comparison, in May of 1999 Elizabeth Dole was polling at 24% nationally. Right now, CNN, ARG, and the LA Times polls have Giuliani at 27, 27 and 29 respectively. Within the margin of error for Liddy Dole's numbers.
On top of that, the polls, like yesterday's Gallup, continue to show Republicans are unsatisfied with the current candidates and the majority are still unaware of Giuliani's views on abortion, guns, and gays.
He peaked too soon. The magic is gone. Have a good Night.
Thompson's high water mark was LA Times 4/9 at 15. Today Fox News has him at 8.
This is total spin. If you are going to a restaurant and someone asks you if you'd like a bigger menu, are you going to say no? Who doesn't want more choices, in anything? It's a silly game being played by the MSM to try to gin up some controversy.
Nor do I. And my political judgement says that long-term it would be more damaging to the issues that are important to me to have those issues become irrelevant to both major US parties.
As far as strategy goes, here's how I see it playing out if Giuliani wins the nomination: a third party emerges on the right and siphons off enough votes to let the donks win. Have you noticed that despite Giuliani's baggage, the NY Times and its ilk have been holding their fire? I haven't seen stories such as "Leading Republican Candidate Has Shady Past" splashed from coast to coast detailing his more, er, unusual proposals such as seizing property from those acquitted of a crime, or collecting DNA from all newborns, or setting his mistress up with taxpayer-funded security from city detectives. Do you think they're just trying to play fair? Or could it be that they're keeping their powder dry until after he's nominated? If they feared Giuliani as a candidate, we'd be hit with wall-to-wall Giuliani scandal to rival the Anna Nicole Smith coverage.
The vast majority of scientists believe in man-made global warming. That does not make them correct. And it certainly does not justify shutting down a minority view.
Or, put simply, you do not have any core beliefs that you are not willing to compromise for the sake of winning a political race.
Maybe he can find a fat-free frozen yogurt scandal to hitch his wagon to?
Do you really believe that?
You cannot change the culture by changing politics. You can only change politics by changing the culture. The culture is not conservative anymore. Period. We can lament it until we are dinosaurs, but it is a fact. All of the data out there, including and especially the 2006 election results, say so.
I am a businessman. As such, I assume the macro environment is something I cannot change. I must operate within the parameters as I find them. Most professional politicians approach their occupation this way, which is why people like Specter and Schwarzenegger have longevity whereas Santorum and Allen did not.
In my heart, I wish it were not so. But it is. The sooner we all figure out how to come to grips with it, the better. If a conservative emerges who can demonstrably beat the Dims in the general, I will rethink it. But I am convinced that will not happen.
And I will support my party's nominee whoever it is, whether I think he can win or not.
Well, I have a PhD myself in business, but I guess I wouldn't qualify as a scientist. But I have sat in numerous faculty lunchroom discussions with environmental science PhD's, geographers and the like. And I would say based on that, the majority seem to believe in man-made global warming, though they disagree on the severity, time line, effects, etc.
But whether they do or not, the point is that the majority is not always right, in court cases, democracy, or anything else. In fact, I dare say that in my business I thrive because I do not subject my decisions to committee, as many of my competitors do.
Within the framework of whatever is discussed, a minority view should be welcome. My credentials as a conservative are established, and I accept I am in the minority at FR. But that will not stop me from posting my observations.