2008 Republican Presidential Primary - Giuliani 30% McCain 14% Thompson 14% (New Rasmussen Poll)

Rasmussen ^ | 5/1/07

[Gop1040]

“If McCain can have 10 points shaved off his favorable in a week, you don’t think Rudy can have the same thing happen to him?”

“And if Rudy’s the pick simply because he’s in front and well-liked, what happens when he’s no longer “well-liked”?”

The two questions you raise above are generalities that can apply to any candidate or front-runner. I don’t see the point of hypothesizing on what “ifs”. It doesn't lead anywhere or resolve anything.

[garv]

I know all you Giuliani people love these polls because Giuliani is still the leader, but if anyone thinks he's going to win the nomination with 30% of the vote they're off their rocker.

His number is up from last week, but is still down from last month and his favorability rating was unchanged from last week. That too is down from his high of 71%.

His numbers have stagnated or declined since March. Just for a little context, in 1999 Bush went over 40% in February, over 50% in May and over 60% in June. In May of 1999 Elizabeth Dole was polling 24%. Giuliani's support is closer to Elizabeth Dole than George Bush at the same point in the cycle.

Even if he somehow manages to get the nomination I fail to see any reason for rejoicing by his supporters. If he squeaks through the primary process by winning a plurality of votes and his support continues to sag or stagnate do you honestly believe he would have the slightest chance of winning the general election?

[areafiftyone]

Did you ever think that the reason why there are so very low poll numbers for everyone is that there are so many candidates. Once the candidates start dropping out the poll numbers will go up for everyone left in the primary race. There are at least 11 people in the race (including the non-candidates).

[garv]

I thought of that, but the 2000 Republican primary included Bush, McCain, Bauer, Forbes, Hatch, Keyes, Alexander, Dole, Kasich and Quayle. That's 10.

The race also included Buchanan as the Reform party candidate which likely siphoned off more Republican votes.

[areafiftyone]

What were the poll numbers then? Were they similar? If not and we are using these kind of numbers than that means we are not going to win in 2008 PERIOD! No matter who is in the race. I don’t want to think that way. I think that once things start to thin out then polling will get better and the it will be more competitive.

[jeltz25]

touche

I don’t think we’ll ever see Rudy in that pose. At least I hope not.

[LightBeam]

Giuliani is the most popular candidate in either party—62% now have a favorable opinion of him.

We have a winner!!

If this number is correct, than this is more than enough reason to NOT vote for him. Do we really want a President who is popular among open and outspoken traitors?

[Rudder]

No, we want a candidate who appeals only to strict conservatives.

Of course that would guarantee his defeat, but conservatives must stick to their principles.

[Rick_Michael]

Source?

[Rick_Michael]

McCain should just leave the race.

[areafiftyone]

I don’t think he will this time around. This is his last chance to run for president. He’s going to be in there until the end. You can tell - He even revamped his campaign. He won’t win but he’s determined to be some sort of spoiler.

[Atlas Sneezed]

All the Giuliani in drag pics circulating around seems to have worked in his favor. He now has the drag queen vote, plus all the closet queens out there. There must be more of them than anyone imagined...

---

Don’t forget all the Freeper RINO Soccer Moms who just share his taste in clothes and makeup.

[garv]

What were the poll numbers then? Were they similar?

That's what I was referencing in my first post. Nationally, Bush was way ahead of the current pace in the 2000 race.

[Victoria Delsoul]

I love good news and there is no question about it. Rudy has been on top since day one. No one else has been able to come close, let alone pass him. ;-)

Bumpity bump!

[LightBeam]

No, we want a candidate who appeals only to strict conservatives.

Of course that would guarantee his defeat, but conservatives must stick to their principles.

A few observations:

1)the people you call "strict conservatives" are actually what our Founding Fathers would have called "Patriots", as opposed to socalists, baby-killers, sodomites, mohammadeans, and other mini anti-Christs on the left.

2)It would actually guarantee victory, as most Americans really are Patriots and do hate leftism.

3)We should NOT run canidates who poll well with the enemy. We might as well run al-Sadr for President. Heck, he's supported by 51% of Iraqis! He's our golden boy!

Abandoning our principles is the same thing as surrender. True conservatives don't surrender. Period.

[finnman69]

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/Political%20Tracking/Favorables/RepublicanPresidentialCandidates.htm

[finnman69]

We might as well run al-Sadr for President.

You are not seriously comparing Giuliani to al-Sadr are you?

[Kevmo]

areafiftyone

This account has been banned or suspended.

---

Okay

[LightBeam]

You are not seriously comparing Giuliani to al-Sadr are you?

No, not at all.

Sadr has only participated in the deaths of thousands of Americans, whereas Giuliani has funded, supported and condoned the deaths of over 40 million innocent Americans.

Thats not to say we shouldn't kill Sadr (of course we should), I'm just pointing out that we have enemies here at home as well.