Here’s a great summary of why the (increasing!) popularity of Rudy for Prez has the Mainstream Media and the Narrowvisioned Leftists scratching their heads. (h/t – Instapundit).
What Does Guiliani’s Popularity Say About Conservatives? – Shots Across the Bow
Conservatism has never been dominated by the religious right the way liberals have always pictures them to be. Fiscally conservative socially liberal conservatives are a dime a dozen. It just doesn’t make for good campaign fodder for either side to recognize their existence.
Hey, my ideal candidate is one who is strong on defense, a champion of the balanced budget, and believes that the best government is the smallest government. Show me a candidate like that, and he’s got my vote no matter what letter comes after his name.
Or her name for that matter.
And here is the Washington Post article that prompted this discussion.
Rudy’s strength in recent national polls and some state polls has already prompted many strategists, including some in rival camps, to reexamine their long-held assumptions about a party that is approaching not only its first nomination battle since the terrorist attacks but also the first since the 2006 midterm elections, which put Democrats back into power in Washington. With President Bush’s approval ratings still low, Republicans are looking for a winner.
For many months, McCain has been seen as the closest thing there is to a front-runner in the Republican contest. But Giuliani has emerged not only as the popular choice for the GOP nomination but also as the Republican candidate who is currently most highly regarded by the American people — Republicans, Democrats and independents alike.
The latest Washington Post-ABC News poll showed Giuliani leading McCain 44 percent to 21 percent, with former House speaker Newt Gingrich at 15 percent and former Massachusetts governor Mitt Romney at 4 percent. A month ago, Giuliani’s lead was much narrower: 34 percent to 27 percent. Without Gingrich in the field, the most recent poll showed Giuliani’s margin over McCain was 53 percent to 23 percent.
Conservatives and moderate Republicans know that the stakes in our world are much higher than the issues that may have driven us before. Rudy knows that too.
(Side note: The universal and speedy condemnation of Ann Coulter by America’s conservatives also flies in the face of the “they are hatemongers” mantra by the Left.)
-Bruce (GayPatriot)
Do you suppose that Coulter was a shill for the DNC?
RE: “This ain’t your grandfather’s GOP anymore”.
I wonder if the apparent “lead” that Giuliani has over McCain, Romney, Brownback, Newt-in-waiting or even None-of-the-above is more about a lack of focus on the part of GOP primary voters and behavorial GOPers (those that walk & talk like a duck and are therefore included in the polling) than any seachange moment in the GOP.
Most polling indicates that if the survey instrument includes a “chicken scratch” –go beyond the initial preference and tests-out if that preference remains after key positions on issues are contrasted with initial support– the GOP primary voters’ initial preference gets weak.
For instance in one recent poll, nearly 1/2 of the “Rudy Dude-ys” who are social cons say that his position on Roe might make him less attractive to them, 44% think the same about same sex marriage, and 30% feel that way about guns.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/17435176/site/newsweek/page/2
And making my point: about 25% of GOP primary voters know enough about Rudy to make an informed decision, nearly 34% don’t know jack about him.
It’s a British Beauty Pageant right now. And hustlers like Romney, who can stack a CPAC meeting with pizza-drugged YRs, will win these little pageants. Aside from that, residual good will and great PR is everything… it’s why Rudy did all those campaign stops for GOP candidates in 2004-06. And why Rudy, McCain and Newt are high in the polls.
The most popular button I saw at CPAC was “Rudy McRomney” with a big red circle, a red diagonal bar and the word “NO”.
Funny! Yeah, Ann is so bad (needlessly bad, given that she can be very intelligent) that it does sometimes seem she’s a double agent. In any case, I wish she would just go away. She’s already got plenty of money. She should just retire and live happily off of the book money she’s already made.
“Side note: The universal and speedy condemnation of Ann Coulter by America’s conservatives also flies in the face of the “they are hatemongers” mantra by the Left.”
Really? I’ve only seen them, for the most part, say that her comments were inappropriate. The comment itself and the use of the word FAGGOT really weren’t addresses in themselves, or condemned. She just said it in the wrong venue, at the wrong time, in the wrong context, etc. But what she said? It was LAUGHED AT and CHEERED and ENTHUSIASTICALLY ACCEPTED by her conservative audience.
Are you really a sucker for the spin? I guess so.
jimmy, rather than just make it up as you go you might want to try “context”.
Coulter was speaking before a group of mostly college aged kids who were there to learn & hear about politics… her “speech” was a lot of one-liners and some pithy jokes… it wasn’t anything people would “enthusiastically” support as you contend. They were laughing –as had been throughout her commentary… and, frankly, most of the laughs on that comment sounded uncomfortable –not supportive.
Her “speech” or comedy routine was more like JonStewart than the politicial stump speeches, endless vegative talking heads claiming victory for the conservative movement, and others at CPAC.
Put down the GayLeft koolaid and take off the Democrat tinfoil hat. Frankly, like many in the MSM, you’re just making it up as you go and while that’s SOP for the NancyP and HowieScreaminDean… it never works for the lower case clanners here. Some of us were actually at the Conference.
I think unwittingly, you have made Coulter’s case for her… the PC police are so keen on control of speech, condemning wayward comments, calling for rehab and redemption… damn, I’d say you lower case clanners were nearly religious in your new persuasion for partisan gamesmanship.
Get it right jimmy or go to the back of the short yellow bus.
And jimmy, for someone to offer that others are a “sucker for spin” when your own mouth is planted firmly around DailyKos liberal turbines is cheeky; very cheeky indeed. Talk about projection.
“Liberal turbines?” I was envisioning something more, uh, phallic.
As Emily Litella used to say, “Never mind.”
Regards,
Peter H.
Giuliani can not be the Rep Presidential candidate because of his stance on gun control and abortion…..the NRA and its members will defeat him…………
McCain can not be the Rep Presidential candidate becuase of his stance on illegals………….
Gingrich, Romney, Tancredo are the best bets………
it will be interesting
Peter, heh heh. Gilda rocked.
Right on, HHobbit. The late, great Gilda Radner was one of a kind. I even have a signed picture postcard she sent me in her SNL days.
Not to go off-topic, but isn’t it coincidental that both she and Lucille Ball passed away within weeks of each other in 1989. Gilda was Lucy’s true heir when it came to comedy.
Now, all we have left is Carol Burnett and Vera Charles (wink-wink).
PS – I do a mean version of Roseanne Roseannadanna. It always cracks Hubby up when he’s had a bad day.
“It’s ALWAYS something!”
Regards,
Peter H.
#8 Has the NRA said anything about him? I generally read what are considered conservative blogs and I’ve heard one (1) person say that they, personally, would never vote for Rudy because of the issue of abortion. I’ve heard any number of people say what religious conservatives will do but it always seems to me that they are not talking about themselves but about what other people will do.
I’d also like to suggest that asking someone if abortion, guns or gay marriage “might make him less attractive” isn’t the same thing as “I won’t vote for him.” It may well mean nothing more horrible than “I don’t like that.” Is this news?
My feeling on this is that the people who really *really* won’t vote for someone because of a pro-choice belief (not at all uncommon for Republican candidates, actually) or a history of gun control advocacy or support for gay marriage… know. People for whom these single issues are so very important that they can not bend even a little have got to know already *because* that issue in some way defines their lives. For most people, a pledge not to actively push for those things they dislike will be enough.
It seems to *me* that Republican primary behavior is to vote for who is seen as having a chance to win more than ever voting for who they like best and agree with on more issues. I suppose it’s a little like betting on horses. Do you put your money on your own horse, or the horse you think has the best chance of winning?
#5
damn, I’d say you lower case clanners were nearly religious in your new persuasion for partisan gamesmanship.
What’s funny is that libs like Jimmy and the rest have been proving her point ever since.
Newt Gingrinch is the only one of the whole lot (of both parties) who understands the world we’re facing.
Read this and tell me what candidate is even pretending to give lip service to these challenges.
presentation
(It’s a powerpoint web thingie, so not sure if non-IE browsers will work)
That link was bad:
http://newt.org/UserFiles/File/RealWorld_RealWar_012307.mht
Synova, you miss an important point in campaign politics and polling… especially at this early juncture. It isn’t that candidates worry about those who “really really” won’t vote for them based on a single issue… they worry about how “soft” their support is IF the other candidates or interest groups begin hammering the leading candidate’s contrary stance on “their” issue or issues.
It’s why Rudy is wisely trotting out the “Don’t make the 20% of me you don’t agree with the enemy… stay focused on the 80% of me we both like, love and support”.
Softness of support is the key… lack of credible information from advocacy groups opposed to the candidate is not evident, yet. Rudy knows it… just ask HowieScreaminDean about soft support in your rank & file supposed stalwarts.
But the main point I was making is that rather than see Rudy’s lead in the horse race right now as indicative of some major change in the GOP or GOP leadership or GOP voters, it’s likely more to do with media-love and notoriety than informed judgments by primary voters.
And frankly, this isn’t even a horse race yet… more like the horses and jockeys braying in near paddocks with 3 hours to gate time.