Decision ‘08

Rudy G. Leads the Way

The latest Rasmussen Poll on GOP presidential preferences has Rudy Giuliani leading with 31%, John McCain with 28%, and Condi with 19%. Now, early polls like this should not be overemphasized, as name recognition plays a big part in those numbers, but neither should they be discounted. Notice that these numbers are from self-identified Republicans - showing that McCain and Rudy G. are more palatable to the general public than political junkies sometimes give them credit for.

Also of note: both men beat Hillary, McCain by 8, Rudy by 4; yet, in a reflection of McCain’s problems with the base, Rudy’s favorables are far higher, 71% to 54%.

13 Responses to “Rudy G. Leads the Way”

1 Knemon Says:
September 19th, 2005 at 2:58 pm
Me likee.
2 Knemon Says:
September 19th, 2005 at 2:58 pm
Rudy needs to make McCain an offer he can’t … uh, actually, such phrasing should probably be avoided …
3 Knemon Says:
September 19th, 2005 at 3:22 pm
It’s worth stressing that Republicans historically go with the obvious front-runner … but they also have a long history of shunning northeastern/urban candidates.

We’ll see …
4 Dennis Says:
September 19th, 2005 at 4:10 pm
The frontrunner precedent probably doesn’t get stressed enough. Reporters who cover the horserace obviously have an interest in making the race as exciting as possible, and there’s often little boomlets that threatens the frontrunners from time to time, but it seems like the frontrunner favored by the establishment usually wins the nomination, and that’s true for both parties.

Dean, of course enjoyed some attention for a little while until everyone ran back to Kerry in 2004; Bradley and McCain gave Gore and Bush brief scares in 2000; Buchanan scared Dole and Bush in 1996 and 1992, respectively; Tsongas had a brief burst against Clinton in 1992; Gephardt and Dole made Dukakis and Bush nervous at the start in 1988; Hart tried out his “new ideas” against Mondale in 1984; Bush beat Reagan in Iowa in 1980 and Kennedy gave Carter agita that same year; Reagan threatened Ford briefly in 1976, etc.

There’s still all the usual “there’s a lot of time between now and the primaries” caveats, and its’ worth noting that while McCain and Rudy are co-frontrunners in these polls, neither has a clear lead. But assuming no big scandal comes along, I’m starting to think one of those two is certain to get the nod. There’s a lot of alternatives, but I don’t see any of them breaking out of the pack. Is Allen demonstrably better than Huckabee? Is Pawlenty head and shoulders above Romney? They’re all sort of interchangeable to me, and I’m yakking about them in 2005. What’s going to be the view of average voters who have no idea who any of these guys are, but think they know who Rudy and McCain are?
5 Dennis Says:
September 19th, 2005 at 4:21 pm
And for those who think Rudy can’t win the nomination because the Republicans won’t nominate a pro-choice guy with an ugly personal life, remember that eights years after seeing their incumbent trounced in the general election, the Republicans went and nominated the guy’s son, and won. And now the Democrats are poised to nominate the wife of their last president, who was impeached after fooling around on her.

In other words, strange stuff happens in politics.

And here’s a great example: “When GOP voters learned that Giuliani has been married three times and is pro-choice on abortion, he still retains support from 31% of Republicans and McCain moves to 31% as well.” So Rudy keeps his voters, but McCain gains? Are people dumping Condi Rice so they can vote for McCain because they don’t like Rudy? How does this make sense?
6 Mark Says:
September 19th, 2005 at 4:56 pm
Dennis, I noticed that…very odd, indeed…
7 utron Says:
September 19th, 2005 at 5:40 pm
Granted, front-runners usually finish first, but that statement needs a few qualifications. Clinton wasn’t an obvious front-runner as late as–oh, December 1991, when my cousin bet me $50.00 he wouldn’t get the nomination. (My cousin expected Cuomo to get the nod.) Certainly McGovern in 1972 and Carter in ‘76 came up from way back in the pack, and Ford wasn’t able to shut out Reagan until very, very late–around the time West Virginia voted at the convention, which finally put him over the top.

If the last couple election cycles have been more predictable, you can blame the relentless front-loading of the primary schedule, which has made it almost impossible for an underdog to mount a credible challenge. But that has less to do with leading in the polls than with assembling the financial and logistical resources for a national campaign. Bush did it in 2000, while McCain focused on getting favorable press. Right now, Hillary is far ahead of any other candidate in either party on this front.

The wild card is on-line organizing, which might make the playing field a little more level. I still think Dean could have given Kerry some serious trouble, were it not for The Scream. This will be a bigger factor in 2008, and it might yet win the nomination for one of the underdogs. But getting your party’s hierarchy behind you counts, and aside from Hillary nobody is close to doing that. Basically, I’m just repeating my tedious refrain that it’s way, way too soon to call this race.
8 Dave Says:
September 19th, 2005 at 8:03 pm
Republican frontrunners almost always win the nomination.

Rudy’s support is solid. He’s got about a third of Republicans under his belt. Take Condi out and he probably gets a half dozen more points. Educate GOP voters about his truly conservative stances on taxes, spending, and entitlements and he gets another half dozen pts. I imagine that Rudy will come into the early primaries with about 40-45 percent of the vote (I don’t think Condi will run) and McCain will get his requisite 25 percent. Eventually, it’ll narrow down to three candidates: Rudy, McCain, and one of the carbon copy red-state conservatives like Allen. But Allen or whoever won’t be able to win any primaries because McCain, as the spoiler, will keep taking his quarter of the vote. Rudy will win a bunch of states with 40 percent pluralities, then McCain will drop out and Rudy will take at least half his support and finally have a clear majority in the later primaries. Eventually, Rudy will have enough delegates to claim the nomination.

Why is the GOP nominating a pro-choice NY Republican? Well, keep in mind that Rudy is friendly with the social right. Unlike McCain, he doesn’t attack them. And he’s always hanging out with Robertson, Ralph Reed, etc. He even endorsed a Christian conservative for mayor of Cincinnati. Kind of like Bush the Elder, Rudy is no southern baptist, but lots of his friends are southern baptists and he’s willing to work with them. Rudy will probably promise Justices in the mold of John Roberts in order to get the social right’s support.

Also, Rudy is necessary right now in the minds of many. The terrorists could easily be planning a series of mini-apocalypses on major American cities. After Katrina, many feel that this country needs an anti-hero to guide us through the turbulence. An anti-hero is a term in literature and art that refers to a character who does heroic things but is less than holy. Superman, motivated by the quest for truth and justice, is a hero. Batman, who is motivated by vengeance, is an anti-hero. Rudy, similarly, is set to be a conservative anti-hero, sort of the flip side of Reagan. Rudy is a tattered and tough figure who is on the wrong side of the most emotional conservative issues, but who is willing to lead conservatives and all Americans as a common enemy looms. It wouldn’t surprise me one bit if Rudy were the next president.
9 Mark Says:
September 19th, 2005 at 9:19 pm
Well, I certainly get some interesting comments around here re: Rudy. Some of my regulars absolutely love him, some of my regulars can barely tolerate him. I make no bones about liking Rudy, but I’m pretty happy with most of the possible GOPers…we’ll see. I absolutely feel that whoever eventually gets my support will have to be unequivocal about seeing through the War on Terror…the pressure to give everyone a ‘break’ will be immense by 2008; it will take a strong candidate to convince people that we can’t let up on this, probably for at least a couple of decades…
10 Dmac Says:
September 20th, 2005 at 10:01 am
The sense memory of what Rudy did and said following 9/11 will allay any concerns regarding his conduct on the WOT. Remember, this is the guy who kicked Arafat out of a concert in NYC one evening because he thought he was a affront to New Yorker’s dignity. How can ya not love the guy?
11 Dennis Says:
September 20th, 2005 at 10:11 am
I absolutely agree on that last point, Mark, which is why Giuliani is a compelling candidate for me. By 2008, what politician will be able to talk about terrorism and still get the attention of a nation that, I certainly hope, will not have suffered any recent terrorist attacks on its soil? It seems to me that Rudy is the natural guy to fit that bill.

I can certainly understand why some people don’t like him, especially if they’re on opposite sides of some issue. The thing that rings bells the loudest in my head is the accusation he’s a “gun-grabber.” I don’t know much about that, but knowing NYC politics, being a second-amendment absolutist won’t fly in the city. If he can promise to be a federalist on things like gun control, I could vote for him.

Anybody here read that “Prince of the City” book? I’m curious to read it myself now, and I’ve never been one for reading books on current politicians.
12 Knemon Says:
September 20th, 2005 at 6:38 pm
The Superman/Batman analogy is dead on. Shall I steal that? I think I shall.
13 Myra Says:
October 2nd, 2005 at 2:47 pm
McCain? Liberals must be voting in this poll.