Ryan Sager writes some very decent puffery stating that Giuliani appears to be favored over McCain and that a socially liberal Republican from the northeast would now be "acceptable" in the south and west. He bases his analysis on a recently released Gallup poll which apparently actually uses the term 'acceptable' in one of its questions. He also posits Giuliani as the "clear leader" on the basis of a 29/24 split in Giuliani's favor in a poll for which he does not state the MOE.
Should the race come down to a Giuliani/McCain choice (bearing in mind that neither received even one-third of the respondents support) then I believe that Giuliani might prevail - if he clearly identifies the type of individual whom he would appoint to the bench. McCain has proven to be entirely undependable with regard to judicial appointments and will receive, at most, lukewarm support from those who give primacy to that aspect of a nominee's curriculum vitae and Giuliani shares with McCain (and with Gingrich) lapses in personal conduct which will not redound to an advantage for any one of them.
Mr. Sager also neglects to emphasize that Giuliani has very few ties at the national level within the party. He is not noted as a team player (nor is McCain). If Miz Clinton is the opposing candidate then either man would win but it would not be on the basis of popularity and trust but upon the choice of a lesser evil.
It is still a bit early to try and follow this very closely but I do expect that McCain will receive a considerable amount of negative press coverage, beginning in November from the same MSM who lovingly patted the head of their favorite 'maverick' in a soon to be forgotten past.
12 comments:
I like Rudy. And I don't find McCain half as obnoxious as I do some of his critcs.
Present company excepted of course.
I would say both or either of them have a better chance than an Allen/Tancredo ticket.
Many, many conservative Republicans simply do not trust McCain. Remember McCain/Feingold and the Nuclear Option fiasco. And look who he chooses to drink vodka with!
Terrye,
I like Rudy just fine - I'd vote for him in the general without hesitation. If he came out with a statement on his basis for selecting judicial nominees that was absolutely clear, I could support him for the nomination. He is certainly more trustworthy than is McCain. It's just that being more trustworth than McCain is a very low bar.
I don't have much of a feel for Allen but how would you feel about a Giuliani/Allen ticket - or vice-versa.
McCain would fight the war. And I don't think the gang of 14 was all bad.
sorry I just can not help myself. I am a Libra. I like balance, harmony all that stuff.
I like Giuliani and really fear McCain's moody swings and disrespect for the First Amendment. But I agree the press will now show that they liked McCain only when he was a maverick who could be counted on to slam the Administration.
Harmony is great but what about the days when McCain gets bad reception through his fillings and doesn't understand what the voices are telling him to do? I'm not sure how harmony arises from a group of second raters making a power play either. Not a smart choice at all, which is understandable.
And if he was going to allow himself to be rolled in order to cover up his own previous ethical lapses, he could have gone to Levin rather Feingold. Feingold is politically dumber than a brick and so far left that I'm surprised he doesn't move to Hawaii.
I am no so sure about Giuliani. He did a good job in New York, but he also recommended Bernard Kerik for the Homeland Security post and Kerik turned out to have all sorts of problems. I would also like to see him put together some sort of foreign policy and defense team before running. If nothing else that would show that he was ready for the job and it would also help us learn something about what he intended and his people skills. One of the good things about Bush as opposed to Kerry was that Bush had a team that he worked with while Kerry had a bunch of Democratic opportunists. That's how it looked to me, anyway.
John,
Truman, Kennedy, Johnson and Nixon were all Senators. The executive issue is certainly valid but it's not a perfect determinant.
The better choice question can't be answered quite yet. The pols with the most sense are keeping a low profile. It's still too early.
Thanks, John. Good recall on your part.
Still Condi. I know.
First, I don't care about squeaky clean. And, personally, I'm damn sick of blue dress references. M'kay? I have no problems with Rudy except for his lack of foreign policy experience. McCain seems more in the know on that score.
But McCain tries to please everybody, and we can't afford that.
So I'd go with Rudi 'cause I like him and he's tough and has great administrative credentials.
I like Allen, but he talks like an RNC chair and has all the talking points down pat. IOW, he sounds like a politician more than a possible leader.
Frist is waaaaaaaay too conservative for my tastes.
But nobody mentioned him anyway, so I guess he doesn't matter.
Newt is smart but I just can't envision him as President or Commander in Chief. He telegraphs and probably has never acted on an instinct in his entire life. We need a touch of raw and gutsy too, and for that I think Rudy would fit the bill best.
Newt is smart, but he scares me.
Wouldn't Europe have a collective cow if we made Newt Gingrich president. Makes it almost worth considering.
Post a Comment