I have been predicting this for months....

[MobBoss]

http://www.breitbart.com/news/2006/03/07/060307155356.z2o6i78w.html

Former New York City mayor Rudy Giuliani is the most popular politician in the United States, according to a national poll this week testing support for potential candidates in the 2008 presidential race.

The survey of some 1,900 voters by the Quinnipiac Polling Institute asked respondents to rate several nationally known politicians on a scale from 0 to 100, with higher numbers reflecting higher regard.

Giuliani topped the list, with an average score of 63.5 percent, followed by Democratic Senator Barack Obama, seen as one of his party's rising stars. Obama scored 59.9.

In third place was maverick veteran Republican US Senator John McCain at 59.7, followed by Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice with a score of 57.1.

Former US President Bill Clinton rounded out the top five with a score of 56.1 in the poll by the Hamden Connecticut-based political institute.

His wife, US Senator Hillary Clinton, seen as the Democrats' top bet to run for the White House in 2008, came in eighth place, with a score of 50.4.

Kinda confirms what I have been saying for months. If Giuliani runs he will be a shoe-in to win the presidential race.

 

[Irish Caesar]

Agreed, but why was Bill Clinton in the poll? He's clearly ineligible...

 

[h4ppy]

Becuase we aren't polling presidential hopefuls, just polititians in general. (Go McCain.)

 

[MobBoss]

Becuase we aren't polling presidential hopefuls, just polititians in general. (Go McCain.)

Well, who can deny the logic of (popular politician = good presidential candidate)?

 

[Irish Caesar]

Just that

...according to a national poll this week testing support for potential candidates in the 2008 presidential race.

Clinton is not a potential candidate.

 

[MobBoss]

Just that


Clinton is not a potential candidate.

Hillery CLINTON is.

Well......

Ok, you are right after all!!!!

 

[Little Raven]

Kinda confirms what I have been saying for months. If Giuliani runs he will be a shoe-in to win the presidential race.

Am I the only one that remembers his Inside Politics interview?

“I’m pro-choice. I’m pro-gay rights.”

You really think a Republican candidate who's pro-choice is going to survive the primaries? The Religious Right will eat him for breakfast.

 

[Desmond Hawkins]

Hell, if the Dems are silly enough to run Hillary, then they won't even need Giuliani to win.

 

[MobBoss]

Am I the only one that remembers his Inside Politics interview?

“I’m pro-choice. I’m pro-gay rights.”

You really think a Republican candidate who's pro-choice is going to survive the primaries? The Religious Right will eat him for breakfast.

Yes, I do. For two reasons. We need a fiscal conservative in the white house badly and he is that. The RR does not have as much pull as you think it does.

Plus the RR is not stupid either. They would vote for the candidate they can possibly influence, as opposed to one they have no chance in hell of influencing.

The G-man can say those type of things all day long come election, but that doenst mean he has to make it an agenda item either once in office. The man is smart enough to cater to both sides in order to win elections.

 

[Little Raven]

Yes, I do. For two reasons. We need a fiscal conservative in the white house badly and he is that. The RR does not have as much pull as you think it does.

Then why did an enormously popular McCain lose to an evangelical from Texas, despite McCain's significant victory in New Hampshire?

 

[MobBoss]

Then why did an enormously popular McCain lose to an evangelical from Texas, despite McCain's significant victory in New Hampshire?

Most likely because the guy from Texas had the famous last name of Bush. Oh, and I am fairly certain he had a ton more money to campaign with. It certainly wasnt because he was an "evangelical". And it is also a known fact that governors get elected to president when senators always seem to lose.

 

[ironduck]

Then why did an enormously popular McCain lose to an evangelical from Texas, despite McCain's significant victory in New Hampshire?

I seem to remember McCain accusing Bush of an extremely nasty and unfair campaing against him during the primaries. I didn't follow the debacle, but if true who did the dirty work for Bush?

 

[Bozo Erectus]

Ive been predicting for years that when push comes to shove, nobody will be able to vote for him knowing it'll mean hearing his annoying lisp every day for four years. Im completely serious.

This is an actual prediction: If Giuliani is elected President, we'll all soon be waxing nostalgic for the good old days of the Bush administration. He's the biggest sleazebag that ever reared itself up on two legs.

 

[Andu Indorin]

Hell, if the Dems are silly enough to run Hillary, then they won't even need Giuliani to win.

Ariana Huffington pointed out yesterday, "If the democrats nominate Hillary Clinton, they've got a death wish."

I totally agree with that assessment.

 

[MobBoss]

Ive been predicting for years that when push comes to shove, nobody will be able to vote for him knowing it'll mean hearing his annoying lisp every day for four years. Im completely serious.

This is an actual prediction: If Giuliani is elected President, we'll all soon be waxing nostalgic for the good old days of the Bush administration. He's the biggest sleazebag that ever reared itself up on two legs.

Then that will make all the old Clinton lovers perfectly happy.

 

[Little Raven]

I seem to remember McCain accusing Bush of an extremely nasty and unfair campaing against him during the primaries. I didn't follow the debacle, but if true who did the dirty work for Bush?

Bush did run a dirty campaign, and Rove was the mastermind. But Bush's big push came from the Religious Right, who voted almost to a man for Bush. As John Weaver, McCain's political director, said after the South Carolina primary "Ralph Reed, Pat Robertson and Jerry Falwell are to be congratulated."

It's not that the RR is big, though it certainly isn't small. But they vote with a uniformity that puts unions to shame. This makes them a very, very powerful in elections, particularly in primary elections, which have notoriously low turnout. It's possible for a Republican to survive without the endorsement of the mega-churches, though it's difficult. But for a Republican who is opposed by those churches to survive the primaries?

I don't think it's gonna happen. But hey, what do I know?

 

[Bozo Erectus]

He's only been pro gay rights and pro choice in NYC because he had to be in order to be elected. If he was seriously running for the Republican nomination he'd drop both positions like hot potatoes.

 

[GenMarshall]

http://www.breitbart.com/news/2006/03/07/060307155356.z2o6i78w.html



Kinda confirms what I have been saying for months. If Giuliani runs he will be a shoe-in to win the presidential race.

Dont get your hopes up. He has yet to go through the primaries.

BTW, do you have any more information about his political background. If he passes the primaries and is a pro-lifer. He would be the only Republican canidate for president that I would vote for. Wait, is it kosher for a Democrat to vote across their partylines for a Republican?! .

 

[Irish Caesar]

I doubt it. He wouldn't need to anyway. Who would beat him running the Religious Right view of those issues? Even if the Religious Right refused to vote for him at all, I doubt they'd vote Democrat. And I think Rudy would beat any Democrat.

Personally, I'd have a tough time voting for any Yankees fan...

 

[Irish Caesar]

Wait, is it kosher for a Democrat to vote across their partylines for a Republican?! .

Far more kosher than a Catholic voting for a Democrat, so they'd make you believe.