Bradley in DC
11-02-2007, 01:39 PM
http://economist.com/world/na/displaystory.cfm?story_id=10063768
Who will take on Hillary?
...Some of these social conservatives are nonetheless so appalled by Mr Giuliani that they threaten to back a third-party candidate if he wins the Republican nomination. Others think that would be foolish, since it would virtually guarantee victory for the Democrats. But many Republicans fall into a third category—they are simply unaware that Mr Giuliani is socially liberal. A recent Gallup poll found that only 37% knew he was pro-choice and only 18% knew he favoured civil unions for gays.
This makes the race for the Republican nomination extremely hard to predict. As the primaries draw near, will voters learn more about Mr Giuliani and reject him? Some undoubtedly will. But others may not have bothered to find out where he stands on abortion because they do not think it matters much. After all, the president cannot ban the practice. The most he can do is to pick pro-life Supreme Court judges who, if confirmed by a substantially pro-choice Senate, might conceivably one day overturn Roe v Wade and hand the issue back to the states. This is highly unlikely, though, and most voters pay more attention to other issues.
For many Republicans, Mr Giuliani's chief virtue is that he has the best shot at beating Hillary Clinton. His boosters say his moderate social views could lure swing voters and bring big blue states such as New York and California back into play, at least forcing the Democrats to spend time and money defending them. Perhaps, but many swing voters will be repulsed by his hawkishness or his dodgy friends. (His third police chief, Bernard Kerik, is currently being investigated for tax fraud; were he to be indicted, that would be awkward for Mr Giuliani.)
Civil libertarians, too, distrust Mr Giuliani. He is worryingly vague as to what constitutes torture. He tried unsuccessfully to stay on as mayor beyond his term limit, citing the emergency of September 11th 2001. Washington Monthly, a Beltway journal, predicts—on the evidence of his record in New York—that if Mr Giuliani were elected president he would grab even more executive power than Mr Bush has.
Rasmussen Reports, a polling firm, also casts doubt on the notion that Mr Giuliani is the most electable Republican. As long as the Republican field remains so unsettled, head-to-head polls reveal mostly what voters feel about Mrs Clinton, the only candidate everyone knows. Against any of the top five Republicans, she wins between 46% and 49% of the vote. Against the little-known Ron Paul, a libertarian, she scores the same (48%). So Mr Giuliani's advantage is slight. And since it partly reflects his perceived electability, any doubts about that could scupper him...
Who will take on Hillary?
...Some of these social conservatives are nonetheless so appalled by Mr Giuliani that they threaten to back a third-party candidate if he wins the Republican nomination. Others think that would be foolish, since it would virtually guarantee victory for the Democrats. But many Republicans fall into a third category—they are simply unaware that Mr Giuliani is socially liberal. A recent Gallup poll found that only 37% knew he was pro-choice and only 18% knew he favoured civil unions for gays.
This makes the race for the Republican nomination extremely hard to predict. As the primaries draw near, will voters learn more about Mr Giuliani and reject him? Some undoubtedly will. But others may not have bothered to find out where he stands on abortion because they do not think it matters much. After all, the president cannot ban the practice. The most he can do is to pick pro-life Supreme Court judges who, if confirmed by a substantially pro-choice Senate, might conceivably one day overturn Roe v Wade and hand the issue back to the states. This is highly unlikely, though, and most voters pay more attention to other issues.
For many Republicans, Mr Giuliani's chief virtue is that he has the best shot at beating Hillary Clinton. His boosters say his moderate social views could lure swing voters and bring big blue states such as New York and California back into play, at least forcing the Democrats to spend time and money defending them. Perhaps, but many swing voters will be repulsed by his hawkishness or his dodgy friends. (His third police chief, Bernard Kerik, is currently being investigated for tax fraud; were he to be indicted, that would be awkward for Mr Giuliani.)
Civil libertarians, too, distrust Mr Giuliani. He is worryingly vague as to what constitutes torture. He tried unsuccessfully to stay on as mayor beyond his term limit, citing the emergency of September 11th 2001. Washington Monthly, a Beltway journal, predicts—on the evidence of his record in New York—that if Mr Giuliani were elected president he would grab even more executive power than Mr Bush has.
Rasmussen Reports, a polling firm, also casts doubt on the notion that Mr Giuliani is the most electable Republican. As long as the Republican field remains so unsettled, head-to-head polls reveal mostly what voters feel about Mrs Clinton, the only candidate everyone knows. Against any of the top five Republicans, she wins between 46% and 49% of the vote. Against the little-known Ron Paul, a libertarian, she scores the same (48%). So Mr Giuliani's advantage is slight. And since it partly reflects his perceived electability, any doubts about that could scupper him...