Giulianism

If British Conservatives had their choice of Republican presidential candidate the former New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani would be the overwhelming favourite.  Their enthusiasm perplexes many American conservatives.  Linking to the BritainAndAmerica finding, Kathryn Jean Lopez of NRO stated simply: Thankfully They Don't Have A Vote.

Although Giuliani holds a (decreasing) lead in the GOP field - dented by some missteps, the emergence of Fred Thompson (now running at 20%) and strong showings in the bellwether states by Mitt Romney - the analysts think that the resistance of Lopez and other social conservatives will eventually defeat Giuliani.  Veteran political analyst Charlie Cook has said that Giuliani winning the GOP nomination would force him to rethink everything he has ever learnt about Republican presidential politics.  Christian conservatives - who have been talking more and more favourably about Romney despite his Mormon faith - warn that Giuliani can't reach the White House without them.  Richard Land of the Southern Baptist Convention, who has criticised Giuliani's family life, has warned that Christian conservatives are as essential to any chance of a GOP candidate winning as black voters are indispensable to a successful Democrat candidate.

The socially liberal views of 'America's Mayor' certainly haven't hauled him below the water yet.  He's the national frontrunner and is competitive in socially conservative states such as South Carolina.  He may be doing well among social conservatives because of the high priority they attach to the war on terror.  All GOP voters put the war in Iraq as their top issue (31%) and 17% choose terrorism and security.  Only 7% name abortion and 1% name gay marriage.   

The Republican Party cannot afford to elevate suspicion of homosexuality into a defining feature of its identity.  The nation that has laughed at Will & Grace and filled cinemas showing Brokeback Mountain is changing fast.  Twenty years ago there was a 51% to 42% majority in favour of a right to fire homosexual teachers.  Now 66% to 28% disagree with such a right.  A nation that was once split on whether AIDS was a punishment for sexual immorality is now 72% to 23% in disagreement with the contention.

In the 21 May edition of the left-leaning New Republic, Thomas B Edsall wonders if Giuliani is best able to lead the Republican Party into this new era of public opinion and whether a wider 'Giulianism' represents the future of the Republican party.  His no-nonsense, pro-cop, anti-tax positions won him widespread support amongst lower and middle income voters in New York.  Some GOP strategists hope that this same worldview might lure Reagan Democrats back to the Republican coalition.  Unlike many other social liberals within the Republican party, Giuliani is a hardliner on other issues of importance to the Republican base.  In addition to a hawkish approach to Iraq (he has said that Bush-Rumsfeld deployed far too few troops) he is a tax cutter, a fiscal conservative and very tough on crime.  His record in New York confirms that these are longstanding positions.  His time in New York politics also show him to be a polariser, writes Edsall.  He doesn't know how to play softball.  Edsall predicts that he will use the same tough rhetoric against terrorists that he used against criminals while he was Mayor.  He has already accused Democrats of waving the white flag on defence and of wanting to return to the defensive stance of pre-9/11.  These techniques will help rally the Republican base behind him - particularly if Hillary Clinton is the Democrat candidate.  The latest polling suggests that her lead over Barack Obama is widening.

Post 9/11 hawkishness may now be the glue holding the Republican coalition together but Giuliani cannot afford to insult social conservatives.  A socially conservative running mate like Sam Brownback, opposition to gay marriage and support for Supreme Court appointments like Alito, Roberts, Scalia and Thomas will be necessary commitments from Giuliani if he is to emerge as the Republican nominee and avoid a third party candidate from the Christian right.

Comments

[Steevo]

Good article and I basically agree.

I may not be in the Christian conservative family but I'm pretty conservative and I think Christians like Land, usually self-righteous leaders, speak for a small minority: 7% think abortion is the highest priority and 1% gay marriage. The fundamentalist Christian movement is not as significant as in previous years.

But you're right, they cannot be taken for granted. A socially conservative running mate makes perfect sense. As close as our elections can be we have to believe every vote will count and just a couple of percentage points can make or break it.

[Frogg]

It is also the Christian conservative wing that is the most supportive of GWOT and wants a strong leader in these difficult times. Guliani isn't exactly a social liberal either. He is usually referred to as a 'moderate' conservative.

I think any of the top tier Republicans would do a great job. Guliani will, indeed, have a close race against both Fred Thompson and Mitt Romney.

This article is worth a read, also:

Rudy Giuliani Could be Just the Ticket for Social Conservatives

March 19, 2007

http://www.americanthinker.com/2007/03/rudy_giuliani_could_be_just_th.html

[Frogg]

Speaking of polls (a few threads down)....this is most interesting and serves as an example of my description of the complexities of American polling....

-------------------------

In Polls, Clinton Loses to Republicans

By MICHAEL FINNEGAN
Los Angeles Times
June 18, 2007

WASHINGTON — It is a paradox of the 2008 presidential race. By a wide margin, several polls show, voters want a Democrat to win — yet when offered head-to-head contests of leading announced candidates, many switch allegiance to the Republican.

In a Los Angeles Times-Bloomberg poll conducted earlier this month, this dynamic was most clearly evident with Senator Clinton.

When registered voters were asked which party they would like to win the White House, they preferred a Democrat over a Republican by 8%. But in a race pitting Mrs. Clinton against Mayor Giuliani, a Republican, the former New York mayor was favored by 10%.

Mrs. Clinton's showing against Mr. Giuliani was the starkest example of how the general Democratic edge sometimes narrows or vanishes when voters are given specific candidates to choose between.

The poll also showed Mrs. Clinton trailing when matched against two other Republicans — Senator McCain of Arizona and a former Massachusetts governor, Mitt Romney.

The deficits, however, were within the survey's margin of error of plus or minus 3%.

http://www.nysun.com/article/56786

[Andrew Ian Dodge]

I have to agree with NRO on this one. I don't think Guiliani can beat the leading Democrats. I do think Fred Thompson can. I would recommend watching this piece with Fred to hear what he thinks.

[JF]

Frogg, if you don't believe that someone who supports civil unions for gays, promotes federal funding of abortion, favors gun control, and makes his city a sanctuary for illegal aliens is a social liberal, how do you define a social liberal? From the perspective of many conservatives, it's difficult to top that, especially given his two divorces.

[syn]

I live in NYC and will vote for Rudy if I have too however, he is a social liberal politiciansand social liberal politicians are typically beholden to the billionaire Collectivist club (ie uber wealthy cultural Marxists like Mike Bloomberg and Arnold Schwarzenegger) Social liberal politicians are unable to govern fiscally conservative and my taxes are as high today as they were under Rudy...he may have helped big business with his undocumented illegal workers driving his sanctuary city but he didn't help the ordinary tax payer.

In other words, RINOs ruined Rudy's chance for gaining the party nomination.

It's bad enough having to live under the creepy nanny statist Bloomberg, it will be worse if a nanny statist ends up in the White House. I simply cannot trust Rudy not to do a Bloomberg/Schwarzennegger about face and stab me in the back with a bunch of nanny statist Collectivism.

[Oliver McCarthy]

Whenever I think of Giuliani I cannot but compare him with Michael Howard -- or, at best, Sarkozy. I haven't seen or heard anything to suggest that Giuliani is a particularly subtle politician, and he shows about as much interest in uniting the Right in America as David Cameron does in this country (i.e. none whatsoever).

The article is perceptive, apart from the idea that Iraq somehow "glues" the Republicans together. They'll unite around a man who can be all things to all Republicans much more easily than they can around an specific policy -- and certainly one that most of them now like to think was a mistake.

On the other hand, if it really comes down to a straight fight between Giuliani and America's answer to Segolene, the next Presidential Election will be a contest to see which candidate can alienate his or her own side fastest. (Basically all this talk of 'leading Democrats' is flim-flam: the only "unknown knowns" in American politics at the moment are which Republican -- i.e. probably John McCain -- is going to beat Hillary and how badly she's going to lose.)

[rightwingprof]

Polls are interesting, but votes win elections. At least now, Thompson is the only candidate who generates excitement. If this continues to be the case (that is, if Fred doesn't do something stupid to sabotage himself), I suspect if anyone else wins the nomination, a lot of conservatives won't vote and the Democrat will win.

[JF]

Oliver McCarthy, John McCain has been fatally wounded by his stance on illegal immigration (i.e. he is a proponent of amnesty). He's not going to be the Republican nominee.

That said, I think your comparison of Giuliani to Sarkozy is quite apt.