Rudy Giuliani is — supposedly — running for president.
Assuming that he is — and there is much doubt that in the end he will give up all his business interests and $1000,000-per-speech fees to run — let us examine what he brings to the table:
He projects a tough image. He talks tough, looks tough, and indeed was tough as mayor of New York.
Is being tough what America wants in 2008? Hasn't G.W. Bush also been tough for the last six years?
Rudy was indeed competent as mayor — whether you agreed with him or not. Competent. Knows what he is doing. On top of things. Is this trait why he is doing so well in the polls?
Rudy has been married three times. Why does the supposedly-moral GOP suddenly embrace him?
How much do the voters in polls, one year before the primaries, really know about these candidates? Do they know all of Rudy's baggage? His pro-abortion position? His pro gay rights position? Are GOP voters willing to switch on all these positions now?
Rudy wins all the head-to-head polls against Hillary or Obama or Edwards. Will GOP voters calculate the winnability of a candidate into their votes in a caucus or a primary? Democrats did this in 2004 — they rejected Howard Dean because they thought he couldn't win in November and John Kerry could. But will GOP voters do the same with Rudy, seeing him as a general election winner, even if they disagree with him on their pet social issues?
Name ID: Many political observers believe these early polls mean absolutely nothing — that they are mere measurements of a candidate's name identification. Is Rudy that well known? All across the country? The mayor of New York City is a household name all over the country? Why? Because of 9/11?
He has been basically gone from the political scene for years — other than the 2004 convention speech — and yet he is the best known GOP candidate? Is that possible?
No New York City mayor — ever — has won any election for any office higher than mayor. Ever. Does this historical fact mean anything at all? Is it relevant? Or does history indeed show us patterns of future behavior? Is there an anti-New York City bias around the country that so far is not showing itself in the polls?
Rudy's judgements: Last year he called G.W. Bush "one of our greatest presidents." He also judged Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's election as president of Iran "as a sign of civilian control returning to Iran."
Both observations show poor judgement, pandering to the GOP base (which used to love Bush but is cooling on him now) and awful foreign policy ignorance.
All of this makes Rudy more hype than anyone wants to admit. He is no conservative — and that explains why the so-called mainstream media so far likes him.
His agenda is often their agenda.
Somehow it doesn't seem likely that a socially-liberal moderate Republican is going to win the GOP nomination. But, after the mess Bush has made of American politics, there is no telling what voters might ping-pong to.
Story Continues Below
Hillary and Obama were un-electable a year ago; today they are leading the polls.
So who knows where we are heading.
Print Page 
Forward Page 
