Pew poll: Hillary leads Rudy by eight nationally, by 11 in the south
posted at 2:03 pm on November 1, 2007 by Allahpundit
Not every poll agrees but this one used an unusually large sample. The head-to-head breakdown is here; note the numbers for the south in the first poll at the top. I can only explain that as residual affection for Billy Jeff among southern independents. On the other hand, the numbers for Rudy among Hispanics are encouraging — 38 percent, which isn’t far off what Bush pulled in 2004 notwithstanding all the immigration sturm und drang that’s happened since.
This is the set I want to focus on, the for/against analysis:
In three elections — 1988, 1996, and 2004 — there was a gap between the candidate whose side was voting for him and the candidate whose side was voting against the other guy. In all three, “for” beat “against.” Which bodes very ominously indeed, especially with Rudy counting on Hillary-hatred for turnout among southern evangelicals who’d otherwise be squeamish about voting for him. Here’s why he has to pitch himself as not-a-Democrat as opposed to a Republican:
The Wash Times has a piece out today claiming that Republican strategists are keen on the idea of Bloomberg running now because they think he’ll swipe more votes from the Democrat than from them. Look again at that data and see the folly of that theory. If anyone’s looking for a protest vote, it’s Republicans, not Democrats, especially after the Nader debacle of 2000. (An early poll confirmed this phenomenon.) Don’t believe me?
44% willing to consider a third-party is no mean number, although the fact that that skews towards conservative Republicans bodes ill for Bloomberg and much better for a social con independent. (See the last poll at the bottom here to see the skew explained.)
The one bit of good news: Americans hate the Democratic Congress. The bad news: One reason why is because they’re not acting “Democratic” enough.
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Comment pages: 1 2 Next »
The Democrats are hard at work to provide the illusion Senator Clinton is popular. Senator Clinton has the highest negatives of any candidate, yet she is pulling ahead in the South? Huh?
Internals of the poll should provide a proper context. I am assuming there is something funky in the internals that makes this poll appear to say something that really isn’t.
Weebork on November 1, 2007 at 2:08 PM
I think it was the fake southern drawl, personally.
World B. Free on November 1, 2007 at 2:09 PM
I do not trust PEW.
pat on November 1, 2007 at 2:09 PM
I think Hispanics are probably fairly comfortable that Rudy’s position on the border parallels that of George Bush, hence the similarity in the numbers.
What I’m wondering is, what ever happened to Fred? Has he fallen in the polls? Does Rudy already have this thing wrapped up?
FloatingRock on November 1, 2007 at 2:11 PM
My fellow southerners seem willing to cut off our collective nose to spite our face.
aero on November 1, 2007 at 2:13 PM
I’ve seen elsewhere that Republicans made up only about 34% of the total poll respondents. From MSNBC:
I know Republican self-identification is down, but 32 percent seems a bit low, especially when you consider that the 648 includes “party-leaners” as well.
Slublog on November 1, 2007 at 2:14 PM
Whoops. Meant to write 32% in the first paragraph as well.
Slublog on November 1, 2007 at 2:15 PM
Cue the “AP, leave Rudy alone!” whiners….
Hollowpoint on November 1, 2007 at 2:16 PM
The Democrats made a crucial mistake in 2004 when they decided to run on the slogan “Anyone But Bush.”
Will the Republicans make the same mistake in 2008 with “Anyone but Hillary”?
aunursa on November 1, 2007 at 2:16 PM
If this poll is true, Americans are now so hopelessly PC-braindead that nothing matters. But it can’t be true.
Halley on November 1, 2007 at 2:17 PM
Buh bye, Rudy. If America wants a liberal president, why accept a cheap imitation?
Valiant on November 1, 2007 at 2:18 PM
I’m hopeful about what will happen when illegal immigration becomes the big issue. However, I’m concerned that the MSM will try to “educate” the American people about the illegals, if they don’t try to ignore the issue.
thuja on November 1, 2007 at 2:20 PM
The Dems could nominate Pee Wee Herman and us Reps would find a way to lose in November. Tired of people claiming that Hillary is soooooooooo bad she in unelectable. It isn’t about who is running, but what. R and D. Unless the Rs figure out how to go on the attack then R is going to be removed from the alphabet.
Limerick on November 1, 2007 at 2:25 PM
PEW=STINK
Nyog_of_the_Bog on November 1, 2007 at 2:25 PM
I think these polls are a bit skewed because Hillary is the overwhelming front-runner for the Dems, and Rudy only has a slight lead over the other Republicans. People won’t really committ to Rudy, because they just aren’t sure he’s the man.
If this is true, things are worse than I imagined inside the hapless (former) GOP.
reaganaut on November 1, 2007 at 2:25 PM
I don’t believe this for a minute.
Maxx on November 1, 2007 at 2:26 PM
1) the South has a high % black population, and Rudy is at 8% in this same poll
2) Rudy is doing well with Rural voters (what most Northern people think of as the South), but they forget about cities like Atlanta and how diverse the South is.
3) Some non-rural Southern white males (me, for example, who grew up in and outside of Atlanta), don’t indentify with a New Yorker much, esp a “reformed” liberal, as New Yawkers tend to think they are at the center of the universe.
4) I don’t see anywhere that says this is a poll of likely voters, which would skew it Democratic. I could’ve missed it, though.
RW Wacko on November 1, 2007 at 2:27 PM
This is another example of pollsters trying to sway public opinion rather than measure it. Remember the 2004 exit polls? Kerry Won!
Not.
pistolero on November 1, 2007 at 2:28 PM
If the numbskulls in the GOP leadership are banking on Nanny Bloomberg to save their asses, they don’t get it, and we’re in big, big trouble in ’08.
Bad Candy on November 1, 2007 at 2:29 PM
Fred is dead. It is between Mitt and Rudy. Mitt will probably win the first two states (If not he’s dead too). If Mitt can turn those two wins into momentum, he can survive Rudy’s Super Ultra Mega Tuesday. Otherwise it’s all Rudy. Fred will loose the early states and will be funneling the remainder of his campaign cash to his son long before Big Tuesday. Sorry Fredheads, I’m back to my illegal still, no fake federalist is gonna tax my hooch.
tommylotto on November 1, 2007 at 2:31 PM
Polls schmols. If you live and die by those things you are going to get alot of things wrong. Hillary wins the South? You have to be kidding me. Ain’t no way that happens.
Theworldisnotenough on November 1, 2007 at 2:32 PM
This is BS, no way this can be right
Defector01 on November 1, 2007 at 2:33 PM
I remember the Pew poll in Sept. 2004 that showed Kerry with a 3% lead…in Tennessee.
I knew damned well that if my home state had dismissed Gore in 2000, there wasn’t a Rolex chance in Detroit that we were going to vote for a Mass. blue blood leftist.
Kerry lost TN, by 14%. I can see where Pew would confuse -14% with +3%. A 17% swing happens to the best of us. Right?
crushliberalism on November 1, 2007 at 2:34 PM
Tom McClintock (Last conservative in California) was on John Ziegler last night giving his endorsement to Fred.
Fred message on immigration wins every border state, period. If Rudy thinks he is going to win Florida with his stance on immigration he is sadly mistaken.
Theworldisnotenough on November 1, 2007 at 2:36 PM
Bullshtein.
Mike Honcho on November 1, 2007 at 2:38 PM
Among Blacks:
Clinton 85%
Giuliani 8%
How out of touch with reality are black Americans? They really do believe Democrats are interested in their well-being.
Gregor on November 1, 2007 at 2:42 PM
Color me very skeptical. For one, it’s a Pew poll. For another, I find it hard as a Southerner to believe that the South will go for Hillary. Lastly, this poll’s sample size is skewed towards the Democrats as with most other polls that are released, a fact that is curiously never questioned.
CP on November 1, 2007 at 2:42 PM
As much as I dislike Hillary, at least she hasn’t tried to stab the 2nd amendment in the back rather than confront it in a more honorable way.
I hope the Rudy supporters here aren’t “piling on” Hillary to heavily for supporting driver’s licenses for illegal aliens: Doesn’t Rudy also support ID’s for illegal aliens? Doesn’t Rudy support sanctuary cities? Isn’t Rudy the guy who’s clearly stated that he apposed shutting off the magnets that draw illegal aliens here? Isn’t he against the border fence and instead wants to install cameras and censors so that he can take pictures and count them as they stream across?
And people wonder why Rudy’s behind Hillary in the polls. Give me a break.
FloatingRock on November 1, 2007 at 2:44 PM
I’m sorry…the south ain’t voting for her. Somethings wrong with those numbers. Not in a million years. I don’t wnat to sound like THEM but dude, that poll is just wrong.
TheGoblinKing on November 1, 2007 at 2:45 PM
See what I have been tolling you.
- Goober Slims
MB4 on November 1, 2007 at 2:46 PM
Unfortunately, there are more of them than there are of us now. However, you are right that this poll is even more skewed; I think it is not looking at likely voters. Likely voters trend more Republican, also more white, which could partially explain away some of the weak Southern data here, but just a bit of it.
RW Wacko on November 1, 2007 at 2:47 PM
38 percent?
That’s all being el santuario alcalde got him???!!!
He got cincelada!!!
MB4 on November 1, 2007 at 2:51 PM
The Pew poll’s sample size is impressive, but without a proper weighing for party identification, it is suspect. In looking at past polls, it seems Pew is vastly overstating the number of self-identified Democrats or Democratic leaning voters.
Going from identical to a 15-point gap just defies reason. People self-identify in parties due to held beliefs, and it’s quite hard to move the needle that far in so relatively short a time.
This poll does show, though, that Pew likely used this weighing in the poll cited above, which would skew the results quite a bit. It seems curious that the pollsters in this instance really believe that such a dramatic shift in self-identification is possible.
Slublog on November 1, 2007 at 2:51 PM
I don’t see Giuliani exciting Southern voters. He doesn’t excite me. I’d support Fred, Tanc, McCain, Hunter and Mitt more than Rudy. I don’t know any of my buddies who are all gaga over Rudy. Some are big on Fred, though. I’m not big on any of them, which I think is true of lots of us; that is our bigger problem. They have their candidate.
RW Wacko on November 1, 2007 at 2:51 PM
Game over, man…game over!
OTOH, we’re still a year out. But I’m still not very hopeful.
flipflop on November 1, 2007 at 2:52 PM
i think a muslim made this poll, muslims make all polls in which republicans are losing, of course it has nothing to do with ineptitude of the GOP or the candidates, its clearly the muslims.
zane on November 1, 2007 at 2:53 PM
Those party i.d. #s are incredibly bogus. I think they are comparing using those from their own polls during past election cycles and #s pulled during this very poll itself. You don’t measure party i.d. in the middle of a campaign, b/c people will “identify” with the candidate they are voting for. Respected measurements of party i.d. HAVE been showing a very pronounced shuffling away from the Republicans, however. Slow and steady, but it is there.
RW Wacko on November 1, 2007 at 2:55 PM
Are you a troll or what?
FloatingRock on November 1, 2007 at 2:56 PM
If Rudy has this thing (the Republican nomination) wrapped up then HildaBeastSuccubus™ has things (the general election) all wrapped up. Close anyway.
MB4 on November 1, 2007 at 2:57 PM
Oh, I agree. I believe Republican party ID is probably closer to 40% than 35%.
Slublog on November 1, 2007 at 2:57 PM
All the commenters here are ripping their hair out over the sheer ineptitude of the GOP. Geez
RW Wacko on November 1, 2007 at 2:57 PM
Hate to break it to you, but Rudy leads by double digits in Florida. They have already awarded him the delagates.
tommylotto on November 1, 2007 at 2:58 PM
Either a troll or a wit. I can’t tell yet.
MB4 on November 1, 2007 at 2:59 PM
I’m not sure if dude meant Rudy winning FL in the primary or the general election.
crushliberalism on November 1, 2007 at 3:00 PM
Take the above comment with a grano de sal as I think that this commenter may be Rudy’s madre.
MB4 on November 1, 2007 at 3:02 PM
JUST ANOTHER LAME ATTEMPT FOR THE TAIL TO WAG THE DOG.
I don’t believe these facts are facts, but wannabe facts. If the American public elects Hillary, the United States is in grave trouble that runs deeper than just Hillary.
What the hell, with the illegal immigration problem having politicians falling all over each other to give away the farm to criminal illegal immigrant cheaters, what else can we expect? Have the hard working, productive, and creative economic engine builders have lost control of the country to trough slopping sheep that are fighting for more free dola?
We shall see.
saiga on November 1, 2007 at 3:02 PM
Oh PLEASE. She just went on record as being for driver’s licenses for illegals and for bringing back the detested comprehensive immigration reform bill and she made a fool of herself in the debate and her polls are going up?
PLEASE.
GogglesPisano on November 1, 2007 at 3:06 PM
About a year ago, on another blog, I said that I thought that the only way Hillary, be she the dim nominee, could win would be if the Republicans nominated Michael Jackson. At the rate the Republicans are going the dims could probably nominate Michael Jackson and the Republicans would still manage to lose somehow. It’s is not quite that bad, but it is getting close.
MB4 on November 1, 2007 at 3:06 PM
BREAKING: This just in, poll of Democrats finds Democrats more likely to vote Democrat! Clear message being sent by voters…
cc: NBC/ABC/CBS/CNN/MSNBC/PBS/NPR/NYT/WP/Gallup/et.al.
CP on November 1, 2007 at 3:09 PM
I think he does. Despite buying some pretty good support in early-voting states, I don’t see Mitt surging to the top since he’s rarely broken out of single digits in national polls. Nobody in flyover country knows who Mitt is, despite millions and millions of dollars spent and months of hard campaigning. And even if he did somehow win the nomination, he can’t beat Hillary. It’s delusional to think he can. Same with Fred, who never took off. It’s possible that when the majority of voters start paying attention (the day before the first primary), they’ll pick Fred for his TV fame. But I don’t think so. It doesn’t look like he can win any of the early states at this point, so I don’t see how he builds momentum. Anyway, I think it’s Rudy. And poll after poll is showing that stubborn conservatives plan to turn their backs on our nominee if it’s Rudy, offering Hillary the White House just to make a point.
The upside is that if Hillary wins, we can run somebody genuinely conservative against her in 2012, like Newt. But we’ll be coming from so far behind at that point that it’s going to be incredibly difficult to unseat her. Plus, God knows how many economy-destroying socialist spending programs she will have instituted by then with the help of a willing Democrat Congress. Okay, I’m gonna stop now. Too depressing.
aero on November 1, 2007 at 3:10 PM
Ruby is behind Hilary more than a year before the election. I’m sure nothing will change over the intervening thirteen months. The sky is falling!!! The sky is falling!!!
thuja on November 1, 2007 at 3:15 PM
These polls are being rigged by the Clintonista machine to sow despair amongst the Republican rank and file.
They know Rudy has the best shot to beat the Beest and they want the GOP to feel the grip of hoplelessness before the contest even begins so that they reject Rudy or turn to a third party spoiler.
TRUST NO ONE.
Always Right on November 1, 2007 at 3:17 PM
I hear ya. Remember that Bush had a 20% lead over Gore about a year out, and we all remember what a horse race that turned into.
crushliberalism on November 1, 2007 at 3:17 PM
I’m afraid you have been drinking the anti-Rudy koolaide
No. Rudy does not support drivers licenses for illegals. Rudy supports a Secure Authorized Foreign Entry Card (SAFE Card) to be uniform for all non-citizen workers and students, utilizing tamper-proof and biometric features for secure identification for persons entering this country legally so we can know who they are and we can keep track of them. This ID card would immediately identify the person as an alien. It would not give them the right to drive or vote as Hillary would like.
No. Rudy reported even illegal alien that was suspected of committing a crime in his city and asked the feds to deport them. The feds failed to stop these guys at the border and failed to deport them after they were reported. Rudy reported more criminal illegal aliens to the feds every year than the feds bothered to deport. The feds refused to do their job and tried to impose a useless and unnecessary bureaucratic nightmare for a city that had 400,000 illegal aliens. The feds gave Rudy lemons and Rudy did his best to make lemonaide. Illegals were not reported for seeking medical attention of schooling for their kids. He was stuck with these people, because the feds did not do their job, as a leader of a huge city he determined it was better to have kids in school than roaming the streets and people getting medical treatment rather than spreading communicable diseases. It’s called making the hard decisions. It’s called leadership.
No. He has promised to effectively end illegal immigration. That is the feds job — not city states or employers. If POTUS, Rudy will be the fed and in a position to do the job. He will do the job so that city, states and employers will not have to.
No. Rudy will build both a physical and a technological barrier. Rudy will commit to building the fence – both physical and high-tech – now, while deploying and maintaining 20,000 Border Patrol agents and measuring their progress toward ending illegal immigration. It is important to accomplish this goal in order to preserve and expand legal immigration. Rudy will propose BorderStat to bring accountability to measuring the progress in securing our borders. BorderStat is modeled after the Mayor’s successful New York City program CompStat which helped reduce the city’s crime by imposing accountability. It will use key indicators to identify both effective enforcement strategies that demonstrate tangible results and areas of the border where we are failing so the failures can be immediately corrected.
Hot Air’s favorite pollster Rasmussen has Rudy up 46-44 while Fred is still loosing.
tommylotto on November 1, 2007 at 3:23 PM
Can you blame them?
I’m a conservative, not a Republican. I have no party loyalty. My only loyalty is to America. I will never vote for anybody who’s apposed the founding principles of this country, especially somebody who’s tried to stab it in the back in a sneaky, underhanded and downright un-American way. It saddens me that so many of you will sell out your principles merely to have a letter “R” in the White House regardless of the fact that in so doing, the letter “R” will be redefined into something entirely different.
“Republican” is just a word. What is important is what it stands for, and a lot of people don’t seem to care. They just want an “R”.
FloatingRock on November 1, 2007 at 3:28 PM
I think the premature panicking is due to MB4′s point that no one other than Dick Morris, who was seriously derided, thought Hillary could ever be president 2-3 years back. Even a year ago, I don’t think anyone on the right really thought she’d get anywhere near 50% in a national poll. Now she’s kicking arse all over the place. What the heck happened? It’s NOT just this poll, either, she’s doing okay in other polls, too.
RW Wacko on November 1, 2007 at 3:31 PM
Stubborn liberals plan to turn their backs on the Republican party’s values and traditions by nominating Rudy, offering Hillary the White House just to make a point.
MB4 on November 1, 2007 at 3:32 PM
Referring to Congress as the Democratic congress is good PR for the Republicans, but not very enlightening. The reason Congress is unpopular is that it’s not doing anything because it’s gridlocked and it’s full of wimps. If you think about it, the greatest legislative victories in the past have been instances where Congress failed to pass legislation: it failed to pass the “amnesty bill” (big legislative victory for the anti-(illegal-)immigration crowd), it failed to override the President’s SCHIP veto (big victory for the insurance lobby and any male candidate for President), it failed to pull do anything about ending the war in Iraq (big victory for … let’s not go there). It’s hard to like this Congress because it’s hard to find anything they stand for or have achieved.
But the distaste isn’t going against the Democrats exclusively because it’s hard to think of anything Republicans in Congress would have achieved, if the Dems didn’t have their razor-thin majorities.
So if you don’t like Democrats, by all means, keep talking about the do-nothing Democrat-led Congress and keep making fun of Pelosi and Reid. Just don’t expect another Gingrich revolution in ’08.
factoid on November 1, 2007 at 3:36 PM
Newt himself has been quoted as saying that he thinks that the chances are 80% that the dims will win the Presidency in 2008. Given that Hillary is almost the certain dim nominee, that is close to saying that she has an 80% chance of becoming Prez and CIC.
MB4 on November 1, 2007 at 3:36 PM
Maybe. I did see Rudy in a television interview very recently saying he didn’t think we needed a physical wall b/c a high-tech super-duper virtual wall would do the job better blah blah. Does he state somewhere officially that he supports a physical border fence?
RW Wacko on November 1, 2007 at 3:36 PM
Yet again showing a madres amor por un hijo.
MB4 on November 1, 2007 at 3:39 PM
I agree. Fred is a scumbag. How could he have provided legal assistance to Lybian terrorists in an effort thwart justice for 11 years. Or were you talking about how he shut down your favorite moonshiner’s still? I know how hillbillies are partial to their hooch.
tommylotto on November 1, 2007 at 3:40 PM
Okay, I see you pulled that off of Rudy’s website. He says he will build a physical and virtual fence. Now I have to decide if I believe him.
RW Wacko on November 1, 2007 at 3:40 PM
That quote came straight from his web site:
tommylotto on November 1, 2007 at 3:42 PM
Sorry Tommylotto, no offense, but when it comes to the candidates I don’t read your comments or BKenedy or CSDeven. It’s just a waste of my valuable time. (I apologize to any rabid partisans I left out.)
However, I only skip your comments in threads pertaining to the candidates, not in general.
I did scan your comment above to confirm that, as usual, you have entirely misrepresented Rudy’s stance on one of the most important issues of our day. I’m not going to address every glaring misrepresentation, but I will address one, (which was the only complete sentence I actually read.)
No. He didn’t. He’s on record that he apposes work place enforcement.
FloatingRock on November 1, 2007 at 3:43 PM
Are you going to believe him or your lying ojos?
MB4 on November 1, 2007 at 3:44 PM
Rudy is basically saying once you sneak in, congratulations! But I’m gonna make it real hard for ya! Still a lot better than what we have. I still don’t trust him, though. Bush talked a tough game in a lot of ways, too, on spending for instance, to win in 2000.
RW Wacko on November 1, 2007 at 3:46 PM
I don’t believe these numbers for a second.
Verbal Abuse on November 1, 2007 at 3:48 PM
Eloquently put. That’s what Yankees don’t realize. Basically the Yankees are trying to steal the R party with nominees like Rudy and Mitt because it is too difficult for them to beat the other D’s in their home districts.
NOW, when they expect the rest of the country’s R’s to recognize them as ‘our party’, it somehow is everybody else’s fault that a POOR NOMINEE won’t win the white house EVEN AGAINST HILLARY.
Rudy won’t win the south ever. Rudy won’t win the north either. I don’t understand why people are blaming anyone but Rudy and Rudy’s positions which are not Republican positions. Mitt might be better. . . but Rudy will never win the White House even if he is the R nomination.
Blame it on whoever you want. Blame it on everyone but Rudy. Blame it on every other faith except Rudy’s faith. Blame it on every other region except Rudy’s region. But if Rudy wins the White House it will be the upset of the century. . . and that’s even if it is against Hillary with all her negatives.
If the R party puts up a southern conservative against Hillary it’s a landslide. Put up a Yankee liberal light and you give Hillary the White House. But blame whoever you want.
ThackerAgency on November 1, 2007 at 3:50 PM
MB4 on November 1, 2007 at 3:50 PM
Basically my point is that Rudy would be a Democrat but he couldn’t beat the local Democrats in the Democratic primary as a Democrat so he ‘changed his name’ to R.
ThackerAgency on November 1, 2007 at 3:53 PM
This poll is pure horseshit.
Hilts on November 1, 2007 at 3:53 PM
No, that is not what he said. And if you read the rest of this post, maybe you will be educated. What he said was that it was not the employer’s job to enforce the immigration laws that the feds are failing to enforce. Nor is it the job of the cities or states. It is the feds job. If POTUS, he will be the feds and it will be his job. He plans to stop them at the border and regulate and identify the ones that are let it.
We have a system where it is too easy to fool an employer. It is unfair to crack down on employers when the feds let them cross the border, won’t deport them while they are here, and will not adopt a tamper proof ID nor enforce SS number fraud. Once Rudy identifies who’s here legally and who’s not, then we can crack down on employers that KNOWINGLY hire illegals.
tommylotto on November 1, 2007 at 3:55 PM
1. The sample size is not all that important once you get above 1000.
2. The poll reflects the Dem advantage in name ID, which is partially attributable to an unenergized GOP, but is also due to the disproportionate media coverage of the Dems. The diff between Rudy and HRC in the South probably reflects a diff in name ID, but it would also be interesting to know whether an Italian name doesn’t play well in the South (I don’t know the answer to this and would hope it’s untrue, but data would be interesting).
3. With regard to “for” and “against” voters, let’s note this is a poll of registered voters. Among likely voters, a majority (or near majority) consistently specifically say they will not vote for HRC. That’s a big problem for HRC, as her 95% name ID suggests people already know and have formed a negative opinion of her. In this respect, the relative lack of name ID for GOP candidates is a plus — they have a chance to make a good impression with those who aren’t political junkies.
Karl on November 1, 2007 at 3:58 PM
Hah! You make me laugh, man!
RW Wacko on November 1, 2007 at 3:59 PM
New Yawk-centric belief system:
1) All roads start in New Yawk.
2) All roads end in New Yawk.
3) The Sun revolves around New Yawk.
4) The moon revolves around New Yawk.
5) The stars revolve around New Yawk.
6) If the Republican party does not nominate Rudy the gun grabbin, illegal supportin, gross dressin Tooty Fruity the orbital stability of the Earth will become unbalanced and the HilldaBeastSuccubus™ will be elected. and eat all your children.
MB4 on November 1, 2007 at 3:59 PM
I don’t think I’ve ever said anything about this before, (this isn’t my blog), but you, Bkenedy and CSD really bring this place down. How old are you guys? You behave like schoolyard bullies. Are you even old enough to vote? If I’d been AP or Bryan I would have banned you long ago, or laid down some ground rules at least. Your vitriol is uncalled for.
FloatingRock on November 1, 2007 at 4:02 PM
Don’t trust Rudy………former Democrat……..gun grabber……….sactuary cities endorser…………for domestic partner rights………on and on and on.
If we nominate Rudy, Hillary SHOULD win.
omnipotent on November 1, 2007 at 4:05 PM
Oh yeah? Rudy if a fartface.
FloatingRock on November 1, 2007 at 4:12 PM
No I would not give you false hope
(No, not me!)
On this strange and mournful day
(When Gringos are dissin patron Rudy!)
But the madre and nino reagrup-acion
Is only a nominacion away, oh, little Rudy of mine.
I cant for the life of me
Remember a sadder day
When people aren’t worshiping Rudy the way they ought to be
But it just dont work out that way
(I don’t know what is wrong with those personas!)
And the course of a hotair thread runs
Over and over again
- Senor Pablo Simon
MB4 on November 1, 2007 at 4:15 PM
MB4 on November 1, 2007 at 4:17 PM
Heh, heh……….that was sweet dude!
/Beavis
omnipotent on November 1, 2007 at 4:20 PM
You are on a roll, sir. Seriously, Hillary is bad, but she is the best of the Dems. She ain’t any worse than Kerry. Worse than Gore, yes. Her and Giuliani (the Giuliani before he started running for prez) are probably closer politically than any other Dem and Repub candidate.
I’d wager that whoever wins, they are in trouble b/c I think the economy is headed for a disaster soon.
RW Wacko on November 1, 2007 at 4:40 PM
Enjoy the next 16 years of first Hillary and then Obama rule. Go and stay ideologically pure.
Hilts on November 1, 2007 at 4:44 PM
At least I have an ideology.
If Hillary is president for 4 years, Republicans will me more or less united against her. If Rudy is president for 4 years, Republicans will continue to be divided.
A Rudy presidency will destroy the modern conservative movement. That’s not to say it can’t be rebuilt from the ground up at some point in the future but there’s certainly no guarantee of that.
FloatingRock on November 1, 2007 at 4:51 PM
I may have understood your point…. Are you saying that if people vote for the “R” they may preserve their ideological purity and should enjoy 16 years of “D” rule?
FloatingRock on November 1, 2007 at 4:53 PM
Correction: misunderstood
FloatingRock on November 1, 2007 at 4:54 PM
I am saying that your hostility and utter disdain for Giuliani (a great mayor by the way, and also a Republican in NYC cannot act like a Republican in Provo Utah)is going to guarantee 16 years of Democratic rule and if you are sticking around expecting the great Reagan II arrival, think again. The demographics are on the other side. If you think that there is no difference between Rudy or Hillary then there is nothing more to say and I would rather you just vote for Hillary then.
Hilts on November 1, 2007 at 4:58 PM
Yeah Newt in 2012 will do the trick. After all he did such a great job that he resigned his seat. Why not then just bring back Bob Dole?
Hilts on November 1, 2007 at 5:10 PM
Statistically, it’s called an outlier, imho.
I live in the South, and I believe the poll may represent the VERY early polling of liberal urban areas.
If it’s too stupid to be true….
Randy
williars on November 1, 2007 at 5:11 PM
What demographics are you referring to? Do you mean the numbers showing how liberals have more abortions while conservatives have more babies? Those demographics? Are you saying that, due to demographics, conservatism is no more? That’s the end? Kaput?
Are you saying that you don’t mind the end of conservatism so much, so long as you have an “R” in the WH? And are you therefore saying that you wish to retain your ideological purity by remaining loyal to the Republican Party?
My loyalty is to America and American principles, not any one party.
FloatingRock on November 1, 2007 at 5:16 PM
Was there a story on hotair that the latest Quinnipiac poll has Giuliani beating Clinton?
http://www.quinnipiac.edu/x1295.xml?ReleaseID=1113
I must have missed it. But since the Pew poll has Clinton winning everything, we might as well toss in the towel and shut down the doors.
Vincenzo on November 1, 2007 at 5:19 PM
So we might as well get used to open borders, I suppose. And 2nd amendment: throw that out. We don’t need that any more. And of course, without the 2nd amendment the rest of our rights are nothing more than privileges, so might as well get used to authority… Lots and lots of authority.
FloatingRock on November 1, 2007 at 5:20 PM
Oh wow hey look Rasmussen’s poll from two days ago has Giuliani beating Clinton too!
http://rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/election_2008__1/2008_presidential_election/election_2008_clinton_vs_giuliani_thompson
But I digress. Pew and allahpundit have declared my paison dead in the water. I’ll get a call over to the emperor and tell him its over.
Vincenzo on November 1, 2007 at 5:21 PM
So despite the possible loss of some southern states and the possiblity of a 3rd party social con entering should Rudy be nominated, he’s the ONLY one who could possibly beat Hillary???
Not buying it. Rudy’s as bad as Hillary on immigration and gun owner’s rights, and has social positions extremely disagreeable to the politically active social con voting bloc.
It’s true that head-to-head polls taken with a year to go, before the general election campaign starts aren’t reliable. However, if they’re not reliable for Rudy, they’re not reliable for a conservative candidate either.
And in the spirit of full disclosure, by “conservative candidate”, yes, I’m referring to Fred.
Hollowpoint on November 1, 2007 at 5:23 PM
The perfect storm may be coming.
And back to Rudy.
Ranking The 2008 Republican Contenders On The Illegal Immigration Issue
MB4 on November 1, 2007 at 5:29 PM
But that’s OK, because it will be “R” authority. That is to say, until we have a period of “D” authority, but the damage will have already been done. In fact if conservatism is dead I don’t suppose it much matters whether the authority is “D” or “R”.
America wont be the same. If conservatism dies, American ideals die.
FloatingRock on November 1, 2007 at 5:34 PM
Grow-up. You sound like my autistic 5 year old. Whaaaa!!!
Rudy promised to reduce crime in NYC. He moved heaven and earth and he reduced crime. Now, Rudy is promising to stop illegal immigration at the border. He will move heaven and earth and stop it at the border. Get that? HE PROMISES TO STOP IT AT THE BORDER. Let me try that again. HE PROMISES TO STOP IT AT THE BORDER. You repeating the anti-Rudy mantra that he is going to “open the borders” is totally unsupportable and absolutely childish. One more time: HE PROMISES TO STOP IT AT THE BORDER
What else are you whining about? Oh, the second amendment, check. Funny, he has stated that the 2nd guarantees an INDIVIDUAL’s the right to bear arms — subject only to reasonable restrictions necessitated by a compelling state interest. The big city murder capital of America will have a more compelling interest to limit guns than, say, rural Texas. You are not one of those NRA nutz that think the 2nd gives you the right to sport a suitcase nuke, cluster bombs and stinger missles in flight paths are you?
You really are acting like a baby. Your silly attacks against Rudy are so wrong and unsupportable, I’m begining to think you are a sockpuppet for the resident song writer/anti-Rudy loon, MB4
tommylotto on November 1, 2007 at 5:39 PM
And Rudy’s personality type is much more authoritarian than even Hillary’s.
MB4 on November 1, 2007 at 5:40 PM
Comment pages: 1 2 Next »