Rudy Giuliani = Viable Candidate?

[Howard Beale]

Of all the 2008 hopefuls I like Rudy Giuliani the most. As I do he leans towards the socially liberal and the fiscally conservative. In my business life I'd been a developer/manager of low and moderate income housing in The Bronx (the high-crime areas) and I was very impressed with his crime reduction strategies and spending restraint. That last may be argued but compared to the Dems he was like the rock you try to squeeze blood out of. When he was a Federal Prosecutor I had the fuzzy feeling that he was a bit over-the-top and showy but that's what I expect out of politically ambitious prosecutors and I also didn't know enough about the subject to form all that much of an opinion.

At any rate, I'd dismissed his 2008 candidacy out of hand due to his personal life (which only makes him more real and therefor likeable to me) and especially his pro-choice stance. However yesterday's paper had this column by George Will.

From the column:

Regarding the Republican race, for many months commentators have said that when the Republican base learns the facts about Rudy Giuliani's personal life (an annulled first marriage, a messy divorce, then a third marriage) and views on social issues (for abortion rights, gay rights and gun control, in each case with limits), support for him will evaporate. But such commentary is becoming self-refuting. The insistent reiteration of it during Giuliani's coast-to-coast campaigning is telling activist Republicans -- the sort of people who read political commentary -- the facts about Giuliani. And so far those facts are not causing a recoil from him: According to the USA Today/CNN poll, his lead over John McCain has risen from 31-27 in November to 40-24 today.

This does not mean that the social issues have lost their saliency. People for whom opposition to abortion is very important might, however, think that in wartime it is not supremely important. Or they might reason, correctly, that presidents can change abortion policy only by changing the Supreme Court, so Giuliani's pledge to nominate justices like Antonin Scalia, Samuel Alito and John Roberts is sufficient.

Furthermore, California's primary is being moved up to Feb. 5, and New Jersey's and some other states' might be moved to that date, so Giuliani's views on social issues might become, on balance, advantages. And suppose Giuliani convinces Republicans that he can become the first Republican since George H.W. Bush in 1988 to be competitive for California's (now 55) electoral votes.

Here is another (long) piece from City Journal that is supportive of Giuliani's chances.

Lastly, he is a known quantity, has been thoroughly vetted, and there will be few (if any) surprises/scandals that can affect him.

[AlexM]

I think it's amusing that a mayor becomes presidential material simply because he was mayor during 9/11.

[Borden]

He's viable simply because the Reps have no decent candidates.

He'd beat Hillary but probably lose to Obama.

He'll also do whatever he wants once elected and most social conservatives who vote for him will regret it.

[Poofler]

[ QUOTE ]
I think it's amusing that a mayor becomes presidential material simply because he was mayor during 9/11.

[/ QUOTE ]

Eh, mayor of New York is probably better prep for President than governor from buttf*** nowhere state. It's not like that many of the candidates are running on some tremendous national track record, either. Many are basically gimmick accounts at this point.

[MoreWineII]

Compared to Romney or McCain? Sure.

[TomCollins]

If Rudy can get past McCain, he should have it wrapped up. All but the most extreme social conservatives will still prefer him. He can win a lot of the moderate vote, and has an image of being an effective leader, which will seperate him from Bush.

Obama is the only one who could stop him, but I don't think even Obama can. Too young/inexperienced.

[John Kilduff]

I see two major problems with Giuliani as a Presidential candidate.

1) He is a extreme gun-control proponent.

2) He is way, way too tough on petty crime, to an extent I find quite disturbing.

Regarding petty crime: He oversaw the NYPD raids and crackdowns on private poker clubs which eventually caused the venerable Mayfair Club to shut its doors permanently.

He also reduced crime in NYC by locking a lot of people up for petty crimes and his policies caused a lot of people to be locked up for much longer periods of time.

Did the poker clubs really need to be raided, again and again, in NYC???

Is it the proper job of the police force to hassle people over minor infractions?

Should people who commit petty crimes be treated as if they are serious criminals?


Regarding gun control, here is what Giuliani said recently:

"SACRAMENTO - Rudy Giuliani addressed a potentially troublesome issue with conservative voters, saying his policies as mayor to get handguns off the street helped reduce crime in New York.

"I used gun control as mayor," he said at a news conference Saturday during a swing through California. But "I understand the Second Amendment. I understand the right to bear arms."

He said what he did as mayor would have no effect on hunting."

yahoo news

So it appears Giuliani thinks the purpose of the Second Amendment has something to do with hunting.

New York City has some of the most onerous gun laws in the country and it is nearly impossible to get a gun permit there.

In Giuliani's Online Archives, he advocated that Congress pass uniform licensing requirements for anyone carrying a gun - effectively taking away the right of the states to regulate guns in that manner themselves.

He also favorably cited that the law requires New York State residents to demonstrate a real need for a gun before they can make a gun purchase.

Excerpted from his archives:

"To purchase a gun in the State of New York you have to give your full name, your date of birth, your residence, your occupation. You have to prove that you're a United States citizen, you have to show you are of good character, competency and integrity. And you have to demonstrate a real need for the weapon.

And thanks in part to our stricter gun control laws, crime is down dramatically in New York City. Shootings are down over 50 percent. Murder is down over 50 percent. But the fact is that 90 percent of the guns we take out of the hands of criminals in New York City come from out of the State of New York.

We need a federal law that bans all assault weapons, and if in fact you do need a handgun you should be subjected to at least the same restrictions -- and really stronger ones -- that exist for driving an automobile.

The United States Congress needs to pass uniform licensing for everyone carrying a gun. Congress must do more to prevent a tragedy like the one that happened at the Empire State Building from ever happening again.

From Gracie Mansion, this is Mayor Rudy Giuliani."

So, the gun control model Giuliani likes involves Congress creating national gun licensing requirements, and citizens having to prove to the satisfaction of government officials the following: 1) that they are of good character, and 2) that they "have a real need" for a gun.

With all due respect: is this Soviet Russia or what, Mr. Giuliani? Don't some rights matter more than crime control?

Surely, the Founding Fathers had it in mind that citizens would have to prove their personal character and "need" for a gun to the satisfaction of government officials before being allowed to own a gun: Not!

I am aware there are some reasonable debates about the Second Amendment on both sides of the fence, but Giuliani is WAY out in left field on this one and is advocating things that could not possibly be intended by the Second Amendment.

Well, he was a federal prosecutor, I believe. So he might reasonably be expected to have a bias towards law enforcement. But in my opinion, it is more than a slight bias: he brought about a near Police State in New York City. One can only guess what he would do for the country as a whole in similar vein.

In my opinion, America does not need FAR stricter gun control laws and America does not need to be FAR tougher on crime. If anything I would like to see gun control laws loosened, but I can understand those that would not. I feel strongly about the crime and prosecution issue though: in my opinion, America is already too tough on minor crimes, and the police already have too much power to stop and search and seize on suspicion, and mandatory minimums are sending people away for really harsh periods of time for crimes (or even for "crimes") that no reasonable jury would approve. The thing is, though, that the juries don't approve it. They just find someone guilty and then the harsh mandatory minimums take over.

I really don't think a President with a "Get Even Tougher On Crime" outlook would be good for this country. I also don't think gun control needs to be far tougher than it already is. Giuliani would favor both and as such he worries me. I believe in our freedoms and don't want to see them taken away (what's left of them, at least). Giuliani may be good in many other regards, but those are two very big negatives to my mind.

[mosta]

[ QUOTE ]
He's viable simply because the Reps have no decent candidates.

He'd beat Hillary but probably lose to Obama.

He'll also do whatever he wants once elected and most social conservatives who vote for him will regret it.

[/ QUOTE ]

I would envision Giuliani vs Obama going as follows:

Reporter: "Are you ready to put the smack down on Islamic militants any time they rear their heads. (See US actions in Somalia just a couple weeks ago?"

Barak [ie, "Peace"] Hussein Obama: "I'll defend this country whenever necessary, but I think now is a time to build bridges, not bomb them."

Giuliani: "I experienced the attacks on a very personal level. I told a Saudi prince to stick $10 million dollars up his ass. I would relish the chance to go after Osama and undo the present administration's downplaying bin laden in the face of their Iraq fiasco."

result: landslide for RG.

[zer0]

"Freedom is about authority. Freedom is about the willingness of every single human being to cede to lawful authority a great deal of discretion about what you do and how you do it." -Mayor Giuliani, New York Newsday pg A3 4/20/98

[HeavilyArmed]

As a social conservative I already know I'm screwed. I'll be forced to vote for a mostly horrible Republican in defense against a truly repugnant and dangerous Democrat. I hate it already. Lots of true conservatives will pass.