McCain is toast

[kurto]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
If anything, McCain is the ULTIMATE electable in a general election

[/ QUOTE ]

I actually think that prize goes to Giuliani, who's viewed in the same light as McCain by most voters (ie., they see him as something of a moderate and is still considered by many to be heroic for his role in 9/11), and should he ever win the nomination, would have the added advantage of putting NY in play for the GOP.

This isn't to say "Giuliani would carry NY!", particularly if his opponent was Sen. Clinton, but it would surely have to concern Democrats that a typically safe state for them (with lots of electoral voters) would now be quite competitive. I can't think of an electoral map that gives the Democrats a victory in a presidential election without NY.

Giuliani *might* have an issue in a general election activating the GOP base, which is a problem I don't think McCain would have to overcome. While McCain is certainly no darling of the right, he at least aligns with them on pro-life/gun/gay marriage issues -- or is at least 'close enough'. Former Mayor Giuliani, on the hand, seems to be so far apart with some important interests on the right that he may have trouble securing their campaign money and/or convincing some of the rank and file to show up on Election Day.

Of course, Giuliani's biggest obstacle is actually winning the GOP nomination, which seems to be a tall order at this point.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'd be curious to see a poll of how New Yorkers really feel about Guiliani. I lived in NYC during his reign. Assuming I'm not completely unique... I have very mixed feelings about him. I thought his poise was very reassuring during 9/11. But I also remember that he was a bit of a fascist. Wasn't big on civil rights. He rates well with the appearance of competence. But he's also a little scary and hypocritical. (he seemed to be the type to legislate morality while not being so good him self.)

[haarley]

[ QUOTE ]
While McCain is certainly no darling of the right, he at least aligns with them on pro-life/gun/gay marriage issues

[/ QUOTE ] McCain is not a favorite amongst second amendment supporters. This is one of his weak points with the right.

[Felix_Nietzsche]

[ QUOTE ]
I was disappointed by his making peace with the far right

[/ QUOTE ]
Don't worry......His 11th hour conversion is as phony as McCain is. Don't listen to his words, watch his actions. He is still a populist pretending to be conservative. If the right-wing is dumb enough to believe his fake conversion AND he gets the nomination....then you will see the real John McCain again...

[AlexM]

[ QUOTE ]
Brownback would be far and away the best non-Libertarian result for Libertarians IMO. (Possibly excepting Ron Paul who I don't know anything about yet.)

[/ QUOTE ]

Ron Paul actually ran as the Libertarian presidential candidate in 1988. Brownback wants to regulate video game ratings. Brownback looks like he might be better for libertarians than most candidates, but he's not all that great either.

[iron81]

Felix, which of the likely GOP candidates do you like?

[bills217]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Brownback would be far and away the best non-Libertarian result for Libertarians IMO. (Possibly excepting Ron Paul who I don't know anything about yet.)

[/ QUOTE ]

Ron Paul actually ran as the Libertarian presidential candidate in 1988. Brownback wants to regulate video game ratings. Brownback looks like he might be better for libertarians than most candidates, but he's not all that great either.

[/ QUOTE ]

Brownback is very hard-line on many conservative social issues, gay marriage, ten-commandments-on-public-property type things, etc. I'm not crazy about those stances, but he is vehemently anti-abortion which is the main reason I like him (in a non-anarchist sense); he is the sort of guy who if elected would push non-stop to actually do something about abortion unlike the rest of the Republican Party that has just been using the issue to print votes. (Dems would own this country if they had the balls or the foresight to abandon the abortion lobby but that's another thread.) The abortion industry would be threatened even if Brownback were to only win the primary; he would constantly pound abortion down the throat of whichever Dem won and make it the main issue of the election IMO. I'd love to watch Hillary/Obama squirm and babble like Kerry did in a transparently dishonest attempt not to alienate voters in key swing states.

He also seems committed to fiscal conservatism which few other mainstream politicians are. Pretty sad that this is what would pass as a good result for Libertarians these days, but, with things the way they are...

He got my name and address somehow (probably from some pro-life list), and has been deluging me with mail requesting money for his candidacy. He appears pretty serious.

[DVaut1]

[ QUOTE ]
I'd be curious to see a poll of how New Yorkers really feel about Guiliani.

[/ QUOTE ]

Siena Research Institute poll of only New York registered voters:

"In head-to-head general election match-ups, (Sen.) Clinton would beat Giuliani 53-39 percent. She would beat McCain 55-36 percent. Giuliani would beat Obama 47-41 percent."

That polling information is from November, although I suspect you could find more up-to-date mock head to heads in NY.

And, because it's from November, I suspect the polling numbers may be just a tad high than we might normally predict for Sen. Clinton; while I have no evidence of such a phenomenon in this case, my guess is she was experiencing a bounce from a very successful campaign where she spent lots of money and had no real opponent (ie., the voters in NY were subjected to lots of positive Clinton press put out by her campaign, and far fewer negative messages, as her opponent wasn't funded in any kind of meaningful way).

It might be interesting to know what a head-to-head Clinton vs. Giuliani matchup polled like in the summer of '06 in NY state, and again what it might look like later this winter/spring, in an effort to control for what may have been an unrepresentative poll taken right around the election season last November.

[4 High]

Polling regarding Obama is really pointless now. His name id is nowhere near McCain, Clinton or Giulani. By the end of the year the numbers will look different no matter what, but i doubt McCain will have that much of an advantage over Obama if any once people get to know Obama.

[DVaut1]

[ QUOTE ]
Polling regarding Obama is really pointless now. His name id is nowhere near McCain, Clinton or Giulani. By the end of the year the numbers will look different no matter what, but i doubt McCain will have that much of an advantage over Obama if any once people get to know Obama.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yeah, I don't necessarily disagree. I thought I was pretty clear in my earlier post that such polls should be taken with a grain of salt, particularly because name recognition skews the results so badly.

But I think the gist of what you're saying is this, if I can reframe it a little more generally: "let's not writeoff Underdog Candidate X this far from out from the election." I think this is prudent advice when handicapping presidential elections, particularly since we're more than a year away from even a singular primary ballot being cast.

So, what I'm saying is: "Good advice! I agree! Let's not writeoff certain candidates this far out from the election! That would be hasty!" ... but I want to bring it one level higher, and say "hey, let's not writeoff the favorite this far out from the election, either!"

[4 High]

Agreed. The only people i am writing off from either side are the 9th level candidates like Tommy Thompson, Chris Dodd etc.