Thursday, November 19, 2009


You've probably seen this report:

Former Mayor Rudy Giuliani has decided against running for governor, but is strongly considering running for U.S. Senate instead, sources told the Daily News.

Politico says Giuliani associates are denying the report. But here's the disturbing aspect of this:

Giuliani Would Beat Gillibrand

A new Marist Poll in New York shows that Rudy Giuliani (D)* would a formidable challenger to Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand (D-NY) and now holds a 14 point lead, 54% to 40%.

Key finding: "Even one-third of Democrats report they would back the Republican challenger, and Giuliani runs competitively against Gillibrand in overwhelmingly Democratic New York City."

To some extent, that's name recognition -- Gillibrand is still relatively unknown. But still -- a guy who's as far to the right as anyone in America on foreign policy and just about domestic issue except guns, gays, and abortion (i.e., spending, taxes, health care, supply side economics) is beating the Democrat in a deep-blue state?

Here's the thing: If 9/11 had happened in a big city in, say, Alabama or Mississippi, and the hero mayor who inspired both local residents and the nation to maintain heart and courage was a Democrat, and that Democrat subsequently ran for statewide office after spending the ensuing years publicly supporting a series of very traditional Democratic policies ... that mayor couldn't win. Not even if that mayor was "America's Mayor."

Hell, if a Democrat from Alabama or Mississippi had actually found and personally killed Osama bin Laden, and then subsequently gone around the country advocating traditional Democratic policy positions, the state still wouldn't elect the hugely popular hero.

That's the difference between right-wingers and non-right-wingers. Right-wingers vote their ideology. Too many non-right-wingers don't. All too often, non-right-wingers vote for politicians with whom they disagree on huge numbers of issues. And I'm not talking about pols who promise what non-right-wingers want and then fail to deliver -- I'm talking about pols who promise what these voters don't want, and then are elected anyway.

That's why Republicans can win in New York and New Jersey and California, but Democrats can't win statewide in the Deep South. Being anywhere near our side is a dealbreaker for them; being on or near their side isn't a dealbreaker for us.


An unsurprising detail in that Politico story:

In other Giuliani news, blogger Rick Klau twitters that Giuliani was spotted today on the Acela, reading Going Rogue.

It's curious how often the names Palin and Giuliani are linked. Before Palin left the governorship, Giuliani was one of the people she called. A month earlier, she went to a Yankee game with him. He's defended her "death panels" remark -- but, then again, he defended her in '08, saying she was more qualified than Obama to be president. And as I've noted a few times, there's the curious fact that a hoity-toity magazine called Monocle mentioned her in 2007 as a possible Giuliani running mate for '08 -- why did their names get linked back then? Even leaving that out, they're pals. And they're two of a kind -- both believe themselves to be utterly lacking in flaws and both have absolutely no respect for anyone who disagrees with them. So I'm actually surprised he didn't get the book from her weeks ago.


*UPDATE: Needless to say, "Rudy Giuliani (D)" is not correct. Oddly, I didn't notice that until Phil pointed it out in comments.

And Kathy points out that Alabama has a Democratic lieutenant governor. My apologies.

No comments: