Giuliani's Falling Poll Numbers - Why?


The falling poll numbers for Giuliani may be inevitable for anyone who has been Republican front runner for as long as he has.  Ultimately, it may come to be seen as a minor blip in what will be a successful campaign. 

Still, the sinking numbers will raise questions about whether this is a trend or not.  And, indeed, there are other developments. 

Yes, for example, Huckabee is coming on strong of late, but this will have greater impact on the other social values candidate, Romney, which may benefit Giuliani. 

Yes, there have been media efforts to dig up dirt on Giuliani about record keeping coverups and other improprieties regarding visits with girlfriend and now wife, Judith Nathan, in the Hamptons.

Yes, there are questions surrounding his dealings and relationship with former NYC Police Commissioner and now disgraced and grand jury indicted Bernie Kerik.

But all of this may be a haze of minor and insignificant points obscuring more fundamental questions about Giuliani positions and attitudes on far more seminal issues of which there are two: immigration and social issues - not abortion as much (which may not be such a liability in the general election), but more specifically "family" - and an understanding of the centrality of intact families in a healthy society - and the willingness to speak about it.

When I hear Giuliani speak about the war on terror, our under funded military, the threat of China and Russia, taxes, market based health care reform, cutting spending, limiting the growth of government, getting rid of wasteful programs, growing the economy, I feel he is about as dead on as can be - and backed up by a solid record of achievment in turning around what was probably the ultimate urban (and liberal) nightmare in the country - the Big Apple.

Notwithstanding current efforts to discredit his mayoral years and even his performance during 9/11 (perhaps Mayor Nagin could have done better?), none of this will stick, so strong and convincing was his record there in turning that cauldron of bankruptcy, corruption, racial strife, conflicting power groups, belligerent unions, a vanishing economy, and crime, into a safe, fiscally sound, economically robust empire city.

But whenever he starts veering off into immigration, his proposals for how to manage illegal (and legal) immigration, he begins sounding tone deaf, hesitant, and weak, as if oblivious to the national strategic significance of this singular issue; unaware that, if left unreformed, immigration may represent the undoing of our national enterprise, a massive threat to the economic, fiscal, and social integrity of the nation. 

He begins sounding basically like a Democrat. 

And that makes me nervous.

Immigration, both legal and illegal, must be transformed.  Illegal immigration, which is actually not nearly the problem that legal immigration is, obviously must be ended by any combination of measures that have been outlined ad nauseum elsewhere (border security, fence, punitive employer sanctions, matching of social security numbers and birthdate, biometric ID cards especially for those overstaying visas, deportation of convicted felons, no amnesty, no guest worker, no incentivizing of more illegal immigration, etc). 

The greater threat to the country, however, is legal immigration, which, as currently comprised with its underlying theme of family reunification, leads to chain migration, and  the massive  influx of millions of non English speaking poorly educated legal immigrants who consume far more of the nation's resources than they produce. 

This, too, must be changed and the whole focus of immigration policy shifted to one that serves the national interest and emphasizes immigrants that will benefit the country - in other words, the best and the brightest, not the least educated, least skilled, and most impoverished. 

Immigration policy should be based on what is best for the country not making sure that everyone's uncle, cousin, and grand parents are on hand. 

Immigration to this country should, in other words, stop being a giant welfare program for the world.

Rudi: pay attention to this issue for it is probably number one for many if not most Republicans and probably most Democrats as well (based on the reaction to Elliot Spitzer's plan to give illegal immigrants driver's licenses in liberal NY).

Secondly, Rudy must be willing to speak of the singular importance of preserving the traditional, intact, married family as the indispensible unit and bulwark of  a thriving, prosperous society. 

Yes, his personal life is flawed in this regard and so he may feel that he cannot, in good conscience, address this crucial matter. 

And this is a problem, in general, for many conservatives who understand the importance of marriage and the traditional family in building a healthy society, but feel unable to do so because of less than ideal personal lives.

But Rudy and other conservatives with problematic backgrounds must overcome concerns over charges of hypocricy and persist in making it a central plank in their platforms.

The healthy, intact, married family must be returned to its central position in society and be a part of any conservative philosophy.

It also, by the way, means a definitive "NO" to gay marriage. 

Immigration and the traditional family.  Run on them Rudy.




  • Jason Elmore

    December 21, 2007

    Dr. M,

    Sorry I am just now finding time this busy Christmas season to read you post and respond. I have a question: Clinton could never be taken seriously on family values because Dirsliekmiester did not hold them himself. I remember being embarrassed as a citizen as insisted that he did not....with that woman... I remember being incredulous as pundits and Democrat operatives defended him nightly on every media outlet. So I felt that in the end we got what we asked for by holding out nose as a country and voting him in in spite of many tawdry tales that abounded from Arkansas during the election run up. At first I blamed Democrats. But when he won again I blamed Republicans for not overcoming our own greed and mustering the moral fortitude to make his immorallity the issue and not "the economy stupid."

    You are stating the case for family values and the bigger implication for leadership credibility that follows moral leadership and leads to power and influence domestic and abroad (i.e. Reagan and the wall) in our world very well. But, shouldn't we learn the lesson ourselves as Republicans. Rudy cannot lead well(both nationally as Clinton's example teaches, or within conservative circles) because he is morally corrupt. I won't hold my nose for him because experience has now taught me the long term consequence if philosophically I couldn't imagine it on my own. Why just today I learned that Rudy's mistress was actually under the same roof as his then wife and kids in a separate wing of the mayoral mansion!! No, he was foolish to think he could keep that swept under the rug and live on this side of the isle. As Rush likes to jokingly point out, it would certainly be a feather in his cap if he were a democrat. But, most of us have learn our lesson and are hoping for someone else to emerge. Some one who needs not pull any wool over our eyes. Rudy enjoy your 911 legacy...and stay home.

  • rmoss

    December 22, 2007

    Well, perhaps the chickens are coming home to roost. Rudy's numbers do seem to be falling.

    I can say this, he is not perfect, but he turned NYC around and governed as a conservative, apart from personal tawdry details.

    He cut taxes, cleaned up the city, got the economy going, cut crime and murder dramatically.

    Then there was 9/11.

    He is a great executive and knows how to fight. We would not have to worry about our national security or the IslamoNazis or any one else for that matter with him in office.

    He is also not one to suffer fools lightly. I would love to see what he would do to the anti American liberal bureacrats at the UN and elsewhere.

    He is not perfect, has made mistakes, but he is a proven leader even with his moral shortcomings. Still, he needs to shore up on immigration and traditional values in some way and i hope he does.

    I am more concerned quite frankly about his stance on immigration which i believe represents the gravest threat to the nation currently - although there are many others: erosion of values, looming debt crisis, China and Russia, IslamoFascism, energy dependence, nuclear proliferation, to name a few.

    Global warming, by the way, is not one of them. Regards, Dr Moss.

Add Comment