New at Reason
Jeff Taylor estimates how Pat Robertson's endorsement of Rudy Giuliani will play out in South Carolina.
Comments to "New at Reason":
Robertson went traipsing over the cliffs of insanity years ago. I'm surprised that Rudy even accepted his endorsement. Since he did, I suspect he bought it, probably with something shiny.
Interesting piece, Mr. Taylor. It might have helped to include references to some polling or election numbers demonstrating that such a shift is actually happening.
de stijl | November 13, 2007, 9:50am | #
Yet Giuliani nominally leads in South Carolina, whose primary actually comes a couple days ahead of the Granite State tilt on January 22nd.New Hampshire will move their primary earlier (probably Jan. 8th less than a week after the Iowa caucuses on Jan. 3rd). It is in their state constitution to be the first primary in the country.
Rudy is going to come on to SC after losing the first two to Romney. How are the polls going to move after that? In SC and nationally? Can a Mormon poll well in a Baptist dominant state?
Rudy's fervent hopes to go to bed peacefully every night with his boot firmly planted on our necks may very well be stillborn.
jj | November 13, 2007, 10:03am | #
It won't play out. Check this out:http://www.christianitytoday.com/ct/features/poll.html
Robertson has become the Jesse Jackson of the Christian Right. Makes big noise, but counts for Jack
joe | November 13, 2007, 10:03am | #
The latest issue of (Even) the (Liberal) New Republic has a story about South Carolina. There's a quote from a SoCa political figure, "We're often called on to clean up the mess made by other states" - referring to the hit job on McCain in 2000 and the marching orders given to voters to support Bush over Buchanan in 1992.I think it's just as likely, de stijl, that the Republican primary voters in South Carolina could be induced to consider it their job to "fix" what voters in NH and Iowa "messed up."
Episiarch | November 13, 2007, 10:18am | #
This stuff is almost impossible to predict because it seems like Ron Paul could have an effect in the prior primaries. Romney leading Giuliani in New Hampshire is a lot less important if Ron makes a suprise showing there.Ron will either tank or do way better than anyone expected in New Hampshire. The former puts everything back between Romney and Giuliani, the latter blows everything to hell (in a good way).
crimethink | November 13, 2007, 10:33am | #
Ron Paul is going to tank in SC. If he does well in IA and NH, I'm sure the guy joe quotes above will be out there helping to make sure the GOP's fundie scum gets out to vote and save God's Party against the terrorist-supporting antichrist.Mo | November 13, 2007, 10:42am | #
Anyone that calls South Carolina's climate "mild", like Jeff does, has obviously never been to Charleston in August.I though I was going to drown in a pool of my own sweat when I was in between air conditioned environments and the water.
Curious | November 13, 2007, 10:46am | #
I've read similar things in many places, but how could a bunch of Baptists vote for Romney or Girliani over a grandfatherly, christain, baby doc like Paul?It just doesn't seem possible, strange bedfellows notwithstanding.
thedifferentphil | November 13, 2007, 10:47am | #
Jeff, I can't trust Pat Robertson now that he changed his name to Pat Robinson. ;)thoreau | November 13, 2007, 10:56am | #
Giuliani will do the one thing that Republicans want most these days: He will continue to engage in torture, warrantless wiretaps, detention without trial, and wars of aggression.Most of the other candidates will as well, but Giuliani is better at making it clear that he's a fascist. So Robertson is just going with the sure thing.
joe | November 13, 2007, 11:06am | #
I've read similar things in many places, but how could a bunch of Baptists vote for Romney or Girliani over a grandfatherly, christain, baby doc like Paul?The same way they turned out to vote for lily-livered, squish, Washington-insider, tax-raising, socially-moderate George HW Bush over Pat Buchanan in 1992 - Because they do what they're told by their political and religious leaders, who do what they're told by the national Republican Party.
Joe's right. And they'll vote for Giuliani because he'll tell them what to do.
robc | November 13, 2007, 11:30am | #
George HW Bush - protestantPat Buchanan - catholic
Rudy Guiliani - catholic
Mitt Romney - mormon
Paul, Huckabee, Thompson, McCain - protestant
Bingo | November 13, 2007, 11:34am | #
joe is right. I don't see RP doing so well in the south. The religious hatred of muslims is too strong there, they want someone that will smite the heathens.Bingo | November 13, 2007, 11:37am | #
Actually, don't forget about Mike Huckabee in the south. The guy is a dimwit but he's their kind of dimwit.VM | November 13, 2007, 11:57am | #
lunchstealer | November 13, 2007, 11:49am | #QFMFT.
The guy is a dimwit but he's their kind of dimwit.
QFT
Doktor T: sadly, you're probably right. sigh. Fear and ignorance. Not to be confused with Crash Davis's approach to baseball ("fear and arrogance").
Taktix® | November 13, 2007, 12:18pm | #
Jeff,Good article, but I'd be wary of quoting polls conducted by Frank Luntz...
Mike Huckabee is not a dimwit. Like him or not, Mike Huckabee is far and away the smartest right-winger in the field.
robc | November 13, 2007, 1:07pm | #
joe,While Huckabee is not a dimwit, do you have any evidence he is the smartest? Like IQ test results or something? Im just wondering your basis for that statement.
R C Dean | November 13, 2007, 1:21pm | #
Mike Huckabee is far and away the smartest right-winger in the fieldHuck a right-winger? I had the impression he was pretty squishy on domestic issues generally.
robc | November 13, 2007, 1:37pm | #
joe,Didnt Huck raise his hand (or not raise it, I forget which way it was asked) on the evolution question? That alone has got to cost him about 100 "Policy Discussion IQ points".
joe | November 13, 2007, 3:11pm | #
RC,I was going to write "Republican," but then I remembered Ron Paul. Then I was going to write "conservative," but didn't want to open the REAL conservative can o' worms.
Righty, right-winger, fill in the blank as you will.
robc,
Religious beliefs don't tell us anything about intelligence one way or the other, as they are statements of faith not based on the use of rational faculties to get at the truth.
TrickyVic | November 13, 2007, 3:27pm | #
"""Mike Huckabee is far and away the smartest right-winger in the field.""""The smartest 14 year old in the third grade.
Kolohe | November 13, 2007, 5:21pm | #
Do not confuse being dumb for being wrong.Guiliani was a pretty effective prosecutor. Romney is a pretty sharp businessman. You can't be a bright as 1 watt bulb to accomplish what they have done. The problem is a combo of holding the wrong ideas on what is most important for the country, and more importantly, the desire for power for its own sake above all else.
Plus, Paul is still a right-winger and is a board certified M.D.
Last, the enitre field can probaly spell and type better than I can.