That title overstates things a bit, but it touches on a topic worth exploring. The P-I's Strange Bedfellows blog posed the question in a way last week. Pollster.com explored the issue further yesterday in an analysis worth noodling.
The pollster breakdown isn't about issues or personal appeal, it's a simple look at polling trends. On that score, the post fairly notes Rudy Giuliani has been on a steady downward track in both national polls and all the major pre-February 5th battleground states since his initial burst of media coverage early this year.
Momentum in campaigns matters. Whether it's Fred Thompson gaining ground nationally as well as in South Carolina and Florida, or Mitt Romney taking the lead in Iowa and New Hampshire, Giuliani's campaign must rectify it's lack of traction in recent months. I posed the question of Giuliani's possible fade in early May. It's alarming in retrospect his campaign has gone this long without changing the overall race dynamic.
The P-I post by Chris Grygiel quoted a since updated ranking of the Republican race by the National Journal, which remains relevant:
Mr. Electable (Giuliani) has map-changing capabilities that no other Republican would dare claim. And he's still popular among Republicans, as evidenced by those national polls. But while everyone's been obsessing over how low John McCain will go, it's Giuliani who has seen his national numbers cut in half since April, and his leads in Iowa and New Hampshire erased by Romney. Does Rudy Inc. realize that the window is closing on his own ability to define his biography? Get some paid media up soon, Mr. Mayor.
It's clear where Mitt Romney is headed in coming months: bet heavily on Iowa and New Hampshire while building the organization necessary to harness of the momentum of those two potential wins. While Fred Thompson still lingers on the sidelines - at least officially - one of the most watched dynamics of the race in coming months should be what Giuliani does to change the "Big Mo" of the race back in his favor. The ongoing roll-out of his 12 Commitments is a decent attempt and the time is right with John McCain's collapse. Will it work? Stay tuned.
Footnote: the current edition of those aforementioned National Journal rankings is worth a read too.
Posted by Eric Earling at July 18, 2007 11:52 PM | Email ThisIMO one of the more perceptive comments in the National Journal rankings was on Thompson, where they said:
''The longer Thompson waits, the more likely the story becomes the waiting rather than the candidate.''
If Thompson is going to get (as I expect he will), it does seem like now is the time. A national campaign is a huge logistical and operational effort, that can only be compressed so much if it's going to be competitive.
That'll leave the field open for Thompson, by acclamation (and, I might add, in desperation). Then it'll be time for lecherous Fred and his trophy kewpie doll (the MSM story-line, not mine) to be fed to the ravenous maw of the liberal media, as Hillary and her running mate B. Hussein Obama are fed marshmallows and wafted to nirvana on the wings of an adoring press, as Bill waits in the wings for another crop of interns and an appointment to the SCOTUS when old man Stevens cashes in.
It won't be pretty.
Posted by: Rey Smith on July 19, 2007 08:17 AMOnce Thompson announces, the big GOP donors will open up their checkbooks.
Posted by: Don on July 19, 2007 09:48 AMAs far as "Conservatives" -- they have changed a bit in the past 8 years, in part because they have gotten some of what they asked for...a Supreme Court decision against abortion, and so on.
They need to "play ball" and they seem willing to do so. Being a "Conservative" does not mean being the radical Christian equivalent of an Islamic cleric...it means being a middle class Catholic family in Nassau County Long Island...or a Baptist in Lexington, KY...or Lutheran in WA.
Which proud march are we talking about? Gay Pride? Solstice? What's wrong with those, a lot of people enjoy those parades and nakedness plays a very small part.
Are morality and decency worth fighting for
Depends on whose version of morality were talking about. I don't appreciate your veiled threat of removing my 'freedom to peacefully assemble' because you're on some twisted moral crusade.
The problem is that the Republicans have been "standing for morality and decency" for the last six years and any sane person can see what a crock that is.... The Republicans are no more moral or decent than the Democrats, and have only painted themselves as a bunch of hypocrits for trying to make themselves something they obviously are not.
The GOP should stop trying to cram this fake, evangelical horse crap down the troats of Americans. In my opinion, most decent moderate Americans are sick of being told how they should live thier lives by a bunch of overly political greedy sex pigs living off the tax-payer's money.
Posted by: Splinter on July 19, 2007 02:26 PMMeanwhile, the GOP pulls a political stunt of blocking a vote on Iraq that it would lose....helping to ensure that the election is all about IRAQ IRAQ IRAQ meaning that 2008 will be a big year of losses for the GOP just like 2006.
This is also why the Dems out raised the GOP at the presidential candidate level and yes, at the overall senate races level. By big margins, too.
In a way this RG-thompson-Romney debate just doesn't matter. Iraq MADE AMERICA WEAKER AND AL QAEDA STRONGER. Thanks a lot, GOP!!!! Now Bush is slamming Hillary because she wants a withdrawal plan -- how utterly irresponsible and ocrupt for Bush tonot prepare a withdrawal plan. He clearly wants to hold our own troops hostage so he can get his way in defianice of what a majority of AMericans a a majority of the Senate want.
Gutless and shameless.
I thank God the Republican Party in most parts of the country do not embrace opinions such as yours. Sodomite "pride" and solstice are far from mainstream America. Only in Seattle , San Francisco and other freak show cities do people, at present, "enjoy" pervert parades. You two seem to fit right in with that culture. I'm glad it thrills you, as you seem to have a lot of company.
Posted by: Saltherring on July 19, 2007 07:29 PM"Its" lack of traction, not "it's." Possessive pronoun. We look to Sound Politics for many things. Among them is to save the English language from the damage that too many years of bad public education has done to it. So proofread, please, before posting.
Posted by: stu on July 19, 2007 09:06 PMIt is not only common, but virtually the norm, for candidates who focus heavily in early states who are not the frontrunner or a top contender elsewhere to fade before the primary. It is likely that Romney will fade before the primary (of course when you are under 10% nationally you don't really have far to fall).
Eric's analysis of RG's numbers are confused. RG's decline started with and is almost an identical inverse of Thompson's poll after his entry in the polls. This suggests that conservatives have not warmed to Romney (again under 10%) and parked their votes with RG until a credible conservative came on the scene. The most likely scenerio is that Thompson will be culling votes from Romney as the campaign advances.
Posted by: plato on July 20, 2007 07:07 AMPersonally, I have never been to the solstice parade or a nude beach or really ever been part of any organized nude event. It sounds pretty interesting really, I just haven't wanted to go so bad that I would spend half a day fighting crowds to do it.
It is interesting that nudity and gayness seem to upset you so much... why is that? What are you ashamed of? Why do you have this overwhelming urge to label any part of America that doesn't fit into your victorian era, evangelical bible camp style of community as "sodomites" and "freak shows"?
What a sad, pathetic and boring world you must live in.
Posted by: Splinter on July 20, 2007 07:59 AMActually 'sodomite pride' parades happen in most larger cities in this country, even the ones in red states.
You know Saltherring, part of living in a country that guarantees freedom of speech/expression is learning to tolerate the people you disagree with.
This provision is necessary because the "Flying Imams" whose suspicious behavior got them ejected from a plane are now suing those who reported the behavior. Now are resident liberals WHO WERE NOT THERE, will try to pooh pooh this as racial profiling or some other snide remark. But I remember 9111. I remember plane crashing into the World Trade Center. No snide liberal remarks will change that. Read the account of one of the passengers "Pauline" and ask yourself what you would do. Would you keep quiet to avoid being sued? That's what DEMOCRATS want to happen. They want to allow terrorist cells within the US to operate freely and cause maximum destruction by disallowed immunity for those that report suspicious behavior.
Here is the account:
The passenger, who asked that she only be identified as "Pauline," said she is afraid to give her full name or hometown. She is spending the night at "another location" because she does not feel safe at home. She credits reports that one imam is apparently linked to Hamas. "It is scary because these men could be dangerous."
Pauline said she never wanted media attention. She wrote an email to U.S. Airways and cc:ed her daughter, who unexpectedly emailed it to her friends. As the letter took on an internet life of its own, it made its way to the inbox of a retired CNN executive producer. Then, to her dismay, the feeding frenzy began.
Pauline revealed to Pajamas Media that the six imams were doing things far more suspicious than praying - an Arabic-speaking passenger heard them repeatedly invoke "bin Laden," and "terrorism," a gate attendant told the captain that she did not want to fly with them, and that bomb-sniffing dogs were brought aboard. Other Muslim passengers were left undisturbed and later joined in a round of applause for the U.S. Airways crew. "It wasn't that they were Muslim. It was all of the suspicious things they did," Pauline said.
Here is her story, along with corroborating quotes from the U.S. Airways spokeswoman Andrea Rader and the official report, another Pajamas Media exclusive.
Sitting in Minneapolis-St. Paul's Airport Gate C9, she noticed one of the imams immediately. "He was pacing nervously, talking in Arabic," she said.
She quickly noticed the others. "They didn't look like holy men to me. They looked like guys heading out of town for a Vikings game."
Pauline said she did not see or hear the imams pray at the gate (she was at dinner in a nearby airport eatery), but heard about the pre-flight prayers from other passengers hours later.
As the plane boarded, she said, no one refused to fly. The public prayers and Arabic phone call did not trigger any alarms - so much for the p.c. allegations that people were disturbed by Muslim prayers.
But a note from a passenger about suspicious movements of the imams got the crew's attention. A copy of the passenger's note appears in the police report.
To Pauline everything seemed normal. Then the captain - in classic laconic pilot-style - announced there had been a "mix up in our paperwork" and that the flight would be delayed.
In reality, the air crew was waiting for the FBI and local police to arrive.
Ninety minutes after the flight's scheduled 5:15 p.m. departure, the captain announced yet another delay. Still, Pauline said, there was no sense of alarm.
Still, it seemed like just another annoying development, typical when flying the friendly skies.
The situation in cockpit was far more intense, according to a U.S. Airways spokeswoman and police reports.
Contrary to press accounts that a single note from a passenger triggered the imams' removal, Captain John Howard Wood was weighing multiple factors - factors that have largely been ignored by the press.
Another passenger, not the note writer, was an Arabic speaker sitting near two of the imams in the plane's tail. That passenger pulled a flight attendant aside, and in a whisper, translated what the men were saying. They were invoking "bin Laden" and condemning America for "killing Saddam," according to police reports.
Meanwhile an imam seated in first class asked for a seat-belt extension, even though according to both an on-duty flight attendant and another deadheading flight attendant, he looked too thin to need one. Hours later, when the passengers were being evacuated, the seat-belt extension was found on the floor near the imam's seat, police reports confirm. The U.S. Airways spokeswoman Andrea Rader said she did not dispute the report, but said the airline's internal investigation cannot yet account for the seat-belt extension request or its subsequent use.
A seat-belt extension can easily be used as a weapon, by wrapping the open-end of the belt around your fist and swinging the heavy metal buckle.
Still, it seemed like just another annoying development, typical when flying the friendly skies. Days after the incident, the imam would claim that the steward helped him attach the device. Pauline said he is lying. Hours later, when the police was being evacuated, the steward asked Pauline to hand him the seat-belt extension, which the imam did not attach, but placed on the floor. "I know he is lying," Pauline said, "I had it [seat belt extension] in my hand."
A passenger in the third row of first class, Pauline said, told a member of the crew: "I don't have a good feeling about this guy," about the imam who wanted the seat-belt extension.
A married couple one row behind first-class, tried to strike up a conversation with the imam seated near them. He refused to talk or even look at the woman in the eye, according to Pauline. Instead, he stood up and moved to join the other imams in the back of the plane. Why would he leave the luxury end of the aircraft? Pauline wondered. The account of the married couple does not appear in the police report.
Finally, a gate attendant told the captain she thought the imams were acting suspiciously, according to police reports.
So the captain apparently made his decision to delay the flight based on many complaints, not one. And he consulted a federal air marshal, a U.S. Airways ground security coordinator and the airline's security office in Phoenix. All thought the imams were acting suspiciously, Rader told me.
Other factors were also considered: All six imams had boarded together, with the first-class passengers - even though only one of them had a first-class ticket. Three had one-way tickets. Between the six men, only one had checked a bag.
And, Pauline said, they spread out just like the 9-11 hijackers. Two sat in first, two in the middle, and two back in the economy section. Pauline's account is confirmed by the police report. The airline spokeswoman added that some seemed to be sitting in seats not assigned to them.
One thing that no one seemed to consider at the time, perhaps due to lack of familiarity with Islamic practice, is that the men prayed both at the gate and on the plane. Observant Muslims pray only once at sundown, not twice.
"It was almost as if they were intentionally trying to get kicked off the flight," Pauline said.
A lone plain clothes FBI agent boarded the plane and briefly spoke to the imams. Later, uniformed police escorted them off.
Some press reports said the men were led off in handcuffs, which Pauline disputes. "I saw them. They were not handcuffed."
Later, each imam was individually brought back on the aircraft to reclaim his belongings. They were still not handcuffed. They may have been handcuffed later.
At this point, the passengers became alarmed. "How do we know they got all their stuff off?" Pauline heard one man ask.
While the imams were soon released, Pauline is fuming: "We are the victims of these people. They need to be more sensitive to us. They were totally insensitive to us and then accused us of being insensitive to them. I mean, we were a lot more inconvenienced than them."
The plane was delayed for some three and one-half hours.
Bomb-sniffing dogs were used to sweep the plane and every passenger was re-screened, the airline spokeswoman confirmed. Another detail omitted from press reports.
The reaction of the remaining passengers has also gone unreported. "We applauded and cheered for the crew," she said.
"I think it was either a foiled attempt to take over the plane or it was a publicity stunt to accuse us of being insensitive," Pauline said. "It had to be to intimidate U.S. Airways to ease up on security."
So far, U.S. Airways refuses to be intimidated, even though the feds have launched an investigation. "We are absolutely backing this crew," Rader said.
Tucked away in the police report is this little gem: one of the imams had complained to a passenger that some nations did not follow shariah law and his job in Bakersfield, Calif. was a cover for "representing Muslims here in the U.S."
So what are the imams really up to? Something more than praying it seems.
Posted by: pbj on July 20, 2007 11:18 AMHow far we have fallen. At one time people who engaged in acts of perversion did so in privacy, partially to hide their shame, partially so their neighbors wouldn't know how sick they were. Nowadays there is no shame. Children access pornography on the internet, sexual predators roam our streets and perverts march proudly down city streets. I do feel sorry for both of you, but worse for America, as I watch her centuries old moral values disintegrate into dust.
Posted by: Saltherring on July 20, 2007 12:15 PMUmm yeah, some people got freaked out because they don't know jack about the Muslim culture except for what they see on O'Riley every night. The whole incident relies on the word of one guy who claims he speaks Arabic.
Now that the pilots have guns, the cockpit doors are reinforced, Airport security is tightened, and anonymous Air Marshals sitting on every flight, what is there to be afraid of? I mean if these guys wanted to kill people they could have just as well boarded a packed Greyhound bus and blown that up. Would have been a whole lot easier.
At one time people who engaged in acts of perversion did so in privacy
They still do.
Children access pornography on the internet
Yes, and if you know how to use a computer you can install a filter to block these slights. It's that easy. No one is stopping you.
sexual predators roam our streets
How is this different from the biblical age?
"If a damsel that is a virgin be betrothed unto an husband, and a man find her in the city, and lie with her; Then ye shall bring them both out unto the gate of that city, and ye shall stone them with stones that they die;" - Deuteronomy 22:23-24
Looks like we still have sexual predators, we've moved from stoning them to death to putting them in jail.
perverts march proudly down city streets
If you don't like Gay Pride, don't go. Simple as that.
It sounds more like you have an issue with he first amendment than anything else.
How far we have fallen?
Ahhh... those good ol' days... when American's used to take thier children out after church to watch the latest hanging, and back when 'colored folk' were enslaved or lynched for trying to run away, when women didn't have the right to vote, gay folks were put in asylums, women were considered the property of men and our native populations were systematically removed from sight.
Yeah, what a terrible ride down hill it's been these last couple centuries. Having to even hear about nude people in a solstice parade, or watch a 3 minute segment on the news about the gay pride parade... it's all just a little too much for your delicate sensibilities, isn't it?
Posted by: Splinter on July 20, 2007 12:55 PMGay people were HAPPY in asylums! Haven't you ever watched "One Flew Over the Cuckooo's Nest?"
Though that movie does help prove your point. Danny DeVito played a simpering malignant dwarf -- not the malignant little drunk he's become.
These are better times? Nearly half the children born to single moms. Millions of abortions every year. Most of the country obese and/or addicted to one drug or another. Homicide the leading cause of death among people of color. Men considered the virtual property of women.
This is progress? To hell, maybe. (Eureka! Come to think of it, maybe "progressive" policies are the real cause of global warming!)
Posted by: Rey Smith on July 20, 2007 02:13 PMIt has NOTHING to do with the "Muslim culture" (whatever that is). I wouldn't expect a race baiter such as yourself to understand that. Do you comprehend what you read or simply look for snippets to throw out race baiting?
Another passenger, not the note writer, was an Arabic speaker sitting near two of the imams in the plane's tail. That passenger pulled a flight attendant aside, and in a whisper, translated what the men were saying. They were invoking "bin Laden" and condemning America for "killing Saddam," according to police reports.
Even the other MUSLIMS on the flight thought they were acting suspicious. It is easy for twerps like you Cato that were not there to throw out snide race baiting remarks. But to continue your race baiting even in the face of the facts only publicly demonstrates your incredible allegiance to ignorance.
I bet you dismissed the fears of those that died on 911 as being unjustly "freaked out because they don't know jack about the Muslim culture". Because after all, as all truthers like you know, it was really SWEDES that hijacked those planes on 911.
Posted by: pbj on July 20, 2007 02:44 PMSo you are advocating locking up homosexuals in asylums? That's good to know.
Actually, 37% of babies are born to unwed mothers, but if you want to round that up to "nearly half", I guess that's fine. It is worth pointing out though that being unmarried does not necessarily mean they do not have a father in the house. Half of the 37% have fathers in the home, the other half do not.... Just thought you might be interested in some facts. The kids today just don't place the importance on a big marriage ceremony that the older generation did. Not sure how all of this actually hurts the family though, but maybe you can point me to some Dobsonite "research" that will clear that up.
Most American's are Obese or addicted to one drug or another... hmmm.... not sure if, other than the obese thing, that has changed much. At least if you include alcohol in the mix. And what do you propose to do about this problem? Regulate the food industry? More Physical Education programs in school? A junk food tax? Imprison the obese with the homosexuals? Since this is a political blog, please tell me what the GOP is doing to correct this issue that is important to you.
Posted by: Splinter on July 20, 2007 02:56 PMFACT: There were many passengers who complained.
FACT: Pauline is NOT a man.
The complaints stem not only from the words, but the actions as well, You don't need to speak Arabic to understand those. And please tell me where in "Arabic" culture they perform the sacred century's old ritual with seatbelt extenders.
Posted by: pbj on July 20, 2007 02:59 PMSpecific sexual sins are addressed in Romans 1, beginning with verse 24; "Therfore God also gave them up to uncleanness, in the lusts of their hearts, to dishonor their bodies among themselves, who exchanged the truth of God for the lie, and worshipped the creature rather than the Creator, who is blessed forever. For this reason God gave them up to vile passions. For even their women exchanged the natural use for what is against nature. Likewise the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust for one another, men with men committing what is shameful, and receiving in themselves the penalty of their error which is due."
Homosexuality is sin. I didn't say it, Cato, God did. You can babble about burning witches and first amendment rights to do what is shameful and evil, but God will judge those who do not repent of what He has stated, in His word, is sin. Only through His grace can I face God on the judgement day, sinner that I am. Are you ready?
Posted by: Saltherring on July 20, 2007 07:24 PMSo sad.
Now go save the (world/whales/environment). You've got time before lunch.
Posted by: Rey Smith on July 21, 2007 10:35 AMWhat do you know about Arabic culture?
Check out this:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/news/news.html?in_article_id=469553&in_page_id=1770&ct=5
The father and uncle of honour killing victim Banaz Mahmod were jailed for life today for her murder.
Mahmod Mahmod, 54, was told he will have to serve a minimumn of 20 years while his brother Ari, 51, will have to serve at least 23 years.
Horrific details were revealed yesterday of the last hours of the young Kurdish woman murdered by her family for falling in love with the wrong man.
Banaz Mahmod, 20, was brutally raped and stamped on during a two-hour ordeal before being garotted.
One of her killers, the Old Bailey was told, was 30-year-old Mohamad Hama, who had been recruited by Banaz's father Mahmod Mahmod, 52, and his brother Ari, 51.
Both were found guilty of murder last month.
The shocking details of the killing came to light when Hama was secretly recorded talking to a friend in prison.
He admitted "slapping" and "f***ing" Banaz, who was subjected to degrading sex acts.
Hama and his friend were heard laughing as he described how she was killed in her family home in Mitcham, South London, with Ari Mahmod "supervising".
The murderers - two other suspects have fled to Iraq - had been told Banaz would be on her own.
Hama is recorded as saying: "Ari (the uncle) said there is no one there. There was someone there, Biza (her sister). The bastard lied to us."
He said of the murder: "I swear to God it took him more than two hours. Her soul and her life would not leave."
Banaz was garotted for five minutes, said Hama, but it took another half an hour for her to die.
Hama said: "The wire was thick and the soul would not just leave like that.
"We could not remove it. All in all it took five minutes (to strangle) her.
"I was kicking and stamping on her neck to get the soul out. I saw her stark naked, without wearing pants or underwear."
Banaz's body was packed into a suitcase and buried in a garden in Birmingham, where it was found three months later.
Posted by: pbj on July 21, 2007 10:49 AMBefore this thread gets too unraveled, let's remember it's about Rudy Giuliani.
Re your comments about "Reagan Democrats", this longtime GOP activist would like to remind you that they are no longer a force in politics because, well, most of them are dead!
If you were a typical 50-year old Dem in 1980 you'd be 77 now. You do the math.
Posted by: sestamibi on July 23, 2007 02:53 PM