Upon learning that former New York mayor Rudy Giuliani (R) has formed a [tag]president[/tag]ial [tag]exploratory committee[/tag], I immediately thought of Katon Dawson, the South Carolina Republican chairman, who told New York magazine in 2004 that Giuliani could compete in the Bible Belt because of work on 9/11. And then, Dawson started backpedaling.
Did he know that Pataki and [tag]Giuliani[/tag] have been staunch supporters of gun control? “Well,” he drawled, “we are all supporters of the NRA in South Carolina.”
Was he aware that both men supported a woman’s right to an abortion? Dawson paused. “That is a litmus test in the South. That would be plowing new ground in South Carolina.”
And how about their support of some gay rights? There was no pause now. “A big stumbling block,” he said.
Those are probably the two most important words surrounding Giuliani’s presidential ambitions: “stumbling block.” Indeed, he has lots of them.
We are, after all, talking about a man who’s not only far from the GOP mainstream on social issues (gays, guns, and abortion), Giuliani is also burdened by serious personal and professional scandals. He’s been married, for example, three times, after a series of brazen extramarital affairs (in 2000, Giuliani marched with his then-mistress in New York’s St. Patrick’s Day parade). For that matter, Giuliani tapped Bernie Kerik as his police commissioner and business partner, despite Kerik’s, shall we say, “issues.”
Granted, Giuliani remains a popular figure in GOP circles. A recent CNN poll found that he came out on top of the presidential field among Republican voters or independents who lean Republican with 29% support, followed by John McCain with 27%. But that’s Giuliani with a 9/11 halo over head, before rank-and-file Republicans learn a bit more about his background.
It seems literally impossible to me that Giuliani could win the GOP nomination.
I was talking a few months ago to a pretty major figure in the religious right about the [tag]2008[/tag] race and he told me there’s just no way for Giuliani to generate any support at all from the party’s base. Even if Giuliani were to completely reverse course and embrace positions that he’s always opposed, religious-right voters would ask how such a transformation is possible, and would no doubt prefer a candidate who’d been conservative all along.
A political scientist in South Carolina recently suggested Giuliani can “get away with” supporting legalized abortion and gay rights because of his credibility on national security issues. I don’t think so. As a rule, Republican primary voters look for ideological purity on all of the major issues — and we’re talking about a candidate who’s “wrong” about guns, abortion, marriage, and gays. That’s not a hurdle for a candidate to clear; that’s a brick wall for a candidate to run into.
Besides, I’d argue Giuliani’s credibility on national security issues is wide but thin. For his national security background to trump all of his other issues, Giuliani would’ve had to have prevented a terrorist attack personally, Jack-Bauer style. Indeed, it’s a delicate issue, but it’s probably worth remembering that Giuliani’s 9/11 halo is not without limits. By stepping up on 9/11 to reassure the public that the crisis was under control, Giuliani impressed nearly everyone. He demonstrated some leadership when people in New York City needed it. But does that make him an expert on national security policy? How, exactly?
Just as an aside, I’d also argue that McCain is the big winner if Giuliani does run. On the one hand, he may have to share the limelight with another national political celebrity, but on the other, McCain has had to work extra hard to convince the far-right GOP base that’s he’s conservative enough to be the Republican nominee. Giuliani makes that task much easier. In other words, with Giuliani in the field, McCain gets to say, “Compared to that guy, I’m Jesse Helms.”
If someone can make the case that Giuliani can get the [tag]nomination[/tag], I’m all ears, but I just don’t see it.