Today is the launch of what promises to be one of the hottest, must read, political news sites of 2007, The Politico. It’s run by disaffected ace Washington reporters Jim VandeHei, John Harris, Mike Allen, Ben Smith and Roger Simon. They open up with a bang, a front page article detailing the skepticism that many in the GOP have had over whether Rudy Giuliani’s bid for the White House is really serious or just really unconventional.
Former New York mayor Rudy Giuliani is finally scrambling to beat back a crippling perception that his bid for president isn’t quite serious. But even as he begins to hire aides and consultants, many of his New York supporters and critics, as well as neutral observers, see a repeat of his half-hearted, unfinished 2000 campaign for Senate.“At this moment in history I do not believe he’s running for president; I just don’t believe it,” said Mike Long, chairman of the Conservative Party of New York State. “I don’t know of anyone who’s gotten a call saying, ‘I’m running, I need you to get behind me,’ same as happened before.”
“I’m having a real hard time believing the guy is taking it seriously,” said a former Guiliani aide, who said that he would love to see him become president. “In 2000 there was this feeling that he didn’t have to play by all the rules that little people have to play by, and I see that even more strongly now.”
The question for this year’s Republican primary is whether voters can expect the Giuliani of his first winning campaign in 1993 — a studious, disciplined, hard-working candidate — or the indecisive, disorganized, reluctant candidate of 2000, carried by spectacular public polling and national Republican hopes toward a confrontation with Hillary Rodham Clinton until he flamed out in May.
To many in New York, it’s starting to look like 2000 all over again with Giuliani drawing the biggest headlines of late when an aide lost possession of a binder containing detailed fund-raising plans and worries that his personal and business life could scuttle his campaign; that 140-page dossier, first published in the New York Daily News, is available online today at Politico.com.
His aides declined to make him available for comment.
Giuliani’s early apparent weaknesses — lack of veteran Republican aides, organization and money — are hardly fatal. However, they do have a domino effect affecting his ability to attract seasoned staff workers and recruit national donors, and that exacerbates the skepticism that he is serious.
“I doubt his ability to actually go through with it to the end,” said Republican strategist Chris LaCivita, who is not working for any of the presidential hopefuls. “Here we are, it’s the 17th of January, we’ve got straw polls around the corner, and they don’t have a media consultant or a pollster yet? That’s a tell-tale sign.”
With the hiring of some New Hampshire organizational staff and the selling of his finance business, it appears that Rudy is definitely starting to get serious about running, but it doesn’t seem to have dampened the underlying skepticism even among people who know him feel. Either way, I hope that Rudy does genuinely run for the Presidency
January 23rd, 2007 at 9:34 pm
I and others have been saying for months that Guiliani can’t be serious…he is just taking all the chumps for a major ride, collecting their contributions, getting paid massive bucks for speaking engagements, and selling books. Had any of you listened, you would not have wasted your time, energy or money on sham that is Guiliani 08.
January 23rd, 2007 at 9:35 pm
It’s a little difficult to run for Senate when you’re undergoing freakin’ chemotherapy!
Ridiculous…
January 23rd, 2007 at 9:38 pm
And, by the way, removing Guiliani from the #1 position on this blog (and providing an intellectual rather than an “E!” entertainment style analysis would lend credibility. Until that happens, this blog is kind of bush league.
January 23rd, 2007 at 10:58 pm
I have to admit. when I posted the Manchester (NH) Union Leader article reporting on the first Giuliani hires in the Granite State, it crossed my mind that the principles were not exactly heavyweights. Plus, okay, Giuliani has four people working for him in New Hampshire – that isn’t a lot, and what about Iowa and South Carolina? This does show some initiative, but it is less than an all out effort. It is almost as if he is simply trying to placate the money-types from whom he needs to raise funds, who want more evidence that he is committed to running, by putting a few people in place.
I am convinced Giuliani is running, if only because the kind of people he has tied up at the top of his political and finance organizations are not the type you secure without being committed to run. But I am increasingly convinced as well that he is going to run a non-conventional type of campaign, which would be appropriate for someone whose strength will be running as an outsider.
We’ll see.
January 23rd, 2007 at 11:43 pm
Republius. . .when you say he may run a non-conventional campaign by an outsider, are you thinking he may run as an independent? I don’t see that happening, but just for fun I’ve been doing some reading about John Anderson and his independent bid in 1980. He first ran as a liberal Republican before making the indy run (with a Democrat as his VP) when he realized that the GOP activists couldn’t support him. Again, I don’t see that happening with Rudy, but if there was ever a year since Anderson where an independent can do well, I think this would be it.
January 24th, 2007 at 12:25 am
Paul S:
Speaking of that, I’d love to hear the justification for putting Pataki ahead of Tancredo and Hunter in the rankings. Both of the congressmen, while perhaps prohibitive long shots, have a cadre of supporters. I can’t find anyone, anywhere, who would want to return Pataki to the statehouse in Albany, no less to the Oval Office. Tancredo has his support among the anti-immigration set. Hunter among fair-traders and border security advocates. Who are Pataki’s supporters?
January 24th, 2007 at 12:50 am
Fredo and Paul S. . .Kavon and company can correct me here if I’m wrong, but I believe he posted once before that Power Rankings are not updated on a regular basis due to web hosting and server issues. The meaning behind the rankings – why candidates are ranked where they are – has been covered on this site. Try doing a search under Categories on the right side of this page and you’ll find several posts referring to the Rankings and logic behind them.
As for calling this site Bush League, (which I took as a negative comment on the site and not a positive comparison to our president – sorry, dumb joke), I won’t comment on that beyond saying that I myself, and the many others who post here, and the many more others who arrive here simply to read others’ opinions, would not be coming back on a daily basis if it was a Bush League site. As a place where anyone can post an opinion and have many educated as well as opinionated readers post their responses, calling the site Bush League sort of insults everyone here, not just the host. The great thing about this country, and the internet for that matter, is that you have the absolute freedom to stop coming to this site and either finding a better one or starting your own. I have noticed that you have posted comments to other topics elsewhere on this site, so it can’t be too “bush league-y” for ya.
January 24th, 2007 at 1:05 am
jake,
I’ve practically been living at this site. Maybe squatting would be more accurate. So you’re preaching to the choir. I just don’t get the Pataki thing. I’m sure everyone else has their own nits to pick with the rankings, but as a New Yorker, I’ve seen enough of Pataki to know he’s not the answer.
January 24th, 2007 at 1:18 am
Fredo. . .My family is from NY – Brooklyn and Long Island – and they all say the same thing about Pataki. I remember asking my cousin, a Republican, what he thought of the governor as President and he just started laughing. Pataki always seemed like a lightweight to me, especially as governor of such a large state. I’m an avid reader of the NY Post and once I saw that even they were no longer fond of Pataki, I realized he had no chance with the rest of the country. Considering the Gov. has been off the radar screen for a while now, I doubt we really have to worry about him.
January 24th, 2007 at 2:15 am
Jake, I apologize for failing to define non-conventional in making my take. I did not mean to imply that Mayor Giuliani would run as anything but a Republican.
From everything I have seen, read, heard, and felt it appears to me that Mayor Giuliani is going to run for president by eschewing the typical status quo, inside the beltway approach (that McCain and Romney are following, by the way) of racing to beat primary opponents for endorsements of Republican legislators and state party insiders, hurrying to hire as many Republican political operatives who had positions with the 2000 and 2004 Bush campaigns as possible, and generally building a campaign where more (endorsements and paid operatives) is considered necessarily better than the alternative.
In contrast, I think Mayor Giuliani is likely to run as a Washington, D.C. outsider and tbe guy who would make the best chief executive, with a much leaner organization than McCain and Romney that relies primarily on his usual New York City inner circle and select recruits, where a high octane message (that by definition is more likely to be communicated through mass means than by door-to-door campaigning) is emphasized more than the depth and breadth of his political organization and is aimed at grassroots voters rather than party stalwarts.
Such a campaign plays to the Giuliani strengths of high name recognition and initial favorability, as well as to his predilections as a guy who favors managerial efficiency and control (which necessitates reasonable layers of personnel for accountability and communication) and relies on a rather small coterie of advisors in whom he places trust. This is also a guy who has the ability to focus laser-like on his goals and will not allow the traditional accoutrements of political viability to dictate a false sense of electoral security. Finally, I think Giuliani, like Gingrich, has sensed properly that the 2008 race will continue the trend where traditional national election rules increasingly break down as voters yearn for a different approach to energizing their loyalties as a proxy for someone who will be able to solve the unique and complex problems of our time. Notice that McCain and Romney are already, through their campaigns, badmouthing potential Republican opponents; I think Giuliani and Gingrich are going to take the high road and avoid the gutter.
The Giuliani problem is that the big time political contributors needed to get things rolling are traditionalists who want to see those political accoutrements the Mayor is specifically eschewing as a benchmark for strength and seriousness. I would not be surprised if a Giuliani campaign is able to raise a ton of money over the Internet from small donors, as Governor Dean did in 2004, once he formally announces a run. But until then, to build up the foundational financial strength (and Giuliani is too strict a manager to enter this race on the fly without sufficient cash to begin with) and reach the long-term numerical goals that will allow him to compete until the bitter end, he is going to need to raise money the traditional way from the usual big ticket suspect donors, who want to know why he doesn’t have as many operatives as McCain and Romney.
Do folks remember all the upaid (free) media that John McCain received in 2000 with his Straight Talk Express campaign? There is no evidence McCain, who is now old news and also on the unpopular side of the War in Iraq, will replicate anything close to that in 2008 or that Romney will catch fire that way. But Giuliani and Gingrich have the potential to be the media frenzy candidates of 2008, and when you are in that position it allows you the luxury of playing the game a little bit differently than your opponents.
January 24th, 2007 at 4:29 am
Well, Republius, if your scenario is actually the case with Giuliani ’08, I really hope it works. Not just because I like the guy, but because if it succeeds it may change the future of political campaigns for the better. Ironically, by focusing less on the DC lobbyist/special interest/political endorsement crowd and more on the average Joe and Jane Voter, it may have the positive effects McCain-Feingold was meant to accomplish, without all those pesky unconstitutional restrictions on free speech the law arguably has in reality. I’m no fan of Howard Dean, but I give him a lot of credit for bringing his campaign directly to the people by going the Internet route to gain support and campaign donations back in 2004. Likewise, I was an early member of the Straight Talk Expreess movement back in 2000 because it was, for me, the first time a candidate basically said to the voters “join me as WE win this thing TOGETHER.” Of all the ’08 candidates, Rudy has the best chance to run a successful “people’s campaign.” I just hope he doesn’t wait too long. Like you said, the political reality is that he still needs a strong financial foundation to get started.
January 24th, 2007 at 9:51 am
Mes Confrères:
I must come to the defense of this site. I have been a regular visitor, and sometime commentator, since last June/July. As I have groked the purpose of this site, it is intended to present a forum for open political discussion — weighted toward the contest for the GOP’s Presidential nomination in 2008 — not to strive for metaphysical clarity or rectitude. In my judgment, the site succeeds admirably in its purpose. I have seen some of the most absolutely inane and puerile opinions expressed here, opinions that strain my own commitment to civil discourse to the breaking point. I have also seen opinions evidencing great sagacity, maturity, and insight — verging on real profundity. I have seen everything in between. My overall seat-of-the-pants assessment of the site’s content would weigh distinctly toward the latter, rather than the former. Moreover, these disparate opinions are expressed by a huge number of contributors, apparently from all across the country. For a discussion forum, gentlemen, that is real success!
Before I turn to the issue of the “Power Rankings”, a bit of disclosure is in order. There is no question that I support Rudy Giuliani for the Presidency in 2008! See: “Run Rudy Run” (). During Rudy’s tenure as U.S. Attorney in New York in the 1980′s, I was a practicing attorney and negotiated with his office many times. I supported Ron Lauder against Rudy in the 1989 Mayoral primary. Subsequently, I saw the error of my ways and supported Rudy in all his three runs for Gracie mansion. All that said, I have been involved in Republican politics since 1960, when I handed out leaflets on the street corner for Richard Nixon. I covered the 1968 Democrat convention in Chicago as a reporter for my college newspaper. My first foray into politics as other than a volunteer or journalist was in the short-lived 1982 Senate campaign of Republican Mike Seymour in New York. I have truly seen it all.
As for the “Power Rankings”: Ranking Rudy and McCain as “tied” for the status of “frontrunner” seems to me a very thoughtful and creative way to address a somewhat ambiguous and confusing, if not unique, situation. At this point in time, every single hard fact-on-the-ground places Rudy as the clear frontrunner, with McCain a distinct second, albeit not terribly far back. No one else is even close. At the same time, the “Conventional Wisdom”, the MSM, the Beltway Punditocracy, and the “Wise Men” of Washington, all virtuously unanimously rate McCain as the frontrunner, even to the point of disdaining or ignoring Rudy. Then there is the nagging suspicion, even among some of his supporters — though not I — that Rudy will ultimately eschew actually running. Finally, there is the inescapable fact that not a single meaningful vote has yet been cast. Without trying here to assess the underlying reasons for this situation as National Review’s Deroy Murdock puts it “[t]he oddest thing about the conventional wisdom may be its almost bulletproof imperviousness to the facts”,– the question nevertheless presents itself: What’s an honest power ranker to do? As I say, the “tie” seems to me a thoughtful and creative answer.
As for the rest of the rankings: Romney (3rd) and Newt (4th) were, when these rankings were last updated, and still are, the only other potential candidates who had/have shown any objective sign of breaking away from the rest of the pack, though neither has shown any objective sign of actually challenging Rudy or McCain. As I have show in other postings on this site, Newt has of late — though he still insists he has not made the decision to run and will not run unless the top tier candidates falter significantly out-performed Romney, who has formed an Exploratory Committee. At same time, there are those on this site and elsewhere who firmly insist that Romney is “the 3rd of the Big 3″, or that he will leap into the lead when his poll numbers rise and Rudy’s decline, or some such thing, all with absolutely no objective evidence to support their wishful thinking. Ho-hum; whatever! In my view, these two, Newt and Romney, should be viewed at this point in time as the only “other” potential candidates who have even a glimmer of hope of competing seriously for the nomination, and that’s just where the Power Rankings have them: in 3rd and 4th place, the specific order is irrelevant.
Below that, there’s no one yet that I am willing to take the time even to consider. By that, I do not mean to denigrate any of them. Some of them are very fine men and government officials. I actually like Mike Huckabee, and I have known Jim Gilmore for almost 50 years. [Note: Jim is not currently in the Power Rankings because (I assume), when they were last up-dated, he had not yet formed his Exploratory Committee.] That said, for a mature, indeed sentient, human being to opine seriously that “Huckabee will come through” or “I prefer Tom Tancredo over Duncan Hunter, or vice versa”, or “Jim Gilmore is the only true conservative in the race”, or “Condi Rice will ultimately be drafted by the American People”, is, in my judgment at this time, nothing more than mental masturbation.
January 24th, 2007 at 10:00 am
It’s obvious that the reasons Giuliani is hesitant is because of the numerous skeletons in his closet:
1. Loving up his mistress while his son was in the house.
2. Covering up for mobster Gideon Chern.
3. Covering up for Kerik while he was being bribed by mobsters while Rudy knew they were mobsters. Covering up for Kerik many more times. DoJ investigation of Kerik bribery will be hung around Rudy’s neck.
4. Cross-dressing on National TV more than once.
5. Locating his Emergency Command Center at the World Trade Center Tower.
6. On 9-11: pulling the Fire Commissioner away from his special communications truck, so when the order to evacuate came from the police helicopter, the Commissioner could not warn the fire squads because he never heard the message! (Breslin)
7. Covering up for the EPA when they said the 9-11 asbestos dust was safe.
8. Refusing to pay the $250,000 for respirators for 9-11 workers, who are now dying and sick by the thousands as a result.
9. Acting like a ninny on 9-11, roaming through the streets without a Command center (see #5) (9-11 Commission testimony)
10. After being thrown out of the Gracie Mansion by Donna Hanover, Rudy moved in with 2 gay friends and lived with them for 2 years! Why? Why did a grown man move in with 2 gay friends and not get his own place? This episode is truly bizarre.
I have another 10 skeletons, including his disastrous business dealings — but I have to go to work now!
HUCKABEE ’08!
January 24th, 2007 at 10:15 am
I Like Mike:
Thank you indeed for proving so quickly the efficacy of my comment about the “broad” range of opinion expressed on this site.
January 24th, 2007 at 10:23 am
I love this site! Except for the stupid editing box that on my browser goes all the way to the right so you can’t see half of what you are typing!
January 24th, 2007 at 11:18 am
Luther. . .let me add that I would go out on a limb and suggest that this is the only political site on the Net where in just one paragraph we see the words rectitude, puerile, sagacity, and profundity, and then we are treated to a post-ending “mental masturbation”. If for no other reason, I will continue to visit this site every day for a much needed refreshment lesson on Advanced English Vocabulary.
January 24th, 2007 at 12:05 pm
Luther,
There is plenty of objective evidence that Romney can win it all, but you object to it.
January 24th, 2007 at 12:21 pm
That happens to you too “I Like Mike”? I thought I was the only one!
January 24th, 2007 at 1:04 pm
ILM, Matt, me too. I’ve noticed that if you resize the window from small to big-screen you can preview all of what you’ve written before posting it.
Luther: …every single hard fact-on-the-ground places Rudy as the clear frontrunner…
If by this you actually mean “current public popularity with regards to no other factors”, then yes…but I think (as Republius might phrase it) that you’re whistling past some other hard facts-on-the-ground.
January 24th, 2007 at 1:11 pm
Here’s a simple way to get rid of the problem of the comment box being too long for your browser window: switch to Firefox!
Kavon convinced me to try it a few weeks ago and I haven’t looked back once. It’s a definite improvement over IE in many areas – not the least of which is security and protection. And the comment box is the right size.
January 24th, 2007 at 1:25 pm
“I love this site! Except for the stupid editing box that on my browser goes all the way to the right so you can’t see half of what you are typing.”
“Here’s a simple way to get rid of the problem of the comment box being too long for your browser window: switch to Firefox!”
The problem of the comments box disappearing was really perplexing to me. Switching to Firefox solved the problem.
I cannot recommend Firefox more highly. What a fool I was for using Internet Explorer for all of those years!
Not only is it vastly superior for all of the reasons that HeavyM just outlined. But it is absolutely free.
Go here to download it. It you don’t like it you can always just delete it.
January 24th, 2007 at 2:55 pm
Kavon,
This is the only site that I have ever encountered that has the magicly expanding text box wherehw eotih woirfgvorih I cant see what I just typed.
Yes, we could all switch to Firefox.
Or perhaps, you or the other R42 poobahs can fix the #$%& code.
January 24th, 2007 at 3:03 pm
Gentlemen:
Alternatively, one could type one’s comments in MS Word or Word Perfect, read them spell-check them, and otherwise tweak them. Then one could use the copy/paste feature to drop them into the R-4-2008 reply box. I have the Firefox browser, and I still do it this way! Even so, I still end up with typos. Alas, however, I refuse to dictate them to my secretary and have her enter them.
January 24th, 2007 at 3:10 pm
Dear Kavon -
I’m in software and fixing this expanding box should be relatively simple. You can’t ask people to change browsers and this site will continue to grow.
It should only cost you several hundred bucks to fix this or maybe there is a volunteer somewhere (hey, anybody). It might only take less than an hour.
All you should have to do is code in the length of the box and that will set it.
Firefox sounds wonderful but you can’t be the only political site that requires it.
Bad idea. Is this written in .net or what?
January 24th, 2007 at 3:46 pm
I used to have the messed up box, but not anymore. I don’t know why.
As for Rudy running, I have a hard time seeing someone leaving poll numbers like Rudy’s on the table without even trying. He is the most popular and well liked public figure in America, for goodness sakes.
January 24th, 2007 at 3:54 pm
As for Rudy running, I have a hard time seeing someone leaving poll numbers like Rudy’s on the table without even trying. He is the most popular and well liked public figure in America, for goodness sakes.
To David – That’s what makes his hesitation all the more glaring. Losing the playbook outlining his potentially “insurmountable” skeletons makes it clear this is what he’s worried about.
January 24th, 2007 at 3:56 pm
Besides the DoJ investigation of the Kerik bribe, he is most worried abnout Donna Hanover and what she might do as she is prone to sensationalist press conferences detailing Rudy’s outrageous behavior with his mistress Nathan.
January 24th, 2007 at 4:19 pm
What we have to admit is that it is unknown what the impact of the Giuliani baggage on voters once they are reminded of it, as they surely will be by opponents, will be. The public may be disgusted and fed up with negative campaigning, the view that our elected officials need to be perfect, and the thought of these kinds of issues taking a strong leader out of play in an election; or they may have their admiration for the Mayor reduced significantly, to the point where he is no longer as competitive a candidate, once his personal life and social views are in the forefront.
The reality is that nobody knows for sure how it will all play out. It will take a campaign to test all of this, and it could arguably go either way. So the question is whether Giuliani will take the risk or not? Keep in mind that if the Giuliani reputation is sullied in a campaign, not only does he lose a chance to win the presidency, but his ability to attract clients after the fact in his various private endeavors will be substantially curtailed. So there is substantial risk for Giuliani in going forward with a campaign that will open his life to a level of scrutiny not reached heretofore.
January 24th, 2007 at 4:24 pm
It may be that Rudy’s hesitation will ultimately do him in. If he was as active in courting staff and moneymen as McCain and Romney are, he would be the clear front runner. Instead, even his own advisers say that nothing is certain about him running. If he is becoming more comfortable with running for President, he has to make a big splash in the money game. McCain already has millions of dollars and Romney was able to raise $6.5 million in one day. But Rudy is even having trouble locking up key fund raisers, without which would make his steep goals almost impossible to achieve in the next 6 months.
Once Rudy starts putting together a fundraising team and even an average field staff (still waiting on those Iowa staff…) then I will be convinced that Rudy is sincerely running for President of the United States.
January 24th, 2007 at 4:31 pm
Exactly right, Republius. What client would want to stay with Giuliani Partners when all the negative stuff starts coming out. How many people outside New York know about Donna Hanover or remember who Kerik is? There’s so many questionable and unsavory details of Rudy’s political and personal career, on top of all his social stances, I just have to wonder how he’ll handle it all. The reason most operatives on either side have avoided attacking him is because no one can really say for sure that he’s running. But the gloves will come off within minutes of an official announcement.
Rudy’s making over $8 million a year, does he really want to have his entire life and the lives of everyone he’s ever known dissected piece by piece for the next 18 months? Even then, there’s no guarantee that he’ll manage to get the nomination.
January 24th, 2007 at 4:33 pm
[...] Somehow I missed this last night, but the Politico also released the infamous Rudy Giuliani campaign dossier publicly. It’s 126 pages (PDF), so it’ll take some time to go through. There might be some fascinating nuggets in there that might help shed some light on whether Rudy is really in it for real and if his campaign strategy has any chance of success. Enjoy! [...]
January 24th, 2007 at 6:15 pm
Rudy just called Anbar Province “ANWAR”, WHEN ASKED: “WHAT DOES A MAYOR KNOW ABOUT IRAQ?” AND HE CALLS IT ‘ANWAR’. He was asked to comment on the SOTU.
Not a good start…
January 24th, 2007 at 6:25 pm
Well, ILM, if past precedents are any indication, the ability to mangle the english language seems to help someone in their drive for the Presidency. Lincoln was constantly criticized for his pronunciation. Reagan was dinged more than once for it, and Bush has been constantly “misunderestimated”.
So Giuliani is in good company, wouldn’t you say?
January 24th, 2007 at 8:30 pm
Kavon,
I’m not an expert on these things, but I have designed a few sites, so take this for what it is worth.
I note in your page source that this text box is defined thusly:
As my best guess, the value for “cols” is the problem – I think it needs to be a number (of pixels), not a percentage.
In any case, your site designer has screwed up and should fix it for you, no charge.
Its a real annoyance, y’know….
January 24th, 2007 at 8:32 pm
oops, sorry, it didnt show up.
here it is without the brackets
textarea name=”comment” id=”comment” style=”width:98%” cols=”100%” rows=”10″ tabindex=”4″
January 25th, 2007 at 9:24 am
Yes your developer should fix it for free… Pixels won’t work because of different resolution settings, however.