Giuliani vs. Clinton in NY

[Queen Mum Inks.LWC]

Clinton.

[bullmoose88]

Clinton...barring a national landslide..which might put NY into play...

Rudy isn't going to win the Republicans NY, but he gives them some hope in NJ and CT...some...

and he might carry PA...

but New York? Highly unlikely.

[Queen Mum Inks.LWC]

Clinton...barring a national landslide..which might put NY into play...

Rudy isn't going to win the Republicans NY, but he gives them some hope in NJ and CT...some...

and he might carry PA...

but New York? Highly unlikely.

Clinton would have to spend $$ in NY - which she would need elswhere and that'd make it interesting.

[Smash255]

Clinton...barring a national landslide..which might put NY into play...

Rudy isn't going to win the Republicans NY, but he gives them some hope in NJ and CT...some...

and he might carry PA...

but New York? Highly unlikely.

No she wouldn't, she still wins by 11-13 points or so

Clinton would have to spend $$ in NY - which she would need elswhere and that'd make it interesting.

[Sam Spade]

If the general election is 50-50, Clinton will win it about 55-45.  Extrapolate from there.

[bullmoose88]

Clinton...barring a national landslide..which might put NY into play...

Rudy isn't going to win the Republicans NY, but he gives them some hope in NJ and CT...some...

and he might carry PA...

but New York? Highly unlikely.

Clinton would have to spend $$ in NY - which she would need elswhere and that'd make it interesting.

No...she wouldn't.

It would be very optimistic that, barring some shakeup nationwide or in New York that Giuliani would force Clinton to spend money there.

I don't think Clinton will spend money there even if she only wins by 10-15 points instead of the larger margins that the Dems have carried NY with. But whats the point in racking up the score in a state?

Conceivably he could force the Democrats to spend more money there for certain house races, but New York for the foreseeable future is a Democratic State

[© tweed]

Clinton by 15

[Reaganfan]

Clinton by 10 pts. If Giuliani is the Republican Nominee...he will bring states into play that aren't supposed to be in play, like Connecticut, New Jersey, Minnesota, Michigan, and would probably take Ohio, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin. Florida easily goes Giuliani. It would cause Hillary to have to make stops in NJ, CT, MI...places where she probably wouldn't have had to in a say...Clinton vs. Romney race.

[Inmate Trump]

Clinton by 10 pts. If Giuliani is the Republican Nominee...he will bring states into play that aren't supposed to be in play, like Connecticut, New Jersey, Minnesota, Michigan, and would probably take Ohio, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin. Florida easily goes Giuliani. It would cause Hillary to have to make stops in NJ, CT, MI...places where she probably wouldn't have had to in a say...Clinton vs. Romney race.

Or a Clinton vs. McCain race.    You pretty much summed up every reason why I think you ought to support Giuliani in the primary: because he can win and give the Democrats a run for their money in states most Republicans wouldn't normally carry; that's something no other Republican in the race right now can do. 

[Moooooo]

Clinton wins.  Giuliani may pull within a few points, but I seriously doubt he wins NY unless Hillary implodes.

[Inmate Trump]

unless Hillary implodes.

Never discount the possible.    Why can't we just have a female president like....Roslin?  (Only BG fans will understand.)

[AndrewTX]

I'd probably say Clinton, although I accidently voted for Giuliani.

 I think he can give her a run for her money in the state. By no means will New York be safe for Hillary, but in the end, she will pull off something like 54 or 55% of the vote in NY.

[Verily]

Clinton...barring a national landslide..which might put NY into play...

Rudy isn't going to win the Republicans NY, but he gives them some hope in NJ and CT...some...

and he might carry PA...

but New York? Highly unlikely.

Clinton would have to spend $$ in NY - which she would need elswhere and that'd make it interesting.

No, she wouldn't. Clinton solidly has the backing of upstate New York over Giuliani (upstaters hate the city and cityfolk), and New York City itself has less than fond memories of Giuliani. Unlike the rest of the country, NYC knew Giuliani before September 11th.

[bullmoose88]

Clinton...barring a national landslide..which might put NY into play...

Rudy isn't going to win the Republicans NY, but he gives them some hope in NJ and CT...some...

and he might carry PA...

but New York? Highly unlikely.

Clinton would have to spend $$ in NY - which she would need elswhere and that'd make it interesting.

No, she wouldn't. Clinton solidly has the backing of upstate New York over Giuliani (upstaters hate the city and cityfolk), and New York City itself has less than fond memories of Giuliani. Unlike the rest of the country, NYC knew Giuliani before September 11th.

I agree...what do you think Giuliani's effect would be on Long Island and in West Chester etc...more suburban areas that didn't have Rudyrule or really have 1st hand knowledge before 9/11

[Small Business Owner of Any Repute]

I'm not sure I buy that New York City doesn't like

Clinton...barring a national landslide..which might put NY into play...

Rudy isn't going to win the Republicans NY, but he gives them some hope in NJ and CT...some...

and he might carry PA...

but New York? Highly unlikely.

Clinton would have to spend $$ in NY - which she would need elswhere and that'd make it interesting.

No, she wouldn't. Clinton solidly has the backing of upstate New York over Giuliani (upstaters hate the city and cityfolk), and New York City itself has less than fond memories of Giuliani. Unlike the rest of the country, NYC knew Giuliani before September 11th.

I don't buy that New York City has "less than fond" memories of Giuliani.  Certainly, they were fond enough to buy him a second term.  And more than fond enough to singlehandedly give Bloomberg his 2001 win.

The last set of approval ratings for Rudy that I can find prior to 9-11 put him at a solid 50 - 40% (Quinnipiac, 25 July 2001).  I'd guess he's probably a little bit higher than that today in NYC.

A poll conducted (again by Quinnipiac) on 14 November 2006 has some more interesting things to say about Rudy, when asked what kind of President the following figures would make:

Sen. Hillary Clinton: 67 percent "great" or "good;" 17 percent "so so," 13 percent "bad;"
Mayor Rudolph Giuliani: 41 percent "great" or "good;" 24 percent "so so," 33 percent "bad."

The slam-dunk popular Bloomberg fares better, however:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Bloomberg's most recent set of approval ratings puts him at 75 - 16%.

[agcatter]

Let's see.  Gore beat Bush there in 2000 by 25 pts.  Kerry beat Bush there by 17.  I say Clinton beats Rudy by 10.  That would be in line with what I think will be a 53 - 47 national vote win for Rudi.

To say that NY would in any way be competitive is a Republican pipe dream.  About as much chance of that as Hillary being competitive in, say, Tennessee or NC.  Voting patterns don't change in any drastic way from presidential election to the next.

[auburntiger]

If a John Anderson type Democrat ran in the race and Hillary ran a bad campaign, I still can't see Rudy actually winning NY statewide. It would be a tossup though. This state is as blue as they come (with the exception of RI and MA of course)

[Starbucks Union Thug HokeyPuck]

I'd put NJ almost at 50-50 if it's Guiliani v. Clinton, he's very popular here for some reason