When I tell my liberal friends and associates that there are only a handful of Republicans that I would vote for before Hillary Clinton, the response is universally the same. I get a blank stare, followed by the question: “Do you really think Rudy Giuliani can win the Republican nomination?”
If you’ve read about my infatuation with the Giuliani candidacy, you know my answer is YES. While Democrats like to fall in love with a candidate – Howard Dean or Senator Barack Obama, for example – we Republicans prefer picking winners.
While most Republicans would rather support a candidate who opposed abortion rights and supported the Second Amendment, they also realize that, even after seven years of George W. Bush’s religious-right mobilization efforts, Americans would be hard pressed to elect such a person. With notable exceptions, like the 2002 California governor’s race, Republicans recognize that they, like the Democrats, are a minority party. So, yes, the Religious Right will vote for Rudy Giuliani just as it voted for Arnold Schwarzenegger in California in 2003 and again in 2006.
Why? Republicans don’t like being losers. Being losers is why people become Democrats.
Rudy Giuliani offers the best and most practical hope to fight off the evil empire of American politics – the Clinton Family – because he remains a national hero and is not tarnished by the Iraq war. What’s more, Giuliani’s “urban conservative” message of freedom for all evokes the origins of the Grand Old Party and chips away at the core voter base of the Democrats.
Giuliani’s electability is what will get Religious voters to support him. Some will eve do so enthusiastically.
If you don’t believe me, then just follow the money. Campaign logic would say that Rudy Giuliani, the more moderate – dare I say liberal? – Republican would be sweeping in campaign dollars from urban areas, where Republicans have more libertarian, socially tolerant leanings. That same logic would suggest that former Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney, the born-again religious conservative, should be raking in the dough from suburban, ex-urban and rural areas where like-minded folks call home.
Campaign logic, however, would be wrong.
Romney leads Republicans in fundraising nationwide—but also in Los Angeles and its most liberal zip-codes of Beverly Hills, Hollywood and the Westside. Giuliani, on the other hand, wins the fundraising battle in the neighborhoods West of the 405 of Brentwood and Pacific Palisades with a higher concentration of single-family homes.
This anomaly is more stark when you look at the numbers from across the State. Romney is raising more money in urban areas like Sacramento, San Diego and San Francisco. Giuliani is taking in the preponderance of dollars in faraway places like Yolo County, Ventura, Santa Barbara, San Luis Obispo, Napa, Salinas, the Inland Empire and Fresno.
It is as if Mitt Romney were the GOP’s Phil Angelides. If you looked at a map of fundraising by County in California, Giuliani would win the Red Counties and Romney would take the Blue.
Look no further than the case of Real Estate Developer/Hotelier C. Frederick Wehba if you need more convincing. The passionately evangelical Christian – who started his own church in Beverly Hills and is a major contributor to George Bush and the RNC. C. Frederick is backing Rudolph Giuliani in 2008, as are Bill Simon and many others in the Christian Community.
Without Ted Haggard to tell them how to vote, Republicans of all stripes seem to be coming to the same conclusion – that the perfect should not be the enemy of the good, especially when the cost of failure is a sequel to President Clinton.