Op-Ed
The Man from New York
Between the Lines
February 15, 2007 - 2:13amFor the last several months, former New York mayor Rudy Giuliani has polled at the top of the Republican primary field. Even so, conventional wisdom in many quarters says that he cannot win. He is too liberal on social issues and too tainted by his personal life to be nominated, or so the story goes. This analysis is superficial, and shows a misunderstanding of Republican primary voters. Giuliani is a strong candidate, and he has a good chance of winning the Republican primary — and the presidency.
Three doubts are commonly raised about a Giuliani candidacy. First, that his second marriage ended badly, and that he became romantically involved with another woman. Second, that he disagrees with much of the party on social issues, supporting civil unions, gun control and abortion rights. Third, that his record in New York is overstated. These issues may hurt Giuliani to some extent, but they are not enough to cripple his candidacy.
Giuliani is hardly the only Republican candidate with significant negatives. Arizona senator John McCain and former Massachusetts governor Mitt Romney, the other two leading Republicans, also bring negatives to the table. McCain is distrusted by many Republicans. They are displeased by his signature issue of campaign finance reform on the grounds that it improperly restricts free speech and has completely failed to improve the tone of politics. They are uncomfortable with his stridency and disrespect for those who disagree with him. Some even recall his connection to the Keating Five scandal, in which he pressured a federal regulatory agency on behalf of the bank run by a corrupt campaign contributor. Like Giuliani, he was unfaithful to a previous wife.
Romney, too, has negatives. Many conservatives feel that he did a poor job defending family values and “traditional marriage” in Massachusetts. He has changed his views several times on abortion. He has few foreign policy credentials. And, rightly or wrongly, many voters will look askance at Romney’s Mormon faith. All candidates bring baggage to a campaign, and Giuliani’s background is not obviously worse than that of the other candidates.
Some of the certainty that Republican voters will reject Giuliani is based on an unfortunate misunderstanding of what Republican voters are like. Republicans are generally not narrow-minded religious fanatics with medieval attitudes. Social issues are not all that motivates Republicans. Witness, for instance, the total lack of right-wing concern about Vice President Cheney’s gay daughter, despite attempts by the Kerry campaign to make her an issue. At present, the GOP base is passionate about restraining government spending, defending the country and preserving traditional marriage. Giuliani has strong credentials on the first two and is positioning himself in the mainstream of American opinion on the latter — opposing gay marriage, but supporting civil unions.
Giuliani is not simply a pragmatic politician. He has a strong record that will appeal to conservative voters. Giuliani’s signature achievements were controlling crime and spending in New York. In both cases, he triumphed despite intense opposition from much of the city’s political elite. This willingness to oppose political elites also extends to social issues. He fought to limit pornography and sex shops in New York City and ended racial set-asides in city contracting. On his watch, New York’s welfare programs were radically reformed — and a large number of people found jobs.
Though Giuliani is more moderate than many Republicans, he can reposition himself without disavowing his record. By pledging to appoint conservative judges, he can likely win over many skeptical social conservatives. Giuliani can satisfy gun owners by observing that different gun laws are required for New York City than for the country as a whole. Giuliani has taken a pragmatic but fairly tough position on immigration: the border needs to be policed, and undocumented immigrants need to learn English and pay back taxes in order to become citizens.
Giuliani, unlike Romney and McCain, is a lawyer. His first prominent post was as U.S. Attorney for New York, where he distinguished himself by aggressively prosecuting mobsters and crooked investors. Many presidents have come from a legal background, and a legal background is a significant asset for a politician. One of the fundamental elements of a legal education is an appreciation for the importance of small distinctions and framing. Being able to pick fights carefully and frame issues advantageously is also a very useful skill in politics. One of the major failings of the Bush Administration has been a certain tone-deafness regarding how issues are presented. A prosecutor, trained and experienced in swaying juries, would be unlikely to baldly assert “I’m the decider,” as Bush notoriously did.
While his past personal life may not help him, few Americans would be quick to apportion blame for the breakdown of someone else’s marriage. While Giuliani’s social stances may cost him some votes with the religious right, few Republican voters are actuated by homophobia and nothing else. It is likely that most Republicans, however, will shrug off Giuliani’s disagreements with them on some issues because of his many compensating strengths. Moreover, there is a sizable constituency among Republicans that would like to change the party’s reputation for zealous and narrow-minded piety, and in this way, Giuliani’s moderation on social issues may become an advantage.
Giuliani is smart and well spoken; he has an impressive resume, and his positions on most issues resonate with Republican voters. His supposed negatives may attract as much support as they cost him. Nothing, of course, is certain in American politics. Giuliani’s campaign could easily flame out or simply fail. However, his high standing in the polls is no fluke; Giuliani just might make the unprecedented jump from Gracie Mansion to the White House.
Ari Rabkin is a graduate student in Computer Science. He can be contacted at asr32@cornell.edu. Between the Lines appears Thursdays.

Giuliani
Giuliani is "well spoken." "Well Spoken!?!?" You might have well said he was "well spoken for an Italian," or even worse, "well spoken... for a wop." The implication is that most Italians are not well spoken, that most Italians sound like their minstrel show charicatures (Super) Mario and Luigi.
Everyone knows that this kind of language is simply code for anti-Italian bias. Rabkin and his "home-boy" Joe Biden should stop using these terms and come out openly with their biases. It'sa only the righta thinga to do, capice paisano?
Well Spoken?
While I think Mr. Rabkin's article presents some other issues, I do not think the well spoken accusation holds up. Mr. Rabkin was simply making a distinction between Mr. Guiliani and many politicians, who are not well spoken (Bush?).Try watching C-Span, most elected people are incompetent speakers. This was not some veiled jab at Italians