Dropping Fast In Polls, Rudy Unveils New Campaign Tack: Call For More War
With his candidacy cratering in multiple polls, Rudy Giuliani has hit on a new campaign strategy designed to turn things around: He's calling for more war on multiple fronts.
The New York Sun has the scoop on his new approach:
WASHINGTON — Mayor Giuliani will announce a new four-point war strategy in New Hampshire today, an effort to refocus a primary campaign season for Republicans that has centered in recent weeks less on foreign affairs and more on immigration and domestic issues.Specifically, Mr. Giuliani will call for a new military surge in Afghanistan, a change in the way America's spies are promoted so that officers are rewarded for finding actionable intelligence and not just the number of agents they recruit, and a new war on Al Qaeda's intricate network of Web sites, sites used both to communicate with its agents in the field and to recruit new jihadis.
What's interesting is that the Rudy foreign policy adviser who leaked this to The Sun is being very explicit about the fact that this shift in direction reflects a belief within the Rudy camp that the Bhutto assassination has given him a political opening to turn things around:
"I think the problem in Pakistan and the assassination of Benazir Bhutto has raised a lot of concern and questions," the Giuliani campaign's senior foreign policy adviser, Charles Hill, said in an interview yesterday. "The media has focused on it, the American people have asked questions anew, it has certainly made clear that the challenge of Islamic radicalism is very much alive and very much a threat."
Not particularly subtle.
In his speech, which is coming later this morning in New Hampshire, Rudy will stick to four major themes, which The Sun describes as follows: "Expanding the military, improving intelligence, homeland security, and winning the war of ideas against radical Islam."
Asked where the new troops for the Afghanistan "surge" will come from, Rudy adviser Hill declined to go into detail, but notably, he did tell the paper that a Giuliani administration would seek to expand the military considerably.
The speech comes as a new poll released today shows that Rudy's national lead has evaporated completely -- John McCain now boasts more national support than Rudy does, while Mike Huckabee is running just behind him. The new Pew survey finds McCain with 22%, Rudy with 20%, and Huckabee with 17%.
The poll also finds that Rudy has sunk an astonishing 13 points nationally since September. This chart from Pew tells the story rather dramatically:
Rudy's whole game plan from the beginning has been to use the imagery of himself walking through the smoke and dust on 9/11 to persuade the national electorate that they need him to defend America against the terrorists lest we get hit with another 9/11 or worse. This hasn't worked out so well, as the above numbers show. So now he's doubling down on the strategy with a call for yet more war. Intriguing.
We'll bring you video of the speech as soon as it's available.
Comments (33)
Frog Leg wrote on January 2, 2008 10:51 AM:Guiliani: "Mr. Giuliani will call for ... a change in the way America's spies are promoted so that officers are rewarded for finding actionable intelligence..."
If this were in effect, the agents who found Curveball would be in charge of the CIA now.
Greg wrote on January 2, 2008 10:54 AM:good point indeed
dcshungu wrote on January 2, 2008 11:05 AM:The contrast between Rudy and his previous co-frontrunner, HRC, could not be starker nationwide. The same Pew Research poll finds Hillary's national lead remaining stable. Considering the large fluxes in support for Rudy (big drop), McCain (big surge), Romney and Huckubee on the GOP side, we must conclude that a large proportion of the electorate has already tuned in, so that whatever has been going on in the early states does not yet appear to be affecting Hillary's standing nationally. I believe that this is due to her stronger standing among the rank and file Dems, which was even apparent in the DMR IA poll:
Hillary Maintains Wide National Lead The Democratic contest has remained largely stable nationwide. Despite state polls that show very close races in Iowa, New Hampshire and South Carolina, Hillary Clinton maintains a 20-point lead over Barack Obama among registered Democrats and Democratic-leaning voters nationwide (46% to 26%), with John Edwards holding at 14%. Clinton continues to benefit from a modest gender gap, drawing somewhat greater support among women (49%) than among men (41%). She also leads Obama among white voters (46%, vs. 22% and 16% for Obama and Edwards, respectively). But Obama matches her among black voters (47% for Obama, 45% for Clinton).Michael A wrote on January 2, 2008 11:06 AM:
When will 9/12 get here? I'm still waiting. I am sick and tired of this fear mongering. How many innocent people will we kill as a nation to satisfy the right-wing loonies? Pathetic.
Anonymous wrote on January 2, 2008 11:41 AM:Asked where the new troops for the Afghanistan "surge" will come from, Rudy adviser Hill declined to go into detail, but notably, he did tell the paper that a Giuliani administration would seek to expand the military considerably.
My guess is that he plans to reduce recruitment and re-enlistments because he believes doing so will actually result in a net increase the total number troops.
Hey, its what he and all the rest of the Republicans says about tax revenues, same theory must apply to troops.
We've already won the war of ideas vis a vis radical Islam.
American ideals have been embraced throughout the world, most notably in international institutions.
If anyone is embracing the ideas of radical Ialam outside of radical Muslims, it is American conservatives, which makes Rudy and any similar conservative the last place you would look for someone to battle the ideas promoted by Islamic extremists: terror, torture, endless religious and cultural war, religious and cultural absolutism, and then more war, suffused with self-righteous preening and insufferable and violent rejection of any and all opposing viewpoints.
Richard L. Adlof wrote on January 2, 2008 11:44 AM:Sounds as if Guiliani's real problem with tha Bhutto assassination is the lack of oppurtunity to apply the same solution is his race for the Oval.
Noonan wrote on January 2, 2008 11:58 AM:War, war, what is it good for? Yeah, Rudy!
The Conservative Deflator wrote on January 2, 2008 12:02 PM:This worm needs to be squashed and squashed soon. He is a dangerous, disturbed little combover with a Napoleonic Complex. Expect catastrophe if he is elected.... Be very afraid.
Greg wrote on January 2, 2008 12:04 PM:I agree that too few people appreciate just how dangerous the possibility of a Rudy presidency is...
Michael A wrote on January 2, 2008 12:06 PM:Anybody see mr. 9/11's interview on cnn this past week? He was acting really, really bizarre. He seemed like he was on something. This guy is a freak.
Winston Smith wrote on January 2, 2008 12:08 PM:I guess our puppet Pakistani dictator's assassination of Bhutto qualifies as "Islamic radicalism."
Jenna L wrote on January 2, 2008 12:13 PM:9ui11iani is so predictable. I am wondering how he doesn't realize that everyone has already figured out his plan to scare everyone into voting for him. His new ad...was about 911. And now this. I don't know why his advisors don't tell him to tone it down.
And yes, the thought of that man in the White house freaks me the hell out.
Diverik wrote on January 2, 2008 12:18 PM:I've just skimmed it so far, but this American Conservative article about Giuliani and his foreign policy team seems pretty good.
http://amconmag.com/2008/2008_01_14/cover.html
The final paragraph sums up the danger of Rudy pretty well:
"Giuliani’s tendency to conflate all terrorist groups—whether Islamist or not and whether they attack the United States or just allies like Israel—led Fred Kaplan of Slate to dub him the “anti-statesman.” Sending him and his team to the White House might actually ignite World War IV."
moondancer wrote on January 2, 2008 12:22 PM:Hey Rudy. Hows your neocon cabal working out for you? Pretty much the same way it worked out for the US. Very badly.
Keep up the good work nitwit.
"He seemed like he was on something..."
Considering one of his law firm's biggest clients was the oxycontin manufacturers, might we safely assume he's still receiving some sort of a weekly installment?
When the latest boogeyman, the islamofascist hiding behind every corner, is finally exposed as the latest military industrial profiteering strawman, Rudy's gonn have to find some Martians to warn us about, if he can't have his war on this world, maybe he can convince us there's a threat from "elsewhere."
Shades of Orson Welles and George Orwell...
And PLEASE, can we have WW3 before we get to 4? For some reason, I don't think the few remaining vets of WW2 would allow some mystery WW3 to have been managed without our knowing it...
dajafi wrote on January 2, 2008 12:30 PM:If there's one thing in this cycle thus far that has somewhat redeemed my faith in the process, it's the inexorable diminishment of Il Douche. The day his political career ends will be one of great celebration in my home--and probably about a million others here in NYC.
Hank Essay wrote on January 2, 2008 12:32 PM:13 point loss in Q4? Man, Mr. Judith Nathan is tanking worse than the subprime mortgage market and home prices...
Heckofajob, Rudeeee!
-
footsore wrote on January 2, 2008 12:44 PM:I attribute rudy's fall to what can be called a true "emperor has no clothes" moment. "Noun, Verb, 9/11" We, as nation owe a debt of gratitude to Sen Biden. It won't get him elected, but we still owe him for that particular rudy collasping statement.
footsore
Specifically, Mr. Giuliani will call for a new military surge "in Afghanistan, a change in the way America's spies are promoted so that officers are rewarded for finding actionable intelligence and not just the number of agents they recruit"
Rudi will reward The Waterboarders. Way to go Rudi. You should also have them Waterboard all your future mistresses to make sure that they are not really your cousins.
Strange that your extended family never noticed that two cousins were exchanging vows and throwing a big family wedding reception. Can't have that happen with your next wife. Use those Waterboarders Rudi.
Hemlock for Gadflies wrote on January 2, 2008 12:50 PM:I will set aside everything else that is Spectacularly Moronic about this guy and focus on one thing only -- promoting clandestine officers who "produce" "actionable" intelligence.
The mere fact that he is invoking this tired old Rumsfeldian verbal tick shows that he knows nothing whatsoever about intelligence, intelligence-gathering, intelligence-analysis, and intelligence-dissemination and use.
This is the "24"-effect at its worst.
Let's forget for a moment that the clandestine officer isn't necessarily supposed to KNOW that something is "actionable" -- raw intelligence is just that, raw. Pegging career advancement to a demand to "do something" would simply mean that clandestine officers would act of the merest hunch, the SWAG -- Scientifically Wild-Assed Guess -- and the rumor.
But because the Gauleiter of 9/11 is so desperate to maintain his Man o' Action pose, he's simply transforming fantasy into reality -- and a thin reality at that.
After all, he was THERE on September 11 (have you heard?), standing on rubble and speaking into a bullhorn. TR on San Juan Hill's got nothing on this paisan!
FrogLeg,
the spys didn't find Curveball, the VP did.
So yes, the people who brought us Curveball ARE in charge!!
Radio Head wrote on January 2, 2008 1:41 PM:True to form, but surprising to me it happened so rapidly: The more folks get to know Rudy, the less they like him. Too bad he couldn't have snared the nomination first, perhaps, but just as happened with his fictional Senate campaign vs. Hillary 8 years ago, he'll bow out before the real campaign begins. Buh-bye.
nikolai wrote on January 2, 2008 2:00 PM:Ghoul-iani! Ghoul-iani! Ghoul-iani!!!
Hmmmm... Too scary, will never work...
Just bend over and take it rudy, it's all over for you. What really "did it" for rudy was abandoning the firefighters and using public funds to shack up with his 'ho. President??? F*ck that! Why isn't this assh*le in JAIL?!
Rudy is so toast. Think about it. The more he pushes the issue of who is best suited to lead in a time of supposedly increased risk of terror, the more McCain will spike in the polls. While I hardly agree with McCain's support of the surge and his general militarism, the fact is that he was an early and longtime advocate for a tactic that most of the braindead repugs think has worked. He is thus elevated as the only repug of national stature that seems to know anything about fighting a war. Now, if the repugs were willing to support Rudy despite his support for abortion, gay rights, and gun control, why can't they look the other way on the taxes, campaign finance reform, and immigration. While he is no friend to the Christian wingnuts, he has always supported them on key hot-button issues. On immigration, he is pretty much in line with the wall street repugs. The WSJ even editorialized this week in strong support of immigration reform. As for taxes and campaign finance reform—well, on the former, it will be out of his hands. The Dems are not going to renew the tax cuts, so there is nothing to either veto or support. On the latter, he has already done his part and he can keep his cred on the issue with indies even if he doesn't do anything else on the matter and avoid angering wall street by not changing the status quo any further. I think he will be looking pretty solid after NH, which concerns me. He would beat Hillary hands down. And likely take out Obama, too. People think the war is going to decide the race, but I think unless things get worse in the next year, that ship has sailed. I think the thing that many indies don't like about Bush is incompetence. I also think that McCain has always been a true fiscal conservative (which is why he did not support cutting taxes while running a deficit.) My guess is for that reason, he would far less likely to plunder US treasure on a lark. Finally, like Nixon going to China and Clinton ending welfare, he might turn out to surprise us in other areas. He is already fairly environmentalist and civil libertarian on free speech issues. Maybe, god forbid, he is the one who will fix healthcare. Like I said in a post yesterday, I'd take him over Obama any day of the week. But I'd still pick HRC or Edwards over McCain.
Anonymous wrote on January 2, 2008 3:54 PM:I don't get it. Why quote the NY Sun in anything? Do you know anything about that paper and its hidden agendas?
nogo war wrote on January 2, 2008 4:20 PM:Rudy gone before the 2/5 stuff would be a good thing..
Like when you play poker you don't want to allow someone to stay in the game long enough to catch a lucky card...
Folks.. remember this time among Republicans it is
Immigration
Immigration
Immigration
McCain cannot win this one...
It will be between Mitt and Huck
.....
"and Jesus took 5 bricks and built a wall a thousand feet tall and two thousand feet long to keep out the brown people"
More war? I thought you had to be president to 'wag the dog'? Now Republican wannabes are trying to out warrior and out hate mong to pander to the Republican primary voter. It says nothing good about either the candidates, or the Republican primary voters, that this is seen as the way to draw their support.
Pope Ratzo wrote on January 2, 2008 6:29 PM:Why doesn't the media mention that Mitt Romney is at 12% nationally? I keep hearing that he's the "front runner". I'm confused. The Establishment must really really want him to be president.
I await some mention of the fact that he's barely a blip on the national polls.
Richard L. Adlof wrote on January 2, 2008 6:44 PM:Dshungu,
I don't quite understand . . . Is your point that Democrats more readily accept the tenents of fascist plutocracy than Republicans because Clinton remains viable and her slightly less evil but way dumber twin RUDE-ee doesn't?
Phillip Hallam-Baker wrote on January 2, 2008 8:03 PM:I have already blogged a longer explanation of why Giuliani's proposal makes no sense at all to me as the author of a book on how to stop Internet crime that was published today.
We cannot defeat Al Qaeda through cyberwarfare any more than we can defeat them through submarine warfare: no targets. How do you sink a non-existent Navy or disrupt a non existent Internet infrastructure
Yes we can gather inteligence (ob. disclosure, yes my employer sells those particular services). But we can't disrtupt AQ propaganda any more than the Iranian government can contain unwanted messages in a police state. And though we can prevent some terrorist groups raising funds through the Internet, AQ does not need them as they have the profits of the opium trade.
r€nato wrote on January 2, 2008 9:00 PM:stopping al-Qaeda's use of websites to pass along messages is a completely stupid idea, only appealing to the completely technologically illiterate, but it would certainly be good cover for censoring the internet in general.
