New York sure likes feeding the political gossip columns: 11 months after a wild night of rumors had David Paterson and Caroline Kennedy’s entourages denying stories and hurling insults left and right, it’s now Rudy Giuliani’s turn to be the subject of wild speculation.
The consensus seems to be that the former New York City mayor is set against running for Governor and that he either has decided to run for Senate or is leaning towards that option. But at the end of the day, it’s hard to know whether we actually learned anything definite.
The New York Times fired the first salvo in the early afternoon, reporting in the early afternoon that Giuliani had decided to pass on the Governor’s race. Within hours, other press outlets (for instance NY1) got confirmation from sources of their own that Giuliani was telling his entourage that he was set against running for Governor; the Daily News cites a source close to the state party chairman, who says they’ve been told as much.
On the other hand, Giuliani’s camp quickly denied that any decision had been taken and the Associated Press and The Washington Post cite anonymous GOP sources (I’m not talking about the official reaction of Giuliani’s spokesperson) insisting no final decision has been taken; both outlets do write that Giuliani is leaning away from a gubernatorial run.
The bottom-line here is that numerous papers managed to independently confirm the information, and do so using a variety of sources since at least a couple are close to Giuliani, at least one to chairman Cox. This does suggests the gubernatorial reports’ veracity, and if this holds up it would be a big blow to the GOP’s hopes of picking-up the state’s governorship. Even if Paterson somehow emerges as the Democratic nominee, he would at least have some chance of surviving; as for Andrew Cuomo, he would be sure he wouldn’t face any trouble in the general election.
Matters got more confusing when the Senate race was thrown into the mix: The Daily News reported that Giuliani was not only certain not to run for Governor, but that he had decided to challenge Senator Kirsten Gillibrand. Shortly thereafter, the AP came out with a more tentative take, reporting that it was hearing that Giuliani had yet to make a final decision but that he is “becoming more interested in running for U.S. Senate.”
That is in and of itself news: Until today Giuliani was not considered to be seriously looking at the possibility of a congressional bid, but if there one thing we can say for sure tonight, it’s that a Senate run is definitely on Giuliani’s radar screen.
Needless to say, that’s music to the GOP’s ears: if he follows through, New York would become one of Republicans’ top takeover opportunities - adding a seat to the NRSC’s increasingly long target list. Just today, a Marist poll found Giuliani leading by a massive 54% to 40%! That margin doesn’t even seem like an outlier, since Siena found a similar result in its September survey; its November poll, released last week, had Giuliani leading by 5%.
What we cannot say for sure, however, is that Giuliani has reached any sort of final decision on the Senate race - let alone that he has started telling GOP operatives. Why is that information less reliable? For one, The Daily News mentions getting it from only a single source, and no other media outlet has managed to confirm it. Besides the AP’s insistence that Giuliani is merely leaning towards the Senate race, sources tell The Washington Post’s The Fix that a Senate run is “not likely.”
Second, Giuliani’s entourage was far more direct in denying the senatorial rumors than the gubernatorial ones. To the latter, they only responded with vague comments that didn’t rebut anything. To the former, however, the spokeswoman left no room for ambiguity: “It’s not true,” she said tonight. Third, most press outlets report talking to Republican operatives, which profess never having heard much about the prospect of a Giuliani Senate bid; as such, even if the former mayor has made up his mind to run, he certainly doesn’t seem to have reached out to those who’ll be in charge with mounting an infrastructure.
Finally, what should raise flags about the Daily News report is the following paragraph: “If elected, the source said, he could use that as a stepping stone to run for President in 2012 - rather than run for re-election to the Senate.” This makes very little sense, and it makes it seem like this source heard about some brainstorming session about Giuliani’s future and took that as his finalized plans.
Consider what it would mean for Giuliani to win a brutal Senate campaign in the fall of 2010, only to travel to Iowa and New Hampshire within weeks of being sworn in: How could he possibly position himself in such a way as to be competitive in a New York general election and not endanger his standing with the staunchly conservative voters that will decide the GOP’s presidential nomination? Giuliani isn’t one to develop sound electoral strategies, but it’s particularly hard to see how he could be viable under such a scenario - albeit one that serves as a remainder that whoever wins this seat next November will have to immediately run for a full term in 2012.
There will be plenty of time to analyze both the Senate and Governor’s races once we learn more about Giuliani’s intentions.
Indeed this talk about Rudy is confusing. Giulani would be a formidable candidate against Gilibrand, but if his intentions is to only use it as a stepping stone to 2012 presidential nomination then I highly suspect that it would be difficult for him to beat Gillibrand, who is likely to stay in the Senate for decades if she gets reelected for such. Gillibrand still isn’t that well known and her connection to Patterson is damagning her, but it could very easy for her to make ads saying that Giulani only cares about his presidential amibitions and not for the well being of New York. If Giulani really wants to run for Senate then he better tamp down this stepping stone stuff and pledge to run beyond 2012. If he did that the I think that he would indeed be competive, and hopefully Cliff agrees with me on this!
I think this is all just “smoke” because Giulani is just a publicity whore. His prochoice stance will make it impossible for him to be a presidential contendor. In my humble opinion he will end up running for nothing.
This is most likely just smoke. At the top of the ticket in NY will be a gubernatorial candidate, more likely AG Andrew Cuomo than present governor Paterson. With NY needing to get its outrageous spending habits in order, the debate during the primary would seem to go toward where to cut the budget. How this all works out is anyone’s guess. NY will get a little reprieve with some additional revenues from the big Wall Street bonuses coming, but, not nearly enough to avoid budget cuts. Also on the ballot with the governor will be 2 US Senate races, popular Senator Charles Schumer will be running for a 3rd term, and the last two years of former Senator Hillary Clinton’s term will be there, so Cuomo and Schumer could easily help Giuliani’s Dem. opponent Senator Gillibrand. Let’s assume Giuliani wins anyway. And, let’s assume that New Yorkers don’t mind him using the Senate seat as a stepping stone toward the presidency, as they didn’t mind with Hillary Clinton. Then, right after the election, in which Giuliani would have to be fairly moderate to even win, probably having to support health care reform and a public option, after all this, he has to now start running for president. What is his plan? Does he plan on being the only “moderate” running in a field of conservatives? Rather unusual. Is he going to avoid the first primaries/caucuses in Iowa, New Hampshire, and others, and wait until Florida comes along? (Florida is home to many former New Yorkers.) He tried this and it didn’t work. Perhaps he could move to Florida and run there, against Charlie Crist and Marco Rubio? I don’t see how he has any reasonable path to the nomination. Does he go independent in 2012? Who knows what, if anything, he is thinking.
If Rudy runs for Senate, he wins.
I really hope he runs. He’s more interested in National Security issues then trying to fix the Spitzer/Patterson mess in Albany anyway.
I don’t agree that if Rudy runs for Senate he wins. First, from 2000 on he has been a stronger candidate in theory than actual practice. Second, there is no hiding from contentious hot-button issues in a Senate race and the political dynamics in New York create great difficulties for Republican Senate candidates. Gillibrand doesn’t risk her base by taking mainstream Democratic position on health care, gay rights or a woman’s right to choose. If Rudy takes the mainstream Republican position, the majority of New Yorkers will be opposed. But if he hedges too much to the left, his base will stay home.
A Giuliani Senate run seems odd to me. First, just because one has been an executive doesn’t mean one wants to be a legislator. Executives get to actually run things. Legislators don’t. They are very different jobs, and it’s hard for me to see Giuliani being happy as one out of 100 trying to make things happen–and one with very low seniority in an organization that runs heavily on seniority.
Second, being an effective legislator, especially in the Senate, requires an ability to get along with other people. And it appears from most reports that Rudy does not play well with others.
As for whether he would win, it seems from his presidential run that the more people get to know him, the less they like him. Many people outside of NYC don’t realize how unpopular he had become there before 9/11; if he had been up for reelection at that time, he probably would have lost. And his hard-line transformation through the Republican convention turned off at least some New Yorkers who might otherwise have given him the benefit of the doubt; he’d have to do extremely well upstate to make up the difference. It wouldn’t be an easy race for Gillibrand, but she has a lot of upside potential since she still isn’t a household name. I’m not sure that Giuliani has the same potential. Indeed, his presidential run would indicate the opposite.
Finally, if Giuliani is really interested in national security, the Senate would seem a strange place to pursue it. Again, he’d be one out of 100 with low seniority. That’s hardly a place to push a personal agenda. (And as for larger security issues, what exactly are his credentials? I never figured out what his policies would be towards Iran, Iraq, the Israel-Palestine conflict, Pakistan, or any other complex international problems that pose national security concerns.)