Premium Sponsor


Featured Sponsor


Our Sponsors


Ad Networks

Advertise Liberally

Buy an ad on all of the top liberal blogs with just one click.

Site Stats

NY-Gov: NYT Says Giuliani Won't Run (UPDATE: But May Run For Senate)

by: Crisitunity

Thu Nov 19, 2009 at 1:31 PM EST


Big news in the Big Apple:

Former Mayor Rudolph W. Giuliani has decided not to run for governor of New York next year after months of mulling a candidacy, according to people who have been told of the decision....

It was not clear what prompted the decision, but the prospect of potentially facing Attorney General Andrew M. Cuomo, who is quietly planning his own run for governor, may not have appealed to Mr. Giuliani, who suffered a bruising defeat in the 2008 Republican presidential primary. While many political analysts believe Mr. Giuliani would have comfortably beaten Gov. David A. Paterson, he would likely have faced an uphill battle against Mr. Cuomo, one of the most popular politicians in the state.

New York Democrats must be sighing with relief over the prospect, however remote it may have been, of not having to face a Giuliani/Paterson matchup. Of course, this may make it likelier that incumbent Gov. Paterson stays in the race, seeing as how even he seems to have a good shot at beating the likely GOP nominee, ex-Rep. Rick Lazio. But this also makes it likelier that AG Andrew Cuomo pulls the trigger on a run (he's already assembling plans behind the scenes, including a full slate of Dems to run with), since, given his titanic polling leads over both Paterson in the primary and Lazio in the general, it's pretty much a governorship for the taking for him now.

One other NY-Gov topic: Rasmussen released a poll of the general election matchups in the race yesterday, although the poll's now looking obsolete already. Interestingly, it had one of Giuliani's best performances so far, with Rudy trailing Cuomo only 49-46. (Giuliani beats Paterson 57-30. Cuomo beats Lazio 57-29, while Lazio beats Paterson 41-37.) Giuliani may well have decided against a run well in advance of this poll, though, simply given the state's lean and the financial challenges of a run against Cuomo -- and probably that if he somehow won it'd be a lot less lucrative and more frustrating than his current "job" as national security talking head and consultant.

UPDATE: For what it's worth, according to NY1, Giuliani is now calling the New York Times story "premature" and saying he has not finalized a decision. (H/t andyroo312.)

LATER UPDATE: Wow, crazy rumors are flying all over the place now. The New York Daily News has him headed to the Senate race instead:

"In the next 48 hours he will announce that he will not run for governor, but will run for the Senate," said a source familiar with the thing of the former mayor and failed presidential candidate....

If elected, the source said, he would use that as a stepping stone to run for President in 2012 - and would not run for re-election to the Senate. A Giuliani spokeswoman downplayed the reports.

CNN, on the other hand, is merely saying, via Giuliani spokesperson Maria Comella, that Giuliani hasn't decided bupkus yet, and they'll keep us posted.

EVEN LATER UPDATE: Comella gives a pretty explicit and succinct denial to Politico's Ben Smith, regarding the Senate rumor: "It's not true." Smith says that if Giuliani did run for the Senate, it would come as a surprise to members of his inner circle.

RaceTracker Wiki: NY-Gov

Crisitunity :: NY-Gov: NYT Says Giuliani Won't Run (UPDATE: But May Run For Senate)
Tags: , , , , , , , (All Tags)
Print Friendly View Send As Email
ROTFL
Cuomo only beats Giuliani by 3%? LOL

Daily News: Giuliani to announce run for Senate
Somewhat conflicting reports, to say the least.


[ Parent ]
Great...
Still think Gillibrand is favored but it's going to be a tough race.

[ Parent ]
Gillbrand will bloody this clown something fierce
I am not the biggest fan of Gillibrand, but the woman is an incredibly sharp campaigner and fundraiser and knows local and state issues backwards (it is kind of scary how quickly she learned from Schumer).  It will also be fun to have all of the firefighters following him around the state talking about how Giuliani's actions directly caused the deaths of dozens if not hundreds of their brothers in the terrorist attack of 9/11.

My guess is that it's Giuliani people just wanting to keep the story on the downlow until Giuliani announces personally and that there is no chance he runs for senate, but if he is dumb enough to run, the clown tries to go the teabagger route here in a blue blue state and gets clobbered by low double digits.

Kind of like his spending over $40,000,000 to get a grand total of ZERO delegate votes.


[ Parent ]
I know I'll be out there reading to take him down
After living with him as mayor...I hate him SOOOOOOOOOOO much...it...it...the fl...it...flame, flames...FLAMES on the side of my face...breathing, breath, uh, heaving breaths.  

[ Parent ]
The spending is going to be insane
If the reace really is Gillibrand v. Guiliani the spending may even squash the 2010 California Gov and Senate spending.

[ Parent ]
Nice Blazing Saddles reference
And I have the same exact feelings on the matter.

[ Parent ]
oh yeah that's gonna work
"I'm running for Senate, but only so I can run for President, which I'm gonna have to do pretty much right after I get sworn in to the Senate."

At least Hillary Clinton waited six years.



[ Parent ]
Well, Obama was elected president after just 4 years in the Senate.


Check out the 2010 California races (http://2010californiaracetracker.wetpaint.com) and help us take back Red California! (http://www.takebackredcalifornia.org)

[ Parent ]
He didnt run for Senate
with the intention of then running for President though, that's the difference.

In this case Rudy is going to be running having it already leaked he plans on starting a presidential run next year.


[ Parent ]
That sounds like something an opponent would say
to poison the Rudy well. It's hilarious.

I still don't relish him running, though. . .


[ Parent ]
Giuliani
It would not be surprising at all, from a strategic point of view, for Giuliani to bail on NY-Gov in favor of NY-Sen (although obviously I'd far prefer he stick with NY-9-11-Talking-Head in preparation for US-Pres.)  Three quick points:

(1) Giuliani will have HUGE problems maintaining positions that will both (a) be moderate enough for New York and (b) be right-wing enough for the Presidential primary.  This is a much more acute problem in NY-Sen than in NY-Gov, because as a Senate candidate he has to take positions on federal issues and can't duck behind "I just want to fix the state."

(2) Obviously, Senator would be a RIDICULOUS job for Giuliani.  There are plenty of big egos in the Senate, but Giuliani is simply not ready to be the most junior member of a 100-person body.  It would be ridiculous, just a stepping stone for the presidential run.

(3) Maybe the perception that he really just wants to be President will help tank his Senate campaign.  After all, New Yorkers want (and think they deserve) big power brokers in the Senate, like Javits, Moynihan & now Schumer.  Gillibrand is a young rising star who will be a great Senator for New York for a long time; she'll likely grow into this role.  Does the state really want a grandstanding short-termer instead who just wants to get in there so as to have a platform from which to run for President?  


[ Parent ]
No way this is happening
I wouldn't be surprised if this was his place and someone leaked this to hurt him.

First off...when he's facing off against Gillibrand in a blue state, is he going to run against healthcare reform? against climate change? against abortion rights, gay rights, etc? If he doesn't, does that mean Conservative Party spoiler? If he does, that loses him the election already.

Second, the GOP would be idiotic to do this...he wins the seat, only to give it up in 2012, a Presidential election year, where the GOP couldn't possibly hold on to it.

This would be the stupidest thing ever if this is true. So stupid.  


[ Parent ]
I imagine Rudy would make the KSM trials a campaign centerpiece
If Obama/Holder/whoever cannot articulate a perfect case for the trials, there's a good chance support for it remains lukewarm among New Yorkers, and that's where Rudy would hope to make a connection.

Otherwise, I suspect he'd run to the center on abortion/gay rights, and he'd probably go the Lieberman route on the public option (oppose it, but support "some form of" health care reform, and don't get teabaggy about it). No matter what, I imagine the Conservative Party won't endorse him and they'll run their own candidate (as was the case in '04, when they passed on GOP nominee Howard Mills in favor of the more conservative Marilyn O'Grady, who garnered 4% of the vote).

Gillibrand has proven herself a talented campaigner in the past, and she'll need to do the same this time around. The potential problem? She was far more popular with her district's constituents in '08 than she appears to be with the statewide crowd in '09.

I suspect a Giuliani/Gillibrand race could go the way of the '98 D'Amato/Schumer showdown (a +10 margin for the Dem), or it could even go the way of the '92 D'Amato/Abrams race (the Republican squeaking by a not-so-beloved Dem). I doubt Gillibrand could pull a 2-to-1 blowout; Giuliani, at least for the time being, is popular pretty much everywhere statewide, minus the area he presided over.


[ Parent ]
lol and when KSM gets convicted before election day
he'll look like an idiot.  

[ Parent ]
Obviously you know nothing of KSM
The republic party has it on good authority that the man has Magneto like abilities to escape from and supermax prison.

[ Parent ]
Sure, but only so he can run for NY-Sen as a Green Party candidate
 

[ Parent ]
Let Me Get This Straight
Rudy's going to run for Senate next year. Should he get elected, he'll start off 2011 campaiging for the Republican primary, then the year after spend half of 2012 in primary mode. He'll therefore really start his Senate career sometime late 2012. And then, in 2016, he'll have another crack at it, because I don't see him running for reelection to the Senate.

And he calls Barack Obama inexperienced. Rudy will have zero experience when he's in Washington.


[ Parent ]
That meme would kill any campaign

"According to conversations with several Giuliani insiders, the Mayor has not made up his mind yet although a run for either governor or Senate is not likely. Interestingly, a Senate bid appears to be the more likely choice if Giuliani decides to get back into the political game, note the sources.

A Giuliani Senate candidacy would be news to most national Republicans who say they have heard or seen little in recent weeks to indicate that the mayor is actively considering a challenge to Gillibrand."

http://voices.washingtonpost.c...


[ Parent ]
Rudy's running for Senate...
Daily News says he is running for Seante Vs. Gilabrand now. He will announce soon.

Fight global warming & help disaster relief efforts by raising money for Music for Relief when you search the web! Click here for more info:
http://searchmfr.swagbucks.com...


Why can't Rudy just go away
He was even that popular as mayor toward the end of his term and then 9/11 happened and every is like Rudy is a hero. I am so sick of Rudy

The politics of 9/11
is so sickening.  People like Giuliani and Bush benefitted heavily from Americans rightfully needing a leader to get through such a disturbing and scary period of our history.  They were the people currently in office, so we looked to them as people to guide us, which automatically gives them way too high of marks than they deserved.  Bush had like a 90% approval rating that month, how telling.  The difference between Bush and Guiliani is that Bush had another 6 years to fuck that up, Guiliani left and was able to retain America's opinion of being "America's Mayor" and being the one to lead NYC through 9/11.

Its morbid and entirely too early to talk about, but the politics of 9/11 is downright fascinating and sits horribly in my stomach.


[ Parent ]
Hell, even I was willing to give Bush
The benefit of the doubt. I remember watching both the Oval Office address that night and the one to congress a week later and being 100% behind the guy. Obviously he pissed it all away.

[ Parent ]
Me too.
I first became politically aware after 9/11 in my first year of college, and after seeing Bush, Rudy, et. al. that day and the days following, I decided I was a Republican and supported Bush. Heck, I was even upset at the political cartoonists making fun of Bush, because I thought such a great person didn't deserve that mockery. (While I did laugh at the OBL cartoons and related humor websites.) Only later on in 2002 after I switched to the D's did I learn that making fun of the president and other political and celebrity figures is their job. Nowadays, I don't mind at all the cartoons making fun of Obama and anyone else.

Check out the 2010 California races (http://2010californiaracetracker.wetpaint.com) and help us take back Red California! (http://www.takebackredcalifornia.org)

[ Parent ]
I wasn't
It was plainly obvious that they knew about the thing before it happened.  If it looks like a rat and smalls like a rat it usually is a rat.

[ Parent ]
I'm talking about the immediate aftermath
Obviously what you describe was part of the pissing it away I mentioned.

[ Parent ]
Leading women?
Sure. No doubt he would be formidable but Siena found very different numbers a couple days ago.

[ Parent ]
Giuliani gets 74% of the 18-29 vote?
Yeah, I don't think so.  

[ Parent ]
I think so
Nearly every young person I have talked to have a great deal of respect for Rudy Guiliani, and consider him a very different kind of Republican than Romney, Palin, etc.

[ Parent ]
yeah, no, not in New York they don't


[ Parent ]
Well, as a New York college student...
I can say I have my pals who think Giuliani's a complete d-bag, but I also have friends who think he's pretty good for a Republican and would probably consider voting for him. It's a pretty even split, actually. And, I imagine it's about as strong reception a Republican can get from a liberal New York college.

[ Parent ]
In New York
Don't minorities make up a disproportionate % of people under 29?  I can't imagine him cracking 50% with that group much less 70%.

[ Parent ]
The whole "launchpad to the presidency"
Argument sounds suspiciously like a report months ago from a veteran NY reporter whose name escapes me. He was pushing the exact same thing. Probably the same source.

This is nuts!
There is no way this is true. He may indeed run for the Senate, something I personally think looks increasingly unlikely, but there is no way he is sworn into the Senate in January 2011 and then heads straight to Iowa/New Hampshire. Giuliani is one grandstanding SOB, but I don't even think he has the chutzpah to pull that one off.

I really don't think he's going to run for anything, but my record on calling these things looks bad after Mike Castle tossed his septugenarian hat into the ring. I wish he'd just go back to making money off corporate speeches so I never have to see his ratface on TV ever again.


Going off the top of my head
I believe Tom Vilsack declared his candidacy like right after the midterms ended, while Hillary and Obama declared in either Jan or Feb 07. So unless he really wanted to get left behind Rudy would only have a few months at most of undivided focus on the Senate. If New York is fool enough to vote him in then it'll learn what it was like to be Minnesota in winter/spring of 09.

[ Parent ]
Rudy 4 Sen?
Rudy only runs for Senate if he wants to spend time talking about forgein policy.

Rudy is the 9/11 hero (hey I was in NY then regardless of what you think of him he did an amazing job then so please don't flame me for saying it) who still believes in the War on Terror. The Senate is the perfect platform for him to concentrate on that.

Being a US Senator Rudy can push his neo-con beliefs in a way he can't as governor of New York.

The question is what does Rudy want to do now at age 65. Devote the rest of his life to fighting Shelly Silver and striking deals with Pedro Espada or being a statesman on World Affairs.

I can see how the Senate would have an appeal for him that wasn't there for him in 2000.

Fight global warming & help disaster relief efforts by raising money for Music for Relief when you search the web! Click here for more info:
http://searchmfr.swagbucks.com...


and
as you can see I can't see why anybody would WANT to be Governor of New York. It just seems like the worst, most fustrating and powerless job in the world.

Pataki gave up on it some time during his 3rd term, Spitzer couldn't handle it before the hookers and Patterson is.... well he is doing is best IMHO in an impossible situation.

Rudy (and I know this breaks the say nice things about the GOP rule) could be a good Governor of NY (just like I think he was a good Mayor there I said it).

He is one of the few people who probably have the cojones to do it right. (Other other guy being Mario's son)


Fight global warming & help disaster relief efforts by raising money for Music for Relief when you search the web! Click here for more info:
http://searchmfr.swagbucks.com...


[ Parent ]
Problem is he has consistently
Said he is an executive not a legislator. We shall see. I think Gillibrand would still win but it would be close and yet another pain in the ass to defend. First Tommy Thompson, now this and worse, Hoeven hasn't given a definitive answer yet. Not good.

[ Parent ]
Remember when we were suppose to GAIN in the Senate?


[ Parent ]
Still possible
But Ohio is a mess, Conway is losing the primary, Hodes hasn't exactly set any fundraising records and Sestak has torpeod Specter. Meanwhile the people of Louisiana are perfectly content with their diaper fetishist and the GOP have barnstormed on the recruitment front. But all in all the biggest problem are the Dems already in congress. They really have screwed health care. So has the White House to an extent. I mean the senate is voting to start debate on Saturday. Frickin' end of November!

[ Parent ]
So?
You seriously thought Healthcare reform would get through Congress in like a month? Medicare/Medicaid took six months to get through Congress, and only after it failed the first time a year earlier. Social Security took two years. Civil Rights took 14 months.

If we get healthcare through both houses of Congress in six months, that's pretty damn good. I don't know why anyone thought it would be as easy as, say, Lily Ledbetter. This would be why Hillary wanted to do healthcare incrementally over eight years.

Maybe the problem is we expect too much too quickly...our lack of understanding in how our government fuctions is showing...or, we just don't like the slow pace a democracy moves.


[ Parent ]
A month?
Of course not. Don't exaggerate. They are about two months behind schedule by my understanding. This stage should have been met as they came back from August recess. But, yeah, it isn't easy and I don't think anybody said it was. Everybody agrees it is taking a toll on the party though and resolution can't come quick enough. That was my point.

[ Parent ]
It was always going to
that's why it failed so many times in the past...this issue has always bloodied the Democratic Party. I think it stems from the irrationality of people's views on the subject...it's complexity and the American people's hatred of everything that's complex.

I suspect things get a lot easier after this is over, and that the Senate will pass something in a matter of weeks. It would have been easier if we just went for Olympia Snowe's trigger and got it over with, but whatever, we're still surviving even while getting through something we have failed at multiple times.

If I look back on history, this is actually one of the most organized legislating events I can find, even though it doesn't seem that way.  


[ Parent ]
Lack of understanding of how government functions?
Hardly.  Underestimating how effective the GOP would be in slowing the progress of our bills and underestimating how against the PO conservadems would be is our fault.

Baucus probably single-handedly fucked everything up.  How the hell does the House have votes on these bills MONTHS ago while the Finance Committee had their vote like 3 weeks ago.  Ugh, I'll accept Blue Dogs and conservadems but either get on board or get the hell out of the way!


[ Parent ]
But that is how our government functions
I said a few weeks ago, I could only imagine the shit Lyndon Johnson and Mike Mansfield would be getting from the blogsphere if they existed during the Civil Rights Act fight in 1964...it took three months just to get through the Senate alone...two months filibustered before they had to compromise with a weaker bill AND then ANOTHER month just to get the compromise bill through and this came after 10 1/2 months it took to get through House, where it might have actually died if not for JFK taking a bullet in Dallas.

Our government functions in a way that the minority party, especially in the Senate, has a lot of power to slow things down and that the moderates call all the shots...our founding fathers created it that way perfectly.

Maybe we're reaching a point where the government our founding fathers intended is no longer favored.  


[ Parent ]
I couldn't care less for the founding fathers
I'm sick to death with the fetish so many Americans have over the founders.  These were a group entirely white guys, many slaveholders, who wore goofy wigs as a fashion statement.  They were ahead of their time for the 1700's-early 1800's, but have little relevance today.  Things like the filibuster need to be completely done away with so that the majority can assert their will.  The constitution isn't written in stone either and could use some enhancements, preferrably to give government more powers.

[ Parent ]
Passing laws should be slow and deliberative and require consensus
you will get better laws that way for the most part.  There are two sides to every argument, and the extremes (both left and right)are best avoided.

Believe it or not, in about 10-15 years, the young generation will be laughing at your 'belts around your thighs, boxers showing' just as much as you laugh at powdered wigs.  


[ Parent ]
You're right
That's why we have a wonderful guaranteed national health plan. Oh wait, we don't? You mean they couldn't come up with a sufficient deliberative consensus for that in the last 100 years? Oh, that was too extreme, wasn't it? (No offense for the sarcasm; it's there to make a point.)

[ Parent ]
Also
That slow, deliberate process produced a lot of wonder compromises like the 3/5th compromise.  I'm sooooo glad the system took it's time rather than rushing to enact basic civil rights.  

Yes, that was sarcasm.


[ Parent ]
Crisis
Look at where national healthcare developed.  I firmly believe that to get genuine single-payer nationalized health care, we need a crisis.  Most of Europe developed it after WWII devastated the entire continent, including its economy.  Britain suffered less, but still suffered heavily.  Canada and Australia might be exceptions except that both were also tightly tied to Britain despite independence (that and Tommy Douglas was an incredible premier in Canada).  We've rarely had a crisis test our "cowboy" individualism here in the US.  The stock market crash might have done it, but it came a little early. I don't know if it's imperative to have a crisis, but I think it would get it done.

[ Parent ]
Yes
But in the warped view of many in this country an economic crisis is considered a time to CUT social services rather than increase services and raise taxes.  These people honestly think a tax cut (mainly for the very wealthy) can magically reenergize the economy.

I'm not sure an economic crisis like the depression would do the trick for single-payer but rather the status quo (premiums continuing to rise by double-digits each year) may be the final straw that causes action.  

Thankfully the current HCR bills greatly expand medacaid.  The medicaid and SCHIP expansions combined with an increasingly ageing population (mostly on medicare) alone will continue to rapidly increase the % of people on single-payer health care.  I think modest reforms in the medicare/medicaid system combined with a gradual extension of those programs to more people is probably the route we're headed.  Just continue to expand SCHIP until all kids are covered and gradually drop the medicare enrollment age over time is the way to go.


[ Parent ]
Arthur Davis
He came out of this looking like the biggest lowlife of all.  He knows full well that health care reform would help his mostly poor black constituents more than most districts but vted against to try to score points with the white racists in Alabama for his quixotic run for Governor.  If I were in his district my blood would be boiling over my scumbag congressman.  I hope he loses the Dem Governor primary in the worst way.

[ Parent ]
not just gain
but possibly even get a veto-proof majority!  oi vay....  

[ Parent ]
Tommy Thompson?
Huh?  I thought he ruled out challenging Feingold.

[ Parent ]
Nope
He was quoted earlier in the week that he might run for senate, for governor again or for Mayor.

[ Parent ]
If Giuliani ran for senate
it would probably resemble the Weld vs Kerry race in Massachusetts. In addition, Chuck Schumer would do everything in his power to make sure his protege Kirsten Gillibrand won and we all know that Schumer has a lot of power. Especially when Schumer himself is also on the ballot and wins with around 70% to 80% of the vote.

Interesting statistic
Number of incumbent Democrats defeated for reelection in New York Senate races since the adoption of the 17th Amendment;

0

Number of incumbent Republicans defeated for reelection in New York Senate races since the adoption of the 17th Amendment;

7

William Calder (1922)
John Foster Dulles (1949)
Ken Keating (1964)
Charles Goodell (1970)
James Buckley (1976)
Jacob Javitz (1980)
Al D'Amato (1998)


Sorta good news
But I have a hard time thinking of Gillibrand as an incumbent being that she has never run for election statewide before.  Still, she has limitless amounts of cash to get her name and accomplishments out there.

[ Parent ]
Yeah, I forget where I read this
but appointed Senators have abysmally bad reelection rates.  

[ Parent ]
Maybe It Was Here
Perhaps at http://www.fivethirtyeight.com... It's a Nate Silver-ish thing to look at.

[ Parent ]
No Rudy, please dont make me have to donate to Gillibrand!
Im broke enough as it is!!!!

If he runs the race is even at best.
In media attention it'll probably comparable to the 1996 Kerry-Weld election except there won't be a popular Democratic incumbent president pulling in votes and Guiliani will not show the class and restraint Weld did.  Instead it will be a year that looks to be favorable to Republicans in an election a year after Republicans took ground back in areas key for any Republican win in New York (Queens, Long Island, and Westchester).

Guiliani running however makes no sense in terms of a Presidential run.  To run for the Republican nomination he needs to move himself to the right.  To win the Senate seat he'll have to drift to the left.  Kirsten Gillibrand will also force him to promise emphatically he won't run for President (and failure to do so will sink him).  Words he'll have to eat and that will be used against him immediately afterwards in a Presidential run.

He also would make a rather lousy legislator.  Patience and congeniality are not his strong points.

Obviously she'd be easier to beat than Cuomo who everyone assumes will run for Governor.  Cuomo would be practically run out of the party if he DIDN'T run.  That's how unpopular Patterson is (and how much hope Democrats are placing on Cuomo to save them in 2010).  He'd also probably not get the state Conservative Party line.  Nevermind the damage it will do to his chances of winning it will prove a public relations disaster as he tries to court national conservatives for a Presidential run.

If Guiliani has national ambitions he'd be better off staying out of any race in New York.



Copyright 2003-2010 Swing State Project LLC

Primary Sponsor

Talk to your supporters, not tech support. Campaign Engine is the powerful, affordable Progressive Campaign Software.

Menu

Make a New Account

Username:

Password:



Forget your username or password?


About the Site

SSP Resources

SSP Race Ratings

Blogroll

Powered by: SoapBlox