Rassmussen Reports: Giuliani's lead over Hillary Grows

Yes, it’s really early. But this is music to my ears, nonetheless, so here’s hoping this trend continues:

In a match-up between the early 2008 frontrunners, former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani (R) leads New York Senator Hillary Clinton (D) 52% to 43%. The latest Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey finds Giuliani’s lead growing in recent months. His current nine-point advantage is up from a six point lead in January and a four-point lead in December.

Giuliani has solidified his title as the most popular candidate of Election 2008–his favorability ratings have inched back up to 70% (see summary for all Republican candidates).

Clinton is viewed favorably by 50% and unfavorably by 48%. The last four times that Rasmussen Reports has polled on a Giuliani-Clinton race, Clinton’s support has remained unchanged at 43%.

While both candidates draw reasonable levels of support from within their own party, Giuliani has an enormous 64% to 27% advantage over Clinton among unaffiliated voters.

The American people didn’t like Hillary when she was the first lady because she was so conniving and calculating. As this campaign goes on, the voters will continue to reflect on the Clinton years in the White House, and I suspect they will probably conclude that they do not want to relive those years.

Captain Ed thinks these numbers show that Democrats are starting to realize that Hillary will end up being a big drag on their presidential hopes:

Giuliani exposes her as an albatross for the Democrats. Despite having near-universal recognition, she can only muster 43% against Rudy. Her Democratic opponents do not fare much better in terms of their support against Giuliani, but more people seem willing to be undecided regarding them than they do with Hillary. Edwards and Obama score in the mid-40s, but they also pull Giuliani into the same range, especially Edwards.

Is that Giuliani? It seems more reflective of Hillary. She has a large bloc of voters who will vote against her regardless of her opponent. Edwards and Obama get more benefit of the doubt.

What does this mean for Hillary? It means that she’d lose the election, if they held it today. It serves more as an early-warning system for the Democrats; Hillary comes with some serious electability limitations, and if that doesn’t start shifting in the next few months, she can kiss that nomination goodbye. Assuming, of course, that nothing changes for the next 20 months.

I can’t imagine anything that could happen that would cause such a change that the American voters would suddenly see Hillary as the only person capable of solving our problems. She doesn’t offer anything that’s particularly special, at least compared to other Democrat candidates. She calls for universal health care. So does John Edwards. She wants our troops out of Iraq. So do Edwards and Obama. If there’s nothing all that special that differentiates her from the others, then why vote for her, especially when she brings so much more negative baggage than the other Democratic candidates?

On the other hand, Rudy Giuliani brings with him a set of experiences and skills that no one has had before: leading America’s largest city back from the brink of disaster after 9/11. Additionally, he was one of the first US Attorneys to bring down the mob by using the RICO statute, a method which proved to be very effective.

What does Hillary bring with her that can compete with Giuliani’s experiences? What makes her so special that she should be the next president of the United States?

Nothing.

An explanation, but not an excuse
The imperial guard