Rudymentary

I’m with Reliapundit, who thinks that Lieberman’s double-digit lead over Lamont in Connecticut is excellent news for Rudy Giuliani, not for John McCain:

I think the fact that both candidates [McCain and Giuliani] appeal to so-called centrists/independents who pick-and-choose from among each party’s platform is trivial. WHY!? Well, Lieberman’s margin over Lamont doesn’t portend a McCain victory, but a RUDY VICTORY: It shows that a liberal hawk is a very appealing candidate for parts of the GOP and the DNC and the “moderate” independents.

(hat tip Roger Simon)

I’m going to go out on a limb here and predict Rudy over McCain—if he can get over the admittedly difficult hurdle of the Republican nomination—for the presidency. Here’s why: my sense is that the country wants a hawk for president (and that those who don’t want a hawk for president are a small minority, which happens to be over-represented in the media elite and the punditocracy.)

Call me crazy, but I think the country also wants a socially liberal (tolerant) hawk, not a socially conservative (intolerant) one. Here’s why: first, because we’ve had one of those icky conservatives for a horrible six years now, and we’re tired of him (and if not of him than of the constant culture war, which has left people exhausted); second (and way more important): social liberalism (tolerance) is one of the things we’re fighting for in the war on terrorism. That makes Rudy a seamless candidate with a consistent message: he stands for the same things abroad that he stands for here at home—a case that Bush has never been able to make. I believe Rudy can make that case, and make it well. 

Having lived in New York City during his entire mayoral career, I have strong reservations about Giuliani. He’s a confidence-inspiring leader in times of crisis—there’s no doubt about that. He is not, however, a democrat.

For what it’s worth, Richard Perez-Pena of the New York Times found that Rudy seems to be made of teflon.

Mr. Giuliani has embraced that role as 9/11 hero and national security authority. At stop after stop, he delivers the same message: that the nation is still in grave danger, that the war in Iraq must be won, that measures like the Patriot Act and electronic eavesdropping are essential to defeating terrorists.

Never mind that Mr. Giuliani has come in for some sharp criticism back in New York — about workers sickened by toxic dust at ground zero, about his disgraced former police commissioner, Bernard B. Kerik, and even about his handling of the trade center attack.

There is little indication that his noble image from 9/11 has been tarnished in the heartland.

For many loyal Republicans — and more than a few independents and Democrats — his national security message seems to work, blotting out the central question facing his candidacy: whether a supporter of legal abortion, gay civil unions, immigrants’ rights and gun control; a thrice-married, Catholic New Yorker whose split with his second wife took place publicly and none too neatly, can win Republican presidential primaries and caucuses.