I never thought I'd write these words in this order, but this
Ryan Sager column is unfair to Rudy Giuliani. There are
many more Republican primary voters who backed Giuliani because
they believed he was tough on terror than wanted him to run against
the Christian right. And how does a campaign that wrote off South
Carolina and most states south of the Mason Dixon line other than
Florida qualify as pursuing a Southern strategy?
Sager accuses Giuliani of running a "hard right campaign" in New
Hampshire and "dueling with Romney over who hates immigrants more."
The first statement shows that "hard right" must be a relative
term. The second is just an absurd characterization of a debate
over illegal immigration. The stuff about "sanctuary mansions"
wasn't all that presidential and the debate did occasionally
descend into pointless chest-thumping, but illegal immigration is a
legitimate issue -- not just a Republican "tear against immigrants"
-- and the candidates had differences over how to deal with it.
Although early voters in Florida may make a fool out of me
tomorrow, my view is that Giuliani has pursued a dumb strategy for
winning the nomination. A pundit who views much of the Republican
primary electorate as bigots and kooks isn't in the best position
to advise him on a better one.
topics:
Immigration
