Why Rudy can win

Rudy Giuliani's poll numbers definitely have declined a bit; some say his campaign is flagging, that his disagreement with the Republican Party's conservative base on some social issues is finally catching up with him. But I keep coming back to this Time magazine profile of Giuliani I read a number of weeks ago; and in it, after a speech Rudy had given in Spartanburg, South Carolina (no hotbed of social liberalism there!), the reporter David von Drehle found this:

One of the first people I met at the rally turned out to be a member of First Baptist church. His name was Paul Walters; he is a dentist, a Republican committeeman and a Giuliani fan. When I asked what his pastor might think of that, he just shook his head as if I was missing the point.
"Rudy can handle the social issues," Walters said confidently, because of his record in New York and because "people are going to look at the bigger issues, especially terrorism. Until we get a handle on that, the social issues will be down here," he said, gesturing at knee level. A few minutes later, John McCarley, a weather-beaten cattleman with a deep drawl and a faded Yankees cap, echoed that analysis. "We're in an era where we need leadership," he said. "There will be social issues where we disagree, but ... we won't have a litmus test. He transcends that."

And that's good conservatism, too. There may be a "litmus test" when it comes to being a conservative (for example, how can you be a conservative and argue that there is no right to private property whatever); but I don't know that abortion is it (and anyway Giuliani's judicial appointments and overall philosophy would seem to indicate that he would have it be a matter left up to the individual states---which is exactly what we did with abortion in this country prior to 1973).

And by the way, if John McCain defies my earlier prediction and does quit the race, poll numbers I've seen indicate that the majority of his support might just go to...Giuliani.

Giuliani grabs more greenbacks...

...than any other Republican presidential candidate in the last fund-raising quarter. Details here. This shouldn't surprise anyone. The guy's a good candidate, with a lot to offer. Yes, he differs with some--many--Republicans on some social issues. I differ with him on some social issues. So what? I'm amazed, flabbergasted even, that so many national political pundits and so-called experts have been roaring with certitude for months now that there is no way Rudy can win the Republican nomination. This is wrong. It rests on a misguided analysis of Republican primary voters as one-issue extremists (they never have been such); it's wrong historically (Ronald Reagan for example became the darling of the GOP only marginally because of his stands on social issues--far more important were his tax-cutting, increase-defense-spending, anti-communist, peace-through-strength ideals); and it would be wrong on principle. American conservatism, properly understood, has never been about one-issue voting. It most certainly does rest on certain principles--tradition, order, liberty, limited government, etc. Russell Kirk so long ago called them the "canons" of conservatism. But always remember this fundamental: there was more than one canon. Seems to me that, in leading New York City for 8 years, Mayor Giuliani did a number of things for which conservatives can have respect.

The other top-tier Republican candidates deserve respect in different ways, too. Let the GOP debate continue.