NBC's Anti-Rudy Push Poll

Photo of Mark Finkelstein.
By Mark Finkelstein (Bio | Archive)
January 27, 2007 - 12:36 ET

Push Poll: Definition: "A push poll is a political campaign technique in which an individual or organization attempts to influence or alter the view of respondents under the guise of conducting a poll. Push polls are generally viewed as a form of negative campaigning. The term is also sometimes used incorrectly to refer to legitimate polls which test political messages, some of which may be negative. Push polling has been condemned by the American Association of Political Consultants."
Melissa Russo, political reporter for NBC's NYC affiliate WNBC, recently followed Rudy Giuliani up to New Hampshire. In her report on this morning's "Today," Russo stressed that at a GOP campaign stop, Giuliani failed to inform the Granite State Republicans that "he's far from a social conservative."

View video here.

So Russo decided to take it upon herself to inform them. Here's Russo interviewing a nice Republican lady:

Russo: "Did you know he was pro-choice, pro-gun control, pro gay rights?"

Nice Republican lady: "No-o-o-o."

Russo: "Would that affect your support for him?"

Nice Republican lady: "Ye-s-s."

Have a look again at that definition of push polling. Sound to you like Russo was engaging in it?

Contact Mark at mark@gunhill.net

Comments Policy

All comments are owned by whoever posted them and are subject to our terms of use. They should not be assumed to represent the views of NewsBusters.

Viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

the democrats fear rudi the m

January 27, 2007 - 13:00 ET by buddyc

the democrats fear rudy the most.  the media can easily destroy mccain (as i predicted look at the vanity fair hit piece "is mccain's temper . . .").  next we will get experts commenting on how prison camp can damage him mentally.

 they will be relentless in their attacks on rudy  they want a hillary vs romney race because they are confident romney can't win.  this is just exactly what nixon use to do and the press thought was so awful and crooked and mean.  hillary is nixon in drag.  with a recession in her second term and her tendency to believe she is above the law, republicans might have a chace to impeach her.  well i can dream can't i?

all rudy has to do is tell me he will appoint judges in the mold of alito and roberts and he has my vote no matter what his views on abortion and gay rights.

"All Rudy has to do is

January 27, 2007 - 13:07 ET by Mark Finkelstein

"All Rudy has to do is tell me he will appoint judges in the mold of Alito and Roberts and he has my vote."

GMTA - I've been discussing that same point with friends.

I can agree to that - definit

January 27, 2007 - 15:00 ET by Eric Turner

I can agree to that - definitely.  Firmly constitutionalist style judges

AKA: armyvet

Dear Mark

January 27, 2007 - 20:36 ET by tumbler_2007

Let me say I really admire Rudy. but he's not a conservative at all.

The chances he'd appoint conservative judges is one in a hundred. IMO, his best chance is finding a lesser spot in a GOP administration. WHICH HE MIGHT.

Like a post on the new president's cabinet or as a personal advisor. He has the stuff. But he'd boost the ticket only in a few eastern states. The Presidential candidate is in absolute NEED of a partner who'll pull in some southern states. The way Johnson helped JFK in 1960. It's not even plausible to see Rudy as vice president.

Right on

January 27, 2007 - 13:09 ET by iveseenitall

Right on, buddyc. They are scared stiff of Rudy. What Republicans have to do is ignore the social issues and his personal life. Can he win?Will he keep us safe from terrorism? are the only questions they should be asking. Let the MSM deal with all the other things. If we're nuked, those issues won't matter a bit.

NEVER,NEVER trust a liberal

"all rudy has to do is

January 27, 2007 - 13:12 ET by ckc1227

"all rudy has to do is tell me he will appoint judges in the mold of alito and roberts and he has my vote no matter what his views on abortion and gay rights."

But, seeing as how he is pro abortion and and pro gay rights(whatever that means), what are the odds that he will appoint judges in the mold of Alito and Roberts?

Liberalism is the philosophy of the stupid.

I'd say it's very possible

January 27, 2007 - 13:17 ET by Mark Finkelstein

I'd say it's very possible he would. I could easily imagine Rudy saying "I'm pro-choice, but most importantly, I'm pro-Constitution. That's why I intend to appoint strict constructionists who will apply the Constitution, not re-invent it."

Mediacrats and Rudy

January 27, 2007 - 23:35 ET by acumen

I agree Mark.  It would serve Republicans well to remember that Rudy held office in NY - not a friendly electorate for a gun-toting, pro-life, bible-thumping, gay basher.  Rudy would never have won holding up those credentials to New Yorkers and say what you want about Rudy, he definitely knows how to play the political game.

Unfortunately, in our current state of star-worship over substance, if the Republicans are going to beat the Mediacrats in '08 they are going to need a candidate that can siphon off traditional Democrat star-struck voters.  Rudy might talk the moderate talk in a hostile political environment but Rudy has demonstrated he can walk the electable walk in that same hostile political environment.  Imagine what he could do in a 50/50 political environment.

It is my personal opinion that Rudy is a lot more conservative than some might think and at the least, a heck of a lot more conservative than Hillary.  The two most pressing issues our nation will be facing in '08 is of course the WOT and the unspoken but nearly important issue of selecting judges which effects most other issues - particularly social issues.  We all know Rudy's passion in fighting terrorists, but few seem to appreciate his healthy constructionist view of  the judiciary.  He demonstrated his dedication to following, rather than interpreting the constitution as a DA in NY. 

The left is streetwise.  They know how to work the voter.  So does Rudy and I think that scares the Mediacrats beyond measure.  IMO that is why the enemy within already has a Mediacrat tail on Rudy.  He is their biggest threat to a coronation of her thighness in '08.  Unless another Reagan (if that is even possible) rides in to save the day, Rudy is our best shot in '08....and the Mediacrats fearfully already have him painted on their radar.

I hope my conservative friends will give Rudy the benefit of the doubt, at least for the time being.  He will be every bit as dependable as Dubya in fighting the WOT, seemingly more dependable than Dubya on fiscal responsibility, and certainly more effective in fighting for his judicial selections than Dubya and best of all he knows how to work the "moderate" voters, not to mention the camera (electability).  Personally I would prefer a Sam Brownback conservative but the reality is, most of America does not.  Sometimes I have learned to settle for less to get more.

acumen...If Rudy is our guy f

January 27, 2007 - 23:42 ET by Clear thinker

acumen...

If Rudy is our guy for 08' why is he having so much trouble raising money?

I know the elections are not supposed to be decided by money, but.....

Good question CT

January 28, 2007 - 00:15 ET by acumen

Good question CT.  I don't have a clue.  I have no idea how the big money wonks operate in either party.  It's still early.  I remember back in '04 that Dean was the big money candidate early on until his bankers dried up.  Still early.....

This might help out.

I desperately hope we don't write Rudy off though.  Frankly, I can't think of anyone else that can beat Hillary or her Mediacrat supporters.

if a majority want gay rights

January 27, 2007 - 15:05 ET by buddyc

if a majority want gay rights or want abortoins including 3rd trimester abortions then i have to accept it.  if rudy says he would like to see legislation passed protecting these rights i can accept that.  however, what infuriates me was the manner in which these rights were given by judges who are not elected, who don't have to account for their decisions, who ignored not only precedent but hundreds of years of history as well as the clear desires of the overwhelming majority of the people in this country.  read the account of how they got the majority in roe v wade.  it was poorly written, poorly reasoned, social engineering in the ugliest back room manner imaginable. 

i want my vote to matter directly.  i don't want judges taking away the importance of my vote.  the supreme court is not competent and is not equipped to pass legislation on such a grand scale.

yes rudy has views i disagree with but if he is strong on defense and crime and if he appoints alito and roberts type judges he has my vote.  it is based on the accounts of before and after rudy new york even by liberals.  he is competent, strong, tough and not tin eared.  i would trust him with the defense of my family.  i can't say that about hillary, obama or edwards.

but, it is going to get really really ugly as to rudy.  expect the worst about his personal life from his ex wife and ex girlfriends.  if you are religious expect to see some offensive stuff.  expect the dirtiest stuff you have ever seen in an election from what kind of sex he likes, to his personal habits to off the record comments.  it is really going to be ugly and i expect it in the next 12 months. 

I think true conservatives fe

January 27, 2007 - 19:34 ET by BW222

I think true conservatives fear Rudy the most as his election would return control of the GOP to Rockefeller Republicans.

If I want a liberal for President, I'll vote for a Democrat.

My understanding is that is t

January 27, 2007 - 13:10 ET by jdhawk

My understanding is that is true.  Rudy Guiliani is pro-choice, pro-gun control and pro gay rights.  And, that is why I wouldn't vote for him either. 

By the way, McCain is a RINO.  His McCain/Feingold bill is a disaster.  He has dogged and embarrased our president at every turn with the exception of his recent embrace of the WOT. 

Republican Party, you better get busy an find a candidate that can win this race in '08.  Neither of the above are it.   

Hint:  Find a candidate that actually adheres to conservative core values.

Draft Newt!

January 27, 2007 - 14:05 ET by aero

Draft Newt!

A draft?  Did someone say dr

January 27, 2007 - 14:10 ET by Eric Turner

A draft?  Did someone say draft?  *looking around* 

Well, we'd have Charlie Rangel in favor of it right?

AKA: armyvet

LOL! Hi again, av! If you can

January 27, 2007 - 14:29 ET by aero

LOL! Hi again, av! If you can't tell, I've decided to be loudly in favor of Newt and see what happens. Hope springs eternal!

aero is out of the closet!

January 27, 2007 - 14:36 ET by Eric Turner

So you've come out of the proverbial closet on this uh?  You're loud and proud!  Three snaps!   LOL!

Yeah, I'm thinking I'm gonna root for Newt too. 

AKA: armyvet

Hey, catchy slogan! Root f

January 27, 2007 - 14:51 ET by aero

Hey, catchy slogan!

Root for Newt!!!

Newt to select his own VP

January 27, 2007 - 14:54 ET by tumbler_2007

Email Newt Gingrich:

Promise him your vote provided he call upon J.C. Watts to run on his ticket as our vice-presidential candidate.

Many of our African American voters would embrace this ticket, it would cut away some of their looming support for Hillary and Obama,

And most importantly capture some of the Bible Belt states; where the Christian Right is crucial. Watts is a minister, I believe; a staunch Republican and conservative who has no respect for Democrat panderers who have thus far treated his people as plantation dummies. He's a terriific campaigner on the Right, as he showed when he addressed the Republican National Convention years back.

Newt NEEDS an African American at his side to counteract the Obama and Hillary camps. I'll vote for Newt anyway; but cannot imagine anybody else really helping him out with our southern states. WATTS can create those votes. NEWT would make an excellent President; notwithstanding his problems in DC back in the nineties. --IMHO . . .

I thought Watts retired from

January 27, 2007 - 14:57 ET by aero

I thought Watts retired from politics. Do you have any reason to believe he could be drafted? I like Watts a lot. Wouldn't mind seeing him back on the national scene.

About J. C. Watts

January 27, 2007 - 17:18 ET by tumbler_2007

It seems hard to say, but would be worth the GOP's effort.

Once a candidate for the presidency is confirmed by the party, he himself (or herself) can lobby for the partner on his ticket. Most often it becomes one of his rivals during the primaries.

But as I suggested above, we'd only have Condi Rice as a minority VP able to command the whole party's respect. She'd turn off a lot of Republicans who associate her with the Iraq -Bush- Cheney -Rumsfeld, and feminists haven't been partial to her. A black man is more able to attract swing voters. Especially in the south where it's crucial. Watts is already very identifiable and prestigious. He'd add a lot to the ticket; where Giuliani and McCain are lib-vulnerable. Neither of whom can attract southern votes, IMO.

Gingrich / Watts

January 27, 2007 - 14:58 ET by Eric Turner

Ohhhh yeah. Now see there's another guy I could go for.  J.C. Watts.  I was raised in Oklahoma too.  He's da man. 

I could go for a Gingrich / Watts ticket also.

But I disagree, there's hardly a black voter out there that would go for that.  They'd call him a Uncle Tom just like they did to all the others.  "It's not about race, it's about party."  Yeah, right. Sure it is.

AKA: armyvet

Add me to the JC Watts band

January 27, 2007 - 15:04 ET by Jerry

Add me to the JC Watts band wagon. Love the guy.

When asked if he went to war with Iraq to derail the impeachment
vote: “I don’t think any serious person would believe that any
President would do such a thing." - President Clinton (Dec 1998).

I agree--evidence from the pa

January 27, 2007 - 15:06 ET by aero

I agree--evidence from the past overwhelmingly indicates that, other than a few individuals here and there, black voters are unlikely to be swayed by a black Republican just because he's black. They don't seem to consider black Republicans to be "real" blacks. This has never made sense to me, but it's an undeniable phenomenon.

That said, I'd still love to see Watts step back into national politics. Good guy.

I agree with all of you, but

January 27, 2007 - 15:38 ET by Mica the Magnificent

I agree with all of you, but lets be realistic. The MSM's mantra will be the usual crap: Newt is the leader of the republican revolution that brought you the worst economy in 50 years, soup kitchens, war, AIDS in Africa, homelessness, locust, and . . he wants to take away your grandma's medicine.

 The average dollar store voter will eat it up again and again. He's been waaay too demonized by the press to make any go of it.

we can't let MSM dictate our choices

January 27, 2007 - 17:30 ET by tumbler_2007

What if the talking heads ridicule Newt? They ridiculed Reagan, and W was absolutely howled at, yet won over an incumbent (though corrupt) vice-president. It's the speeches; the fund-raising and the debates that separate the men from the boys. (Or from Messalina Clinton; if she's nominated.)

No mantra from the MSM ought to influence our party's strategy. I fail to see how McCain or Giuliani will fare any better. They'll be shafted every night by Obsurdmann and Matthews; they'll take no prisoners. We need strong candidates. Newt Gingrich with all his baggage, is nevertheless a GOP powerhouse.

I understand your point, but

January 27, 2007 - 21:07 ET by Mica the Magnificent

I understand your point, but they will have 'specials' and 'documentaries' spin their bile back to the beginning of 'the problem with America today.'

I hate to see a smart, educated, American history expert, common sense conservative dragged through the mud while watching Hillary and Obama get away with their stupidity!! I will be forced to scream more and more at my t.v!

What do you mean I have to wait a month to buy a gun? I'm angry NOW! - Homer Simpson

TV Yellers Anonymous

January 27, 2007 - 21:15 ET by Eric Turner

"I will be forced to scream more and more at my t.v!"

LOL!  You're in good company then!

I'll be right there with you.  We could start a 12 step program for TV yellers anonymous

AKA: armyvet

I don't yell at my TV. I do,

January 27, 2007 - 21:23 ET by aero

I don't yell at my TV. I do, however, make snide, sarcastic comments to it. It hasn't yet turned into a plasma to appease me. Maybe I should try the yelling thing.

Try talking nice to it...it m

January 27, 2007 - 21:33 ET by Eric Turner

Try talking nice to it...it may surprise you and turn into a plasma!  As long as it doesn't talk back to you - you're okay.

AKA: armyvet

LOL! Give diplomacy a chance,

January 27, 2007 - 22:35 ET by aero

LOL! Give diplomacy a chance, huh? Maybe all my mean comments have made it hate me, and that's why it won't become a plasma. It's my own fault that it makes me angry--I understand now! ;-)

LOL!  See, now you're catchi

January 28, 2007 - 15:43 ET by Eric Turner

LOL!  See, now you're catching the "progressive" spirit!

--------------------------------------------------------------------

(on a side note [I know I'm kinda slow], it's incredible that progressives will blame America for attacks against it. Saying we "brought" it on ourselves.  Yet when it comes to women being raped - who might be dressed provocatively - the blame is still on the rapist...mmmm)

AKA: armyvet

Rudy is having trouble raisin

January 27, 2007 - 19:51 ET by Clear thinker

Rudy is having trouble raising money. If this continues for much longer you can stick a fork in him, he's done. Besides, I don't know anyone that would vote for him.

I'm hoping to see Tancredo on a ticket. If he has enough common sense to care about our illegals problem, surely he has the common sense to fight a GWOT.

Russo: "Are you aware th

January 27, 2007 - 13:13 ET by midnight cowboy

Russo: "Are you aware that us here at NBC and all other branches of the media, hate republicans so much that we will, lie, discredit, make up half truths, distort, character assassinate, make false accusations, demean, demoralize, spread false propaganda, about them meanwhile give cover,credit, support, cheer on, spread false positive news, spin, congratulate, bury negative stories, give unlimited free air-time to any democrat?"

Nice republican lady " N-o-o-o"

Russo: "Do think we in the media are elitist snobs, that are way smarter than the American people, who are hippocrates that drive SUV's, smoke cigarettes, discriminate, engage in racial sterotypes, who are self congratulatory, pompous, arrogant, pieces of human garbage?"

Nice Republican lady: "Y-e-s-s" 

Rudy

January 27, 2007 - 13:23 ET by iveseenitall

Rudy doesn't mix is personal feelings with his professional responsibilities. He'll be just fine and do the right thing when it comes to judges, abortion, and, most of all, terrorism.

NEVER,NEVER trust a liberal

How Hillary will become President, if nominated.

January 27, 2007 - 13:19 ET by acaiguana

How Hillary will become President, if nominated.

I've been waiting for a thread to post this on for a long time.

Here's how it will play out.  Take any Republican candidate (Rudy if you want).

There will be a third party candidate from the Right, either Conservative or strongly Republican with solid conservative credential.  Someone like a Liebermann on the Republican side.

There will be a mass defection of Republican voters who will either vote in 'protest' of their 'hurt feelings' when let down by their previous dream guys and this will allow the woman to win with 42 to 45% of the vote.

Then, we'll have 'taught' them a lesson, won't we?

ACA

...

Acaiguana says:  "I love blind Monkeys and any inference that I am making fun of blind Monkeys would be wrong.

And she'll have won just as h

January 27, 2007 - 19:56 ET by Eric Turner

And she'll have won just as her wife did back in '92.  I'm afraid you may be right and thus the reason I will not waste my vote on 3rd party candidate or alternate rep candidate.

AKA: armyvet

Abandon the Perot gambit

January 27, 2007 - 20:18 ET by nkviking75

We should have learned something in '92 and '96 when all those votes were diverted to Perot and let Clinton get elected with pluralities rather than majorities.  If we didn't get it then, our current Congress should drive the lesson home now.  We need to work in the trenches of the party before '08 rather than shooting ourselves in the foot in the general election.  And take advantage of primaries to send our messages whenever the opportunity arises.

This lesson seems almost forg

January 27, 2007 - 20:23 ET by Clear thinker

This lesson seems almost forgotten.

Seems to me that conservatives had better get behind a candidate early and STICK with them. Of course this is where it get's tricky...getting everyone behind a candidate early is damn near impossible.

no 3rd party has the votes

January 27, 2007 - 20:19 ET by tumbler_2007

Sorry, ACA. If Hillary's election depends on a split vote among conservatives, she loses. We know that's how her husband benefited, but just recall. Ross Perot was a BIG 3rd party figure. He had a big following and big bucks.

Nobody today would likely split the right-wing vote. As long as we run a strong presidential candidate. No lightweights like Hunter or Tancredo. No woman candidate; and not a liberal RINO type such as Rudy (I admire him, but not as a Republican) or McCain. It ought to be easy to whip Hillary. We only need a NAME with conservative credibility. Not somebody the 52 states never heard of. That means NEWT.

Tumbler... Do not speak badly

January 27, 2007 - 20:25 ET by Clear thinker

Tumbler...

Do not speak badly of Tom Tancredo just because you have an agenda protecting illegals! Remember, we all know what you are about.

my agenda is better than your agenda

January 27, 2007 - 20:41 ET by tumbler_2007

Tancredo is not a national figure. The anti-illegal dispute isn't a national dispute. Let me remind you: I do not "protect" illegals. That is a figment of your racist imagination.

Tom Tancredo for all his apparent merits is never even CLOSE to winning a presidential election. If he's the GOP candidate for Pres-- Just give it all to Hillary over the telephone. She's a cinch.

Is that what you want? I thought you were a conservative?

Tumbler...2007 has only just

January 27, 2007 - 20:46 ET by Clear thinker

Tumbler...

2007 has only just begun, but you may well have already won the award for the dumbest sentence of the year with..."The anti-illegal dispute isn't a national dispute".

I am a conservative, more so than you could ever dream of being, that's why I think Tancredo would be a great choice!

Tumbler:"I am a conservat

January 28, 2007 - 10:21 ET by digdog1

"I am a conservative...that's why I think Tancredo would be a great choice!"

Bzzt. Sorry -- it won't happen. Tancredo's appearance at the SC "Americans Have Had Enough" meeting in the fall would be used like a cudgel to beat him over the head with. Confederate flags and uniformed Rebs singing "Dixie?" The MSM would replay that on an endless loop between now and 11/08.

Newt's a smart guy, whom I've always liked, but I kinda doubt he's electable on a national scale. Better to have him in a key policy role in a future GOP administration. SecState, maybe?

McCain -- too prickly. And way too eager to be liked by the MSM.

Rudy gets zapped as a RINO, but frankly, I've been having the same feeling about Bush, at least on the domestic side. Rudy would be at least as good as Bush on WOT, probably better, since his charisma would allow him to make the case for doing what needs to be done.

I'm a Christian conservative, but I'm willing to give Rudy a shot.

typical of "clear" thinker

January 28, 2007 - 15:37 ET by tumbler_2007

Very typical of you, Sir or Madam. Everything YOU think (not very clearly) is supposed to rise to the national level. But this dispute isn't. Many folks who VOTE feel exactly as I do. The proof is, your guy Hayworth failed to hold his seat in congress. And that was in AZ, where sentiment runs high. All the blue states ignored the illegal controversy and now even that boondoggle of a fence is unlikely to be erected. That's not my opinion, it's just the political facts.

Sure, Tancredo might be a great choice, IF there were enough voters interested in making him our President. There just AREN'T, though. He won't stagger in 4th when the campaigning starts. The illegal alien issue isn't bothering half the country. We lost our congressional majority precisely because we were putting all our eggs in that basket. And with the negative hate speech about illegals, our party alienated the entire hispanic voting bloc of our nation. EVERYWHERE.

We needed a large segment of that vote. Thanks to hell-raisers like YOU, we'll never recover it. Of all our contributors in these threads, YOU are the one who LEAST thinks clearly. Sorry to embarrass you publicly, but you never spare my feelings, do you?

Russo: "Did you reali

January 27, 2007 - 14:54 ET by Jerry

Russo: "Did you realize that over 95% of the MSM are hard core democrats?"

News consumer lady: "No-o-o-o..."

Russo: "Would that knowledge affect your trust in the MSM to provide you un-biased news and legitimate polls?"

News consumer lady: "Ye-s-s-s-s-s-s-s-s-s-s-s, you bet your sweet bippy it would! "

When asked if he went to war with Iraq to derail the impeachment
vote: “I don’t think any serious person would believe that any
President would do such a thing." - President Clinton (Dec 1998).