Of course this gets buried on A25 and hidden on the NYT website... can't even copy/paste it.

http://www.nytimes.com/imagepages/2007/12/20/us/politics/20071221_GIULIANI_GRAPHIC.html

http://graphics8.nytimes.com/images/2007/12/20/us/politics/1221-nat-webGIULIANI.jpg

I don't recall the travel expenses being the issue, but rather the added security team costs, which were being buried in obscure budgets.

Both travel expenses and taxpayer-funded security details for the then-unknown Ms. Nathan were issues raised during examination of this issue. If Buettner's analysis holds up, Giuliani might see his vanished lead return.

Giuliani.... Man, I won't even comment on this guy

Corrupt and immoral, what more do you want in a president? :cool:

i dont know ailwon, cross dressing authoritarian perhaps?

oh yes, i went there.

and it felt good :(

The Hamptons are quite pricey to vacation at. Renting a house for just one week will cost you about $15000.00 minimum and thats the bad area.

It seems to me quite odd that a guy like Giuliani coud even remotely afford it there. Those in the Hamptons usually make in the area of $5,000,000 + per year.

It's not like he has a chance anyway.

Who cares.

Now go join your parties death march toward Huckabee and pray they pull their heads out of their ass long enough to make McCain the nominee.

It's not like he has a chance anyway.

Who cares.

Now go join your parties death march toward Huckabee and pray they pull their heads out of their ass long enough to make McCain the nominee.

Truth be told, McCain is really the only viable candidate in the Republican field atm. Each of the candidates has something that will alienate parts of the voting bloc, but McCain does have the experience and proven ability to reach across the aisle to forge agreements that is needed right now to rebuild this country.

Giuliani is just too slimy and arrogant, and Romney's religion will never cease being an issue. Huckabee is a nice warm, fuzzy candidate, but I don't think they will get too serious about having a Republican Jimmy Carter in the White House right now with all the work that needs being done, and wars that are underway. Thompson is going nowhere, and Paul cannot cobble together a large enough base even with his great fundraising.

A McCain-Huckabee ticket is the Republican's best chance of keeping the White House.

It seems to me quite odd that a guy like Giuliani coud even remotely afford it there. I think he was pulling in $100Million+ a year after his Mayor job... I could be wrong though.

And to everyone else making predictions, I would suggest holding off until after the first few primaries for both parties. I suspect none of these polls are anywhere near accurate.

i read in some paper he made alot of money selling terrorist fighting 'strategies' to people after resigning as mayor...which is ironic on so many levels.

Well he was out on the street walking around right in the thick of things on 9/11...oh yeah I forgot he was outside walking around because his disaster emergency office had this huge building cave in on it...:eek:

Well at least we know that picking out emergency office locations are not his forte'

Back on the Giuliani topic for a moment. does anyone think he has a realistic chance of going far in this race when he thumbs his nose pretty much at the smaller states? I mean, he has more or less said flat out that he is going to only put his money in the states that can offer him a larger bloc of votes/delegates. Does that mean if elected he will be the President of only certain select states? :rolleyes:

But thats not a Guiliani thing, thats all candidates.

Remember this thread: http://www.ayonae.ro/showthread.php?t=10201&page=1&pp=10

In 2004, candidates spent 99 percent of campaign funding in only 16 states, leaving the rest of the country without a political voice. Highly populated states like New York and California, and states in much of the South, are considered “safe” and therefore offer little incentive for candidates to pay attention to their residents.

Its the way the game is played, and it sucks. Its good that they're trying to fix it. However I can't fault anyone for following the best tactics to win, it'd be futile to spend all your money in the small states.

The difference here is that Rudy has done so overtly, where before it was the practice but not done so in such an outspoken manner. I think it is going to put more of a spotlight on the fact that all Rudy is is a big city mayor, with no real connection or empathy with the small town or rural parts of America.

Rudy has tried to defend his "late state" strategy, but I don't see it working. His endless repeating of the 9/11 mantra has degenerated into self-parody, the early primaries have given other candidates momentum that has drawn from Giuliani's own early lead, McCain is on the rise (and may end up last man standing), and polls repeatedly show Giuliani declining.

I think he saw the writing on the wall in those early states (especially Iowa) and decided to gamble his lead on surviving the early primaries, planning to recoup any losses later in the fracas. It seems more and more like he 9/11'd his own campaign, but with that campaign centered upon a single note -- and with so many compounding problems stemming from his personal and professional life -- I'd have been surprised if he lasted til the end.