Recently Rudy Giuliani lost a Values Voter straw poll. He was not last, but he lost nonetheless.  Attendees at the Values Voter Summit offered Giuliani an underwhelming level of support: 6.3%.When the online returns were tallied, less than 2% favored the former mayor. While the poll was arguably not representative, the poll numbers, combined with the importance of social conservatives in the Republican party, raise serious questions about Giuliani's electability.

    From the outset of his campaign, Rudy and his advisors have known that social conservatives would be a troublesome constituency. Consequently, supporters of the former mayor have argued that Giuliani's liberal stand on social issues, a weakness in Republican primaries, will actually be strength in the general election. In other words, the support of socially moderate voters will make Giuliani competitive in traditionally Democratic areas. As appealing as it sounds, his status as a second tier candidate among social conservatives makes this assertion tenuous.

    Heretofore, the Giuliani campaign has assumed that the prospect of another President Clinton will keep most uneasy social conservatives inside the Republican fold. The campaign is unduly optimistic. A substantial percentage of Values Voters cast their ballots on the basis of moral principles. These individuals view social issues in terms of right and wrong, a fact that makes it morally impossible to support a socially liberal candidate. Consequently, this traditionally high-turnout voting bloc could easily stay home on Election Day, or defect to a third party. The loss of these critical votes in a handful of key states would severely jeopardize Giuliani’s ability to win a majority in the Electoral College. 

    From a strategic perspective, low turnout among social conservatives in Republican leaning states makes moderate voters critical. For example, in 2004 George W. Bush carried Nevada, New Mexico, Iowa, and Ohio by minuscule margins. If Giuliani is to retain these states, absent social conservatives must be replaced by the social liberals who shunned George W. Bush. Otherwise, the Democrat nominee will carry these states. Naturally, the scenario is more complex if the state was narrowly carried by John Kerry in 2004. 

    Analysts have pointed out that Rudy could win Democrat-leaning states such as Wisconsin, Pennsylvania, and New Hampshire. A definite electoral possibility, these states do however present a serious challenge. If the former mayor looses the support of many social conservatives, he must offset these losses with new votes from the political center. Only then can he search for the additional centrist votes necessary to defeat the Democrat candidate. The question is, does the Giuliani campaign have a message these voters will embrace?  The answer is no.  

      Until now, Rudy has drawn skeptical Republicans into his camp by casting himself as a tough leader who is committed to reducing the size of government – a fine message for the Republican primaries. But if he wins the Republican nomination, his message will not fit the voters he most needs to impress. This message/voter mismatch could doom his bid for the White House. In this regard homeland security and health care reform are illustrative.

    When it comes to homeland security, the former mayor has embraced the sports witticism that the best defense is a good offense. Hence, unlike many of the voters he needs to woo, Giuliani favors aggressive foreign policy measures aimed at destroying terrorism abroad. Likewise, Rudy appears to have an elastic view of Presidential authority. This belief holds that warrant-less wiretapping and controversial top-secret interrogation techniques are useful intelligence tools, not signs that American ideals have been compromised. Many moderate voters will not agree.  

    Giuliani's ability to win the support of centrists voters will also be hampered by concerns about health care reform. While many Americans believe health care reform is important, the sentiment is particularly strong among center-left voters. Democrat presidential candidates have seized the opportunity. All of the top candidates have proposed bold plans for covering the uninsured. In so doing, the Democrats have cast themselves as pro-change. In comparison, the former mayor's focus on health savings accounts is, relatively speaking, a status quo solution. Fueled by Democrat rhetoric, centrist voters are bound to react negatively, an outcome Rudy can ill afford.

    An albatross in any election year, Giuliani's social liberalism is a greater liability in 2008 than his supporters want to admit. Not only does it promote apathy among social conservatives, but it also increases the importance of his polarizing message. In so doing, the former mayor could alienate the very voters he so desperately needs, thereby undermining his electability. Since this message/voter mismatch is nearly irrelevant until the general election, it will be impossible to know if Pat Robertson's recent endorsement of Rudy Giuliani will translate into conservative votes. By then it will be too late.