About us Login Get email updates
Research
Print

Wash. Post reported Giuliani's McGovern reference in "swipe[]" at Clinton, but not that Giuliani voted for McGovern

October 04, 2007 3:08 pm ET

36 Comments

An October 4 Washington Post article by staff writers Dan Balz and Jon Cohen reporting on the latest poll numbers for presidential hopefuls noted that Republican candidate Rudy Giuliani "has reveled in taking swipes at [Sen. Hillary Rodham] Clinton [D-NY] in recent weeks and yesterday offered an unflattering comparison of her to 1972 Democratic nominee George S. McGovern." The article later reported: "Giuliani has made attacks on her a major focus of his campaign. ... The latest came Wednesday, when he attacked her proposal to establish a $5,000 savings account for each child, comparing it derisively to a 1972 proposal by then-Democratic nominee McGovern to give every American $1,000." Balz and Cohen, however, did not note that Giuliani has said he voted for McGovern in 1972.

By contrast, an October 3 AP article quoted Giuliani as saying, "It's interesting that Hillary is taking something from the George McGovern playbook," then noted: "In the 1972 election, Giuliani liked McGovern and his ideas enough to vote for him for president." And in an April 28, 1994, article, Newsday reported that "Giuliani noted that he voted for Nixon's Democratic opponents in the 1968 and 1972 elections, when the mayor was still a registered Democrat."

In addition, a leaked 1993 "Rudolph W. Giuliani Vulnerability Study" was, as the Los Angeles Times reported, "commissioned by Giuliani's 1993 mayoral campaign and warned of perceptions of a 'weirdness factor' due to his first marriage, to his second cousin." The study also listed as one possible "charge": "Giuliani is a man without convictions. His political opportunism drove him from McGovern Democrat to Reagan Republican."

From the October 3 AP article:

Republican Rudy Giuliani compared Hillary Rodham Clinton to 1972 Democratic nominee George McGovern on Wednesday and chided his rival for adding a Southern lilt to her voice as he intensified his criticism.

[...]

"It's interesting that Hillary is taking something from the George McGovern playbook," Giuliani said in Manchester, N.H., likening her idea to the former South Dakota senator's proposal to send $1,000 to every U.S. resident.

In the 1972 election, Giuliani liked McGovern and his ideas enough to vote for him for president. The liberal lawmaker lost in a landslide to President Nixon.

From the October 4 Washington Post article:

Former president Bill Clinton has emerged as a clear asset in his wife's campaign for the White House, with Americans offering high ratings to his eight years in office and a solid majority saying they would be comfortable with him as first spouse, according to a new Washington Post-ABC News poll.

But Americans said they would not regard the election of Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton (D-N.Y.) as simply the resumption of her husband's presidency. Instead, two-thirds said she would take her presidency in a different direction, and half of all Americans said they believed that would be a good development. About half of those who said it would be a resumption described that as positive.

The survey also showed Hillary Clinton with an early advantage in a matchup of the party front-runners. A majority of those polled support her over former New York mayor Rudolph W. Giuliani, who has reveled in taking swipes at Clinton in recent weeks and yesterday offered an unflattering comparison of her to 1972 Democratic nominee George S. McGovern.

[...]

While neither Clinton nor Giuliani can yet claim their respective nominations, Giuliani has made attacks on her a major focus of his campaign, as if to show Republicans that he hungers for a general-election contest against her. The latest came Wednesday, when he attacked her proposal to establish a $5,000 savings account for each child, comparing it derisively to a 1972 proposal by then-Democratic nominee McGovern to give every American $1,000.

Expand All Expand 1st Level Collapse All Add Comment
    • Author by nerzog (October 04, 2007 3:23 pm ET)
         

      Haven't you heard? The Regurgicon party is all about redemption and forgiveness now. You were pro choice once? No problem. You advocated for gun control? Who cares? Started a costly war based on jacked up intelligence? Pfffft! Why dwell in the past?

      Report Abuse
    • Author by nbarell4083 (October 04, 2007 3:26 pm ET)
         

      We can only hope that if she is the Dem's nominee that she ends up losing like McGovern.

      Report Abuse
      • Author by HuntingtonBeachLefty (October 04, 2007 11:25 pm ET)
           

        Why? Do you miss Nixon? Giuliani's pretty close.

        Report Abuse
        • Author by sundog (October 05, 2007 12:17 am ET)
             

          Watch out Beach they do miss Nixon. Except that for many of today's righties he was actually too liberal.

          This whole Guillianni thing is just one more part of the GOP trying to bait the Democrats into nominating Hillary. Why would he be going after her before the Democratic primaries if he was afraid of facing her in the general election? It's getting old watching this stupid bait and switch trick work for them over and over. Rove's people actually described how they did this to help ensure Kerry would face Bush instead of Edwards.

          I really wish Media Matters would begin to question the importance of the right attacking Hillary now when they aren't actually running against her. As it is, if they ARE playing the bait game, Media Matters is simply serving as another part of it. Don't get played. It's a simple trick, if she's in a fight with Guillianni now, Democratic voters begin to assume their choice is between Hillary and the GOP. But none of them are running in the Democratic primaries which is, after all, the campaign we are in the middle of.

          Quite simply, by attacking her now, the right turns a site like Media Matters into a proxy group in support of Hillary against other Democrats in the primaries. Unless Media Matters chooses to investigate this angle a little further.

          What exactly is the history of a party attacking a particular opposition candidate during the other party's primaries? Isn't it obvious that a site like Media Matters is in a position to get used in a campaign like that? Please, please, put an intern on it or something. I love this site and I'd hate to see it get used as a tool by the GOP to help them influence who they run against in 08.

          Report Abuse
    • Author by bruce1ace (October 04, 2007 3:28 pm ET)
         

      I'm not sure MMFA makes a very compelling case here.  Does voting for a candidate mean you endorse every single idea that the candidate puts forth?  I'm surprised that Guiliani voted for McGovern, but then again I'm surprised at myself for voting for Mondale in 1984.  It was a long time ago.

      Perhaps Guiliani should apologize for voting for McGovern???

      Report Abuse
      • Author by Pithaughn (October 04, 2007 4:19 pm ET)
           

        Misinformation my friend, the mission is expose misinformation. Would I know he voted for McGovern, would you have known if not for reading it here???

        Report Abuse
      • Author by nerzog (October 04, 2007 4:27 pm ET)
           

        Let me be the first here to apologize for voting for George H.W. Bush. If he'd lost in '88, his idiot son might now be running a baseball team into the ground instead of our country.

        Report Abuse
        • Author by bruce1ace (October 04, 2007 4:54 pm ET)
             

          That was funny.  But only feel guilty if your state also cast its electorals for H.W., otherwise you're off the hook.

          Report Abuse
      • Author by carlileb5935 (October 04, 2007 8:49 pm ET)
           

        No, it means that you're a hypocrite for condemning the very notion of someone that you voted for the one time he ran for President.

        Or you are very, very confused....

        Report Abuse
    • Author by tommy (October 04, 2007 3:30 pm ET)
         

      Yes, Giuliani's vote for McGovern nearly 40 years ago is extremely relevant today........nice catch MMFA!

      Report Abuse
      • Author by bruce1ace (October 04, 2007 3:35 pm ET)
           

        Guiliani's a flip-flopper!!!!!  But this explains his liberal views on many issues!!  He's the only McGovern Republican alive...

        Report Abuse
    • Author by kevin1007 (October 04, 2007 3:34 pm ET)
         

      In 2004 Wesley Clark ran as a Democrat against George W. Bush. In 2000 the same Clark campaigned for Bush.

      Do the sissies at MMFA believe people cannot change their minds, especially after 35 years?

      Report Abuse
      • Author by dave_chicago (October 04, 2007 3:46 pm ET)
           

        "Do the sissies at MMFA believe people cannot change their minds, especially after 35 years?"

        Personally, I wasn't aware that Giuliani once supported McGovern. I would bet a lot of people aren't. And it's an interesting factoid since he's bringing McGovern up in a derisive way. So there's no question that it's relevant.

        No one's saying a person can't change their mind. That's not the point. 

        Report Abuse
        • Author by tommy (October 04, 2007 3:50 pm ET)
             

          He's bringing up McGovern because his government handout is similar to the one Hillary likes.......Giuliani's voting record 40 years ago has nothing to do with that.

          Report Abuse
          • Author by dave_chicago (October 04, 2007 4:08 pm ET)
               

            I disagree. It's relevant.

            Report Abuse
          • Author by nerzog (October 04, 2007 4:29 pm ET)
               

            Holy crap! Was that 40 years ago? I suddenly feel so.....old.

            Report Abuse
            • Author by onionhead (October 04, 2007 4:37 pm ET)
                 

              Relax. It's actually 35 years ago.  You still have another five years until you have to shake your head in disbelief.

              See ya in 2012!

              Report Abuse
          • Author by sundog (October 05, 2007 3:07 pm ET)
               

            Boy you guys are really brilliant.  Maybe you should actually read the articles before you try to make fun of them.  The story goes that Rudy was making disparaging comments about Clinton by comparing her to McGovern.  In that context, it could pretty easily be seen as interesting or even funny that Rudy actually voted for McGovern.  Oh yea, an entire day of several people trying to help you and you never could quite grasp what irony means.  Maybe that's your problem here.  Sorry, you're special in your own way. 

            Report Abuse
    • Author by belltoller (October 04, 2007 3:41 pm ET)
         

      In reporting this story, MMFA failed to note that its 'little bit s.lutty' and quite a bit nutty leader, David Brock, was once a right-wing smear-nut that attacked the Clintons. I suppose that invalidates everything they do.

      For the record: Hillary supported Goldwater. I suppose this nugget needs to be brought up whenever she talks about raising taxes and creating more massive government programs.

      Report Abuse
      • Author by dave_chicago (October 04, 2007 3:49 pm ET)
           

        "For the record: Hillary supported Goldwater. I suppose this nugget needs to be brought up whenever she talks about raising taxes"

        No. But if she bashes Giuliani by comparing him to Goldwater, then yes, of course it should be mentioned.

        Report Abuse
      • Author by magnolialover (October 04, 2007 4:01 pm ET)
           

        In reporting a fact that everyone here already knows, it makes you look, well, silly really by trying to turn the topic from one of where Rudy attacks Clinton for being like McGovern, even though he voted for him, into David Brock once lied as well. Oh, remember, he wrote an entire book about it, that you might want to read. It's not like it's a big secret that Brock used to be a hired hit man for the right wingers, no doubt, such as yourself, who of course like to attack the messenger (as evidenced by your post) instead of the message.

        As someone else said. If Hillary starts attacking Rudy in a negative way, and starts comparing him to Goldwater, then by all means bring it up, it would be relevant, such as it is for Rudy voting for McGovern. This isn't to say that someone can't change their mind. Not at all. If Rudy had said, "Back in 72 I voted for McGovern because he represented things that I believed in at the time, and since then, my beliefs have changed and I would not vote for someone like him again." then there wouldn't be an issue. But now, he used McGovern as an attack against Clinton.

        It's funny that folks, such as yourself, don't see the nuanced differences between Hillary voting for Goldwater and not using that as a basis for attack, and Rudy voting for GM, and then using that political figure as a basis for attack.

        Report Abuse
      • Author by nerzog (October 04, 2007 4:37 pm ET)
           

        Well, Goldwater was a real Republican, not a troglodyte nutjob like the ones who have taken over the party now.

        Report Abuse
        • Author by sundog (October 05, 2007 4:11 pm ET)
             

          Zog, he was kind of a race-baiting troglodyte himself. If he hadn't ridden the wave of reactionary racism spurned on among southern whites during the Civil Rights movement we wouldn't even be talking about Barry Goldwater.  Or Ronald Reagan for that matter. 

          Report Abuse
      • Author by sundog (October 05, 2007 4:09 pm ET)
           

        Hillary supported Goldwater.  Nice.  Actually, her dad did.  She was a 'Goldwater Girl' as a kid, going along with her Republican daddy.  She wasn't even old enough to vote.  Not quite the same.  Besides, there was nothing about Hillary comparing Rudy to Goldwater but leaving out that she voted for him.  Which she didn't anyway.  So that would be a dumb comparison in a couple of ways I guess.  Maybe there are conservatives out there who could make honest, relevant, logical arguments in today's world?  Just considering the stuff that shows up here, it's hard to believe.

        Report Abuse
    • Author by MRF (October 04, 2007 3:44 pm ET)
         

      Back in 1967 he defended the Newark rioters

      http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9402E4D61E3FF93AA25753C1A961958260&sec=&spon=&pagewanted=4

      Representative Peter T. King, a Republican from Long Island, said, ''I was struck by him being very, very smart and really, really liberal.''

      The two men had met in 1967, when they were summer interns at a law firm that included Richard M. Nixon. Mr. Giuliani, the Kennedy zealot, talked briefly with the future President on two occasions, both times managing to refrain from using his scornful nickname for Nixon: the Trickster.

      ''That summer, there were riots in Newark and Detroit, and Rudy was very sympathetic to the rioters,'' Mr. King said. ''He told me he had gone to a bar and started in on a black guy because he wasn't radical enough. Rudy said before the conversation was over he'd turned him into a Black Power guy.''

      Report Abuse
    • Author by mookworthjwilson (October 04, 2007 4:28 pm ET)
         

      I personally wish Clinton was more like McGovern.  Then maybe she would actually be a liberal and worthy of my vote.

      Report Abuse
      • Author by nerzog (October 04, 2007 4:40 pm ET)
           

        And McGovern was a war hero...and a liberal! Wait, does that make him a "phony soldier"?

        Report Abuse
        • Author by dave_chicago (October 04, 2007 4:53 pm ET)
             

          McGovern was a decorated WWII bomber pilot, if I recall. But because of his fierce opposition to the war in Vietnam, the slimy Nixon crew (of which Rove was a part at that time, I believe) did all they could to paint McGovern as a weak, capitulating peacenik.

          Tactics sound familiar? 

          Report Abuse
          • Author by HuntingtonBeachLefty (October 04, 2007 11:30 pm ET)
               

            Very familiar, Dave. If it's still working, why change it?

            And even if some of the GOP base catches on, they can be replaced by throwing in a little Jesus and Gay Agenda.

            Report Abuse
    • Author by panz (October 04, 2007 7:58 pm ET)
         

      Please dear Neocons, give us Tutty-frooty Rudy! Please.

      I even gave a donation to him. He's well worth the $10 I swear!

       10Q

      Report Abuse
    • Author by panz (October 04, 2007 8:10 pm ET)
         

      I voted for McGovern so for once in his life Guliani was smart. Once does not make you presidential material.

      Report Abuse
    • Author by bill7744 (October 05, 2007 12:18 am ET)
         

      Now this one really is lame. Should we hold it significantly against Hillary that she was a young republican at one time? Should we hold it significantly against Robert Byrd that he one held leadership positions in the KKK?

      To compare a belief from 35 years ago to one held today is, at best, failing to understand that some people learn things over time. In addition, it tends to undermine the credibility of the mediamatters.com site.

      Report Abuse
    • Author by kdbb885 (October 05, 2007 1:16 am ET)
         

      I would like to know the amount of money that the Clintons put into the establishment of media matters. If they did why are you doing such a bad job of getting her message out.

      Report Abuse
    • Author by BeyonceWelch (October 05, 2007 3:41 am ET)
         

      My first Presidential ballot was cast  Proudly for George McGovern . I am happy to that  I will not be voting for fascist Rudy, but the Democrats have no spine. Beyonce Welch - Proud Liberal African - American lady.

      Report Abuse
      • Author by chimpevil (October 05, 2007 7:13 am ET)
           

        Welcome, to the MMFA boards, Beyonce.  While I was too young to vote in 1972, my family proudly voted for George McGovern, a principled man and a true war hero who, as has been mentioned, was slimed by the same scum who swiftboated Kerry, foreshadowing the tactics that they have used time and again, much to the detriment of our political system and to the disgrace of our nation as a whole. 

        Report Abuse
    • Author by hstybuf6553 (October 05, 2007 1:41 pm ET)
         

      Giuliani is weird.  I know of two social situations in which he showed very bad manners. 

      Report Abuse

my.MediaMatters.org

Login  Sign Up

Push Back

Phone calls, emails and letters from the public do make a difference. Remember that to be effective you must be polite, and professional. Express your specific concerns regarding that particular news report or commentary, and indicate what you would like the media outlet to do differently in the future.