I just concluded a conference call with Mayor Giuliani in which he spoke with bloggers regarding the state of his campaign in the wake of last night's debate. All-in-all, he sounded pretty pleased.
While a candidate who underperformed in the debate might open the call with revisions or additions to remarks made on the stump, or by calling attention to the mistakes of others, the Giuliani used this as an opportunity to plug Fox News. He said this debate format was superior to the one in California, in that contenders had to answer tough questions, but had 30 seconds or a minute to explain their positions.
In response to questions, Giuliani said that the vote in the Senate today to withdraw immediately American troops from Iraq was not helpful to U.S. interests--even though it was defeated 29-67. He pointed out that while the Democratic Senators seeking the presidency once had varied positions on when U.S. forces should leave Iraq, they were all united today in support of a fast withdrawal. The mayor offered--'respectfully'--that the Democrats 'don't get it.' He said they do not understand the threat of Islamic terrorism, and their inability to utter the words in their recent debate showed as much.
When asked why his polls had slumped a little from the high 30s and low 40s to where they are now, Giuliani quickly answered (paraphrasing) 'I don't pay attention to polls, but I did notice the Wall Street Journal poll yesterday that had me at 38--down just a point from a month ago.' So much for not watching polls.
On Israel and Palestine, he said that the ball is still in the court of the Palestinian Authority, and he said in strong terms that there could be no successful two-state solution until Hamas recognizes the right of Israel to exist and forswears terrorism. He said that in that sense the U.S. message in the Middle East must be clear.
The discussion became a little muddled when the topic turned to torture and interrogation, and a rehashing of the 'Jack Bauer' scenario set up in the debate. Perhaps in a reference to Romney's answer that a president cannot let things get to that point, Giuliani commented that he learned in law school to answer those hypotheticals--even if you disagree with the premise. He said that we should definitely use enhanced interrogation... or aggressive interrogation (forgetting exactly what phrase was used last night), but he said we should never use torture.
Then in a thinly-disguised reference to McCain's answer yesterday, Giuliani said that we should not eschew torture because we think it will get better treatment for Americans captured by the enemy, but because the U.S. does not torture. He said that our enemies 'will do what they do,' and that right now that means beheading people. And he refused to get drawn into a discussion of what constitutes torture and what does not, saying--perhaps problematically--that those questions should be decided by treaty, the Geneva Convention, and the like.
The next debate is scheduled for June 5, at St. Anselm College in New Hampshire. If he can avoid any major pitfalls before then, the mayor might draw more concerted fire at that time, as his challengers try to take him down a peg. That might be the lead story, unless another strong contender jumps in before then.
