I argued today that nominating Rudolph Giuliani for president would run a significant risk: It would deprive Republicans of issues that have helped them in the past, at a time when they need every winning issue they can get.

Philip Klein makes several arguments in response. The first is that Giuliani supposedly puts California, New Jersey, and other states in play. So there’s an upside risk, as I noted. But is that the way to bet? Is it really consistent with his holding a two-point national lead this month?

Yes, Giuliani has an eight-point lead over Clinton in one poll in New Jersey. Tom Kean had a seven-point lead over Bob Menendez in January 2006. We have been told repeatedly that New Jersey was being put in play: by Bob Franks’s social liberalism in 2000, by Doug Forrester’s social liberalism in 2002, by 9/11 in 2004. It has never panned out for Republicans.