For twenty years people have been saying that Hillary Clinton is too polarizing.....

[Joe the Revelator]

and now for the 2nd straight primary season they are being proven right. Hillary cannot gain during the primary season, she starts at her peak and then she slides when it matters most. People just do not like her enough to get enthused and there will always be a better, more progressive candidate to dash her hopes.

I know everyone is going to say 'you're speaking too early' or 'you're an idiot you don't know what you're talking about'.....but I do. Watch again, as Hillary's 'inevitable' campaign comes to an abrupt halt. I don't know if it will be Sanders, or Biden or O'Malley who ultimately ends the dream this go around, but I hope she has the class to step down more gracefully when it happens then she did in '08.

** Bookmark this thread. **

[DemocratSinceBirth]

1. Res ipsa loquitur

What’s more, 92% of Democratic voters say they could see themselves supporting her for the Democratic nomination, which is up six points since March.

http://www.msnbc.com/msnbc/clinton-dominates-2016-democratic-field-leads-gop-rivals-poll

** Bookmark this thread. **

[Joe the Revelator]

3. A 10 day old article is of very little interest.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2016/president/ia/iowa_democratic_presidential_caucus-3195.html
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2016/president/nh/new_hampshire_democratic_presidential_primary-3351.html


The trend line is pretty clear. She is consistently moving in the wrong direction. If you want to see how it will play out over the long term:

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2008/president/us/democratic_presidential_nomination-191.html#polls

[DemocratSinceBirth]

5. From your own link...She had a sixteen point lead at this time in nat'l polls (I took the last five)

From your own link...She had a sixteen point lead at this time in 07 in nat'l polls (I took the last five)


http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2008/president/us/democratic_presidential_nomination-191.html#polls



She now has a forty nine point lead:



http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2008/president/us/democratic_presidential_nomination-191.html#polls

[roguevalley]

16. I find the contrast between her overmanaged appearances which lack warmth and

accessibility as well as relatability a sharp contrast to Bernie. That is important to me. When she sits down to talk to 'real people' those people are carefully chosen. That kind of shit leaves me cold.

[NanceGreggs]

7. OMG!!!

You post an OP about what "people have been saying about Hillary for twenty years - and then declare that a ten-day-old article is of little interest!!!!!!!!!

Yes, definitely bookmarking!

[DemocratSinceBirth]

9. Maybe logic and consistency is not the seminal poster's forte

eom

[NanceGreggs]

10. Apparently. n/t

[DemocratSinceBirth]

11. Oh, I don't know why he held out IA as a predictive model.

Madame Secretary was actually trailing in IA at this point in the 08 cycle:

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2008/president/ia/iowa_democratic_caucus-208.html#polls

[zappaman]

18. That's too funny.

Unreal.

[NCTraveler]

33. "For twenty years......."

"A 10 day old article is of very little interest."

[Le Taz Hot]

27. Wall Street and the Party Faithful are her base.

Of course she's polling at 92% of DEMOCRATIC VOTERS. She's polling 100% with the .001%.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

29. Your math doesn't work...

If you believe that 92% of Democrats belong to the .001% there is nothing I can do to disabuse you of that notion but on behalf of them and me I thank you for the raise.

[Le Taz Hot]

30. I clearly presented them as two seperate entities.

But you go ahead and keep on diggin'. I like it when others do my work for me.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

39. I like when folks try to patronize me

I clearly presented them as two seperate entities.

I like when folks try to patronize me and slip up when separating fact from opinion.

[Le Taz Hot]

41. A typo?

That's all ya got? LOL!

[DemocratSinceBirth]

43. A typo is when you hit the y instead of the u because they are close to one another.

Unless a person has fingers the size of thumbs the a and e are not remotely close to one another.

You tried to diss DemocratSinceBirth and came up wanting. You can take succor in the fact you weren't the first.


#lol@me

[Le Taz Hot]

46. Very well, a misspelling then.

Interesting that you referred to yourself in the third party. Makes one say, Hmmmmm.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

48. I was referring to my internet persona.

" All the world's a stage..."

[Thinkingabout]

51. Link

[sufrommich]

2. Yes,I think I will bookmark this thread. nt

[Joe the Revelator]

4. Please do!!

[rock]

6. Then if you're a Bernie fan

You've got nothing to worry about!

[Le Taz Hot]

28. We're not the ones who are worried.

[rock]

34. See?

[Juicy_Bellows]

8. Tell me who's that writin?

Joe the revelator! Kick.

[Indepatriot]

12. HRC was yesterday's candidate in 07' and her triangulatin' shtick has not aged well.

She's whistling past the electoral graveyard once again.

[Juicy_Bellows]

13. You got that right.

I wish more people would see it - none are so blind as those that choose not to see.

[tularetom]

14. She's the anti-Stuart Smalley

She's not good enough, she's not smart enough, and doggone it, people just don't like her.

[brooklynite]

15. Sigh...

...Hillary Clinton's campaign didn't "come to an abrupt halt". She ended up with the same number of votes as Barack Obama, who was better known, better financed and more strongly politically supported than Bernie Sanders is.

You may now resume your anti-Clinton platitudes.

[Bonobo]

17. Obama was better known? LOL!

Perhaps the stupidest thing I read today.

[Flying Squirrel]

20. Wasn't he that guy who crashed airplanes into the WTC?

Seriously, if a black junior senator with a similar name to OBL and middle name Hussein, plus everything else they threw at him, could beat Hillary eight years ago... Well I'm preaching to the choir here I know but it's really sad how some otherwise intelligent people just refuse to see the truth. And they just better hope the Bernie revolution succeeds because if it doesn't, well, most revolutions are not fought with words the way Bernie prefers to fight. The revolution will come one way or another, it is a historical inevitability.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

23. He was given the keynote speech at the 2004 Democratic National Convention,

Last edited Fri Jul 3, 2015, 09:18 AM - Edit history (1)

He was given the keynote speech at the 2004 Democratic National Convention, a slot reserved for our party's rising stars, and gave a spellbinder of a speech that was met with universal aplomb:

Barack Obama was a comer. That's why then Senate Majority Leader, Harry Reid urged him to run:


http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0110/31318.html

Your assertion is belied by the facts.

[Bonobo]

24. Uh yeah, I know. But that doesn't exactly make up for:

1. Being the FIRST LADY for 8 years, and
2, Being the Senator of New Fucking York.

Jeezus. This isn't brain surgery.

Hillary was better known for fuck's sake. Can we at least agree on the easy stuff?

[NCTraveler]

35. Goalposts. nt.

[Bonobo]

37. Brooklynite said Obama was better known.

I didn't move ANY goalposts.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

36. Truthiness is a hill I would die for...

Hillary was much better known than Barack Obama at that point but Barack was a comer in every sense of the word. I don't know why Brooklynite wrote that he was better known.

His overarching point though was correct that the race was a close one... HRC had some impressive victories in CA, TX, FL, MI, NY, PA, OH , et cetera, and ended up with nearly the same amount of votes.

[Bonobo]

38. Yeah, "Comer" I can agree with. But THAT is moving the original goalposts. nt

[DemocratSinceBirth]

45. It seems he made a mistake.

Maybe he has an explanation.

[RoccoR5955]

59. That's Fuckin' New York to you

I am telling you as a lifetime New Yawkah.
I was born and raised in Brooklyn, not far from where Bernie grew up.
Moved to the Hudson Vallley 40 years ago.

[Sancho]

57. Given that he had Oprah campaigning for him - yes - and the media was big on a "black President"

The political junkies are not the majority who vote. With the semi-clueless, independent, whatever-types, it's important that celebs are on your side.

Obama had a lot of endorsements and high-visibilty proponents. Hillary actually had votes that matched or exceeded Obama, but didn't win the delegate battle. It was a close primary.

Now that she's been SoS, and has an even larger budget, etc. she is better known than in 2008.

[Martin Eden]

19. "polarizing"

If a politician intentionally tries to polarize the people by setting them against each other, that is a good reason to oppose that politician. But I don't think that's true about Hillary Clinton any more than it is about Barack Obama, who could also be labeled "polarizing" because so many voters are so vehemently against him.

We have to ask how the polarizing came about. With President Obama, from day one we have witnessed a steady barrage of false narratives (birther, muslim, marxist, death panels) which have convinced Fox News viewers & Limbaugh listeners that Obama is an evil threat to the American way of life. Similarly, Hillary Clinton was caught in the crosshairs of the rightwing assault against her husband and the anti-feminist hatred against a smart ambitious politically involved woman.

Those qualities in Hillary Clinton that made her "polarizing" and a target of the right are positives in my book.

However, in a Democratic primary I simply can't support her or anyone else who voted in October 2002 to give GW Bush authority to invade Iraq and/or is very cozy with big Wall Street donors.

When the primaries approach and DUers settle into opposing camps and start sniping at each other, the word "polarizing" is an accurate description -- but it is almost entirely of our own doing.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

21. The dirty secret about politics is it's about dividing...

The dirty secret about politics is it's about dividing as long as after the dividing your side is bigger... When was the last time America was united, the days immediately after 9-11 when George W Bush literally had an an approval rating of 94% and the 94% would have been more than happy to put the 6% who disapproved of him in a detention center.

You can see the manifestations of that approval rating when the Senate voted 99-1 in favor of the Patriot Act.


Reminds me of when Ronald Reagan told Mikhail Gorbachev that he could envision the US and the USSR standing shoulder to shoulder as allies if we were attacked by aliens, lol... Actually it took a more mundane threat in the 1940s to accomplish that.

[Martin Eden]

22. Everything is relative.

Rarely is "polarizing" or any other adjective an all or nothing proposition. In every political campaign the candidates have to convince people to vote for them and not the other guy (or gal), and this is a form of "dividing." When a term applies to every candidate across the board, it loses its meaning unless put in relative terms. A demagogue like Ted Cruz is intentionally polarizing with his divisive rhetoric, whereas Bernie Sanders tries to unite people and avoids smearing his opponent.

After 9/11 GW Bush stated "You're either with us or you're with the terrorists" -- which is one of the most polarizing statements ever made by a president. He may have accurately gauged the tenor of the times, but ultimately he was extremely polarizing. Much of it was his own doing and that of his surrogates.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

26. The ironic thing is W said he was "uniter, not a divider." He was either disingenuous or stupid.

I have a friend who is not especially political. He always muses that the Democrats and the Republicans will rarely support an idea of the other side because they will get credit for it and benefit at the ballot box. IMHO, there's a lot to that.

[Sancho]

58. Bernie was much worse in congress than Hillary

Ratings show that Hillary was effective and had a high index of cooperation and getting things done. Bernie, in both the House and Senate, was ineffective and had a low index - he was much more uncooperative than Hillary.

https://www.govtrack.us/congress/bills/browse?sponsor=400357#sponsor=300022¤t_status[]=28

[Le Taz Hot]

25. You are absolutely 100% correct.

She starts at her peak. She has two and only two sources of support: The Democratic Party Machine (remember when the Democratic Party used to wait until the primaries were over and the people voted in who THEY wanted as the candidate before they would throw their support towards a candidate?) and Wall Street. Formidable though those two entities may be, they don't amount to votes.

Her poll numbers are going down at an alarming rate. That's why we're seeing all these BS threads on DU -- the campaign is having de ja vu and is in panic mode.

Hillary, should the Masters of the Universe be successful in shoving her into the nomination seat, is a sure loser against the Republicans in the General. She will STILL have only the Party Faithful and Wall Street and Wall Street doesn't give a shit who is in the WH as long as they are controllable which puts Hillary and the Republican nominee on equal footing.

Bernie, however, unlike Hillary and unlike the Republican nominee (whatever batshit crazy offal they decide on), has tremendous crossover appeal and will pull off votes from virtually every sector -- independents, Republicans, millennials, progressives, Greens and a whole lot more. He absolutely CAN win against the Republicans.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

32. "Her poll numbers are going down at an alarming rate."

"Her poll numbers are going down at an alarming rate."

Scratches , errrrr, head and does a google search:


http://elections.huffingtonpost.com/pollster/2016-national-democratic-primary


http://elections.huffingtonpost.com/pollster/2016-general-election-bush-vs-clinton

Facts are stubborn things; and whatever may be our wishes, our inclinations, or the dictates of our passion, they cannot alter the state of facts and evidence.

-John Adams

[Le Taz Hot]

40. She's stagnant. Bernie's got the Big Mo.

The latest Quinnipiac poll reported today the following numbers out of Iowa:

--Clinton 52 %
--Sanders 33 %

Given that the media has all but ignored Sanders, with Clinton benefitting from the media machine that is behind her, I'd say those are fantastic numbers.

We all remember that Clinton was "inevitable" going into the primary. She was expected to win, with Obama and Edwards trailing far behind. Of course, we all remember how Obama eventually won Iowa.

Take a look at these July 2007 poll numbers from the exact same point in the Democratic primary that we are in today (15 months from election day). This is how Clinton and Obama stacked up in July of 2007:

--Clinton 51 percent
--Obama 29 percent

That's totally incredible. Sanders numbers v Clinton are slightly higher than Obama's numbers were 15 months from the Presidential election.

All bets are off at this point. Sanders can win Iowa.

Link to 2007 poll: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/07/22/AR2007072201135.html

Bernie Sanders Gains In New Hampshire Primary Polls

Poll: Sanders down by just 8 points in New Hampshire

Hillary Clinton’s once vast advantage over independent Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders has shrunk to single digits in New Hampshire, according to the latest CNN/WMUR Granite State Poll released Thursday evening.

Among likely Democratic primary voters in the state, 43 percent said they would vote for Clinton, with 35 percent going for Sanders.

<snip>

Sanders holds a strong lead over Clinton in terms of empathy, with 45 percent saying he is the candidate who cares the most about people like you. Just 24 percent picked the former secretary of state and first lady when asked that question.

Read more: http://www.politico.com/story/2015/06/poll-hillary-clinton-bernie-sanders-new-hampshire-119460.html#ixzz3epmrO83q

[DemocratSinceBirth]

44. The seminal poster compared a poll of national voters with a poll of Iowa caucus voters.

The seminal poster compared a poll of national Democratic voters with a poll of Iowa caucus voters.


I demolished that argument in Post 23:


http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1251&pid=422736

[Le Taz Hot]

47. Early primary states are what's important

and Hillary isn't looking good right now. It's why you're wanting to switch the focus. Guys having de ja vu right about now are you?

OK, so I have to go to work now. But you keep working on those paradigm shifts. Y'heah?

[DemocratSinceBirth]

49. I am not changing the focus

The poster you cited compared a nat'l poll with a state poll and consequently made a series of incorrect inferences.


Oh, the snarky remark followed by "I have to go" is a cliched internet debating tactic.

To paraphrase Lennox Lewis it's going to take more than obscurantist rhetoric and a fancy handle to defeat DemocratSinceBirth.

[JoePhilly]

31. There is not an Obama in the group.

And he barely got passed Hillary.

[still_one]

42. Another worthless Hillary bashing thread. Interestingly you put Joe Biden in the list of folks

which imply that anyone is more progressive than Hillary, which also indicates you don't know what you are talking about, but please continue to ramble on, instead of giving reasons why someone should support a candidate of your liking, just continue to bash away at Hillary. I am sure you are going to change a lot of minds here with your approach, NOT

[Evergreen Emerald]

50. Yes, and they say Obama is also polarizing.

And a Muslim. And he faked his birth certificate. And he is destroying the country.

"They" will do their best to dehumanize any Democrat they can. They are in full force attacking Clinton from the right and left and laying in wait right now, hoping that their game plan works and Bernie gets the nomination--they have stacks of attacks ready to go.

Perhaps to avoid polarization, we should just support the republicans.

[Thinkingabout]

52. BOOKMARKING

[The Second Stone]

53. She fought hard for universal health care and made herself lifelong

enemies on the right by doing so.

[Joe the Revelator]

54. So that's why she can't garner any enthusiasm in a democratic primary?nt

[The Second Stone]

55. And here I thought she was far ahead of her four announced competitors

but for certain values of "any enthusiasm" and "democratic primary".

[Metric System]

56. Have you seen her polling numbers? Are you posting from bizarro world?