Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

BooScout

(10,406 posts)
Mon Aug 31, 2015, 06:13 AM Aug 2015

Clinton numbers may be better than some think

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/elections/2015/08/30/hillary-clinton-approval-ratings/71310258/

Clinton numbers may be better than some think

August can be the cruelest month of the year for Democratic presidential candidates. Just ask Hillary Clinton.

The Democratic presidential front-runner's favorable rating is down to 39% in a recent Quinnipiac poll, from as high as 48% earlier this year. A Des Moines Register/Bloomberg Politics Iowa Poll released Saturday showed her lead over Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders down to seven points in the state that hosts the first caucus early next year.

It's a month that's been unkind to other Democrats, too. In August a year before his re-election, President Obama’s approval rating stood at 40%, the low point of his presidency, according to Gallup; the same month in 1995, Clinton's husband, Bill Clinton, was at 46%, 12 points lower than shortly after he was re-elected.

Much of the handwringing in the Democratic Party is over the 61% of Americans who now say Clinton is not honest and trustworthy. It’s evidence of the damage done by a drumbeat of summertime stories about whether she sent and received classified material over her private email server as secretary of State.

(more) http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/elections/2015/08/30/hillary-clinton-approval-ratings/71310258/
67 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Clinton numbers may be better than some think (Original Post) BooScout Aug 2015 OP
Honestly I'm not even sure why she would want it anymore... Agschmid Aug 2015 #1
This is why.... BooScout Aug 2015 #2
She's a stronger person than me that's for damn sure. Agschmid Aug 2015 #4
Iraq War Vote - The Criticism Is Deserved cantbeserious Aug 2015 #3
Sure if the critiscm was limited to actual "things"... Agschmid Aug 2015 #5
HRC Will Never Outlive That Vote cantbeserious Aug 2015 #6
Odd comment. Agschmid Aug 2015 #7
For 'political expediency', glad to see someone admit it. Live and Learn Aug 2015 #11
Nope... I don't think I did that at all. Agschmid Aug 2015 #13
Hmmm, I think you did. Live and Learn Aug 2015 #14
... Agschmid Aug 2015 #15
Nope, pretty sure it was yours! Live and Learn Aug 2015 #16
What? Agschmid Aug 2015 #17
I simply replied to your own post. Live and Learn Aug 2015 #18
hmmmm BooScout Aug 2015 #20
live and learn. with such a handle then to have this conversation, i find it fascinating. nt seabeyond Aug 2015 #47
Yup because insults are the way to go. Agschmid Aug 2015 #27
You find your own words are insulting? nt Live and Learn Aug 2015 #30
No. Agschmid Aug 2015 #34
I don't see how I have issued personal jabs but I agree we aren't getting anywhere. Live and Learn Aug 2015 #37
Thanks. Agschmid Aug 2015 #40
just wave at them.... BooScout Aug 2015 #49
I clearly read they said it was for political expediency. Juicy_Bellows Aug 2015 #61
Constantly.. I was on the receiving end yesterday. And, watch Cha Sep 2015 #67
HRC Is Solely Responsible For Her Vote And Shares Responsibility For The Outcome cantbeserious Aug 2015 #25
Hillary voted for the Iraq war because uwep Aug 2015 #19
Rationalization - Some Politicians Saw Through That Argument cantbeserious Aug 2015 #23
Many on DU did too, as I recall. nt Live and Learn Aug 2015 #32
Yes - Much Of DU Saw The HRC Iraq Vote For What It Was - Political - Not Principled cantbeserious Aug 2015 #36
So you think trusting Bush was reasonable thing to do? Live and Learn Aug 2015 #24
So she voted for that resolution in good faith, was lied to and thousands of human beings died tularetom Aug 2015 #39
She voted no on the UN amendment. joshcryer Aug 2015 #56
+1 nt Live and Learn Aug 2015 #9
I disagree with this point, if the Chair of the Democratic National Committee and Clinton backer Uncle Joe Aug 2015 #8
What is missing from the article is once a month the State Department Email Dump... 4139 Aug 2015 #10
Yes, good catch on that issue... riversedge Aug 2015 #21
She's getting about the same treatment President Obama gets: skewed polls to diminish her popularity BlueCaliDem Aug 2015 #12
i remember i was pretty comfortable with obama position, though the #s suggested i be concerned. nt seabeyond Aug 2015 #48
Me, too, sea. It was pretty discouraging they had one poll after another come out showing BlueCaliDem Aug 2015 #54
ya. so much history to remember. see it clearly, then today is so much clearer and easy to see. seabeyond Aug 2015 #55
You must have been reading those famous unskewed polls dsc Aug 2015 #60
I have no idea what those "famous unskewed polls" are you're referring to. BlueCaliDem Aug 2015 #63
That last part of the article ....sets her numbers in context riversedge Aug 2015 #22
Exactly.... BooScout Aug 2015 #26
aplomb---I had to look up the word... riversedge Aug 2015 #28
I don't know about that. RoccoR5955 Aug 2015 #29
Aplomb or arrogance? Live and Learn Aug 2015 #35
Yes women can be so arrogant... BooScout Aug 2015 #42
Not all Duckhunter935 Aug 2015 #43
hmmmmm BooScout Aug 2015 #44
Clinton is not honest and trustworthy PADemD Aug 2015 #31
Answers?...apparently, us peons don't deserve answers...Debby and the rest of the DNC knows what's best... InAbLuEsTaTe Aug 2015 #38
Don't you just hate it when women are in charge? BooScout Aug 2015 #45
so any valid criticism of Hillary has to be sexist in nature? ChairmanAgnostic Aug 2015 #53
maybe that turd will find purchase on the wall eventually.. frylock Aug 2015 #57
(eyes squeezed tightly shut) There's NO place like home There's NO place like home There's NO place cherokeeprogressive Aug 2015 #33
Clinton supporters seem endlessly fascinated by the polls, quoting them as if they are recited an LondonReign2 Aug 2015 #41
Saw an odd thing on our Canadian news network last night OnlinePoker Aug 2015 #46
In the case of the Democratic Party - no, they do NOT think it is the voter's job. Not at all. djean111 Aug 2015 #50
I thought you were talking about corporate campaign donations Android3.14 Aug 2015 #51
Lordy, if her campaign spent as much time giving us policy detail as shoveling askew Aug 2015 #52
+100 Juicy_Bellows Aug 2015 #62
I'm guessing that if they have to tell us that they're better, then they're probably worse. frylock Aug 2015 #58
K&R R B Garr Aug 2015 #59
KICK! Cha Sep 2015 #64
Good Morning Cha! BooScout Sep 2015 #65
Good Morning again, Boo! Cha Sep 2015 #66

Agschmid

(28,749 posts)
1. Honestly I'm not even sure why she would want it anymore...
Mon Aug 31, 2015, 06:20 AM
Aug 2015

The grief she has to put up with everyday.

I think she is still clearly the front runner but a lot of damage was done this summer.

Agschmid

(28,749 posts)
5. Sure if the critiscm was limited to actual "things"...
Mon Aug 31, 2015, 06:29 AM
Aug 2015

Except it's not.

Just yesterday Drudge posted a link to the UK Sun which essentially accused the Clintons of murdering a UK spy.

A bullshit story, a hit piece... And they just keep coming.

You'd think at some point people would stand up and say stop the lies and utter fabrications, I have yet to really see that.

There is more at play here than simply not supporting her.

Agschmid

(28,749 posts)
7. Odd comment.
Mon Aug 31, 2015, 06:33 AM
Aug 2015

You realize she isn't solely responsible for that votes outcome, nor is she solely responsible for the invasion?

Sure she gave a speech in support of it, most likely for political expediency... But she isn't alone.

"Outlive"? That was odd.

Live and Learn

(12,769 posts)
11. For 'political expediency', glad to see someone admit it.
Mon Aug 31, 2015, 06:47 AM
Aug 2015

She let a lot of us down with that vote that is responsible for killing hundreds of thousands of people based on lies. Are you suggesting we just forget about them all?

Live and Learn

(12,769 posts)
14. Hmmm, I think you did.
Mon Aug 31, 2015, 06:52 AM
Aug 2015
Sure she gave a speech in support of it, most likely for political expediency... But she isn't alone.


Nothing wrong with admitting the truth. It was pretty obvious to everyone anyway.

Agschmid

(28,749 posts)
15. ...
Mon Aug 31, 2015, 06:53 AM
Aug 2015

This was your post...

11. For 'political expediency', glad to see someone admit it.

She let a lot of us down with that vote that is responsible for killing hundreds of thousands of people based on lies. Are you suggesting we just forget about them all?


The bold part was the section I was responding too.

Pretty sure we agree here, but for some reason your instinct is to attack? Why?

Live and Learn

(12,769 posts)
16. Nope, pretty sure it was yours!
Mon Aug 31, 2015, 06:58 AM
Aug 2015
Agschmid (18,045 posts)
7. Odd comment.

You realize she isn't solely responsible for that votes outcome, nor is she solely responsible for the invasion?

Sure she gave a speech in support of it, most likely for political expediency... But she isn't alone.

"Outlive"? That was odd.

Agschmid

(28,749 posts)
17. What?
Mon Aug 31, 2015, 07:03 AM
Aug 2015

Honestly I have no idea what are you talking about...

Are you saying she is solely responsible for the actions taken in Iraq?

She isn't. She supported it, I don't feel she should have.

I don't give her a pass for that.

I'm not voting for her in the primary.

I'm honestly not sure what you are getting at?

Agschmid

(28,749 posts)
34. No.
Mon Aug 31, 2015, 08:15 AM
Aug 2015

I find your inability to maintain a conversation without personal jabs when we are on the same side of an issue somewhat ridiculous.

We aren't going to get anywhere and I'm not about to hurl insults.

Live and Learn

(12,769 posts)
37. I don't see how I have issued personal jabs but I agree we aren't getting anywhere.
Mon Aug 31, 2015, 08:27 AM
Aug 2015

If I somehow missed you real point, I apologize. I can only go by what I you posted and I read.

Juicy_Bellows

(2,427 posts)
61. I clearly read they said it was for political expediency.
Mon Aug 31, 2015, 08:51 PM
Aug 2015

Which you picked up on as someone willing to admit it. After that, it all went to crazy town. Cheers!

Cha

(295,929 posts)
67. Constantly.. I was on the receiving end yesterday. And, watch
Tue Sep 1, 2015, 07:41 AM
Sep 2015

him insult me again, now.

It's sickening.

uwep

(108 posts)
19. Hillary voted for the Iraq war because
Mon Aug 31, 2015, 07:43 AM
Aug 2015

shrub was supposed to get a second approval for the war by the UN. He never did , he never listened to the UN weapons inspectors, he falsified the information from the CIA and invaded without waiting for the UN approval or the advice from both the former weapons inspector or the current weapons inspector. Can we put this dog to rest. Hillary wanted to support the interests of the United States and thought that a president of the United States has the best interest of the country in mind and would avoid war. The asshole did not.

tularetom

(23,664 posts)
39. So she voted for that resolution in good faith, was lied to and thousands of human beings died
Mon Aug 31, 2015, 08:51 AM
Aug 2015

And still she is somehow okay with this:

joshcryer

(62,265 posts)
56. She voted no on the UN amendment.
Mon Aug 31, 2015, 10:55 AM
Aug 2015

She voted yes because she was running for president and calculated that if she voted no she would come off as weak.

Uncle Joe

(58,112 posts)
8. I disagree with this point, if the Chair of the Democratic National Committee and Clinton backer
Mon Aug 31, 2015, 06:41 AM
Aug 2015

didn't "sense real danger," Debbie Wasserman Schultz wouldn't be putting off the first Democratic Primary Presidential debate until Oct 13th.



It's a long view of the former first lady’s polling data that explains why it'll take far more adversity before Clinton and her allies sense real danger. As the email controversy drags on, her unfavorable ratings could dial further upward. That’s particularly true as the summer comes to a close, voter interest in the election perks up and Republicans prepare to grill her before a House special committee on Benghazi on Oct. 22.

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/elections/2015/08/30/hillary-clinton-approval-ratings/71310258/



We would be having more debates and earlier in the primary season.

Thanks for the thread, BooScout.

4139

(1,893 posts)
10. What is missing from the article is once a month the State Department Email Dump...
Mon Aug 31, 2015, 06:45 AM
Aug 2015

And once a month the press will cover the dump into next year. The article passes it off as just a summer thing.... It is going to slowly grid on and also be a Fall and Winter thing

BlueCaliDem

(15,438 posts)
12. She's getting about the same treatment President Obama gets: skewed polls to diminish her popularity
Mon Aug 31, 2015, 06:48 AM
Aug 2015

hoping people will fall for it.

Most polls on President Obama were skewed by intense hatred by Republicans (for the life of me, why would they even ask a Republican to rate a Democratic president?), according to a Pew Research study. it'll be no different for Hillary Clinton since the GOP and the moneyed elite in this country will do everything they can to stop another Democrat from winning the White House for another eight years.

Pew Research Center 02/16/2015:
Views of the president among members of the opposing party have become steadily more negative over time. Our 2014 report on political polarization documented this dramatic growth in partisan divisions over views of presidential job performance. Over the course of Obama’s presidency, his average approval rating among Democrats has been 81%, compared with just 14% among Republicans.

During Eisenhower’s two terms, from 1953-1960, an average of 49% of Democrats said they approved of the job the Republican president was doing in office. During Ronald Reagan’s presidency, an average of 31% of Democrats approved of his job performance. And just over a quarter (27%) of Republicans offered a positive assessment of Clinton between 1993 and 2000. But the two most recent presidents – George W. Bush and Obama – have not received even this minimal level of support.
http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2015/02/16/presidential-job-approval-ratings-from-ike-to-obama/


This is why I believe polls are no longer an accurate reflection of where the people are. These days, polls show what the purchaser of those polls want them to reflect. We've learned that lesson back in 2012 when Romney's numbers by most polls were even or higher than President Obama's...and Obama still beat Romney with 51.1% of the vote.
 

seabeyond

(110,159 posts)
48. i remember i was pretty comfortable with obama position, though the #s suggested i be concerned. nt
Mon Aug 31, 2015, 09:28 AM
Aug 2015

BlueCaliDem

(15,438 posts)
54. Me, too, sea. It was pretty discouraging they had one poll after another come out showing
Mon Aug 31, 2015, 10:50 AM
Aug 2015

Romney beating President Obama up to the last day before the election. Then election day happened, President Obama lost the "White" vote, and he still went on to win a second term with 51.1%!

 

seabeyond

(110,159 posts)
55. ya. so much history to remember. see it clearly, then today is so much clearer and easy to see.
Mon Aug 31, 2015, 10:53 AM
Aug 2015

i am now having to go all the fuckin way back to 2002 and into 2005.

i just went 2007-2008. there is a lot to remember in these times and they are still a part of conversation. hugest pain in the ass this is becoming. i have an old brain. and it is getting older, lol

dsc

(52,130 posts)
60. You must have been reading those famous unskewed polls
Mon Aug 31, 2015, 07:51 PM
Aug 2015

in the reality based community Obama and a steady but small lead throughout the campaign. The first debate put him into the MOE but he was still ahead and after the second debate he was back to being ahead even accounting for MOE and never looked back. The polls were very good in 2012.

BlueCaliDem

(15,438 posts)
63. I have no idea what those "famous unskewed polls" are you're referring to.
Mon Aug 31, 2015, 10:24 PM
Aug 2015

President Obama's lead was well within the margin of error, and some polls even showed Mitt Romney ahead. As it turns out, President Obama won by nearly 4 pts, which none of the polls showed.
http://www.rawstory.com/2012/11/how-the-2012-election-polling-really-was-skewed-for-mitt-romney/

So I disagree. The polls were NOT good in 2012, let alone very.

riversedge

(69,731 posts)
22. That last part of the article ....sets her numbers in context
Mon Aug 31, 2015, 07:47 AM
Aug 2015


//\\\\\Among Democrats, her numbers haven’t changed much. From March — before she officially announced her campaign and when her use of the private email account first surfaced — through August, Quinnipiac found her unfavorable rating increased from six to 11%.

"What you’re seeing is, well, Republicans don’t like her,’’ Witt said. As Clinton served as the nation’s top diplomat, Republican attitudes about her warmed, pushing her ratings as high as 62%. Now, however, she’s back in the political arena where opinions are more polarized.

"There was a period of several years as secretary of State where she was extremely popular by a large margin,’’ Democratic pollster Mark Mellman said. "That was bound to change when she became a candidate.’’

What may matter most is how Clinton ranks relative to her Republican competitors, who’ve yet to face the same intensity of scrutiny.

Right now, she’s still either ahead of or within the margin of error vis-a-vis Trump, Bush and Marco Rubio, three of the GOP's top performing candidates.

BooScout

(10,406 posts)
26. Exactly....
Mon Aug 31, 2015, 07:56 AM
Aug 2015

I think most Dems see her as our nominee. She's proven overwhelmingly that the GOP smears roll off her and she can call the GOP on their bullshit with aplomb!

PADemD

(4,482 posts)
31. Clinton is not honest and trustworthy
Mon Aug 31, 2015, 08:11 AM
Aug 2015

I think the gentleman who asked how she would vote on Keystone XL would agree.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/1017282158

We voters deserve frank answers on important issues, not evasion.

IMO, too much is being made of the email issue as a cause for the lower favorable rating.

InAbLuEsTaTe

(24,110 posts)
38. Answers?...apparently, us peons don't deserve answers...Debby and the rest of the DNC knows what's best...
Mon Aug 31, 2015, 08:31 AM
Aug 2015

Now sit down, be quiet, and enjoy your shit sammich.

And if your good boys and girls...you can get dessert!...poo-berry pie!..yummy!

ChairmanAgnostic

(28,017 posts)
53. so any valid criticism of Hillary has to be sexist in nature?
Mon Aug 31, 2015, 10:47 AM
Aug 2015

That is what you repeatedly are arguing?

Let it go. That horse won't bark, and that dog won't fly.

There are many good and strong reasons for progressives and democrats NOT to want her as our nominee. Not one of them is based on her sex.

frylock

(34,825 posts)
57. maybe that turd will find purchase on the wall eventually..
Mon Aug 31, 2015, 12:11 PM
Aug 2015

just keep picking it back up and fling it.

LondonReign2

(5,213 posts)
41. Clinton supporters seem endlessly fascinated by the polls, quoting them as if they are recited an
Mon Aug 31, 2015, 08:59 AM
Aug 2015

incantation that will keep her safely in the lead. Even as her numbers swoon you dig up reasons while the polls are just fine and she is doing just great.

Maybe she should actually get out there and talk about the issues. Maybe Bernie is surging because he is out mingling with voters, not just donors, and talking about issues that people care about.

Read all the polls you want; looking in the rear view mirror is a sure way for the car to go off the road.

OnlinePoker

(5,702 posts)
46. Saw an odd thing on our Canadian news network last night
Mon Aug 31, 2015, 09:24 AM
Aug 2015

They were talking about the surge in support for Sanders in the recent Iowa poll. The article compared his outsider campaign to that of Trumps. What was odd was the final statement. It went: "It is unclear if either party establishment will allow the outsiders to be nominated". Forgive me if I'm wrong, but isn't that the voter's job to make that decision?

 

djean111

(14,255 posts)
50. In the case of the Democratic Party - no, they do NOT think it is the voter's job. Not at all.
Mon Aug 31, 2015, 09:57 AM
Aug 2015

The current peevishness, IMO, reflects this. I think the DNC only accepted Bernie because it was thought they could scoop up Bernie's contributions and Bernie's host of supporters who would not have bothered for Hillary. Thus the instantly created contribution page on the DNC website. A ;ot of us said no, we will just contribute to Beernie, we have been smugly told that HRC is bathing in dollars, so - 'kaythanksbyei.
And " 'kaythanksbye(don't forget to vote for Hillary)", IMO , is exactly the attitude the DNC has for Bernie and his supporters.


On Reddit, there are 96,933 subscriber, with 605 currently signed on, for the Bernie support group. Hillary group - 610 subscribers, none currently signed on.
https://www.reddit.com/r/SandersForPresident
https://www.reddit.com/r/hillaryclinton/

I believe that the DNC assumes those Bernie supporters will switch over to Hillary if Bernie does not get the nomination.
I believe the DNC is wrong. Those people do not think of politics as some sort of team sport, with the rich guys sitting in the skyboxes, laughing their asses off and swilling expensive brandy and champagne.

But I do also believe that this campaign is a lot more contentious than was planned for, and that it was the fervent hope of the DNC that there would not be much in the way of pimary activity at all.

 

Android3.14

(5,402 posts)
51. I thought you were talking about corporate campaign donations
Mon Aug 31, 2015, 10:13 AM
Aug 2015

or support from the oil industry or for-profit prisons.
My bad.

askew

(1,464 posts)
52. Lordy, if her campaign spent as much time giving us policy detail as shoveling
Mon Aug 31, 2015, 10:34 AM
Aug 2015

useless BS at voters, we'd actually know where Hillary stands on issues. Instead it is just insult after insult for voters.

Her numbers are bad period. No one outside Democrats likes her and even her likability among Democrats is falling. The most commonly used word to describe her in the last Q-poll was liar. The general public doesn't trust. Her email saga has been mishandled from the start. Her campaign and Hillary can't even stick to one story explaining it. And now we are left hearing how her #s might not be that bad because her more talented husband was able to win with low #s? The difference is people actually like Bill. Fewer and fewer people by the day like Hillary.

Juicy_Bellows

(2,427 posts)
62. +100
Mon Aug 31, 2015, 08:56 PM
Aug 2015

I wish she'd come out and answer some questions. The more time passes the worse off her numbers. This snowball is picking up speed.

Latest Discussions»Retired Forums»2016 Postmortem»Clinton numbers may be be...