Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Indies not warm to Obama-Clinton ticket

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU
 
babylonsister Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-18-08 06:04 PM
Original message
Indies not warm to Obama-Clinton ticket
Indies not warm to Obama-Clinton ticket
Posted: Wednesday, June 18, 2008 1:20 PM by Mark Murray
Filed Under: 2008, Clinton, Obama

From NBC/NJ's Mike Memoli


Todays Quinnipiac numbers for three key battleground states suggest that Obama may have indeed gotten a bounce after Clintons exit left him the undisputed, presumptive nominee. Yet a closer look at the poll finds that -- at least in these states right now -- there would be no sizeable benefit for Obama to make Clinton his running mate.

Only 21% of Florida voters, 23% of Ohio voters, and 25% of Pennsylvania voters say theyd be more likely to support the Democratic ticket if Clinton were a part of it. In each case, a slightly smaller percentage said theyd be less likely to vote for that dream ticket, with a majority saying it would make no difference.

Most significantly, Quinnipiac found that independent voters in those key battlegrounds believe that the Illinois senator should not select his New York counterpart -- and by double-digit margins in two of the three.

If Sen. Obama seriously is thinking about picking Sen. Clinton as his running mate, these numbers might cause him to reconsider, Quinnipiacs Peter Brown said in a release.

more...

http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2008/06/18/11525...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
lojasmo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-18-08 06:06 PM
Response to Original message
1. Exactly what I have said ALL ALONG.
Obama is winning women, middle class, blacks, hispanics, and independents.

Clinton only detracts from the ticket.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
maxsolomon Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-18-08 06:13 PM
Response to Reply #1
3. my reagan dem parents will vote mccain if HRC is on the ticket
i'm having a tough enough time fighting the muslim rumors with them. don't add to my burden.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
babylonsister Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-18-08 07:33 PM
Response to Reply #3
8. Wow. So are they really Dems? How can that be?
Then again, my father threatened to vote for McCain if Obama got in; we haven't talked politics in months, so the current thinking of the paternal unit is unknown.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Riktor Donating Member (476 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-18-08 09:23 PM
Response to Reply #8
11. I hate to be the bearer of bad news, but...
... the Democratic party is an umbrella party that appeals to Americans that identify themselves as center-left to left in political outlook. Because there are only two political parties, neither can be too extreme in their positions as to alienate the middle-ground. Consequently, there is a high degree of variance in intra-party political ideology. For example, the Democratic party is made up of social liberals, fiscal liberals, unionists, environmentalists, social democrats, classical liberals, and so on. In some cases, these ideologies may be diametrically opposed.

So, yes, it is possible to a conservative Democrat. There are hundreds of thousands of them in the southern and mid-western United States. Do the names Robert Byrd and Zell Miller ring any bells?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
maxsolomon Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-19-08 12:07 PM
Response to Reply #8
16. REAGAN democrats
meaning they voted democratic up until Reagan in 1980, then got fooled because reagan promised to lower their taxes. every impulse they have is liberal but they are ruled by their fear & voted for * twice - they listen to WLW & bill cunningham a LOT.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Blondiegrrl Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-18-08 08:23 PM
Response to Reply #1
10. I agree 100%. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cha Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-18-08 09:43 PM
Response to Reply #1
14. Like Michelle said on The View today
when Barbara tried to pin her down on that question.. paraphrasing.."Obama gets to chose and it will be someone who has his vision for what AMerica should be"..and she said she had "nothing to do with that!"

What I said from the very beginning :)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Colobo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-18-08 06:11 PM
Response to Original message
2. Obama/Biden is a winning ticket.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rpannier Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-18-08 06:16 PM
Response to Original message
4. I'm not going to dispute the numbers on the polling
But, this similar to what we heard in 2000.

Polling showed that Independents did not like Clinton and Gore built part of his campaign around this item.
He distanced himself from Clinton.
He didn't want Clinton campaigning on his behalf -- Hell, he didn't want Clinton to campaign in Arkansas.
As we got closer to election day, Gore had Clinton out campaigning for him in some places.
The places where Bill campaigned they had a larger than expected turn out and it went in Gore's favor.

I put very little stock in these polls about what independents think, because they are usually off the mark.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Liberal_Stalwart71 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-19-08 12:55 PM
Response to Reply #4
18. You're wrong. The places where Gore used Clinton were not places
Edited on Thu Jun-19-08 12:55 PM by Liberal_Stalwart71
where there were a lot of Indies or Reagan Democrats. You saw Clinton strong in historically/traditionally strong and liberal-leaning areas, many of them black and Hispanic. Gore didn't have Clinton campaigning in places like OH and the FL panhandle and for good reason.

Also, Bill Clinton's negatives are still a bit higher than Hillary's, whether fair or unfair. This is a problem that Hillary Clinton has always had to contend with. She has generally always had high unfavorables and those unfavorables translate into a loss of Indies and blue-collar voters for the general election. Sure they voted for her against Obama but there is no indication that they are going to stay with that ticket if she's on it. They are essentially more Repug-leaning anyway.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
blm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-19-08 03:37 PM
Response to Reply #18
19. People forget that Clinton lost Arkansas for Dems after Lewinsky scandal.
Clinton did campaign in Arkansas for Gore - but, by then the shame factor in that state was palpable. It took a fuckup as huge as Bush2 to get many in Arkansas to forgive and forget.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Thrill Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-18-08 06:21 PM
Response to Original message
5. Obama/Kaine its a winner!!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bunnies Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-18-08 06:23 PM
Response to Original message
6. It wont fly in NH either.
Where Indys are the largest bloc.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Zhade Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-18-08 06:24 PM
Response to Original message
7. Hey, what do you know? We were right - not only does he not need her, she hurts his ticket.
Thank goodness he's unlikely to make the strategic blunder of putting her on his ticket, since mcLame could easily prove her a liar by playing the Tuzla video (and he's already using her "Obama has a speech" line in his ads).

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cha Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-18-08 09:50 PM
Response to Reply #7
15. That's one of the stupidest lines
they could have in their ads..'cause it turns out Obama's speech was prescient and basically brilliant.

Al Gore talked about The Speech in his endorsement speech in Michigan. If we had listened to Al Gore and Barack Obama instead of the bush enablers like mccain we wouldn't have lost all our Blood and TReasure over lies.

mccain needs to go down.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NC_Nurse Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-18-08 08:14 PM
Response to Original message
9. Good neither am I. I will vote for it, but I'd rather have a better VP choice.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
polichick Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-18-08 09:29 PM
Response to Original message
12. I know I've said it a million times, but it would kill the movement...
The coalition Obama has built is about a peoples movement ~ Clinton represents what we're moving away from.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
greguganus Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-18-08 09:35 PM
Response to Reply #12
13. I agree. Obama stands for change, not the same 'ol song n' dance. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Liberal_Stalwart71 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-19-08 12:50 PM
Response to Original message
17. This confirms what many of us have stated all along.
Edited on Thu Jun-19-08 12:50 PM by Liberal_Stalwart71
There's something about Obama that many Indies are attracted to. Put Clinton on the ticket, and they run back to the Repugs. The Indies could swing this election in either direction and the Obama-Clinton ticket is a losing one. It is baffling why the Indies can see it but Democrats who support that ticket can't. Bascially, the Indies are warning us that it's a bad idea.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
old mark Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-19-08 03:46 PM
Response to Original message
20. Clinton came in second for a reason-
More people want Obama. It would be a terrible choice, and I can't see it happening.

mark
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Johonny Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-19-08 03:51 PM
Response to Original message
21. VP rarely help, hurt candidates
just look at Cheney. The guy has always polled huge negatives, yet apparently few indie voters used this to influence their decision. In general VP choices may give small bumps at the time of announcement and may give small regional help to a ticket, but the very rarely affect how people vote.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Wed Jul 23rd 2014, 02:52 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC