***** Breaking HARD! ***** "Voters Say Hillary More Qualified To Be President....

[smalll]

Rasmussen: Voters Say Hillary More Qualified To Be President Than Obama, Romney, Gingrich, Palin

Tuesday, June 22, 2010

U.S. voters think Hillary Clinton is more qualified to be president than Barack Obama, but most believe that both Democrats are more fit for the White House than three top Republicans interested in the job.

A new Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey shows that 57% of voters feel Clinton is qualified to be president, but 34% disagree and say she is not.

As for President Obama, 51% say he is fit for the job. However, 44% say he is not qualified to be president, even though he has now served 17 months in the job.

Nearly as many (49%) say former Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney, an unsuccessful candidate for the GOP presidential nomination in 2008, is qualified to be president of the United States. Thirty-two percent (32%) say Romney is not qualified, but another 20% are not sure.

Just 35% of voters say former House Speaker Newt Gingrich is qualified...

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics...

[babylonsister]

1. ...

[AtomicKitten]

48. ditto

[Jennicut]

2. Lots of PUMA types polled by Rasmussen?

The type of voters that are polled by them don't like Obama to begin with.

[Clintonista2]

57. Yea, cause supporting Hillary Clinton automatically makes you a PUMA

You sure are in a tizzy over this aren't you?

[Jennicut]

78. Actually, I like Hillary and would vote for her if she ran in 2016.

But this is Rasmussen.

[KansasVoter]

3. Jesus! Why post this?

[smalll]

15. Well, don't we need a break from McCrystalgate tonight?

Oh, wait...

"Only Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, who is portrayed as having strongly backed Gen. McChrystal's plan for Afghanistan, is singled out for praise by the general's aides."

(That's the very last sentence of the Wall Street Journal - Not The Editorial Page - article on McChrystal) http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704853404...

[AtomicKitten]

46. Here's the direct quote on that from the Rolling Stone article:

The Secretary of State is the only member of Obama's staff to get good reviews from McChrystal's people:

"Hillary had Stan's back during the strategic review," says an adviser. "She said 'If Stan wants it, give him what he needs.' "

[emilyg]

110. Why not?

[angee_is_mad]

4. why the hell would they take a poll like this?

Oh I forgot it's rasmussen. nuff said.

[Pisces]

63. or they read DU and see people posting about Hillary running against Obama in 12 .

They like to stir up crap, and this board is ready to eat it up.

[niceypoo]

98. I think I've seen one thread saying such

...and that was a year or two ago.

[stray cat]

5. Then they should have voted that way - no do overs in votes

[Guy Whitey Corngood]

6. Oh noes the pumabaggers are at it again. nt

[onpatrol98]

101. LOL!!!

[Wilms]

7. Please define: "***** Breaking HARD! ***** "

Thanks.

[asphalt.jungle]

20. breaking news that makes his small hard /nt

[JTFrog]

34. .

I know it's wrong, but I couldn't help laughing.

[AtomicKitten]

53. *snort*

[cliffordu]

60. Well.....

[Bobbie Jo]

64. !

Oh no you didn't.

[vaberella]

8. Well if she was Pres we could enjoy an endless war as demanded by McChrystal.

She was his ally in this. Ugh...this will be locked anyway.

[Skip Intro]

19. Instead we have...oh, wait a minute. nt

[vaberella]

37. Note what I said..."endless"

You can choose to be ignorant of the fact and there's nothing to be said about it, but even the article states that both HRC, Gates, and McChrystal hated Obama's timeline. I'm not happy about Obama agreeing to the escalation---however he obviously wants to end it. Petraeus also said as much at the hearing. There will be a draw down and hopefully soon we're out. With others..unlikely.

[AtomicKitten]

47. Correct. From the Rolling Stone article:

The Secretary of State is the only member of Obama's staff to get good reviews from McChrystal's people:

"Hillary had Stan's back during the strategic review," says an adviser. "She said 'If Stan wants it, give him what he needs.' "

[NBachers]

9. Breaking HARDER than Overcooked Noodles!

[tekisui]

10. Quite the spin from rassy.

[Forkboy]

12. When the OP can't even get our support you know there's a problem.

[tekisui]

25. I just had a strange acid trip to two year ago.

[Forkboy]

28. You and me both, buddy!

[Forkboy]

11. Something is hard, but it isn't this "breaking" story.

[Name removed]

13. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[FrenchieCat]

14. Easy to be seen as more qualified when one isn't actually governing!

So that result is hillarious!

[smalll]

18. Actually, you're 100% right. That IS the reason Obama does less well than Hillary in this poll -

he's actually been at the job for 17 months.

Still, this does make me think that maybe Hillary might, after all, be a good VP choice for a second-term Obama administration. (And I'd certainly bet Obama gets a second term.)

[AtomicKitten]

58. Yahtzee! "Hillary might, after all, be a good VP choice for a second-term Obama administration."

Oh, I'm sorry. That position is already filled.

[azmouse]

16. Hardly breaking...

oh brother

[Metric System]

17. THE CLINTONS COMMISSIONED THIS POLL!!!!

But seriously, THIS warmed my heart:

"As for Sarah Palin, ex-governor of Alaska and the 2008 GOP vice presidential nominee, only 26% feel she is qualified to be president, but 61% do not."

[Skip Intro]

21. Lol! nt

[wisteria]

22. Rass. just likes to stir up trouble. If you recall we already had this dicussion in 2008

and President Obama won.

[Skip Intro]

23. Interesting, thanks. nt

[jenmito]

24. Those numbers are GREAT for Obama, considering that HE, unlike Hillary, has had

to actually BE president. What a STUPID poll!

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

79. My thought exactly.

[JohnnyLib2]

26. Unity on DU!!!

Good ol' Rasmussen.

[Colobo]

27. So what?

[angee_is_mad]

29. Fired Up and Ready to Go

is what I feel when I see a bullshit poll like this.

[Metric System]

32. STOP IT NOW before I start singing Hillary For You & Me!!!!

Just kidding. I'm not THAT cruel.

[Skip Intro]

43. That was an instant classic.

Now it's in my head. I didn't really want it in my head...

[shellgame26]

44. Damn you!

I thought I buried that down the memory hole ages ago.

[Number23]

71. Damn! I had COMPLETELY forgotten about that monstrosity

Now you've reminded me and I have to go find it so that others can be as disturbed as I am now.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5FvyGydc8no

((*humming* "Hillary for you and ME!
Bring back our democra-CY!..."))

[boppers]

72. Holy CRAP.

I had totally forgotten that.

Until now.




You will not be forgiven.

[dionysus]

102. .

[stevedeshazer]

30. *splork*

[jenmito]

31. A hypothetical, non-sensical poll is NOT "breaking hard." n/t

[FreedomRain]

33. and 75% did not answer honestly

and just want to drag the numbers their way, because they like or dislike a certain guy.

(and I didn't read the article, but the data above merely state that more people think she is qualified than think he is - their relative qualifications were not discussed)

[karynnj]

84. Good points - Nothing here measures relative qualifications

The op's subject line is not provable - there is a difference between more people agreeing she is qualified vs people saying she is more qualified. I would easily say that she is qualified - as are most serious past Democratic candidates. I think Obama is more qualified.

Welcome to DU

[Proud Liberal Dem]

35. Although I don't really want to validate these *findings*

It's a lot easier for people to say that Hillary would've made for a better POTUS without her actually having been in office making difficult decisions every day and having to deal with the RW hate machine that would've been just as hostile to her- if not moreso- than they have been to Obama. ANYBODY at this job for the last two years probably wouldn't be polling as well (and Obama's not really doing all that horrible overall anyway) and we would all here still have at least SOME problems with Hillary in terms of her policies, decisions, and appointments just like with Obama. While I would have just as happily pulled the lever for Hillary on Election Day 2008, on the whole, I think we'd generally be in the same place- maybe a little better, maybe a little worse, but not likely significantly different in most crucial aspects.

[Drunken Irishman]

36. Is this like Breaking Bad?

[Metric System]

52. That's an excellent show, yo!

[Aramchek]

38. but guess who is President and will be until 2017? Barack Obama!!!

[Codeine]

39. **BREAKING EVEN HARDER***

Obama will win without opposition from Clinton in 2012! And you'll have to cry like a little baby for another four years while we laugh at you!

[davidpdx]

40. IBTL

Ah, just in case.

[fishwax]

41. that sounds like a very important poll

[grantcart]

42. New Rule: Unless Scotty R. takes a header off a tall structure

Nothing from Rasmussen is "Breaking Hard".

It may however be classified as "Spinning Squishy"

[MrsCorleone]

45. Roger Hedgehog and other RW radio hosts have been on this talking point

all day.

I guess Hill is their fave. Speaks volumes, if you ask me.

[Metric System]

50. According to the link Republicans don't consider either Obama or Clinton to be as qualified as Palin

Romney or Gingrich. ***shudders***

"Sixty-eight percent (68%) of GOP voters rate Romney as qualified to be president, followed by 53% who say the same of Gingrich. Republican voters are evenly divided over whether Palin is fit to be president. But they view all three Republicans as more qualified than Clinton or Obama."

[apocalypsehow]

49. My prom date in HS said the same thing. That's where I first earned the nickname "gentle dental"...

[ProudDad]

51. I knew before I clicked it would be the republican rasmussen...

lousy excuse for a "polling company"

[ProudDad]

54. Mitt Romney the Mormon...

Yuch!

Here's another one of that tribe:



Russel Pearce -- author of the racist, neo-nazi SB1070 in the New Mississippi, Arizona!

They fucked up Utah and Arizona, now they're coming after the whole country...

Did you know that the Mormons are Socialist (within the church) and that's why they hate government so much. Government takes their taxes and helps Gentiles...ooooh...

[golfguru]

55. Hillary has my vote in 2012

but don't think she will run against Obama. So this subject
is meaningless conjecture.

[Metric System]

61. No, she wouldn't.

[onehandle]

56. All I see is that Democrats are seen as more qualified. More power to Obama and Clinton. nt

[Metric System]

62. Cosigned

[onpatrol98]

103. So....

A poll from Rasmussen (polling company hated on DU for being too conservative), says America still believes Democrats are more qualified than Republicans to run the White House.

[tranche]

59. Holy Hell

I'd normally try and knock this stuff down, but the timing couldn't be better and it's giving me a chuckle. I have no idea how you dug this up.

[Liberal_Stalwart71]

65. Hillary and Rasmussen? You're kidding, right? n/t

[Tarheel_Dem]

66. I'm sure this was dragged from noquarter.com. They're very nostalgic over there.

[AtomicKitten]

68. The "Hillary for VP in 2012" campaign has begun.

The OP referred to it upthread. I advised the OP that the job is already filled, but if nothing else the Clinton folk are persistent. Oy.

[Tarheel_Dem]

69. Which ain't ever gonna happen. Hillary seems to have moved on,

but.....her supporters? Not so much. What's hilarious to me now, is seeing the folks who hated Hilary, tag teaming with her fan club here. Breaks me up.

[AtomicKitten]

75. It's as amusing as it is persistent. nt

[Metric System]

70. Oh right, your delusion that the Clintons are behind this VP talk...

[AtomicKitten]

74. I have never said it was the Clintons. It's the Clinton backers. nt

[juajen]

89. I'm a a"Clinton Folk", and I much prefer the SOS position than VP position.

IMHO, she would be wasted as VP.

[JohnnyLib2]

105. Same here.

I wasn't included in that poll and doubt that anyone here was, either. Seems like the SOS has a good deal of respect these days.

[impik]

67. Breaking hard???????? Hilarious.

[treestar]

73. Rachel is more qualified to be President

Er, uhn, er,

[yourguide]

76. And the dead enders just keep on dead ending. n/t

[NatBurner]

77. well hell, that changes everything!!

oh wait- no it doesn't

[kjackson227]

80. Oh, please! Exactly, why would they think that???

What would she have done so DIFFERENTLY for hcr, the economy, and this BP disaster??? Not a damned thing. I like Hillary, but I haven't forgotten that she didn't do much for health care when she was given the opportunity. Don't even start this ish.

[spiritual_gunfighter]

81. She lost get over it n/t

[paulk]

82. what's most interesting

is how poorly the Republicans do in this poll - especially considering it's a Rasmussen poll, who usually favor Republicans.

[CBR]

83. And? Didn't she always get higher ratings on that characteristic during the campaign? nt

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2008/02/12/politics/main...

"Another pattern that has become familiar this year also held up in the Potomac states - the desire for change, and the choice of Obama as the agent for it. Over half - 56 percent of Virginia Democratic primary voters said they most wanted a candidate who could bring about needed change, as did 57 percent of Maryland voters. Obama was the overwhelming choice among these voters - winning 82 percent to 17 percent among Virginians seeking change, and 84 to 14 percent in Maryland.

Only 21 percent of Virginia voters and 21 percent of Maryland's Democrats were looking for Clinton's strong suit - experience. Clinton won more than nine in ten voters in each state who said they most wanted a candidate with the right experience to be president."

Franklin and Marshall Poll: Pennsylvania March 2008
"Qual. Regardless of how you plan to vote, do you think (rotated) Hillary Clinton or Barack
Obama is more qualified to be president?
59% Hillary Clinton
19% Barack Obama
8% Neither
14% Don’t know"

[Beacool]

85. Oh, this will go well...............

It'll be the usual reaction:

The Hillary supporters will completely agree (me included). The Hillary haters will spew their vitriol. The moderators will decide to close the thread when the fur has flown long enough to clog the air ducts.

Enjoy!!!

[Mass]

86. Misleading title. They did not ask if she more more qualified than Obama

They asked if she was qualified, and if Obama was qualified, but you can see the anti-Obama bias of Rasmussen just by the poll.

BTW, obviously, she is qualified, and it is shocking 43 % are not ready to say she is. (same goes obviously for Obama).

[Beacool]

87. 34%, not 43%

[Mass]

93. 57 % said she was qualified, 43 % did not say she was qualified (among which 34 % said she

was not qualified. I am no fan of hers, but you've got to wonder why people would think she is not qualified)

[Beacool]

95. More think that Obama is not qualified.

What can I tell you..........



The one thing that everybody seems to be in agreement is that Palin is definitely NOT qualified to be president. LOL!!!

[WI_DEM]

88. Breaking hard? A Rasmussen poll. Admit it you just want to try and stir up trouble, don't you?

[ClarkUSA]

90. No surprise. Clinton pollster & Mark Penn business partner Doug Schoen works with Scott Rasmussen.

Here's a link to their recent jointly-written March 9, 2010 Wall Street Journal op-ed titled "Why Obama Can't Move the Health-Care Numbers":
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704784904...

Rasmussen Reports' "About Us" webpage features Mark Penn's buddy offering an unqualified and hearty endorsement of Rasmussen's polling accuracy:

Pat Caddell and Doug Schoen, pollsters for Presidents Jimmy Carter and Bill Clinton, say that Rasmussen Reports has “an unchallenged record for both integrity and accuracy.

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/about_us

But Schoen's problems go beyond mere establishment-perpetuating ideology. In light of the importance of perceptions of polling success for the Clinton campaign, Schoen...has been holding himself out as an independent polling analyst for Rasmussen Reports and other media venues, concealing his long-standing ties to the Clintons and writing one ostensibly objective analysis after the next which has no purpose other than to depict Clinton's candidacy as an inevitability.

The front page today of Rasmussen Report touts an "analysis" entitled "Hillary's Great Week," by Douglas Schoen... The "analysis" itself reads as though it was written by Hillary Clinton's campaign itself -- because, in essence, it was...

http://www.salon.com/news/opinion/glenn_greenwald/2007/...

[Tarheel_Dem]

92. Oh snap! That explains a lot. Good thing Rasmussen is viewed skeptically..

around these parts, at least by most of us.

[ClarkUSA]

94. We should also remember that Scott Rasmussen was a paid consultant for the 2004 Bush campaign.

TIME has described Rasmussen Reports as a "conservative-leaning polling group". Democratic Party activists have pointed out that Scott Rasmussen was a paid consultant for the 2004 George W. Bush campaign... MSNBC does not use Rasmussen polls. Conversely, conservative media frequently refers to Rasmussen, praising them for being the first to ask about a relevant issue or to ask questions that other pollsters do not.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rasmussen_Reports

Nate Silver has this to say about Rasmussen's push poll methodology:

But there are other respects in which I'm much less sympathetic to Rasmussen's case. In particular, this has to do with their choices of question wording and subject matter. The Politico question, for instance, points toward an August question in which Rasmussen asked "It’s always better to cut taxes than to increase government spending because taxpayers, not bureaucrats, are the best judges of how to spend their money.” That is not a question designed to elicit the most accurate reflection of public opinion.

Likewise, Rasmussen recently produced a poll in which they purported to describe the Democratic health care plan to their respondents. Several other pollsters have found that support for the plan increases when it is actually described to respondents, but Rasmussen showed no such increase. However, the second sentence in their description reads:

The plans before Congress would prohibit people from choosing insurance plans with lower premiums and higher deductibles.

I don't particularly know where this comes from; Rasmussen claims that its questions came from a 'summary of the legislation provided by the New York Times', but such a depiction of the health care policy appears nowhere in the New York Times article. But there it is in the Rasmussen survey, where it appears to be designed to build a relationship in the respondent's mind between the Democratic plan and higher premiums... I also have some questions about Rasmussen's choice of subject matter. In particular, they have a knack for issuing polls at times which tend to dovetail with conservative media narratives.

http://www.fivethirtyeight.com/2010/01/is-rasmussen-rep...

Nate Silver Explains It All
by John Cole

I glanced over that WSJ piece by Scott Rasmussen yesterday, and then I looked at the gallup poll numbers, which seem to me to be remarkably steady, and then I looked at the aggregate numbers at pollster.com, and the first thing I thought was that if you take out the Rasmussen outliers, this looks relatively stable.

Today I see that Nate has gone through and explained what I already knew- Obama’s numbers aren’t crashing to earth as some are claiming.

At any rate, as a general rule I just have no faith in Rasmussen polls.

http://www.balloon-juice.com/2009/03/14/nate-silver-exp...

[jillan]

91. Newsflash!!! Obama IS the President.

Why is Rasmussen even asking this question? Just trying to stir up trouble.

Obama was not my first or second choice, but he won. GET OVER IT!

[Beacool]

96. Or third, or fourth, or.............

Sorry, I was talking about myself.

[Phx_Dem]

Breaking hard? ROLF.

From Rassmussen no less.



She lost. She didn't even get the party's nomination. You really need to find a way to deal with that.

[Phx_Dem]

97. Delete dupe.

[Arkana]

99. Jesus Christ, not this shit again.

[dionysus]

100. BREAKING HARD: some folks will never get over primary 2008.

[CakeGrrl]

104. No joke. Deja vu all over again.

It's only 2010 and some are trying to grasp onto the notion that Hillary will nudge Biden out of the VP slot - sounds like leftover pique that she wasn't selected in the first place, and that SoS is just a placeholder until...

[anAustralianobserver]

106. I wouldn't be surprised if they ran that poll lots of times aiming for a weak point for Obama

or an outlier. Or maybe polling companies just make one up now and then, between real polls to keep up their credibility (?)

A couple of weeks ago I was thinking Hillary may have been more effective in some ways than Obama (based on reading your opinions); about a week before Jon Stewart and the MSNBCs were most heavily criticising him. Maybe they waited for this sentiment to propagate and snapshotted it.

I think you sometimes need many simultaneous polls to approach reliability (due to the finagling) and even then it's just an indicator to be interpreted, depending on the wording.

The problem is polls can be and are effectively used to manipulate public opinion; but they seem to be less effective for this purpose with the rise of the internet.

I think Marshall McLuhan used the phrase 'pollstergeists' but I'm not sure what he meant by that.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

107. Breaking hard: The official contest contradicts this poll.

Don't you remember the last time she went down in flames?

[yourguide]

108. Is this still breaking hard?

*snort*

[proteus_lives]

109. Then why did she lose?

[Beacool]

112. The caucus states. That's where Obama gained his pledged delegate advantage.

She did much better in the primaries.

[JoePhilly]

111. More right wing circle jerk!!