47% of BASE see Hillary as UNFAVORABLE!

[Cosmic Kitten]

In the latest PPP poll Hillary is seen
UNFAVORABLY by 47% of the BASE
when measured by PARTY.

That should alarm every Democrat
and "left-leaning independent"!!!11!!1!

Hilary's "favorable" is only 45% of the base???


Page 14 of the report, favorable/unfavorable by Party
http://www.publicpolicypolling.com/pdf/2015/PPP_Release_National_22515.pdf

[Paulie]

1. I thought it was only 5%

[Erich Bloodaxe BSN]

9. Take all of these numbers with a grain of salt.

They measure on all sorts of slices, but what really matters is the people who actually will turn out and vote when the time comes. If you don't vote when push comes to shove, either for one candidate or another, it doesn't really matter how much you like or dislike anyone. They might be 'the base' now, but are they actually showing up to vote every single election? Are they only 'presidential election' voters?

And who cares about 'very liberal' voters? Again, the question is 'Are they going to be voters in Nov 2016?' If not, I don't care how much they love Hillary, or 'how liberal' they are.

[former9thward]

128. If you read the link

they polled Democratic primary voters.

[muriel_volestrangler]

139. "democratic primary voters" is from page 27 onwards - 76% favourable, 15% unfavourable

(Biden 67/15; Warren 48/17).

54% of the Dem primary voters favour Hillary as Democratic candidate for president. 16% Biden, 12% Warren, 5% Sanders, 2% Webb, 1% O'Malley, 10% others.

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

145. This is a red flag, fo sho, tho Hillary fans will dismiss it at their own peril. We can do alot better.

[Agschmid]

150. What's the red flag exactly?

[hollowdweller]

134. I don't view her one way or the other.

I liked her health care plan she put forth when Bill was in.

I don't like her hawkish tendencies I have observed.

However she has not really put out a clear picture as far as the actual things she would pursue as president for me to be able to know whether I like her or not.

She's talking to Warren. That's good.

I'm sort of giving her a chance. There are things about her that make me not like her and some that do in her past, but if she comes out with 4 or 5 things I agree with, like stock transaction tax, mandatory sick leave, alternative energy, increase min wage I'd be for her.

[sabrina 1]

156. What actually matters most is, that the Dem leadership listen to the voters. They failed

to do so in the mid terms.

The base won everything for them in 2008.

Since then they have destroyed all that work and lost us the Senate and the House by stubbornly refusing to listen to what the voters have been telling them.

Polls don't tell us anything much at this point, but ELECTIONS do.

Eg in the last mid terms, progressives mobilized to support Progressive candidates, incumbents and a few new candidates. They WON those seats.

Had it not been for those Dems working so hard to hold on to those seats, the losses would have been even greater.

What they did not do was to work for Third Way candidates, the ones the Leadership were supporting.

Either the party stops moving to the right each time they lose an election, or it's going to keep happening.

Blaming the voters doesn't win elections. LISTENING to them does.

[Cosmic Kitten]

10. That's the thing about "statistics" they are VERY flexible!

In reality, these numbers are miniscule.

[DanTex]

31. It is only 5%. "Base" means the base percentage over the whole population, before it is broken

up into segments. Either the OP is a joke, or the OP doesn't know how polls work.

[Cosmic Kitten]

40. 47% of respondents find Hillary UNFAVORABLE

[titaniumsalute]

68. Hello?

47% of ALL Respondents...not Dems. This includes everyone.

Look at every candidate likely to run for the high office on that list. They have have crappy fav versus unfavs. Remember this also...most people aren't even thinking about 2016 like we do here on DU.

[pnwmom]

124. But 91% of "Very Liberal" primary voters had "very favorable" views.

She was less popular among less liberal voters, despite how some people here view her.

[Cosmic Kitten]

157. How many people is that EXACTLY?

is it 91% of the 14% of the total 691 or ...
is it 91% of the 14% of the 301 Democrats???

Either way were talking about...
LESS THAN 100 PEOPLE

[Agschmid]

164. Have you heard the term sample size?

You are coming off quite foolish.

[SidDithers]

166. Are you now arguing against the methodology of the poll that you put up?...

This thread is all kind of awesome.

Sid

[Cosmic Kitten]

175. NOPE, just underscoring what it ACTUALLY says

And you are correct it is some kind of awesome...
but not for the reasons you probably want to believe ;~/

[Agschmid]

180. Again... Please tell me what it actually says?

[pnwmom]

190. It basically says that Republicans hate her. So what else is new? n/t

[pnwmom]

172. The fact that there was a steady decrease in popularity with voters who were less and less liberal

is very significant.

It would be one thing if the 91% didn't fit with the rest of the table. But instead, there was a clear and steady decrease in her popularity as the voters got more conservative.

[Cosmic Kitten]

179. How many people does it represent, NUMBERS not percent?

Citing a "trend" among 300 people is absurd?
No, it's surreal given the inherent variables in polling.

But don't let that stop others from cherry picking
how GREAT it is for Hillary

[Agschmid]

182. It's not...

http://www.surveysystem.com/sscalc.htm

Try it out yourself. If you don't trust the Internet calculator we can walk through the math here as well...

[pnwmom]

188. You don't understand statistical significance. There was a margin of error of 5.6% so that means

differences beyond that are significant. And her standing among the most liberal is far greater than among the most conservative -- way, way beyond the margin of error.

[SidDithers]

191. LOL...

You're arguing that one part of the poll that you created the thread about isn't valid because it's a small sample.

And yet you won't acknowledge that you've completely misrepresented what the numbers in the poll mean.

This is too fucking funny.



Sid

[Cosmic Kitten]

252. You ALMOST get it

[Number23]

255. The rec list for this Hall of Fail contender is the funniest of all

[giftedgirl77]

259. But yet somehow so very predictable....

[pnwmom]

189. Including Rethugs, so what did you expect? Which candidate did better than Hillary? n/t

[L0oniX]

143. That's just a bogus liberal hater figure.

[Helen Borg]

158. But you see, 45% + 5% = 50%...

[Octafish]

3. That number is closer to my experience when asking.

Last edited Thu Feb 26, 2015, 11:10 AM - Edit history (1)

No offense to the possible candidate, the former Secretary of State, Senator, and First Lady of the United States and Arkansas.

[Scuba]

4. No surprise there. Real Democrats don't like corpo-war hawks.

[Renew Deal]

6. Surprise

That number includes republicans.

[Cosmic Kitten]

16. Why don't you run the numbers for us?

How many people EXACTLY are included in the percentages?

EXACTLY how many people polled SUPPORT HILLARY?
This poll is being held up ar PROOF that Hillary is INEVITABLE!!!11!
So why don't you run some numbers and tell us EXACTLY
how many people out of 691 support Hillary


You will also NOTICE, the breakout is BY PARTY!

[brooklynite]

44. Who said the poll showed Hillary is inevitable?

What people said is that Hillary is POPULAR.

Once again, the ONLY people pushing the "inevitability" meme are the anti-Hillary folks.

[Agschmid]

51. Yup.

[Cosmic Kitten]

52. ONLY 5% of VERY LIBERAL people find Hillary unfavorable!

That sounds like great news, right!

[Agschmid]

54. It certainly proves DU is not a good representation of the party "base"...

[Cosmic Kitten]

65. Or... that polls are a crap shoot?

Funny how they are great when we like the results
not so much when they are unfavorable?

DU needs an education on READING POLL RESULTS

[Agschmid]

69. This poll is pretty positive for Hillary supporters...

[DemocratSinceBirth]

72. When you point a finger at someone you have four fingers pointing back at yourself, ergo:

Her favorable numbers among Democrats are:

Favorable -79%
Unfavorable-13%
Not sure-8%

according to the poll you cited.

[Cosmic Kitten]

160. Which table are you citing?

79% of 300 people = 238
238 people favor Hillary

[DemocratSinceBirth]

170. You are the one that cited the poll so it's a little late to question the quality of the sample.

I would use emoticons to hide the paucity of thought that went into my thread but since I don't have the I Q of a palm tree I won't.


#lol@me

[Renew Deal]

105. It shows that hillary is mostly opposed by moderates and republicans.

Where do you fall?

[Renew Deal]

104. Your post doesn't make sense

The number of people polled represent a sample of the entire population.

[leftofcool]

13. Did you actually read the poll! 47% includes Republicans

[Cosmic Kitten]

20. Where is the break out by PARTY AFFILIATION?

EXACTLY How many DEMOCRATS
have a favorable opinion of Hillary?

Page, percent and actual count, please.

[BlueCaliDem]

92. Haven't read the break out by Party Affiliation, but there are definitely Republicans

in that poll - and a few Neo-confederate traitors, too.

Q5: Do you have a favorable or unfavorable opinion
of Ben Carson?

Favorable........................................................35%(???)

Unfavorable.....................................................17%

Not sure..........................................................48%

Do you know any Democrat who'd think nutter Ben Carson's unfavorable numbers should be LOWER than than VP Biden's?

[karynnj]

136. No - and that goes to the difficulty in really understanding or comparing these numbers

Here, I suspect that the 42% of people who have enough information to know what they think on Carson is highly concentrated on the right. He is a hero of talk show radio and Fox News. On the left, he is likely known mostly to people with a very healthy interest in politics -- and they are most of the 17% unfavorable.

I suspect (though obviously could not prove) that the vast majority of the 48% unsure would become "unfavorable" if they received information (from BOTH sides) on Carson.

Biden on the other hand is known to nearly everyone. I suspect that almost all Republicans, in this politically charged world, are giving him an "unfavorable". If you go to pollingreport.com and look back at past politicians, you would see that things were far less polarized. I suspect that Biden might also suffer from some Democrats knowing he has not ruled out running for President - and some of rating unfavorable or not sure (though he has been VP for 6 years).

[BlueCaliDem]

146. Exactly. And the polarization is being perpetuated by Republicans (neo-confederates) in order to

divide and conquer - even in this Democratic Party supporting community, and the OP poster is a clear example of that.

[muriel_volestrangler]

142. p.27 & 28 for Dem primary voters: Hillary 76% favourable, 15% unfavourable

compared with Biden 67%/15%, and Warren 48%/17%.

For 'very liberal' Demo primary voters:
H. Clinton: 91%/6%; Biden: 88%/4%; Warren: 70%/5%.

You're welcome.

[Agschmid]

144. Thanks!

[Cosmic Kitten]

198. NAME RECOGNITION

[muriel_volestrangler]

201. NO I DO NOT RECOGNISE YOURS

IS THERE A POINT TO THAT POST? OR TO THIS WHOLE MISBEGOTTEN THREAD?

[Cosmic Kitten]

209. Misbegotten! Oh my!

AND IN ALL CAPS, TOO!

How about Name Recognition
in the context of polling.

Does name recognition impact poll results?

Maybe you could explain the biases and variables
that effect polling data, the impact of "weighting"
to reflect population demographics, when the sample
is not representative of the general populous?

[muriel_volestrangler]

227. Are you now saying that you are capable, after all, of reading a poll?

After an OP in which you hadn't the faintest clue what the words in a poll mean, and after many people had to post before you even started to admit how misleading your OP was, now you're suddenly concerned about weighting?

IT WAS ALL IN CAPS BECAUSE YOUR POST WAS ALL IN CAPS. AND YOU HAVE BEEN SHOUTING AT PEOPLE THROUGHOUT THIS THREAD.

What about name recognition? State your concern.

'Populus', not 'populous'. You may as well learn something from this misbegotten thread.

[Agschmid]

229. Maliciously disrupting IMO.

[Hekate]

231. At this point in the thread I crack up in LOLs. Someone needs to hack up a furball...

...of cosmic size and import.

[Art_from_Ark]

283. Hillary and Biden have had nationwide name recognition since the '80s/early '90s

Warren is just now starting to make a name for herself.

How would those numbers look if Hillary had a national face-to-face debate with Warren?

I'm pretty sure that Warren's favorable numbers would rise among "very liberal" primary voters.

[muriel_volestrangler]

290. I'm sure Warren's favourable number would go up

but her unfavourable numbers are already at Hillary's level, among Democrats. At best, she'd get close to Hillary's (and Biden's) positive numbers. Warren doesn't have such unfavourable numbers among conservatives as Hillary, yet, but, if she did run (and she's said she's not going to), that would change. The 'independent' figures are Hillary 31% favourable/56%; Warren 21%/34%. The ratio is roughly the same.

If we take this poll seriously (as opposed to the farce the thread starter is trying to make of it), then Warren might, with further exposure, get the same sort of numbers that Hillary has. But she's not running.

[Art_from_Ark]

293. Well, almost nobody's running at this point

Hillary hasn't declared, neither has Biden. Sanders is considering running. Warren has said she isn't running (present progressive tense), but then again so did Bobby Kennedy until early 1968.

[muriel_volestrangler]

294. Future tense for Warren, too

So are you going to run for President?

No.

http://fortune.com/2015/01/13/elizabeth-warren-sheila-bair/

[William769]

15. You should read a little better.

Oops.

[Cosmic Kitten]

21. Show the CORRECT numbers...

Page, percent, and specific breakout....

If you are so confident
show us the CORRECT numbers.

[William769]

25. Sorry not my job to help with your math skills.

[Cosmic Kitten]

43. BECAUSE without CHERRY PICKING, Hillary looks BAD

This is supposed to be the poll
that SHOWS Hillary is INEVITABLE!!!!11!

[NCTraveler]

117. One of the best posts ever. nt.

[pnwmom]

194. Do you get it yet? The numbers you're citing include Republicans. Of course they don't like her.

That "base" doesn't refer to the "Democratic base" at all.

[yeoman6987]

116. You did vote for The Obama-Biden ticket didnt you?

If you did, your statement is moot. If your for? didn't, who did you got

[pnwmom]

193. The poll included Republicans, and they were the ones who overwhelmingly don't like Hillary.

Democrats were heavily in her favor.

[Renew Deal]

5. You misread it. That number includes republicans.

The number is 13% of Democrats.

[William769]

12. Wasn't misread. Tried to be used as misleading.

[GusBob]

32. try replying with emphasis in caps

"TRIED to be USED as MISLEADING"

maybe that will register?

[Cosmic Kitten]

46. ;~/

[BeyondGeography]

19. Forget it, she's rolling

[Cosmic Kitten]

24. What page and what breakout are you citing?

Just putting up a number is bogus.

Show us the page, table and real numbers.

[Renew Deal]

88. Page 14, same as you.

Base is being used in place of "total"

[Beacool]

236. Thank you.

It won't matter, though. They already made up their minds that 47% of Democrats have an unfavorable opinion of Hillary and damn accuracy.

[Number23]

249. Oh my God!!

Base is being used in place of "total"

Whether intentional or deliberate, this is the OP of the year right here, folks!!!

[One of the 99]

99. Don't confuse the haters with facts nt

[Renew Deal]

107. I originally thought this was an issue of ignorance

When in fact it's malice.

[Agschmid]

113. Yup.

[NCTraveler]

114. "When in fact it's malice."

That is very clear after the ops responses and their feigning ignorance. This poster if fully aware of what they are doing. Dead on by calling it malice.

[FSogol]

7. Unrec for cherry picking of stats. The important # here is that she leads the most GOP by 10 points.

[Cosmic Kitten]

26. NOPE. cherry picking is citing a poll of 691 people with 301 Democrats

EVERY Hillary supporter
has CHERRY PICKED RESULTS...
from the very same poll!

[FSogol]

27. You brought the poll up as something important, not me.

[Cosmic Kitten]

48. Yet here you are?

THis is the Poll that shows how STRONG
Hillary's support is among voters.

It seems to hardly show that?

[Agschmid]

57. ... Again.

[Cosmic Kitten]

61. WRONG TABLE! That table is IDEOLOGY I'm citing PARTY

Page 14, bottom right corner

Thanks

[Agschmid]

67. Okay here it is...

All this table shows is that 79% of the party views her favorably.

[Cosmic Kitten]

75. So 47% of the sample see Hillary as UNFAVORABLE!

Yikes, not someone I want to run in the Primary!

[Agschmid]

79. The "sample" is everyone who was polled.

You should self delete the OP it is quite foolish.

[Renew Deal]

94. 47% of who?

The word "base" has a meaning and I don't think you understand it.

[NCTraveler]

109. So you want Republicans to decide who runs in our primary.

You want someone who will be approved by those responding as republicans. This makes such little sense.

[progressoid]

101. Not really skewed R.

Q29
If you are a Democrat, press 1. If a Republican,
press 2. If you are an independent or identify
with another party, press 3.

Democrat........................................................40%

Republican......................................................34%

Independent / Other........................................26%

Q26
In the last presidential election, did you vote for
Barack Obama or Mitt Romney?

Barack Obama................................................49%

Mitt Romney...................................................43%

Someone else / Don't remember......................8%

[Agschmid]

102. Your correct sorry, I deleted that part of my post.

[Jim Lane]

273. It's more complicated than that.

Clinton leads the notable GOP contenders by about 10 points -- yes, that's important.

BUT in the poll of the base (i.e., the entire electorate), Clinton is underwater, with unfavorability exceeding favorability. That's also important.

Clinton has been in the national spotlight for more than two decades. At this point people have formed their opinions. She has comparatively little opportunity to win over those who dislike her.

By contrast, some of the Republicans, though trailing now, have much greater upside.

Let's consider Scott Walker. Clinton leads him in the hypothetical matchup (Question 24 on page 4):

Q24 If the candidates for President next time were
Democrat Hillary Clinton and Republican Scott
Walker, who would you vote for?
Hillary Clinton 48%
Scott Walker 40%
Not sure 12%

The worrisome point, though, is that Walker has a positive favorable-unfavorable split, and with a very high "Not sure" group (Question 13 on page 3):

Q13 Do you have a favorable or unfavorable opinion
of Scott Walker?
Favorable 33%
Unfavorable 26%
Not sure 41%

It's striking that Clinton, with a net unfavorable rating, leads Walker, who has a net favorable. The explanation probably lies in that 41% who aren't sure about Walker. They don't know much about him. Clinton beats him because of her name recognition (people are reluctant to trust the Presidency to someone they don't know much about).

The obvious danger for the Democrats is that the campaign will dramatically change this. If Walker is the Republican nominee, we can be confident that, by Election Day, his "Not sure" rating will be far less than 41%. Facts about his conduct in office and his general vacuity will bring some of those 41% into the Unfavorable column. At the same time, though, the corporate media will be pumping him up (to make it more of a race), and the Kochs will be backing him heavily. Many of those 41% will shift to Favorable.

Although the OP badly botched the interpretation of the 45-47 statistic, it is an important and disquieting one. Clinton's current 8-point lead over Walker (along with similar leads over other possible opponents), so long before the voting begins, is not grounds for complacency.

[whatthehey]

8. Read again....

[Cosmic Kitten]

50. What are you disagreeing with?

What's your contention?

[leftofcool]

11. Uh no! 47% includes Republicans. Try again!

[Cosmic Kitten]

30. Show us the NUMBER OF DEMOCRATS

How many Democrats favor Hillary.

Not a percentage, the ACTUAL number of respondents.
Page and table please.

[postulater]

14. There are a lot of people who vote for the least unfavorable.

Like who is going to screw them the least permanently.

Or who is going to make them puke a little in their mouth the least.

Or who will make them look the least inferior.

Or who is not too much smarter than them.

Mostly they just vote against a candidate, because they don't think anyone is really worth voting for.

I imagine a lot of the people who see Hillary as unfavorable will see her as less unfavorable than most of the others.

[pampango]

17. Accidental mistake analyzing poll results or something else?

As others have pointed out that is not what the poll shows.

[MineralMan]

18. Since that poll includes Republicans, that's not what it says at all.

Nice try, though.

[Cosmic Kitten]

34. OH, son ONLY Democrats will vote in 2016??? who knew!

Care to show us the POLL of ONLY DEMOCRATS

The table cited shows favorable/unfavorable by PARTY.
The 47% is of the BASE

[MineralMan]

42. I'm not your son, and your use of the word "base"

is not accurate. In politics, the "base" of any party is that group that can be counted on to support candidates of that party. It has been modified to a certain degree to sometimes refer to only certain like-minded members of a party, like teabaggers for the GOP and a small percentage on the lift for the Democratic party.

Your use of it is not the standard use of the word in any way,

There is no recognized "base" of voters who are of both parties. Wrong word choice.

I'm more likely to be the age of your father than your son, by the way. Trying to dismiss me in that way is rude.

[MineralMan]

76. I'm not talking about either. I'm talking about your language

error. I don't know if you're missing the point or what. Your headline, though, is highly misleading.

[Agschmid]

83. The poster is acting as a malicious disruptor currently.

Fun isn't it?

[MineralMan]

98. I don't like to characterize posters.

Perhaps the OP was just confused about how polling works. I don't know.

[BlueCaliDem]

103. MIRT! MIRT! Where art thou?

[Agschmid]

81. 79% of Democrats...

You've gone off the deep end here.

[OKNancy]

22. As others have pointed out, this is a cross-section of all Iowa voters, not "the base"

try again

[Cosmic Kitten]

35. NO, the TABLE CITED CLEARLY says BASE

[sharp_stick]

23. Were you mistaken

in your horrible reading of the poll? You're not doing yourself or your cause any good by posting stuff that would barely pass the smell test at World Nut Daily.

[Cosmic Kitten]

36. This is a teaching opportunity!

Teach us ALL here how to properly
read POLLING RESULTS

[sharp_stick]

125. It would be useful

but only in the case of those that actually want to learn.

[Agschmid]

130. And the OP cleary does not.

Malicious disruption at its best...

*Comments to a jury, read the whole thread. I am not alone here, and the poster refuses to deal with math and facts.

[Cosmic Kitten]

168. Sorry, thats very inappropriate

What exactly do YOU think is being "disrupted"?

There is a PPP poll that readers are citing
as evidence of trends among voters.

Clearly, the trend is that amongst
those polled Hillary has higher
unfavorables than favorables.

It's very relevant and appropriate
for this community to be aware and
discuss such a huge liability of the
"favored candidate"

Discussion is not "Malicious disruption"

[Agschmid]

171. Unfortunately you aren't willing to discuss.

Your posts consists mostly of this emoji...



Quality discussion at its best eh?

Also as its been pointed out repeatedly by several posters your numbers just don't add up.

And no I'm not just one of those "mindless Hillary supporters", but I'm not going to just sit here and "discuss" outright lies and misrepresentations of data.

If you think my comment is bad, alert. That's what it is there for.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

214. Actually she has the best favorable/unfavorables of all the candidates in that poll except ....

Actually she has the best favorable/unfavorables of all the candidates in that poll except the Huckster who has also has quite a bit of undecideds...

I don't hang my hat on any one poll and while that poll is a tad bit different than other findings it is not so far off as to be totally discounted.

[aquart]

276. This is IOWA you're talking about?

IOWA? Six electoral votes? Quaking in my Uggs, I am.

[Cha]

269. All this is "teaching" us.. is that you like to ignore the facts and use the :rofl: to show you

couldn't care less about reality.

Jeeze. I don't even support Hillary at this point but all of you on DU who are trying to bring her down with propaganda tactics are only hurting yourselves.

[Agschmid]

270. You won't get a reply...

At least not in this thread.

[Cha]

272. It wasn't a question..

[Agschmid]

274. Yup that's accurate!

[jwirr]

28. This is in the primary. This does not alarm me since there are at least two other candidates that

many of us love. If this were just before the general election then I would be worried.

[DanTex]

29. I'm seriously hoping this is a joke. "Base" refers to the base percentage over the whole population

[Cosmic Kitten]

37. SO 47% don't have an unfavorable opinion of Hillary?

[DanTex]

39. 47% of the whole electorate, yes. Not the base of the party.

Among the base of the party, "very liberal" voters, the unfavorable is 5%. Yes, five.

[Cosmic Kitten]

55. AND 18% of "somewhat liberal" voters.

So that's a combined 23% UNFAVORABLY ?!?

BTW, is that the "BASE" or the "base"

[Agschmid]

60. That's not how you would do that math...

In his situation 5% + 18% DOES NOT EQUAL 23%.

[DanTex]

64. Please tell me that you are not serious.

[giftedgirl77]

33. Wow, what a fuckin FAIL.

[Cosmic Kitten]

38. Great retort

You are gifted

[whatthehey]

47. It would have been better to admit your error

Then the normal assumption would have been a simple and common oversight. Keeping digging and pretending you did not make a mistake, especially with unwarranted defensive vitriol, enforces another and much baser interpretation.

[closeupready]

53. lol, I know, right? Wordsmiths. DU is Wordsmith University.

Populated with English Ph.D.'s.

[giftedgirl77]

93. Well you're the one that completely distorted the facts to your liking...

Apparently you were referring to the entire base of Iowa voters & not democrats as you alluded.

Hence, making your OP a huge fucking FAIL as stated previously.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

80. POTW

Post Of The Year

[sendero]

41. Just like the other thread..

.. selling the idea that "no true Scotsman would fail to like HRC", (from same PPP poll think) I don't know who these folks are and so I take their "polling" results with a very large grain of salt.

[ALBliberal]

45. She needs to get in the race and state her platform.

Yes it could develop from past sentiments ala PBO and his position on gay marriage. Seems on DU that HRC is marginalized before the primary even starts. She is a quality candidate. The right has no candidate of her caliber. I personally like Sanders the best at this point and as a senator his views are continually voiced. HRC is a private citizen now. I am interested to see how the Democratic primary develops. But an automatic dismissal of HRC? No thanks. I will vote for the Democratic candidate in the general election.

[Agschmid]

49. The word base doesn't represent the "democratic base" just FYI...

In fact this chart shows 91% of people who self identify as "very liberal" have a favorable opinion of Hillary...

[brooklynite]

56. I keep getting told we can't win by appealing to the middle, so we should appeal to the liberal left

Works for me.

[Cosmic Kitten]

59. WRONG TABLE! Page 14 by PARTY, NOT ideology!

Please post the table on pae 14, bottom right corner...
the one that shows Favor/unfavor by PARTY.

Thanks

[Agschmid]

62. This table is more telling IMO.

[sharp_stick]

73. You're reading it wrong

if it was the base of each party there would be two bases or three (Dem, Rep, Ind). As there is only one base listed while showing the favorability as 79% Democrat, 18% Republican and 31% Independant/Other.

It's impossible to equate the "base" number to the Democratic base.

There is no way that Ted Cruz is facing a 28% - 38% - 36% (fav, nonfav,notsure) on the GOP base.

[HappyMe]

58. I guess it does include Republicans.

This does kind of mean something in that some have claimed that even republicans would vote for Clinton over their candidate.

I don't know that polls mean a whole lot this far out. This perpetual election season is pretty tiring and annoying.

[pnwmom]

195. You are correct. And so it isn't surprising at all that 47% have a negative opinion. nt

[HappyMe]

205. I'm getting pretty sick of the 'polls say..' posts.

Nothing is going to happen until July, so all of this is pretty useless. As are the demands for people that don't like Clinton to shut up. Election season is far, far too long.

[Agschmid]

212. Again very few people are telling others to shut up, sure there are a few...

But from what I can tell it's not the majority of Clinton supporters on this board.

[HappyMe]

215. I couldn't say really how many it actually is.

It may be a very few. But boy oh boy, they sure are loud and ornery.

I'm just going to start trash canning more threads.

[William769]

63. Who needs Comedy Central?

We have this thread!

[Agschmid]

70. MORE caps PLEASE!

[William769]

77. I'm the subtle type.

Mass hysteria isn't my thing.

[wyldwolf]

74. If the OP isn't joking...

... this is, by far, the most ludicrous and uninformed reading of poll results ever. It borders on Sarah Palin territory.

[William769]

78. ...

[geek tragedy]

154. More like Louie Gohmert. Don't disparage their asparagus. nt

[herding cats]

221. This has to be a tribute to the departed Leslie Nielsen.

Surely you can't be serious?

I am serious, and don't call me Shirley.

[JI7]

254. i was having a bad day and this thread has helped a lot

Giving me a good laugh

[Number23]

256. + a million. And the rec list takes it firmly over into Classic Fail territory

[DemocratSinceBirth]

66. You are just making stuff up:

Her favorable numbers among Democrats are:

Favorable -79%
Unfavorable-13%
Not sure-8%

[DanTex]

82. Wow!!!!! Negative 79% favorability among Democrats! EVEN WORSE!!!!!!!!!

And here's the tag the really belongs on the OP:

[SidDithers]

84. ...

Edit: And at the Recs.

Sid

[William769]

85. You owe me a new keyboard!

[SidDithers]

86. Heheh...

Sid

[Cosmic Kitten]

200. Nice gif, did you make that?

Thanks for participating

[DemocratSinceBirth]

87. This board is past the point of being a parody of itself and is now on the precipice ...

This board is past the point of being a parody of itself and is now on the precipice of becoming a caricature and the primaries haven't even begun.

[Beacool]

238. Yep, you said it.

[Renew Deal]

96. It should get more recs

So people see what lengths some people will go to make a point. Ignorance or malice. Doesn't matter which one.

[geek tragedy]

120. Poll was commissioned by

the BFEE.

[JoePhilly]

153. Bwahahahaha!!!

[Tarheel_Dem]

280. +1000

[Hoyt]

89. You should delete the OP or change it. Your OP is misleading because you misinterpreted "Base."

I understand how you made that mistake, but it is clear the poll includes conservatives -- which you would expect a high percentage to disapprove of any Democrat.

[abelenkpe]

90. 691 people polled

"PPP surveyed 691 registered voters, including 310 Democratic primary voters, from February 20th to 22nd. The margin of error for the overall survey is +/- 3.7%, and for the Democratic primary component it’s +/-5.6%. This survey was conducted through automated telephone interviews and interviews over the internet to voters who don’t have landline phones."


I wouldn't put much faith in this poll. Or really any poll. Polls measure what older voters think. It's difficult to develope a poll that gauges students and those under fifty because they don't have landlines or the time to participate in online polls. That said running Hillary would bring every hater on the republican side to the polls and as the constant fighting on this board illustrates alienate some liberal voters. Not a good recipe for success. Whatever democrats do they need to offer a hopeful vision for the future. Don't run on "We're better than republicans" because that's not going to work.
Personally want a candidate who would fight to stop offshoring jobs...

[DemocratSinceBirth]

108. Most reputable polls call cell phone users.

I'm kind of surprised PPP doesn't. In any case their findings are mirrored by other pollsters in the field.

As to your assertion that HRC will bring out the Repugs if the "crypto-Muslim, illegal alien, Kenyan socialist who pals around with terrorists" as his Republican detractors call President Obama didn't bring them out I doubt Hillary will bring any more of them out.

[abelenkpe]

140. Yeah, it's the no cell phone

That's really makes this poll worrisome. Still most young people I know refuse to answer a number they don't recognize so even with cell phones polls will tend to skew to an older demographic. Think that's part of the reason why FOX was so surprised by last presidential election.
Moreover, get the impression that Republican pundits want Hillary to run. They've already got their play book against her written. They know she's controversial.
If my republican FOX fed family and hometown friends are indicative of the level of dislike for Hillary then plan on a lot of republicans showing up to vote. Seriously, they're scary. President Obamas election brought forward the ugly racism still prevalent in our country. O it's gonna be so fun getting reacquainted with ugly sexism still festering. But that's beside the point. Fear and dislike motivate republican voters. Hope brings liberal and young voters. Whoever runs needs to be sold as someone who will bring positive change, hope, etc. Last time there wasn't a unified platform or vision offered. It was a message of fear: vote or else republicans. Can't make that mistake again.

[uponit7771]

91. This is trolling, you know damn well its not the DEMOCRATIC base...

[giftedgirl77]

115. Damn right.

[stevenleser]

95. The intentional misrepresentation of this poll is more evidence of what I pointed to in my OP

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10026276064

res ipsa loquitur

[SidDithers]

97. Yup. The right hates Hillary. The fringe left hates Hillary...

and neither, apparently, minds using dishonesty to smear her.

Sid

[Agschmid]

111. Yup.

[AgingAmerican]

232. Obama supporters hated Hillary

And screamed it from the rooftops during the 2008 primaries. It was a year long orgy of Hillary hatred by Obama supporters. Randy Rhodes was fired for it and Stephanie Miller became completely unlistenable. The last time I listened to Stephanie Miller, she asked her listeners, "Why can't we just use the Ken Starr accusations against Hillary?". She went there, so I have never listened to her since. I didn't like Hillary then, but the Obama supporters were acting like rabid animals, so I really didn't care for Obama either.

Now those same Obama folks are all indignant and in a twist over any critique of their beloved Hil!

Politics is fickle stuff

[SidDithers]

235. Who were you during the 2008 primaries?...nt

Sid

[AgingAmerican]

239. Wow!

Is that the best comeback you got?

[SidDithers]

242. Just curious, is all...

You were speaking as if you'd experienced the 2008 primary wars at DU, yet you've only been here since 2012.

My apologies if I inferred incorrectly that this isn't your first time on the carousel. DU3 was a fresh start for lots of posters who had left DU2.



Sid

[AgingAmerican]

244. So you are trying to deflect

In poker we call it a 'tell'

[SidDithers]

245. Nevermind. I'll figure it out myself...nt

Sid

[AgingAmerican]

246. Given our short conversation

It's all you got

[NCTraveler]

100. Really good numbers.

To have an unfavorable number at 45% with democrats, republicans, and independents with the name recognition she has is pretty good. Only 13% unfavorable from democrats. She is in a strong position. Thanks for pointing it out. Though you shouldn't be surprised that she is very disliked by republicans. To take this poll as you seem to be, Scott Walker is in a much better position than E Warren. But some of us actually have a formal education in statistics and can comprehend what we are looking at.

[BlueCaliDem]

106. UNREC*. Your OP should be deleted. It's skewed in wording which skews your opinion.

MIRT...where are you when we need you?

[Autumn]

110. Not sure where I fit in but I see her as unfavorable.

[B Calm]

118. I'm with you. I think the democratic party could find a politician with

less baggage. I will vote for her if she ends up being our candidate, but I hate holding my nose when voting.

[William769]

119. Putting aside your comment.

Do you agree or disagree with the OP's assessment of the numbers?

[Autumn]

121. I really don't care about the poll numbers. This far out I think they are meaningless.

[msanthrope]

257. I thank you for that answer. nt

[DemocratSinceBirth]

132. When we lie about those we don't like it makes us worse than our opponents./NT

[zappaman]

112. You better believe it!

[NCTraveler]

122. Recommending. This shit needs to go to the greatest page.

Shine some light on this CDS crap.

[Agschmid]

123. CDS?

[DemocratSinceBirth]

127. Clinton Derangement Syndrome./NT

[Agschmid]

129. Got it.

[Rex]

126. I'm sorry your thread ended up being about something other than the numbers from the poll.

Something blah blah blah something.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

151. These are the numbers from the poll that the original poster intentionally misinterpreted*

* I only use the word "deliberate" because as it has been pointed out, ad museum and ad infinitum, they are being misinterpreted and he or she ignores them.

[Godhumor]

131. This is the greatest thread since the moon bombing

Bookmarking for endless entertainment!

[NYC Liberal]

133. This thread may earn a spot in the DU Hall of Epic Fail.

Put it in there next to the Moon bombing thread.

Don't worry, though. There was a PRO-Hillary thread that was just as bad as this one in 2008: WIPEOUT!!! 35% reporting in Indiana: Clinton up by 14points!

[Bobbie Jo]

135. Seriously?

You're really doubling down with this?

Amateur hour, part II.

[Cali_Democrat]

137. You misinterpreted the poll.

The number you're referring to includes Republicans....it's not referring to the base of the party.

You should probably delete this.

[frazzled]

138. I think the OP is committed to that misinterpretation

Come hell or high water. Dozens have tried to explain it. The OP wants to believe what (s)he wants to believe about this poll—facts be damned. Almost makes you wish that literacy tests were required for voting. (Just kidding.)

I don't think there's any way of convincing the OP of the wrongness of his/her interpretation. I guess we just have to say:

[DemocratSinceBirth]

141. BOOM

[L0oniX]

147. K & R ...for pissing off ...someone

[DemocratSinceBirth]

149. If we lie about people we don't like what does that make us?

[upaloopa]

148. That is about the percent that doesn't vote.

What matters is what likely voters think since they are in the game. The rest are in the stands booing or cheering.

[Android3.14]

152. Misleading OP

If Cosmic Kitten has any sense, he or she will remove their post. The 47 % number includes Republicans, which makes the results unremarkable and harms CK's credibility.

The MIC and corporatists are spinning these polls like crazy, pushing a damaged candidate on the Democrats who will further divide the country, even if she wins. Even so, that is little justification to double down on an obvious misread of this poll's data.

[Cosmic Kitten]

155. How is it "misleading"?

The poll clearly reads that Hillary
has a 47% unfavorable with the BASE.
It's right there... in black and white.

I'm sure readers here don't need to be hand held
to read that the % within parties differs?

Regardless of how closely some people read
the table data.... Hillary has a huge LIABILITY
amongst voters.

If 47% of voters see a candidate unfavorably
why would any sane person INSIST on them running?

Nearly HALF of Voters view Hillary unfavorably...
according to the poll cited.

[Agschmid]

159. Very few people on DU actually are insisting she run...

Would you prefer a candidate that republicans like more... That's about the only way you'd get that favor ability number up considering how high her favoriability numbers on the liberal side are?

[Cosmic Kitten]

161. Actually, Populist values poll highest generally.

Working class and middle class voters
prefer Populist policies over neo-liberal
or "new democrat" policies

[Agschmid]

165. Ok...

[DemocratSinceBirth]

162. The "BASE" is all voters.

In your seminal thread you held out the base as being representative of only Democratic voters, ergo:

47% of BASE see Hillary as UNFAVORABLE! [View all]

In the latest PPP poll Hillary is seen
UNFAVORABLY by 47% of the BASE
when measured by PARTY.

That should alarm every Democrat
and "left-leaning independent"!!!11!!1!





""favorable" is only 45% of the base???

"EVERY PICTURE TELLS A STORY..."





[blockquote" If 47% of voters see a candidate unfavorably
why would any sane person INSIST on them running? "

Maybe because her favorables are higher than any of her would be opponents.

It's on Page 21.

[geek tragedy]

167. "BASE" as used in that chart refers to EVERYONE, not the base of the Democratic party.

"Base" as used by people here, refers to the base of the Democratic party.

Clinton has been around 45-47% unfavorable for about two decades now. Zzzzz.

[Cosmic Kitten]

174. Isn't the "BASE" all voters?

As to...
[div class="excerpt"]Clinton has been around 45-47% unfavorable
for about two decades now. Zzzzz.

Why in the world would any sane person nominate
a candidate with the favorable/unfavorables
around 45-47% for two decades???

20 years of being equally disliked and liked?
And that's the BEST the Democratic Party can offer


The problem here isn't MY READING
of the poll data...
It's Hillary supporters INTERPRETATION!
HRC supporters cherry picking stats is the problem.

[geek tragedy]

177. "Base" normally refers to the most loyal party voters.

No one facing the Citizens United money blitz will poll below 45% unfavorable in this polarized environment.

[Agschmid]

186. Again...

To increase the base favorability about the only place oh can pick up higher percentage is from the Republican side...

I don't see how that is good?

[Beacool]

243. No, it isn't.

The "base" refers to the people who support a political party. The base of the Democratic party has a 79% favorable view of Hillary. THAT's the base. What you posted were the results for ALL voters who responded to this poll. That includes Democrats, Republicans and Independents.

Do you finally get what people have been trying to show you or are you going to continue to insist in your inaccurate OP?

[Android3.14]

199. What do you think "base" means in this context?

Do you think it means the "party base"?

[Cosmic Kitten]

204. Doesn't matter what I think...

What does DU think

[Android3.14]

222. Actually

What matters is the truth.

I sent an email to Tom Jensen, the author of the press release.

Here is his response, which shows that "base" refers to the overall results, which includes members of both parties and independents. Your OP is incorrect.

[NCTraveler]

224. Well dont. Nailed it. nt.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

226. BOOM/NT

[Agschmid]

230. Nicely done.

[Tarheel_Dem]

284. Well that settles that!

[Agnosticsherbet]

163. Base in this poll is not Democratic Party Base. It is the raw data from those polled.

Party and ideology are self descriptors by those polled.

[Cosmic Kitten]

169. OK, where is it suggested otherwise?

[DemocratSinceBirth]

176. Right flipping here

"In the latest PPP poll Hillary is seen
UNFAVORABLY by 47% of the BASE
when measured by PARTY."

[Cosmic Kitten]

187. So is your complaint about parsing?

[DemocratSinceBirth]

192. Is this the Bill Clinton "meaning of is" debate. It was actually charming from the ole rascal.

That being said, here's the graph:

[pnwmom]

197. No, about extreme distortion. A poll that includes both parties OF COURSE will have

a high unfavorability rating by members of the other party. But please show me what candidate does better than Hillary.

[Renew Deal]

237. Lying is more accurate

[Agnosticsherbet]

202. "Clinton also remains dominant in the Democratic Primary field. 54% of the party's voers want her"

"Clinton also remains dominant in the Democratic Primary field. 54% of the party's voters want her to be their candidate to 16% for Joe Bide, 12% for Elizabeth Warren, 5% for Bernie Sanders, 2% for Jim Webb, and 1% for martin O'Malley."

This is from the write up of the data From "Public Policy Polling."

Link to the source of he data "http://www.publicpolicypolling.com/pdf/2015/PPP_Release_National_22515.pdf"

[NYC_SKP]

173. It was a terrible poll, automatic and only a few hundred respondents.

Check this out:

PPP surveyed 691 registered voters, including 310
Democratic primary voters, from February 20th to 22nd.

The margin of error for the overall survey is +/- 3.7%, and for the Democratic primary
component it’s +/-5.6%.

This survey was conducted through automated telephone interviews and
interviews over the internet to voters who don’t have landline phones.

Automated telephone surveys of 691 voters, only 310 of whom were Democratic primary voters.

If your n is 310 for a national automatic survey, your results are crap.

Liberals are WAY smarter than that.

[taught_me_patience]

178. You forgot the sarcasm tag.

Clearly "Base" = "Total".

[Cosmic Kitten]

183. mehbee ;~/

But it doesn't change the numbers.

I'm not so paternalistic to believe DUers
cant read the data and make their own inferences.

It was not stated that her numbers reflected Democratic voters.

Maybe, DU needs to bone up on POLLING, and reading polling results?

The only way we can prevent being mislead is if DU members
can discriminate what people say, versus what POLLS ACTUALLY REPORT!

[DemocratSinceBirth]

210. Well, if your inference was that only 45% of those Democrats polled ...

Well, if your inference was that only 45% of those Democrats polled had a favorable opinion of Ms. Clinton you drew the wrong inference.


The poll you cited indicated that of all those polled (Republicans, Democrats, and Independents) forty five percent had a favorable opinion of Ms. Clinton and forty seven percent of those polled had an unfavorable opinion of Ms. Clinton. Among Democrats she had a favorable rating of seventy nine percent and a unfavorable rating of thirteen percent, ergo:







What's being off by nearly three hundred percent among "friends" any way?

[msanthrope]

181. When did American high schools stop teaching basic math terms? nt

[Cosmic Kitten]

184. Anything to add or just snark?

[NCTraveler]

206. They did add something.

Your replies throughout are a reflection of the education system in this country. Your post number 55 really made that clear.

[Agschmid]

213. Yup.

Last time I checked that's not quite how math works...

[NCTraveler]

218. Some things I just don't get.

You won't see me post on the topic of GMO's here because I am completely uneducated on them. We only have so much time in our lives to educate ourselves on things and we can't all be experts or even knowledgeable about everything. I have made mistakes at du and been quickly corrected. I would even say I have had my ass handed to me and rightly so. I do try to stick to that which I know. There is nothing wrong with admitting an error. I find it to be a very good thing to admit, as it shows an ability to change and learn, although one doesn't want to find themselves doing it often. When one continues down a path of propping up a thought that has been proven to be incorrect, the word necessary to describe them is no longer uneducated.

Sorry I am as uneducated as I am with respect to GMO's. I only have so much time and that is an area I have yet to jump into. I'm sure I will at some point. Bad Traveler Bad.

[Agschmid]

219. I there with you, you won't see me in one of those threads... I know better.

And I as well have had my ass handed to me, sometimes it's a good experience.

Thanks for the reply.

[msanthrope]

247. When you have an OP as broken as this one...one as poorly resourced

and with obvious mathematical flaws?

You have to reach a certain level of erudition before I 'add.'

[Thinkingabout]

185. What base, the GOP base, if 47% of the GOP base then this should scare the hell out of the GOP.

Kinda misleading on thread name, looks like Hillary being 47% of the GOP base is too much to expect.

[Cosmic Kitten]

196. I know, right?

It's very confusing what the poll ACTUALLY reports?!?!

Someone, please, explain polling, and statistics
so that DUers cannot be so easily mislead by
reporting PERCENTAGES!

[Agschmid]

207. We've tried...

Several times now.

[99Forever]

203. That number keeps growing.

As more Democrats become enlightened, the pace will quicken.

[Agschmid]

208. It's actually only 13% of Democrats who view her unfavorably, in this poll.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

211. Don't confuse the poor fella with facts:

It will only upset him.

[daredtowork]

216. Revamping Hillary's "Brand" is Not Enough

She either represents you or she doesn't. It's all about the policy/platform and freaking TRIANGULATION!!!

[DanTex]

217. Well, in this case, it apparently is, because the OP is flat-out wrong about the poll numbers.

The actual number is 14% disapproval among dems, and 5% among "very liberal." The fact that this OP hasn't been self-deleted after this was pointed out, and instead has 22 recs, is a testament to the mindset of the Hillary haters. Facts be damned!

[McCamy Taylor]

220. Which base? First base?

[Android3.14]

223. This should settle this silliness

I wrote to the author of the press release, and he responded, showing definitively that "base" in this context refers to all the respondents, including Democrats, Republicans and independents.

[stevenleser]

281. This comment of yours should have received more attention. Nothing like hearing it from the horses

Mouth, so to speak

[Agschmid]

282. Yup.

But then the OP switched their stories... Clearly they were never trying to talk about the "democratic base" only an idiot would think so...

So much fail here in this one OP. I'd love to let it sink but good lord.

[Android3.14]

291. Thanks

Oh well. Lies spread while the truth is getting its shoes on.

[BklnDem75]

225. Base = 691 registered voters

All the percentages are 'based' on that number.

[Agnosticsherbet]

241. Like....+1

Because DU does not have a like button.

[Hekate]

228. My goodness, get a grip on yourself. It's a wide-open primary with lots of choices coming up...

Why we've got a whole clown car of Democratic candidates jumping up and down at the chance to take on Hillary.

[muriel_volestrangler]

233. Whose bright idea was it to make Cosmic Kitten a host of Populist Reform of the Democratic Party?

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=profile&uid=318616

If this is what reform produces, we are screwn.

[Tarheel_Dem]

285. "Screwn" indeed!!!

[Beacool]

234. That's not accurate, it was asked of all respondents.

The "base" would be if only Democrats had participated in the poll. Of all the people who may be potential candidates in 2016, only two had a higher positive v. negative score, Ben Carson and Mike Huckabee. Realistically, neither one will be the Republican nominee. If the question would have been only posed to Democrats do you think that Bush's favorable/unfavorable ratio would only be 1%?

54% of Democrats want Hillary to run for president, 16% want Biden to run and 12% want Warren. Those are the results of the base, not what you proclaimed.

Dislike Hillary all you want, but try not to manipulate results.

[DCBob]

240. Im alarmed how you've totally confused the facts..

Yet refuse to admit it when clearly explained by several posters above.

[34th Avenue]

248. As a Daikykos pollster...

PPP would commit suicide by coming up with pro - Hillary numbers.

[Number23]

250. Thank you for so thoroughly validating stevenleser and LynneSinn

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10026276064
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10026282138

Not that they needed your help, mind you. But it was so wonderful that you decided to do so anyway.

[JI7]

251. HAHAHHHAHHAHAHHAH

[Aerows]

253. I'd vote for her

against Satan.

[JI7]

258. you should apply for a job with cnn

Obama 49 Romney 40 TIE

OBama 45 romney 46 Romney leading

[giftedgirl77]

260. This is basic chart reading at this point....

We aren't even in the realm of math anymore. Hell, you don't even have to read the chart to know you are blatantly wrong you not only have been explained it several times there's now a damn email in the thread explaining what base means.

You're entire OP is complete & total bullshit & you should have the decency to either admit that you were wrong or are intentionally trying to push a false narrative. At this point it is becoming obvious which one it is.

[Number23]

261. She's lock out of her own thread, gg. So no reply will be forthcoming.

Just take a second, take a deep breath and take it all in. Because this is some world class, Grade A Fail we have all been privy to today.

[giftedgirl77]

262. Ha figures, my first post in this OP blatantly called it

an epic fuckin fail. This crap should have been shit canned a long time ago. Utter garbage.

[Agschmid]

263. What post got the hide?

I skimmed but don't see it...

ETA: Found it... Yikes.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

264. I don't think when you get a hide you're locked out of the entire thread./NT

[Agschmid]

265. You are.

[zappaman]

266. Yes, you are. n/t

[DemocratSinceBirth]

267. Interesting. In that case

[Agschmid]

268. Remember he dies in the end...

And it's not pleasant.

[Number23]

275. Hillary concurs

(I like to think this was the face she'd make if she ever read this OP)

And though I do like and respect Hillary, I have my issues with her, particularly during her term as SoS. But this DU anti-Hillary brigade is so full of crap that I find myself defending her more than I want.

[Cha]

271. You are.

[JI7]

279. she is posting similar things in another thread and refuses to acknowledge

the failure of this OP

[Hekate]

295. Oy. Then I guess the cosmic furball didn't make it all the way up yet.

This has been amazing.

[SoapBox]

277. This...would not surprise me at all.

I've said it before and will say it again...personally, I feel she is unelectable.

While there is Bush Burn Out, I think there is even a larger Clinton Burn Out.

[onenote]

278. I've seen some stupid and-or dishonest posts at DU, but this one takes the cake.

Even Bill O'Reilly couldn't have done a better job misstating that poll's results.

[Jamaal510]

286. I don't know which is more embarrassing:

the OP misinterpreting his/her own poll, or the thread getting any recs at all.

[Tarheel_Dem]

288. I'm gonna say it's "the recs" as the OP truly seems incapable of being embarrassed.

[Jamaal510]

289. It's sad when

you think about all the wingnuts who infiltrate this site and probably laugh at threads like these.

[Tarheel_Dem]

287. Seriously?

[SidDithers]

292. Kick. For shits and giggles...nt

Sid

[Aerows]

296. Water is wet.

Liberals don't like opportunists, because we have been burned before by them.