HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Retired » Retired Forums » 2016 Postmortem (Forum) » Poll: 50% Say Clinton Sho...

Tue May 31, 2016, 11:09 AM

Poll: 50% Say Clinton Should Keep Running Even If Indicted

"Most continue to believe likely Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton is a lawbreaker, but half of all voters also say a felony indictment shouldnít stop her campaign for the presidency.

The latest Rasmussen Reports national telephone and online survey finds that 43% of Likely U.S. Voters think Clinton should immediately stop campaigning if she is charged with a felony in connection with her use of a private e-mail server while secretary of State. Fifty percent (50%), however, think she should continue running until a court determines her guilt or innocence. (To see survey question wording, click here.)

Voters were evenly divided on this question in January, but at that time we didnít include the name of any candidate.

Among Democratic voters, 71% believe Clinton should keep running, a view shared by only 30% of Republicans and 46% of voters not affiliated with either major party.

Forty percent (40%) of all voters say they are less likely to vote for Clinton because of the e-mail issue, while nearly half (48%) say it will have no impact on their vote. Just eight percent (8%) say the issue makes them more likely to vote for the former first lady.

Sixty-five percent (65%) consider it likely that Clinton broke the law by sending and receiving e-mails containing classified information through a private e-mail server while serving as secretary of State. This includes 47% who say itís Very Likely. These findings are unchanged from January. Thirty percent (30%) still say Clinton is unlikely to have broken the law with the e-mail arrangement, with 16% who say itís Not At All Likely."

http://m.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/general_politics/may_2016/50_say_clinton_should_keep_running_even_if_indicted

This is an interesting poll and it's kinda what I expected.

92 replies, 12330 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 92 replies Author Time Post
Reply Poll: 50% Say Clinton Should Keep Running Even If Indicted (Original post)
NWCorona May 2016 OP
flor-de-jasmim May 2016 #1
KingFlorez May 2016 #2
JonLeibowitz May 2016 #3
KingFlorez May 2016 #4
JonLeibowitz May 2016 #6
merrily May 2016 #28
NWCorona May 2016 #7
KingFlorez May 2016 #8
NWCorona May 2016 #15
Post removed May 2016 #9
KingFlorez May 2016 #10
Baobab May 2016 #20
EndElectoral May 2016 #54
LoverOfLiberty May 2016 #74
merrily May 2016 #30
CorkySt.Clair May 2016 #66
merrily May 2016 #68
artislife May 2016 #45
JimDandy May 2016 #64
JimDandy May 2016 #60
Baobab May 2016 #14
merrily May 2016 #31
scscholar May 2016 #56
merrily May 2016 #58
Tierra_y_Libertad May 2016 #26
ucrdem May 2016 #5
AgingAmerican May 2016 #16
Matt_in_STL May 2016 #18
ucrdem May 2016 #23
Matt_in_STL May 2016 #24
J_J_ May 2016 #19
Orsino May 2016 #32
Marr May 2016 #55
floppyboo May 2016 #11
Joob May 2016 #36
floppyboo May 2016 #49
leveymg May 2016 #62
Robbins May 2016 #12
Orsino May 2016 #38
reformist2 May 2016 #80
elana i am May 2016 #13
NWCorona May 2016 #17
Baobab May 2016 #34
Matt_in_STL May 2016 #21
Abouttime May 2016 #35
Matt_in_STL May 2016 #39
philosslayer May 2016 #71
Matt_in_STL May 2016 #72
DesMoinesDem May 2016 #92
grasswire May 2016 #51
Tierra_y_Libertad May 2016 #22
lumberjack_jeff May 2016 #25
bigwillq May 2016 #27
The_Casual_Observer May 2016 #29
morningfog May 2016 #33
COLGATE4 May 2016 #41
morningfog May 2016 #43
COLGATE4 May 2016 #46
morningfog May 2016 #50
COLGATE4 May 2016 #75
morningfog May 2016 #81
COLGATE4 May 2016 #83
morningfog May 2016 #85
COLGATE4 May 2016 #86
morningfog May 2016 #89
COLGATE4 May 2016 #90
floppyboo May 2016 #69
COLGATE4 May 2016 #73
floppyboo May 2016 #76
COLGATE4 May 2016 #77
floppyboo May 2016 #78
COLGATE4 May 2016 #79
bkkyosemite May 2016 #37
kstewart33 May 2016 #40
Arazi May 2016 #42
progressoid May 2016 #44
highprincipleswork May 2016 #47
Binkie The Clown May 2016 #48
EndElectoral May 2016 #52
B2G May 2016 #57
thesquanderer May 2016 #67
nadinbrzezinski May 2016 #53
JesterCS May 2016 #59
Jester Messiah May 2016 #61
Vinca May 2016 #63
lagomorph777 May 2016 #65
trudyco May 2016 #70
reformist2 May 2016 #84
Waiting For Everyman May 2016 #82
BillZBubb May 2016 #88
BillZBubb May 2016 #87
Cobalt Violet May 2016 #91

Response to NWCorona (Original post)

Tue May 31, 2016, 11:10 AM

1. If representative, it explains a lot.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NWCorona (Original post)

Tue May 31, 2016, 11:10 AM

2. Who are you going to vote for when Sanders is not the nominee?

When Clinton isn't indicted, who will you vote for between her and Trump?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to KingFlorez (Reply #2)

Tue May 31, 2016, 11:11 AM

3. This is a news post, and you follow up with a loyalty pledge? How transparent.

I also hear there are more than two people & parties on the ballot.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JonLeibowitz (Reply #3)

Tue May 31, 2016, 11:12 AM

4. Nobody said anything about loyalty

It's a simple question.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to KingFlorez (Reply #4)

Tue May 31, 2016, 11:15 AM

6. And one with a transparent purpose on this board.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to KingFlorez (Reply #4)

Tue May 31, 2016, 11:38 AM

28. You don't seem to get what "loyalty oath" means in this context.

Also, how people vote is their own business.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to KingFlorez (Reply #2)

Tue May 31, 2016, 11:15 AM

7. Is that a real question?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NWCorona (Reply #7)

Tue May 31, 2016, 11:16 AM

8. Yes

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to KingFlorez (Reply #8)

Tue May 31, 2016, 11:22 AM

15. First. I will never vote for Trump and will do everything in my power to stop him

The issue of voting for Clinton is much more complicated. I say that from the comfort of Washington State that will never go for a Republican. If the polls said something different I would have a dilemma.


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to KingFlorez (Reply #2)


Response to Post removed (Reply #9)

Tue May 31, 2016, 11:18 AM

10. Thank you

An honest answer is refreshing.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to KingFlorez (Reply #10)

Tue May 31, 2016, 11:26 AM

20. I would rather vote for Jill Stein than Hillary. At least Jill Stein opposes the FTAS.

Hillary should start her own party. Its dishonest for her to try to portray herself as a progressive when she is not.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Baobab (Reply #20)

Tue May 31, 2016, 12:34 PM

54. At least the Green Party advocates progressive ideas.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Baobab (Reply #20)

Tue May 31, 2016, 03:17 PM

74. Is dishonest for you to say

she's not a progressive Democrat when she is.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to KingFlorez (Reply #10)

Tue May 31, 2016, 11:39 AM

30. The question is out of order, and inappropriate, especially on DU.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to merrily (Reply #30)

Tue May 31, 2016, 02:03 PM

66. Yes, because nobody here ever talks about who they vote for.

 



You Berners sure are going out ugly!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to CorkySt.Clair (Reply #66)

Tue May 31, 2016, 02:20 PM

68. Talking about it on your own initiative is one thing. Asking others how they will vote is

another thing entirely, especially since some answers can get people banned from DU.


If you think my saying a question is inappropriate is ugly, I can conclude only that you have no idea how an ugly DU post actually reads. Either that, or your claim is totally phony. One or the other.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to KingFlorez (Reply #10)


Response to artislife (Reply #45)

Tue May 31, 2016, 01:46 PM

64. ZING!! n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to KingFlorez (Reply #10)

Tue May 31, 2016, 01:04 PM

60. Yes it is. And anyone who is being intimidated or punished for stating how they want to vote

or did vote, or are threatened with, or actually removed from DU for how they want to vote, or how they actually did vote, should retain an attorney. I believe the federal voting act specifically prohibits such actions.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to KingFlorez (Reply #2)

Tue May 31, 2016, 11:21 AM

14. If Clinton is the Democratic candidate I will just write in Bernie. I will support good people.

I wont vote for Trump and I will support the Democrats that I can, (many/most of whom are not part of this scheme) with the exception of the ones that I know are in bed with the current incumbents.

In terms of supporting candidates, yes if I see Bernie supporting a candidate I am much more likely to vote for them than the others.

The country desperately needs real change. I suspect that I am not the only Democrat who is very close to leaving the party if things don't really change really fast.

I like the proposal of putting Elizabeth Warren in charge of the party. If the "Third Way" people want their own party let them start one and join it.

They do not speak for most of us. They hijacked it by deception.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Baobab (Reply #14)

Tue May 31, 2016, 11:41 AM

31. You want to check the laws in your state before writing in anyone. In some states,

a write in at the top of the ticket invalidates the entire ballot, or so I've been told.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to merrily (Reply #31)

Tue May 31, 2016, 12:41 PM

56. Those Republicans will just throw it away

 

Throw it away

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to scscholar (Reply #56)

Tue May 31, 2016, 12:46 PM

58. Which Republicans? Please don't post things that just make you seem silly.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to KingFlorez (Reply #2)

Tue May 31, 2016, 11:30 AM

26. Neither.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NWCorona (Original post)

Tue May 31, 2016, 11:13 AM

5. 8% say the issue makes them more likely to vote for the former first lady.

That's loyalty! Incidentally I agree completely with the title. If Obama can't stop an indictment that will be a shame but it won't mean squat coming from team Issa. Some of us know a hawk from a handsaw.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ucrdem (Reply #5)

Tue May 31, 2016, 11:22 AM

16. That's political suicide

 

It would come from the FBI, if anyone.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ucrdem (Reply #5)

Tue May 31, 2016, 11:24 AM

18. What does Issa have to do with this?

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink



Response to ucrdem (Reply #23)

Tue May 31, 2016, 11:29 AM

24. He's not running the investigation, the FBI is.

 

As much as I hate Issa and know he is a criminal in his own right, his pointing out a glaring gap in security doesn't attribute the results of the investigation to him at all. This is all the FBI and the investigation, and results, will lie squarely with them.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ucrdem (Reply #5)

Tue May 31, 2016, 11:24 AM

19. "That's loyalty! " No, that is paid posters voting in online polls

 


No one is that stupid.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ucrdem (Reply #5)

Tue May 31, 2016, 11:44 AM

32. If only she'd knock over a bank or something.

She'd have the election in the bag.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ucrdem (Reply #5)

Tue May 31, 2016, 12:37 PM

55. Issa.

 

You really have no idea what you're talking about, do you?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NWCorona (Original post)

Tue May 31, 2016, 11:19 AM

11. Thanks! Interesting and a little unsettling.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to floppyboo (Reply #11)

Tue May 31, 2016, 11:45 AM

36. Not even a little

unsettling.

It's quite unsettling. But I agree with ya

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Joob (Reply #36)

Tue May 31, 2016, 12:20 PM

49. It's like watching a fatal car crash in slo-mo.

Or one of those bad nightmares where its as if you are running from disaster through clay mud. But you just can't wake up. Fuck!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to floppyboo (Reply #49)

Tue May 31, 2016, 01:38 PM

62. Maybe I'm old-fashioned, but I can't imagine any major political party running an unindicted felon

Not since this guy in 1972:

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NWCorona (Original post)

Tue May 31, 2016, 11:20 AM

12. Republicans and her supporters want her to run

the GOP is jumping for joy they can run against Her.her supporters don't care.they are happy as long as she is nominee on her doing anything including throwing all progressives under the bus.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Robbins (Reply #12)

Tue May 31, 2016, 11:46 AM

38. Of course they do.

A different Democratic nominee would mean the Right would have to change up some of their talking points. Selling Clinton outrage is the thing they already know how to do, whether or not it's effective.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Robbins (Reply #12)

Tue May 31, 2016, 03:25 PM

80. So 71% of Dems are so asinine they won't budge no matter what, and 31% of Repugs are laughing at us.


We're in a huge mess.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NWCorona (Original post)

Tue May 31, 2016, 11:20 AM

13. huh...

i'd have expected this kind of result for a repug candidate not a dem.

go figure.



Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to elana i am (Reply #13)

Tue May 31, 2016, 11:24 AM

17. The investment that people have in Hillary Clinton canít be overlooked.

If this was a Republican the numbers would be much higher.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NWCorona (Reply #17)

Tue May 31, 2016, 11:44 AM

34. They made the wrong investment.

Time for them to make another one. I suggest Bernie.

She can't win in this situation. She's the wrong choice. She's a dishonest phony.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NWCorona (Original post)

Tue May 31, 2016, 11:26 AM

21. And there is the number that proves the party has left me. 71% of Dems are okay with indictment.

 

When an overwhelming majority of the party is okay with a candidate under indictment, that says everything that needs to be said about blinding loyalty to a person and not the cause.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Matt_in_STL (Reply #21)

Tue May 31, 2016, 11:45 AM

35. The majority of democrats

 

have been seeing the repukes hound the Clintons since 1992, they see this as just the latest witch hunt. The majority of Americans view Hillary in a sympathetic light, she will win this November and become our Nations first female President. 50 years from now nobody will be talking about the emails but the history books will show that the first black president was succeeded by the first female president and both were Democrats. History will also show that trump will be the end of the repuke party, thanks to the Clintons.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Abouttime (Reply #35)

Tue May 31, 2016, 11:47 AM

39. This isn't a Republican witch hunt, this is an FBI investigation.

 

And while I doubt an indictment comes of it (whether deserved or not), the fact that 71% of the party is okay with a Federal indictment brought down by the Obama DOJ is rather disturbing and says a lot about where the party has gone. You can't claim to be the party of integrity when you are willing to elect someone who has to work their inauguration around their court dates.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Matt_in_STL (Reply #39)

Tue May 31, 2016, 03:13 PM

71. The head of the FBI was appointed by GW Bush

 

Therefore, another Republican investigation.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to philosslayer (Reply #71)

Tue May 31, 2016, 03:16 PM

72. Oh yes, it's all a conspiracy against Hillary.

 

Obama reappointed Comey at the FBI, so that one falls on him now. The State IG was also a Dem appointee, so how can we spin that one?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to philosslayer (Reply #71)

Tue May 31, 2016, 04:25 PM

92. No, he was appointed by Obama in 2013.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Matt_in_STL (Reply #21)

Tue May 31, 2016, 12:32 PM

51. well said. nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NWCorona (Original post)

Tue May 31, 2016, 11:27 AM

22. Sixty-five percent (65%) consider it likely that Clinton broke the law.

 

The perception of wrongdoing is often as damaging as the reality of wrongdoing.

Saying that it will have no impact on the election is whistling Dixie while having your head buried in the sand.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NWCorona (Original post)

Tue May 31, 2016, 11:29 AM

25. This is the upside of identity politics.

 

The fundamental reason for voting for you, your identity, doesn't change even if you're a criminal.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NWCorona (Original post)

Tue May 31, 2016, 11:35 AM

27. If indicted, she should end her White House bid

 

For the sake of the party. It would be a huge distraction.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NWCorona (Original post)

Tue May 31, 2016, 11:39 AM

29. A land line pole. Might as well invent the numbers.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NWCorona (Original post)

Tue May 31, 2016, 11:44 AM

33. We know she broke the law, the OIG said it. The only question left is whether her and/or her inner

 

circle broke a criminal law.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to morningfog (Reply #33)

Tue May 31, 2016, 11:57 AM

41. The OIG says she broke State Department regulations, not

any law. For breaking regs there are no penalties.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to COLGATE4 (Reply #41)

Tue May 31, 2016, 11:58 AM

43. Administrative laws are still federal law. She broke them.

 

No, there is no penalty, they are not violations of criminal laws. I made that clear.

The OIG provided evidence of a possible criminal violation: destruction of federal records, a felony.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to morningfog (Reply #43)

Tue May 31, 2016, 12:01 PM

46. We'll have to see if anyone pursues the destruction of records meme.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to COLGATE4 (Reply #46)

Tue May 31, 2016, 12:28 PM

50. By anyone, of course you mean "FBI" and by meme, of course you mean "evidence."

 

Four emails were obtained by the OIG which were not in HIllary's production to State. All those not produced, she claims to have destroyed. That is what you call a little problem.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to morningfog (Reply #50)

Tue May 31, 2016, 03:17 PM

75. When we see some facts we can talk about this more

intelligently. Until then it's rank speculation.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to COLGATE4 (Reply #75)

Tue May 31, 2016, 03:26 PM

81. We have facts. At least four federal public records were not produced by her

 

and she stated that she destroyed those not produced.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to morningfog (Reply #81)

Tue May 31, 2016, 03:27 PM

83. And?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to COLGATE4 (Reply #83)

Tue May 31, 2016, 03:29 PM

85. 18 U.S. Code ß 1519

 

18 U.S. Code ß 1519 - Destruction, alteration, or falsification of records in Federal investigations and bankruptcy-

Whoever knowingly alters, destroys, mutilates, conceals, covers up, falsifies, or makes a false entry in any record, document, or tangible object with the intent to impede, obstruct, or influence the investigation or proper administration of any matter within the jurisdiction of any department or agency of the United States or any case filed under title 11, or in relation to or contemplation of any such matter or case, shall be fined under this title, imprisoned not more than 20 years, or both.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to morningfog (Reply #85)

Tue May 31, 2016, 03:33 PM

86. Well, aside from having to prove that there was destruction with an "intent to impede, obstruct

or influence the investigation..." you also have to prove the "knowingly" part of it. Much easier said than done.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to COLGATE4 (Reply #86)

Tue May 31, 2016, 03:53 PM

89. The "knowingly" element goes to the destruction, which is already a proven fact.

 

Hillary, or someone on her staff, knowingly and intentionally destroyed the records.

The question unanswered publicly (but probably answered by the FBI) is whether there was an intent to impede, obstruct of influence.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to morningfog (Reply #89)

Tue May 31, 2016, 03:54 PM

90. I assume you have proof that they weren't destroyed by accident?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to COLGATE4 (Reply #41)

Tue May 31, 2016, 02:49 PM

69. No, the conclusion dfrom the OIG says this:

"... the office of the Secretary ... been slow ... to manage effectively the legal requirements..."

When are legal requirements not legal requirements? Why did they use this language? It does not say rules. I would think for a document with such far reaching implications and the time it took them to spit it all out that every word is chosen carefully.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to floppyboo (Reply #69)

Tue May 31, 2016, 03:16 PM

73. Rules are not laws. Calling them legal requirements begs the issue.

There are zero penalties for not following the rules. Not so with the laws.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to COLGATE4 (Reply #73)

Tue May 31, 2016, 03:19 PM

76. That's what I guessed. But can 'rules' have 'legal requirements'? Or just recommendations?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to floppyboo (Reply #76)

Tue May 31, 2016, 03:20 PM

77. They are requirements without any mechanism for enforcing them. I.e. closer to

suggestions than laws.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to COLGATE4 (Reply #73)

Tue May 31, 2016, 03:21 PM

78. I'm not sure I understand. Are you saying the OIG is begging the issue? That she broke the law?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to floppyboo (Reply #78)

Tue May 31, 2016, 03:23 PM

79. The OIG did not say she broke the law.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NWCorona (Original post)

Tue May 31, 2016, 11:46 AM

37. Well that's bull shit!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NWCorona (Original post)

Tue May 31, 2016, 11:47 AM

40. Sounds good to me.

Considering her opponent, I'd campaign for her.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NWCorona (Original post)

Tue May 31, 2016, 11:58 AM

42. It proves there really is a cult of personality with Hillary

They don't care about policies or integrity, they're solely about voting for her regardless of criminality.

Its proven here on a regular basis as Hillary supporters never want to discuss her positions, or Libya, or cluster bombs.

Explains a lot

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NWCorona (Original post)

Tue May 31, 2016, 11:59 AM

44. Rasmussen?

no thanks

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NWCorona (Original post)

Tue May 31, 2016, 12:01 PM

47. That is disgusting.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NWCorona (Original post)

Tue May 31, 2016, 12:09 PM

48. They must all be Trump supporters. n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NWCorona (Original post)

Tue May 31, 2016, 12:33 PM

52. Of course Republicans want her to run if she's indicted. Got to be kidding me.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to EndElectoral (Reply #52)

Tue May 31, 2016, 12:41 PM

57. And 70% of Dems

 

Unbelievable really.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to EndElectoral (Reply #52)

Tue May 31, 2016, 02:13 PM

67. Yup. Surprised it's only 30%. (n/t)

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NWCorona (Original post)

Tue May 31, 2016, 12:33 PM

53. Not surprised

 

And I expect this regardless of letter or name. People get way too invested in these people they do not know, and who could care less about them.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NWCorona (Original post)

Tue May 31, 2016, 12:52 PM

59. I weep for our country n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NWCorona (Original post)

Tue May 31, 2016, 01:33 PM

61. I bet the Republicans sure said so.

 

What an opportunity for them!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NWCorona (Original post)

Tue May 31, 2016, 01:40 PM

63. This has to be the "Onion."

If she's indicted and doesn't drop out we should rename the party. I suggest the "Titanic Party."

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NWCorona (Original post)

Tue May 31, 2016, 02:01 PM

65. Well, it's official.

71% of Democrats don't care about ethics. We are ready to merge with the GOP.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to lagomorph777 (Reply #65)

Tue May 31, 2016, 03:03 PM

70. I don't think an online pollwould be scientific

This poll doesn't sound valid at all if it includes an online poll. That can be easily manipulated. I do think a lot of people leaning towards Hillary don't really understand what all she's done or her covering up or possible RICO with the Clinton Foundation. They just think this is another Right Wing witch hunt.

But I seriously doubt that many Democrats would chose to ignore justice.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to lagomorph777 (Reply #65)

Tue May 31, 2016, 03:27 PM

84. I'll take it a step further. If the 71% prevail, I will drop them like a bad habit.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NWCorona (Original post)

Tue May 31, 2016, 03:26 PM

82. Great, we have a culture of corruption now.

And we wonder why we have problems.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Waiting For Everyman (Reply #82)

Tue May 31, 2016, 03:42 PM

88. Exactly, people accept it, especially if it someone they support. Very sad.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NWCorona (Original post)

Tue May 31, 2016, 03:41 PM

87. 71% say someone under indictment for a felony should keep running? That is disgusting.

The Democratic party truly has left me it seems. I would expect something like that from republicans, but never Democrats. The Third Way has won.

If the situation were reversed and it was the republican front runner under indictment, how many Democrats would feel the same?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NWCorona (Original post)

Tue May 31, 2016, 03:55 PM

91. very stupid idea.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread