Poll: Majority may vote for Clinton

[Walt Starr]

But opposition to 2008 run equally strong
Thursday, May 26, 2005 Posted: 5:02 PM EDT (2102 GMT)

(CNN) -- More than half of those responding to a new poll said they would be at least somewhat likely to vote for Sen. Hillary Clinton if she runs for president in 2008.

But those saying they are virtually certain to vote against her topped those virtually certain to support her by 10 percentage points.

The release of the poll comes amid steps by Edward Cox, son-in-law of President Richard Nixon, to challenge Clinton for her U.S. Senate seat from New York. (Full story)

Clinton served on the staff of the congressional Impeachment Inquiry in the wake of the Nixon's Watergate scandal in 1974.

<snip>

http://www.cnn.com/2005/POLITICS/05/26/hillary.clinton/index.html

[keithjx]

1. Holy Crap can a poll get any more worthless?

Seriously. This is a waste of time and electrons.
Or I think so, at least.
KJ

[struggle4progress]

13. From the network that believes we have no right to know. eom

[wallwriter]

2. I'd vote for Hillary, but what will be left of her

after the Swifties get done with her?

[nookiemonster]

18. I agree, and call total bullshit on this poll

"Hey Repugs! Maybe ya can influence your little sheeps' minds with your choice of candidate, but you're fucked if you think that you can pull that shit on us." :rant:

Bullshit. Totally.

[sallyseven]

20. She will be expecting it

and she will beat the living hell our of them. She will answer promply and they will look like fools. Like they really are.

[tinrobot]

41. What a chicken attitude.

You could say that about any candidate. What will be left of them after those mean nasty swifties attack them?

Here's some news - They will attack whoever is the nominee.

The only way we win is if we stand up to the likes of the swifties.

[Onlooker]

3. Controversial candidates win! Bland ones don't!

Anyone who thinks bland, non-controversial people win elections should think again. Look at Bush II, Clinton, Reagan, Kennedy, Johnson, Nixon -- all controversial.

Hillary is a great candidate because she really stands for something, makes people passionate, is a woman, and isn't afraid of the right wing. Sure, she has a lot of enemies, but how many bland candidates can you think of who beat controversial ones?

[sniffa]

10. yeah, she stands for cozying up with homophobes

fuck that, and fuck her for puLLing that shit. :mad:

[jobycom]

17. It's politics, everybody gets dirty. Bush visited the Pope, didn't make

him Catholic. Or anti-war.

[sniffa]

19. and i didn't vote for him either

[jobycom]

23. Well, when you find someone clean, competent and capable of winning

you let me know, k?

(BTW, glad to have you back!)

[sniffa]

27. it's good to be back

:hi:

i'm sorry, i can't back her after the dirt she's been pLaying in.

[jobycom]

29. She still smells better than the other parties, she's got my vote.

[sniffa]

30. not taLking about the other parties

i'm taLking about the dems. gimme cLark, gimme dean, gimme kerry again for christ's sake.

[jobycom]

32. Those are better?

They're all flawed, too. I'd pick Gore of Hillary. Kerry would be a tie, though she'd edge him out just because she's smarter. Dean, then Clark if he was all I had left. If they ran McCain against Clark... It'd be tough, but I'd go with the Republican calling himself a Democrat, whichever of the two that was by then.

[AlGore-08.com]

59. Clean, competent and PROVEN winner = Al Gore

For those keeping score at home, he:

Opposed the invasion of Iraq
Opposed the Patriot Act
Opposed Smirk's tax give-a-ways to the rich and self-absorbed
Let's cut to the chase: Opposed pretty much everything Smirk's done or said
Gave us all the Internet (there is nobody anywhere that has an accomplishment that even touches that)
Other accomplishments here ('cause I'm at work and don't have time to list them all):
http://www.algore-08.com/?option=com_content&task=section&id=13&Itemid=165

Started 20 points behind "any Republican" in 2000
Was outspent 2 to 1
Had the most hostile press in history
Won the popular vote by 1/2 million
Won the electoral vote but that's another story

8 years in the House
8 years in the Senate
8 years as "the most powerful Vice President in history who used his powers for good"

Stick with the winner - - Gore in 2008! :)

[Virginian]

67. What about John Edwards?

He may not have the experience of Al Gore, but all that personality counts for something.
I would like to know how he stands on the Iraq war now that the Downing Street Memo has been exposed.

[jobycom]

16. Good post, I agree. I think we have a real chance for our first female

president. That in itself would give her an edge difficult to beat.

[Placebo]

31. Agree!

Hillary '08

[Catherine Vincent]

4. I miss this Clinton:

[politicasista]

7. Me too

[BamaLefty]

8. Me too

:(

[loudsue]

5. How can 50% say yes, and 60% say no?

:freak: Well, they borrowed some folks that WEREN'T in the poll to make up 110%, of course! :applause:

Sounds like some of the 2004 election polls!

:kick::kick::kick:

[dave29]

6. Hey, I give 110% every day

hehe

[dsc]

11. That isn't what the story says

The story says there are three groups of people, those who definately would vote for Hillary, those who would consider voting for Hillary, and those who wouldn't vote for Hillary. The first two groups total around 50%, but the third group is 10 points bigger than the first group. One scenario which fits that would be 20% definately voting for her 30% would conisider, 30% wouldn't. The other 20% either refused to answer or something else in that scenario.

[alcibiades_mystery]

38. You're mistaking the results

More than half said "somewhat likely" - let's say, 53%
Those certain to oppose outnumbered those certain to support by 10% - let's say 27% certain to oppose and 17% certain to support, with 3% don't know.

[aneerkoinos]

9. Hooray!

For another pro-war DLC AIPAC candidate! Just what Murika needs.

[Nothing Without Hope]

12. This is total GOP spin, trying to keep people from turning to the Dem

party. The GOP WANT Clinton to the be candidate - it would be maximally divisive and would serve their purposes well. I'm betting the way the poll was set up and conducted insured this result, which was the goal. We've been hearing this from the GOPs for some time now. It's total bunk, but it's also damaging propaganda.

[loudsue]

14. Exactly right: the GOP tries to DIVIDE, DIVIDE, DIVIDE

We are now the DIVIDED States of America, and it was intended to be that way by the neocons, both those in government, and in media ownership.

And since "a house divided against itself cannot stand" is a true statement, it tells me that the republicans, and their financiers, have wanted to destroy America for a very long time. They've been positioning the media, think tanks, and anti-labor forces to divide our country to the point of civil war, so that we would no longer be able to require "rights" from our bosses, the elite, the capital ownership class.

The Divided Capitalist States of America...that is what they have wanted, and have now created.

I mean, really: Does Kenny Lay want to be told how to treat employees, or be told that they can't promote a man over a woman, just because he's a man?? Or do they want to be told that, hey, maybe people with different shades of skin have BRAINS and TALENT, and need to be hired, paid and promoted as such? NOOOO! That's not how the good ole boy network functions. The big money people and corporations in this country DO NOT LIKE BEING TOLD to treat human beings with respect and equal rights. Nor do they like being told that they have to share a bigger portion of their "winnings" with the people who helped get them there.

:kick:

[anitar1]

15. I agree. They really are trying to stir up

their fundies--pour on the hate! And divide. They advocate lying ect to win.And they admit it.

[Onlooker]

21. Your soooo wrong

The GOP is afraid of Hillary. Most people thought Reagan would never win. Most people thought Nixon would never win. Most people thought Bush II would never win. Keep supporting wimpy moderates like Kerry, Gore, Dukakis, and so on, and watch the Republicans win again.

Your naive post opposing a candidate because she's divisive shows you don't know much about presidential history (where divisive candidates more often win than lose) and your ready to go down the same failed path of uninspired, wimpy moderation.

[aneerkoinos]

22. Talkin about wimpy moderates

Mz. Hillary is wimpier and "moderated" to the right of all those you mentioned.

[silvermachine]

55. I have to agree...

...her rightward shifts since becoming Senator have been disappointing. But not too surprising.

[MADem]

53. Most people thought Bill did not have a rat's chance in hell!

Remember Genifer Flowers? Bush 1 was cruising, laughing, thinking he had it sewed up...and then came a surprising strong showing for Bill in NH. And of course, they thought it was a fluke, but then, the Comeback Kid kept coming back. One by one, the field melted away, leaving the Big Dog standing alone.

He picked the GOP pockets--while they were making fun of him as a Big Mac eating, french fry loving, can't keep his pickle in his pants, backwoods rube, he was out there pressing the flesh and delivering a message that really resonated with people who had lost their jobs, had no skills for the new economy, and were just down and out. He brought hope, and he delivered on his his promises.

[earth mom]

36. I'm thinking the EXACT same thing.

The RW wants Hillary to run because they know they can beat her. Look what they did to Dean-they didn't want him to run and they got rid of him quickly didn't they? And they don't want Kerry again that's for sure. Because they know Kerry won in the first place and that next time around he will win by such a wide margin that they won't be able to steal the vote again!

[Rainscents]

24. My opinion...

Hilliary/Clark vs Frist/Bush (Jeb)....... I think Hilliary will win land slide! Even tho, I am not a big fan of Hilliary, I vote for Hilliary any day over frist... I'm hoping that, Frist does run.

[howmad1]

26. Hillary/Clark

First reasonable post I've read. Although I think I would prefer a Clark/Clinton ticket. Clark could cancel out all the bullshit the thuglicans will come up with against Hillary.:-)

[llmart]

25. I have always thought that many, many people........

would vote for Hillary with the logic that they would be getting Bill back because he would be advising her. Don't dismiss that reasoning. Let's face it. Times were extremely good under President Clinton and people want that back.

[Chicago Democrat]

28. I'll vote for any Democrat...

But i dont think she's gonna make it.

[high density]

33. Who pays for this garbage, the GOP?

Have there ever been such useless polls done in the past? Probably the only useful thing this poll says is that about 56% consider her to be a liberal, which I think is a problem since she's really a moderate. If the Democrats are going to run a moderate, then they might as well find a candidate who is perceived as being a moderate. I suppose though with the country tilted so far to the right, I could understand Clinton being perceived as a liberal.

[doni_georgia]

34. Halliburton...Chalabi...Texas Fundraisers...USA Next...

.....and you're asking how the GOP can pay for garbage????

Come on!!!!


Mac in Ga

[Voltaire99]

35. Not likely!

The pro-invasion, pro-outsourcing, soften-our-rhetoric-on-abortion senator from New York?

Heh; fat fucking chance. I was rather hoping for more of a choice between GOP and GOP-lite, but if the party can't provide one, I'm sure there's a more interesting independent candidate worthy of my vote. I'm finished voting for sad, diluted simulacrums.

[Democat]

37. Hillary Clinton is a sure loser in 2008!

Even if you believe this is true, the majority of people responding to this poll are not the majority of people who will vote in the next election.

Hillary will not win in 2008.

[bdot]

40. I know I will either vote against her or not at all.

Depends on who the other parties are running. I don't like Hillary.

[oasis]

39. Hillary's the one.

[WatchWhatISay]

42. Bullshit!

And so begings the 2008 campaign for CNN to tell the Democratic party (once again) who their candidate should be.

[Mokito]

68. I get that feeling also

Someone seems quite eager to push Hillary Clinton forward as the 2008 democratic candidate. Why?

I mean this is not the first thread I see abourt such polls indicating she could win, which doesn't mean she will win.

[Freddie Stubbs]

43. Poll majority say they'd be likely to vote for Clinton

By Susan Page, USA TODAY

WASHINGTON — For the first time, a majority of Americans say they are likely to vote for Hillary Rodham Clinton if she runs for president in 2008, according to a USA TODAY/CNN/Gallup Poll taken Friday through Sunday.

The survey shows that the New York senator and former first lady has broadened her support nationwide over the past two years, though she still provokes powerful feelings from those who oppose her.

Clinton commands as much strong support — but more strong opposition — as George W. Bush did in a Newsweek poll in November 1998, two years before the 2000 election. She is in slightly stronger position than then-vice president Al Gore, the eventual 2000 Democratic nominee, was in 1998.

"Over time, Clinton fatigue has dissipated ... and people are looking back on the Clinton years more favorably," says Andrew Kohut, director of the non-partisan Pew Research Center. In a Pew poll released this month, Kohut called former president Bill Clinton and the senator "comeback kids" because of their rising ratings.

more: http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2005-05-26-hillary-poll_x.htm

[BlueEyedSon]

44. Name recognition, plain and simple

[Avalux]

45. Name recognition is all

it's way too early for this kind of stuff. I guess I should resign myself to the fact that Hillary will be shoved down our throats by corporate media from now until the 2008 election. I really hope she doesn't run.

[oasis]

46. Hillary's the one.

:party:

[GarKeeper]

47. Waaay to early

I hope Wes Clark and Dennis Kucinich run again.

[Anarcho-Socialist]

48. Welcome to DU GarKeeper!

:hi: :toast:

[Dhalgren]

49. Welcome to DU!

Any Democrats chance will be determined by how strong the third party candidate is. If Hillary is the Democratic candidate, then a third party is almost sure to be relatively strong.

[dubyaD40web]

50. This quote says it all.

"Over time, Clinton fatigue has dissipated ... and people are looking back on the Clinton years more favorably,"

[JuniorPlankton]

51. There will be a couple of years of sliming her, though

The Republican dirt-machine hasn't even been started!

[im10ashus]

58. It won't happen.

At least, it shouldn't happen. First off, she'll never win the states we need to win. Second, these polls don't reflect what most American's are feeling. It is reflective of only a handful of people. I like Hillary. But I like her best in the Senate. There are better candidates, IMHO.

[Mizmoon]

52. You're not towing the DU line: Everyone's supposed to hate Hillary

:sarcasm: No one likes her, she's a nobody except for her husband, she's greedy, selfish, too ambitious(?), eats babies, and she'll never win the Senate seat in NY either - especially not against such a brilliant repub like Rick Lazio. :eyes: :eyes:


:puke:

[MADem]

54. I like her!

Smart, aggressive, proactive, able to see the forest AND the trees, and a hard, hard worker. Plus, not that it should matter, but in public life it does, she makes a very nice appearance, too.

If she wants to run, I'll vote for her.

[0007]

56. Booooooo

[Strawman]

57. I'm tired of brand name marketing style politics

I have mixed feelings about Hillary Clinton politically, but have this overriding feeling that it's time for some new people and I don't want to see these competing dynasties. Bush brand versus Clinton brand or would you prefer Kennedy/Schwarzenegger brand? Which family sitcom dramedy would you prefer to watch for the next 4 years? Enough. Maybe that's unfair. Objectively, her family shouldn't disqualify her, but I think this shallow brand name marketing style politics is bad for the country.

[T_i_B]

60. Americans 'likely' to vote for Hillary Clinton

The fact that this story is in such a RW source alone makes it a bit fishy to me IMHO.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2005/05/28/whillary28.xml&sSheet=/portal/2005/05/28/ixportal.html

Hillary Clinton, one of America's most prominent and yet polarising politicians, received two fillips yesterday to boost her supporters' hopes that she is the Democrats' best chance to take back the White House.

An opinion poll has for the first time indicated that a majority of Americans would be "likely" to vote for the former First Lady.

Mrs Clinton, now a senator for New York, had significantly broadened her support in the past two years, according to the Gallup poll, apparently reflecting her shift to the centre on key domestic and foreign policy issues.

Fuelling her supporters' delight, a former aide was acquitted in court last night of under-reporting the cost of a fund-raising reception for her 2000 Senate campaign.

[SolarAxi]

61. Hillary vs Condi?

I'm sorry, it's just that I had this terrible thought, what if the repugs try to run Condi against Hillary? Not that it would ever really happen but what a horrifying idea! Anyway, I won't vote for Hillary, she's too eager to be in with the Washington "elites". Sometimes she acts just like a Republican. Plus until we find a way to do something about Diebold and the like, how much do our votes actually count?

[truthisfreedom]

62. condi is a nebbish.

a nothing. a name on an oil tanker, nothing more.

[SolarAxi]

65. I agree, just kidding about Condi vs Hillary

But it would make a good horror flick...

[SolarAxi]

63. CLINTON PUSHING WOMEN IN COMBAT ROLES

Senator Hillary Clinton is moving against new limits on women's work in the military - a day after the House backed away from curbing female soldier assignments in combat zones.

Clinton said she would try to put the Senate on record opposing further restrictions on military rules regarding female soldiers.

http://www.newswatch50.com/news/local/story.aspx?content_id=5DC337C
5-D734-40CB-83CA-4A66D632E60C

Just what we need more cannon fodder for the back door draft. More motherless children. Equal opportunity Death. Wonderful.

(Gee, I wonder if Chelsea will ever see combat duty...)

[RebelOne]

64. I'll definitely vote for her.

I would love to see a woman president in my lifetime.

[Deja Q]

66. Cool. Kinda pointless until Oct. 30, 2008, but cool nonetheless.

[realcountrymusic]

69. Presidential Idol

Saw this recommended by a commenter on Metafilter. The Dems should hold an American Idol-style televised competition for a candidate. It is a brilliant idea. It would totally F with American politics. We'd win if we were careful to prescreen contestants for squeaky-clean pasts.

As for Ms. Clinton, not a chance in hell. I would vote for her if I had to, but please don't make it a necessity!

Besides, am I the only one who remembers Obama lighting up the television screen like a halogen bulb during the convention? I have my candidate.

RCM