Poll: Clinton to run in 2008, but won't win

[IDemo]

Also, 80 percent don't think Condoleezza Rice could win presidency

Updated: 8:47 a.m. ET Feb. 23, 2006

ALBANY, N.Y. - Two-thirds of Americans believe Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton will run for president, but only one-third believe she can win, according to a national poll released Wednesday.

Almost 80 percent said they don't think Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, a Republican, could win the White House either.

Gender is a factor, pollster Lee Miringoff said."It looks like whether you treat them together or separately, it would certainly be an uphill fight for either of them, and clearly part of that has to do with a continuing reluctance on the part of a large number of American voters to think in terms of a woman in the White House," said Miringoff, the head of Marist College's Institute for Public Opinion.

Twenty-seven percent of voters said they were not likely to vote for a woman candidate in 2008 no matter which party ticket she headed, according to the poll sponsored by WNBC-TV in New York City. Of that 27 percent, almost one-third said they wouldn't back a female candidate because "women are not up to the job" while 10 percent said it was because the presidency is "a man's job."

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/11517609/

[Toucano]

1. Is this a poll of registered voters, likely voters, or morans? n/t

[Radio_Lady]

25. In the 1970s, I went on record as saying, "Americans will NOT elect any

woman as President before they elect a black man." I still believe that. I wouldn't even hazard a guess about someone of either sex who is of Hispanic or Asian descent.

Furthermore, I think that any male president will have to have a wife of the same race who is duty-bound to be her husband's assistant while he does his job. That's why I believe I turned off of Howard Dean in the latter days of his campaign. His wife wanted to stay in Vermont and continue with her country doctor practice, while Howard was in the midst of a heated campaign. Maybe I'm traditional, but it just doesn't work for me.

Make peace a worldwide priority in 2006!

Radio_Lady

[BlueEyedSon]

2. Enough with the dynastic presidencies already!

[ChairmanAgnostic]

6. bravo.

and no shit. I was hoping someone would mention this problem.

[HughBeaumont]

42. Reagan (Bush), Bush, Clinton, Bush, Bush or Clinton?

We get it, why doesn't the REST of the world?

No wonder we're so fascinated with the British Monarchy - we have one ourselves.

Time for some new blood, and that right soon.

[IDemo]

3. more from the original source (Marist Poll) :

http://www.maristpoll.marist.edu/

Original poll here (embargoed): http://www.maristpoll.marist.edu/usapolls/HC060222.htm

[electropop]

4. The real problem they share: Both are war supporters.

60% will vote against anybody who voted for the war.

[IndianaGreen]

7. I think the percentage of those that won't vote for a warmonger is less

than that, far less in fact, but it is still significant enough to deny victory to any candidate that will not end the war at once.

Hopefully the US will be forced out of Iraq before the elections!

[karynnj]

20. Not really true

I know people who would currently answer to feeling the war was wrong (or a mistake) that would vote for Hillary. (She's not my first choice). There was no vote for war. The motives for people voting yes on the IWR ranged from those who were for the war even after we invaded and found no weapons (including Democrats like Edwards, who said on Hardball in late 2003 that he agreed with the war) to people who wanted Bush to negotiate and avoid war. Some of these people, like Kerry and Harkin, spoke out aginst the war in early 2003, before the invasion. And as someone who went to anti-war rallies in DC and NYC in early 2003, I would rather vote for John Kerry than anyone.

[Strong Atheist]

5. .

:popcorn:

[wicket]

8. WTF?

Twenty-seven percent of voters said they were not likely to vote for a woman candidate in 2008 no matter which party ticket she headed, according to the poll sponsored by WNBC-TV in New York City. Of that 27 percent, almost one-third said they wouldn't back a female candidate because "women are not up to the job" while 10 percent said it was because the presidency is "a man's job."

:grr:

[tnlefty]

11. Yeah, as if the currrent occupant is 'up to the job'!!!

morans

[Yupster]

16. But 10 % of 27 % is less than 3 %

of the total number of people polled said that the presidency is a man's job.

Is 3 % bad?

I would think you could get 3 % of poll responders agreeing to anything just because of marking the wrong box by mistake.

[Texacrat]

26. Sad thing is that rhetoric is on this board

Not in the form of people who directly oppose Sen. Clinton, but people who constantly harp how she's unelectable because she's a woman and we need a Southern white male like Clark or Edwards to run.

[liberalmike27]

9. Don't Care for Her

I'd rather have a candidate that was a little further away from the center. But with a bad choice, and her as the less bad choice, I'd certainly think about voting for her.

I see such little difference between republicans and democrats generally, though Bush has certainly moved so far to the right of his initial campaign position that he widens the gap some. But the problem with Hillary lies in her continuing to out-republican the competition, which will not work. We desperately need a candidate who will try to tap into that vein of 80 million Americans who didn't bother to vote. Certainly some apathy exists within this group, but a lot of them don't vote as they just don't see either candidate convincingly speaking to their needs.

Dean proved that a candidate can gain funding in small amounts from ordinary Americans, and the Internet proved to be quite the equalizer. Let us look for a real democrat, and not allow the media to dissuade us again, as they did with Dean. The MSM puts forward a false choice, and pretty much steers us to candidates on both sides who they want to run. We need to run away from their candidates. And please, no more Skull and Bones. We are guaranteed a war if we get one of those in office, no matter which party, and no reruns either.

[karynnj]

43. Please stop this nonsense

"And please, no more Skull and Bones. We are guaranteed a war if we get one of those in office, no matter which party, and no reruns either." It is beyond stupid and attacks a decent man who even if he doesn't win the nomination will be a very strong, principled voice of the Demaocratic party.

This is clearly an attack specificaly on John Kerry. Kerry's 30 plus year record is emphaticly not that of a war monger - in truth, he is likely one of the least likely to take this country to war. If he did, it would very clearly be when there was genuine danger and only after every diplomatic means was used.

Listen to the end of his 1971 speech, his appeal was for a change in how the US faced the world. A few days later he spoke of a committment that went beyond one war. He fought the covert war that Reagan initiated via the Contras. He spoke very dramaticly against the first Gulf War insisting that a longer diplomatic effort could avoid war - that war was really for oil.

I'm sure you have a list of real reasons why you don't like or support Kerry, but to call him a war monger is neither fair or sensible. His history clearly doesn't bear out that insult and there is no one else, Hillary, Edwards, Gore (the deciding vote - the last one needed for the first Gulf War) or even the Republicans, who you have accused of making us "guaranteed a war". (Oddly some of the RW that said he was a dove were closer, but ignored that fact that he would protect the country.)

[bdot]

10. Them running would be an excellent way to get a 3rd party candidate. :)

[jamesinca]

12. Hilly and Condi campaign

Either everybody over 18 would vote or nobody would show up. I think the media would cover their fashion interest and decorating plans for the WH. I seriously doubt they would cover any of the "manly" issues like foreign policy and the war on terror.

[Dover]

13. Only the elite can afford to run for the presidency these days.

Nice little club they have there, eh? Members only.

No shirt, no shoes, no money.......no service.

[AlGore-08.com]

14. As we used to say back in the day, "... DUH!"

eom

[AndyTiedye]

15. We Want a Woman Like Barbara Boxer!

[Army]

17. Please, Lord...

Just let me have a Hillary vs. Condi race.

I'll be watching the news 24/7. :bounce:

[brentspeak]

18. NOBODY'S going to be prez in 2008 who's a controversial figure

After Nixon, what did the people want? A long respite from daily presidential headlines. Hence, Gerald Ford and Jimmy Carter.

And after a long respite from daily presidential headlines, what did the people want? Another "charismatic" president who they can argue about at the dinner table. Hence, Ronald Reagan.

These things go in cycles; Americans usually choose their next president based on the personality of the president who preceded him.

So, after eight years of daily chaos with Bush, eight years of everyone's lives being dominated by a president, Americans are weary of even thinking about a President. That eliminates potential Republican candidates like Jeb Bush, Rick Santorum, and Bill Frist -- all controversial, all likely to make headlines for something or another.

It also eliminates potential Democratic candidates like Howard Dean and (needless to say) Hillary Clinton. It also eliminates (unfortunately) an outspoken, charismatic, not-afraid-to-speak-his-mind Democrat like Montana Gov. Brian Schweitzer.

Possible candidates like Mark Warner or (maybe) Gen. Clark are kind of low-key Dems that the public might feel comfortable electing.

[Texacrat]

27. Warner is polling worse than Clinton

n/t

[superconnected]

19. It doesn't matter who runs. They've stolen 2 elections.

At this point I think we're lucky if we even have another election.

It getting stolen is a given.

[RelativelyJones]

21. Pipedream

Unless she does something bold and dramatic her story is wrote. She`s skating on the name and she KNOWS it (because she's a smart egg). At this point she can look forward to doing less well than Kerry in 2004.

[mantis49]

22. If she won the primaries, I'd vote for her because it would

be my only choice. However, her candidacy would be too divisive. Her name is "Clinton," after all.

I want Al Gore to do it again, and I think that now many voters regret having voted for * and would like to see him take the place in which he so rightfully belonged.

For me, it has nothing to do with gender.


Edited for grammar.

[Texacrat]

28. Clinton's divisive, but Gore isn't?

I don't get you?

[AlGore-08.com]

35. In 2000, Gore got 60% of the vote in New York State, HRC got 55%

That's all I'm sayin'...

[ktlyon]

41. I to would like to see Gore.

It would be nice to be able to compare a Gore presidency after 8 years to this Bush nightmare. Then we will have a clear view of what could have been the start of this century.

Also so far I think he is the best candidate.

[oasis]

23. Hillary will run, and win. They always underestimate the power of Hill.

:spank: She will kick their asses.:spank:

[VegasWolf]

24. I won't be voting for her because of her war stance. nt

[Placebo]

29. HILLARY '08!

IT IS TIME FOR A STRONG LEADER. A WISE LEADER. A SMART LEADER. A VISIONARY LEADER.

IT IS TIME FOR PRESIDENT HILLARY RODHAM CLINTON.

HILLARY '08! www.hillaryclinton.com HILLARY '08! www.hillaryclinton.com HILLARY '08! www.hillaryclinton.com HILLARY '08! www.hillaryclinton.com HILLARY '08! www.hillaryclinton.com HILLARY '08! www.hillaryclinton.com HILLARY '08! www.hillaryclinton.com HILLARY '08! www.hillaryclinton.com HILLARY '08! www.hillaryclinton.com HILLARY '08! www.hillaryclinton.com HILLARY '08! www.hillaryclinton.com HILLARY '08! www.hillaryclinton.com HILLARY '08! www.hillaryclinton.com HILLARY '08! www.hillaryclinton.com HILLARY '08! www.hillaryclinton.com HILLARY '08! www.hillaryclinton.com HILLARY '08! www.hillaryclinton.com HILLARY '08! www.hillaryclinton.com

[RDU Socialist]

30. IT'S PEANUT BUTTER CLINTON TIME

PEANUT BUTTER CLINTON TIME, PEANUT BUTTER CLINTON TIME... WHERESHEAT, WHERESHEAT? PEANUT BUTTER CLINTON WITH A BASEBALL BAT, PEANUT BUTTER CINTON WITH A BASEBALL BAT

[Placebo]

31. HILLARY '08!

WE DON'T WANT HER BECAUSE SHE'S A WOMAN. AMERICA NEEDS HER BECAUSE OF HER STRONG LEADERSHIP.

SHE CAN RESCUE THIS NATION BEFORE IT GOES OFF THE DEEP END.

[RDU Socialist]

32. AGREED

America needs Hillary Clinton because she has proven that she can handle all kinds of situations. Terrorism, scandal, owning a cat and dog, she's done it all and with the kind of grace one would expect only from royalty.

[Placebo]

33. HILLARY '08!

SHE IS THE CLOSEST AMERICA WILL COME TO ROYALTY. BUT IN A GOOD WAY. A DEMOCRATIC WAY.

HILLARY '08!

[RDU Socialist]

34. Her intelligence reminds me of Abigail Adams,

her strong feminist sentiments are remeniscent of Eleanor Roosevelt, and her personal strength in the face of adversity is equal to Dolly Madison. Hillary Clinton is a combination of all the greatest women our country ever had all in one.

CLINTON 08!

[Placebo]

36. WELCOME TO DU!

:hi:

THIS BOARD COULD USE SOME MORE HILLARY SUPPORTERS, WE'RE A RARE BREED AROUND HERE!

[RDU Socialist]

37. I don't understand why not

Being that she was so firmly involved in the best administration overall since FDR was President, and has done an excellent job in the Senate, she would seem like the absolute best possible choice for President. I mean seriously, who can compete with her judiciousness? Her competence? Her grace under fire? Hillary can return our country to the greatness we saw under Clinton and Roosevelt.

[Placebo]

38. SO RIGHT. YOU'RE SPOT ON!

I'VE NEVER HEARD THE CASE FOR HILLARY SUMMED UP SO SUCCINCTLY OR PERFECTLY.

BRAVO! :applause:

[darkism]

39. Hillary will be our biggest loss since McGovern.

Except she's FOR the war. And that's not just DU hyperbole.

[ktlyon]

40. Is this a possible scenario?

What if Cheney resigns, steps down or is removed then
C. Rice is appointed VP then
Bush is removed and Rice becomes Pres.

Possible or too scary to think about?
Is Bush impeachment unthinkable in this situation?