Clinton's support amongst liberals is rising (new WaPo ABC News poll)

[rinsd]

Hillary Clinton's opponents have accused her of sounding too hawkish on Iran, of refusing to commit to a firmer timetable for removing troops from Iraq and of generally moving to the center -- all criticisms designed to undermine her support among the Democratic Party's liberal base.

But a new Washington Post-ABC News poll of the 2008 race shows a surprising trend: Clinton's support among liberals is actually rising, not falling, as the nomination debate has intensified.

A review of Post-ABC polls throughout the year, assembled by analyst Jennifer Agiesta of our polling unit, shows that Clinton has expanded her overall lead in the Democratic race in large part because of growing support among self-identified liberals.

The new poll showed 54 percent of liberals said they supported Clinton for the Democratic nomination, the second consecutive poll in which she has won the backing of more than half of all liberals. That represents a significant jump in liberal support from earlier in the year, when she was backed by 40-43 percent of those who identified themselves as liberals.

The opposite has happened to Barack Obama. His support among liberals has actually declined over the course of the campaign. He began the year with the support of 33 percent of liberals, topped out at 36 percent in July and now has drifted down to 25 percent.

More at the link http://blog.washingtonpost.com/the-trail/2007/11/05/post_178.html

[Tejanocrat]

1. NOT AMONGST THIS LIBERAL.

[fenriswolf]

2. sure it is

time to give her campaign another "shot in the arm" so that she is the so called "progressive" candidate, god this crap makes me wanna puke

[durrrty libby]

9. I love watching the Haters squirm and twist in the wind

:hi:

[fenriswolf]

11. hah name one true progressive stance

that she will actually do.

ps. social band aid programs do not count.

[durrrty libby]

16. Go read her DU support site. Her stances have been posted

hundreds of times, but blind hatred tends to make it tough to see.

[Tellurian]

25. Hillary is running a positive campaign..

Obama and Edwards unrelentless attacks on Hillary are turning people off to their candidacies. Their campaign strategy is backfiring big time. Obama and Edwards have gone from doing nothing to doing too much. They have fallen into the media's entrapment called for by Matthews and Bitzer "you must attack the front runner" to gain points.

[Cha]

32. Yeah, I'm sure you do,

durty.

[CoffeeCat]

27. I don't believe these polls for one second...

Do you ever notice how many polls the media conducts---just for Hillary???

Then these polls are packaged into stories and then disseminated on blogs--
reinforcing the misnomer that she is the inevitable front runner.

I call total bullshit on these polls. I don't believe them.

We all know the MSM is a tool of the political elite--of which Hillary is a part. Hillary
is leveraged by the media--at every turn--as a quid-pro-quo favor to Hillary for her
anti-deregulation votes. These corrupt politicians steal elections, perpetuate
war and desecrate the Constitution. Are we actually going to suggest that they wouldn't
concoct fake polls to prop up candidates?

This is so predictable. Hillary tanked in the debates, and now she need good news
to perpetuate the inevitability illusion.

Do they realize how transparent this all is? Really! Suggesting that she's surging
among liberals! :rofl: Yeah, paving the way for Bush to go to war with Iran is
a real hit with the liberals! God, these people are so focused on their own greed--
they have no idea how absurd and obvious their shenanigans are.

[theoldman]

3. I guess they want Bill back in the White House.

[Captain Hilts]

7. Maybe they think she has the best chance of beating the Republican?

I'm supportiing Biden then Richardson myself.

[avrdream]

4. Thanks for the info.

Good news for Senator Clinton.

[emilyg]

5. Excellent news.

[NC_Nurse]

6. I think Obama lost momentum when he started courting all

the religious folks. He alienated a lot of people, including gays, atheists, and people concerned about separation of church and state.
I guess he was trying to reach out to those folks, but I think it hurt him with a lot of others.

As for Hillary, I think more people are seeing her as inevitable so they are moving in her direction.

[mrreowwr_kittty]

22. But it's okay for Clinton to do the same thing?

Accepts endorsements and contributions from homophobic preachers, hires another one as a consultant, and has prayer meetings with people like Rick Santorum and Lindsey Graham.

Nope, nothing to bother gays, atheists, and people concerned about separation of church and state there. :eyes:

[Basileus Basileon]

8. Perhaps people are realizing that despite her opponents' attacks,

she's actually a liberal Senator? She has a career 95% party solidarity rating, and a 97% for this particular Congress.

[fenriswolf]

12. where do you get those numbers?

and btw the congress has not been that progressive either.

[Basileus Basileon]

13. Here you go.

http://projects.washingtonpost.com/congress/110/senate/party-voters/

Oh, hey, there she is, seventh-most-loyal Senator (of either party) this Congress. Change the 110 in the URL to 109, 108 etc. to go back in time.

(The inevitable shift from "She's not a real Democrat" to "Democrats aren't real Progressives" in 5...4...3...2...)

[fenriswolf]

15. actually i already

mentioned that in the above post saying the democratice congress is not progressive.

[Sparkly]

24. Check the "on the issues" site, too.

http://www.ontheissues.org/Hillary_Clinton.htm

[Lerkfish]

21. party solidarity does not necessarily equal Liberal

[William769]

10. K&R!

[zulchzulu]

14. New poll finds that liberals now like going to useless wars a LOT!

I'm sure a poll will be supplied shortly...

:boring:

[cuke]

17. No surprise there

She's the most liberal of the top three

[Lerkfish]

20. in other news War is Peace, Freedom is Slavery, Ignorance is Strength

if Clinton is the most liberal, I'm the easter bunny.

sorry, but that's complete and utter bullshit.

[paulk]

30. reality sucks, doesn't it?

by any real measure Clinton is a liberal, unless, of course, your definition of liberal excludes about 95% of the Democratic Party.

And I do mean "your".

[Lerkfish]

18. funny, not this liberal.

they obviously didn't poll me.

and it begs the question: why do her supporters here spend so much time castigating liberals?

[IndianaJones]

19. like the south, a bonus, but not necessary. nt.

[Moochy]

23. Oh if Anonymous Liberals in a Poll say she's Liberal

Golly Gee, Then that seals the deal!

Heavens to Bettsy She's a Super Duper Liberal!

[mtnsnake]

26. The rightwing fears her because they KNOW she's a Liberal & will be liberal once elected

Once she's sworn in (if Obama doesn't overtake her, that is), I believe that Hillary Clinton will prove to be one of the most liberal presidents in history, totally putting to rest some of the false impressions that have been generated about her here on this forum.

Hillary Clinton, Goddess of Peace, liberal President who will thumb her nose at the rightwing idiots once in office.

[CoffeeCat]

29. Uh, sorry to break it to you, but...

...your "Goddess of Peace" recently voted for the Kyl/Lieberman
Amendment, which paves the way for Bush to drop 10,000-pound bunker
busters on the faces of innocent Iranian men, women and children.

Let me know when you officially coronate Lieberman:
"King Rainbow: Lord of Peace, Prancing Ponies and Squishy Teddy Bears"

:rofl:

[Alamom]

28. k

[onenote]

31. Some "unliberals" for HRC:

Diane Watson
Sheila Jackson-Lee
Tammy Baldwin
Yvette Clarke
Edolphus Towns
Ron Dellums
John Lewis
Eliot Spitzer
Rob Reiner
Maya Angelou

These folks have all endorsed Clinton, so we know they that they can't be liberals. Bunch of corporatist hacks. Even the five that have co-sponsored Kucinich's impeachment resolution (Watson, Baldwin, Jackon-Lee, Clarke and Towns).

And then there are those corporatist unions that have endorsed Clinton.

:sarcasm:

[HughBeaumont]

33. Union LEADERS need to explain the logic of supporting a staunch free-trader.

And one who I've pointed out many times is a proponent for offshore outsourcing. At least that's what she's told business leaders in India on more than one occasion.

Not really getting why they're siding with a candidate that supports American job-killing practices.

Are the union leaders simply going with a "done deal"? Because I'm sure as shit not getting it. At ALL.