Posted on 02/21/2005 8:32:45 PM PST by Libloather
Clinton's Popularity Up in State, Even Among Republicans
By RAYMOND HERNANDEZ
Published: February 22, 2005
Remember Hillary Rodham Clinton and the conventional wisdom about how polarizing a figure she is? Well, think again.
Recent polls have shown that Mrs. Clinton, the junior senator from New York, may have turned a corner politically, sharply reducing the number of voters in the state who harbor negative views of her.
Pollsters say the change is remarkable for a woman who has long been shadowed by a seemingly implacable group of voters - commonly referred to as Hillary haters - who dislike her, no matter what she does, and who pose a potential obstacle to any presidential ambitions she may harbor.
A measure of how far Senator Clinton has come was on display Sunday when Senator John McCain, Republican from Arizona, said on "Meet the Press" that he thought Mrs. Clinton, a Democrat, would make a good president, although he said that he would support his party's nominee. She returned the compliment, saying when asked by the program's host, Tim Russert, that Senator McCain would be a good president.
The changing view of Mrs. Clinton coincides with a period following the November election in which she offered a series of speeches filled with references to faith and prayer, while putting less emphasis on polarizing social issues like gay marriage and abortion.
The result of these comments has been an emerging image of Senator Clinton that is far different from the caricature that Republicans have painted of her: that of a secular liberal whose stances are largely at odds with a public that they say is concerned about the nation's moral direction.
Political analysts say the themes Senator Clinton has emphasized - combined with the hard-working image she has sought to project - appear to be causing large numbers of voters to re-evaluate her in New York, although not nationally, where the number of people who disapprove of her is still high. In a Marist poll last fall, roughly 4 in 10 Americans had negative views of her.
Her progress appealing to once skeptical New Yorkers was illuminated by a New York Times poll released last week that showed that 21 percent of New Yorkers had an unfavorable opinion of how she is handling her job, down significantly from the 29 percent of voters who expressed similar sentiments in October 2002.
(In two recent back-to-back surveys, pollsters for Quinnipiac University, in Hamden, Conn., also found a notable decline in the number of New York voters who expressed a negative view of Mrs. Clinton.)
At the same time, Senator Clinton's job approval rating has increased to 69 percent from 58 percent in October 2002, according to the Times poll. That is higher even than the 63 percent approval rating of Charles E. Schumer, the senior senator from New York who was re-elected last year to a second term with a record 71 percent of the vote and who is known for his attention to upstate concerns.
The new attitudes toward Mrs. Clinton may be forcing Republicans to reconsider how to deal with an opponent they had until now viewed as an enticing target because of the depth of negative feelings she inspires among large numbers of New York voters.
Independent political analysts say her strong standing may give pause to any big-name Republican thinking about challenging her in 2006, chief among them Rudolph W. Giuliani and Gov. George E. Pataki. In fact, a Quinnipiac poll released earlier this month found that Mrs. Clinton would defeat both Mr. Pataki and Mr. Giuliani in head-to-head contests.
"There isn't a long line of opponents forming to take her on in 2006," said Lee M. Miringoff, the director of the Marist Institute for Public Opinion in Poughkeepsie, N.Y.
But New York Republican leaders say that they are eager to challenge Senator Clinton, especially since Republicans from around the country will almost certainly provide plenty of money and other campaign support to defeat her, as they did in 2000.
New York Republicans also say that the senator has had a free ride so far and that her opponent in the campaign will have an easy time driving up her negative ratings - and halting her rise in the polls - by pointing out what they describe as her poor record of accomplishment and her liberal ideology.
Hill is hated in the South & flyover red states
Hill is no Slick Willie
Let the DNC burn their money on her
Do they think that McCain talking about Hillary is going to help her with Republicans -- they need a dose of reality -- she is still polarizing out here in Flyover Country!
I mean give me a break, I wonder how many deep cover DUmmies we have here :-) Or just plain idiots.
RE: "Nice try N.Y.T.'s but McCain and N.Y. Republicans are not a good litmus test and you know it."
Maybe a FEW NYers might fall for her charade here and there, but If HC the dyed-in-the-red socialist thinks that she can fool her way into taking any of the more moderate or conservative Southern/Western states from the Republican nominee in '08 she is BADLY mistaken.
People's memories are not as short as you'd think, 'ya know? Most of the 'Pubbies I know (and a few of the Democrats too) remember her extreme influence on the corrupt, disasterous administration of her husband and we sure as hell won't let her forget it.
As for my own homestate of Alabama (a perfect representative of the type of conservative bastion Hillary is aiming to steal away in '08), we went to Pres. Bush with 63% of the vote in 2004. Conservative 'Pubbies occupy 5 of the 7 congressional seats (with a Blue-dog Dem in one of the other spots), and the Democrat-controlled state legislature is rushing to ban gay marriage in Alabama as fast as it's head can spin (I don't agree with that, but it's a pretty good example of how conservative we really are down here). Does Mrs. Clinton have any idea how little chance there is that a radical leftist like her will appeall to Southerners, Westerners, or conservatives in general.
Alabama is a challenge for old shrillery if I ever saw one, and similar massive defeat awaits her in Mississippi, Louisiana, Utah, Texas, both Virginias, and even Florida.
Come and get it, Hil. We "red-staters" are waiting for you (he, he).
Don't think some of you get it -- here in Oklahoma immigration is not a really big issue as it isn't in a lot of states -- in fact, I am not sure where it would rank in priorities but we are a conservative state and getting rid of activists judges far outweighs any discussion of immigration.
Not sure some of you on here are the ones that don't understand that immigration is not the number one issue with a lot of voters unless they live along a border. Not saying it is right, but it is reality.
GAAAWWWWD!
I don't know where you got that photo from, but the Fugly waves it gives off are powerful enough to knock a mountain into the Indian Ocean.
A Rocky mountain.
New bimbo eruptions will make Killery The Killster feel like she's standing on top of Mt. St. Helens.........
"if the Republicans...put up someone who can't deflect her arguments on free trade, they'll be unpleasantly surprised in 2008"
I happen to think the Republicans can win with free trade--they've done it before--but they have to put up someone who can make a case for their position, instead of trying to dance around it like a Rat. Especially when they know it will be her issue as far as the 'idiots' are concerned. Some Republicans have demonstrated that they understand this and are quitting the free trade and open border ranks (Newt Gingrich, for example, is making noise on this). I don't LIKE these candidates, necessarily, but I do think they're being smart in trying to mute this issue.
In the meantime, I cordially invite you to rethink your comments. There are plenty more than 5 or 6 voters who will be motivated by a protectionist stand, especially one that deals with immigration at the same time. Our concern should be that they'll end up voting for a woman whose sole goal in extending protectionism and closing down immigration is to concentrate her power here.
So feel free to make another smartass comment about Lou Dobbs. But you'll be laughing out of the other side of your face if Hillary is elected because people like you nominate a Republican candidate who can't persuade the public regarding these issues, around which Hillary seems to planning her candidacy, and which the media will certainly highlight.
Blah , blah, blah, bring it on. You may be scared, but I'm not.
I'd prefer NOT to see the House have to do the dirty work all the time, thanks. I'll vote for almost anyone before that witch. God, I wish we had a Reagan in the wings. I despair of a new conservatism rising again, though, every time I see people here touting government action for "good" reasons. Compassionate conservatism certainly isn't.
Ah, hell. Rummy in 2008.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.