Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Poll: Hillary Can't Be Commander in Chief
NewsMax ^ | 7/19/05 | NewsMax

Posted on 07/19/2005 5:23:12 PM PDT by wagglebee

Is Hillary Clinton tough enough to be president?

That question is increasingly being asked as speculation mounts that the New York Senator will seek the Democratic nomination in 2008. A front-page story in USA Today - "Can Hillary be Elected Commander in Chief?" - explores the issue and features a poll that contains troubling news for Hillary and her supporters.

When respondents were asked if they would rate Clinton highly (4 or 5 on a 5-point scale):

* Only 36 percent said she could handle the situation in Iraq if elected president.

* Just 38 percent said she would effectively protect the country from terrorist attack.

* 59 percent thought Clinton is not strong on national security.

* 42 percent said she would use military force wisely as president.

* 56 percent doubted she could handle an international crisis.

* Only half said she is a strong and decisive leader.

Overall, 37 percent said they "strongly disagree" or "somewhat disagree" with the statement "Hillary Clinton is tough enough to president."

Washington insiders say Clinton has been repositioning herself to beef up her standing among voters as a strong supporter of the military who could be an effective commander in chief.

She is the first New York senator to sit on the Armed Services Committee, and recently introduced legislation to boost the Army by 80,000 soldiers over the next four years.

She was nominated by the Pentagon – "with which her husband often had contentious relations, particularly on gays in the military – to serve on a blue-ribbon panel studying how to foster better cooperation among the military services," USA Today reports.

A recent study by National Journal showed Clinton's record on defense, foreign policy and economics last year made her the 34th most liberal senator, while in 2003 she had ranked ninth.

But critics say Clinton's recent shift smacks of a political makeover aimed at polishing her national security credentials before a 2008 run.

"I think these are absolutely newfound views," William Black, executive director of the anti-Clinton political action committee Stop Her Now, told USA Today.

"This is someone coming from an administration that had open disdain for the military.

"Her whole involvement in getting on the Armed Services Committee is a calculated political ploy to burnish up her national security and defense credentials. She certainly didn't seem to care a whit about the military before."

Some GOP analysts say Hillary's decision not to divorce her husband after he admitted having an affair with Monica Lewinsky, which garnered sympathy from voters during her run for the Senate, could raise questions about her toughness if she seeks the White House.

"She's going to have a problem in reconciling voters' pity for her plight as first lady with seeing her as a figure with heft on foreign policy and defense issues," said GOP pollster Kellyanne Conway.

"That's the nagging underpinning that nobody likes to talk about, the 800-pound gorilla on her back."


TOPICS: Foreign Affairs; Government; News/Current Events; Politics/Elections; War on Terror
KEYWORDS: 2008election; hillary2008; hillaryclinton; stophillarynow; unfit; usatoday
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-43 next last
This is rather shocking considering it's USA Today.
1 posted on 07/19/2005 5:23:15 PM PDT by wagglebee
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: wagglebee

America is not yet ready for a dyke Commander-in-Chief, we haven't even had a woman president.


2 posted on 07/19/2005 5:29:57 PM PDT by citizencon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: wagglebee
recently introduced legislation to boost the Army by 80,000 soldiers over the next four years.

LOL - I thought the only way you could increase force sizes was through conscription! Shazam!
3 posted on 07/19/2005 5:30:41 PM PDT by andyk (Go Matt Kenseth!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: wagglebee

"Only half said she is a strong and decisive leader"

Huh? Like in 50%? That's too damn good for the witch....this is scary! All she has to do is campaign on her strong points where the folk rate her in high numbers!


4 posted on 07/19/2005 5:31:41 PM PDT by RoseofTexas
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: citizencon

Technically, she would be Commander in Panties.


5 posted on 07/19/2005 5:33:12 PM PDT by Edit35
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: wagglebee; citizencon; Mia T
She also was never supposed to be able to become a U.S. senator from New York. And she covets the Oval Office exponentially more.
Underestimate HRC at your own peril.
6 posted on 07/19/2005 5:33:12 PM PDT by jla
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: andyk
I think this is the poll that Hotline (a National Journal subsidiary) ran that showed Condi smacking down Hillary on National Security issues going away. It was a slaughter. That part of the poll was not in USAToday.

Be Seeing You,

Chris

7 posted on 07/19/2005 5:34:27 PM PDT by section9 (Major Motoko Kusanagi says, "Jesus is Coming. Everybody look busy...")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: jla
The day Rudy Guiliani dropped out of the NY senate race, Hitlery was basically guaranteed the spot.
8 posted on 07/19/2005 5:34:36 PM PDT by wagglebee ("We are ready for the greatest achievements in the history of freedom." -- President Bush, 1/20/05)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: wagglebee

Hillary Clinton's "toughness" has never been an issue. She's as tough as nails. It's the quality of her character or lack thereof and political agenda that make her unqualified for any position of authority.


9 posted on 07/19/2005 5:35:16 PM PDT by SpaceBar
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: citizencon
we haven't even had a woman president

If we needed the 19th amendment for women to vote, I'm not sure one could be President, constitutionally, without another amendment. I realize that goes against the conventional wisdom.
10 posted on 07/19/2005 5:36:21 PM PDT by andyk (Go Matt Kenseth!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: wagglebee

Good, case closed. Let's move on!


11 posted on 07/19/2005 5:36:35 PM PDT by kempster
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: wagglebee

"That's the nagging underpinning that nobody likes to talk about, the 800-pound gorilla on her back."

How does one differentiate between Hitlery and a Gorilla?


12 posted on 07/19/2005 5:37:18 PM PDT by Diana in Wisconsin (Save The Earth. It's The Only Planet With Chocolate.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: wagglebee

The democrats wont nominate Hillary, there is no way she could win, heck they will probably go with Kerry/Edwards again.


13 posted on 07/19/2005 5:39:15 PM PDT by danny5555
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: jla


She has a huge money machine behind her, one which controls a great portion of the MSM ~ she will stop at nothing to gain the White House, while Slick quietly moves into position to take over the UN.

Make no mistake about it, this pair has world domination as their ultimate goal and we all stand to lose if we allow it happen!


14 posted on 07/19/2005 5:40:22 PM PDT by Zacs Mom (Proud wife of a Marine! ... and purveyor of "rampant, unedited dialogue")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: wagglebee

Condi Rice, great though she is, would have the same problem.


15 posted on 07/19/2005 5:40:26 PM PDT by tkathy (Tyranny breeds terrorism. Freedom breeds peace.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: wagglebee
I have no doubt that this lamp throwing bitch is tough enough; my concern is that she lacks the temperament to exert self-control. There's no way Hillary would keep her head in a crisis.

Besides, she wouldn't have Jake Reno to cover her massive keister.

16 posted on 07/19/2005 5:40:33 PM PDT by Carry_Okie (The fourth estate is the fifth column.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: jla
she covets the Oval Office exponentially more.

Reason enough she should not get the office.

17 posted on 07/19/2005 5:42:59 PM PDT by RightWhale (Substance is essentially the relationship of accidents to itself)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: wagglebee

Guess she isn't going to unite the country...


18 posted on 07/19/2005 5:44:27 PM PDT by Echo Talon (http://echotalon.blogspot.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: citizencon

Actually, hillary in "old crusty" configuration [aka "enhanced yield dirty bomb"] has tremendous military - nay, strategeric military- value and should be dropped on Mecca at first opportunity. I hope it would be within B-52 lift weight.


19 posted on 07/19/2005 5:44:58 PM PDT by GSlob
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Carry_Okie

I think her cover was more likely named Gorelick. Reno was Gorelick's cover.


20 posted on 07/19/2005 5:51:41 PM PDT by BARLF
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-43 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson