Posted on 02/20/2006 7:11:12 PM PST by Aussie Dasher
WASHINGTON -- Growing numbers of Americans oppose a presidential bid by Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton, D-N.Y., in 2008 -- and favor a run by Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice -- amid broad public willingness to elect a woman president, according to a nationwide poll released Sunday. Advertisement
The President's Day survey conducted for Hearst Newspapers by the Siena Research Institute of Siena College in Loudonville, covered 1,120 registered voters and was completed Feb. 10.
Some 48 percent of survey participants said Rice "should run" for president at the conclusion of President Bush's two terms -- an increase of 6 percentage points over a similar survey a year ago.
But Clinton saw opposition to her own presidential bid grow over the same period. Some 44 percent of survey respondents now say that Clinton "should not run" for president in 2008 -- up from 37 percent who felt that way last year.
The percentage of registered voters who say Clinton "should run" slipped from 53 percent to 51 percent over the past year, as support for a Rice candidacy increased, from 42 percent to 48 percent.
The survey found that 79 percent of participants were willing to vote for a woman as president and 64 percent said the nation was "ready" for one.
The survey did not test a head-to-head race between Clinton and Rice.
The margin of error for the survey in both years was 2.9 percentage points. That could mean that Clinton's 2 percentage point drop in the "should run" category may not represent an actual change.
The survey found that a majority of registered voters thought a woman president would handle national security-related issues as well as a male president, including serving as commander-in-chief of the armed service.
Douglas A. Lonnstrom, director of the Siena Research Institute, said the findings coupled with results from a comparable poll by his organization last year suggest the nation is on the cusp of a dramatic political change.
"As things stand now, I see a real possibility that a woman will be elected president in 2008," said Lonnstrom, a professor of finance and statistics and member of the American Association for Public Opinion Research. "Disapproval of President Bush has opened voters' eyes to alternatives -- and women benefit from that."
The latest nationwide Gallup Poll showed 56 percent of respondents disapproving of Bush's job performance and 39 percent approving -- the third lowest approval rating of his presidency.
Sally Friedman, a political scientist at the State University of New York at Albany, cautioned that the generic support for a woman president reflected in the poll could decline when voters get closer to weighing the strengths and weaknesses of actual candidates.
"Right now the election is more than two years away and pretty hypothetical," said Friedman, who studies women in politics. "That will change, the closer we get."
The survey detected a wide disparity of views between Democrats and Republicans, with 91 percent of Democrats expressing their willingness to elect a woman compared to 68 percent of Republicans.
She's said repeatedly that she's not running, and I believe her. But if she did, here's a wild card suggestion. She could acknowledge that she's pro-choice -- but then insist, as a pro-choice, socially moderate, judicial conservative, that Roe was wrongly decided (the Krauthamer position). She could then pledge to nominate Scalia-Alito type judges, placing her rhetorical emphasis on the many issues other than abortion at stake in the constitutional debate.
Rudy Giuliani could do the same thing. That might scramble the deck.
Good point, and even more telling when we are at war. Will women trust a woman (my preference for the out-of-the-ordinary Dr. Rice excluded), especially a Dem woman, in a time of war? Doubtful.
I think Condi would be a great President, but can we put someone into the White House who supports killing babies?
Please see my #20. Some combination of Rudy and Condi would absolutely sweep the country, IMO. IF they could get past the primaries.
There is a Civil Disobediance counter offensive to run against Clintonian curtailment of First Amendment Rights:
Everyone simultaneously and publicly violates unconstitutional restrictions on free speech. There cannot be enough Government censors to stop a flood of free speech.
Rice/Coulter ....or Coulter/Rice for that matter.
"Any chance of a bloke getting it?"
The Republican nominee will be a man. Hillary has the Democratic nomination locked.
Whether or not the Republicans can win depends on the Iraq situation just before the election, if you ask me (assuming we still have troops there.)
.
That's what a once Free South Vietnam thought.
MICHAAL SAVAGE is warning us of the Fascist State that a President HILLARY will bring upon us.
With us Freepers right in her cross-hairs.
.
"so will internet speak be dead. "
True. Dead as we know it. We need to keep it alive in other ways, if it comes to that.
You are assuming people won't vote for someone they are "not willing" to vote for.
I have cast plenty of vote against the lesser of too evils, I don't think these folks would necessarily NEVER vote for a woman. Also, any disadvantage there would be nullied if there were two women running.
" IF they could get past the primaries."
Which they can't.
.
No, we NEED to prevent a President HILLARY at ALL costs to ensure our own safety in a new time of war with an enemy that's now just around the corner and up your street.
.
When they pry my guns from my cold, dead fingers.
.
Now your GET it.
In a still Communist enslaved Vietnam, the Communists and the Peoples Army of Vietnam are the ONLY ones who HAVE the guns.
Something that's right up a President HILLARY's alley.
Guaranteed.
.
"21% were NOT willing to vote for a woman president."
So, let's hope Condi runs against Hillary.
"No, we NEED to prevent a President HILLARY at ALL costs to ensure our own safety in a new time of war with an enemy that's now just around the corner and up your street."
I say we need to do both. Fight all out to beat Hillary, but still make contingency plans. We can survive Hillary (as a society) but only if we have a plan.
Not until Jan 07.
HA ha ha ha!! The last time he did that, he was impeached!
You are correct!
She is pro-choice and so is McCain.
Neither of them could get the majority of the base who are anti-abortion.
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.