Rice rises, Clinton slips in poll

Times Union ^ | 21 February 2006 | STEWART M. POWELL

[ALOHA RONNIE]

.

Good for you. Plans are good.

HILLARY RODHAM and WILLIAM CLINTON have been planning against US for over 3 decades.

And thanks to TV News covering up their own worst misbehaviors, these 2 still threaten.

.

[ALOHA RONNIE]

.

KOSOVO = HILLARY's TV diversion from CLINTON Impeachment

IRAQ = HILLARY opposes Freedom for the Middle East

.

[antaresequity]

[Soul Seeker]

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.

That tends to be the natural effect when Gallop polls more Democrats. It might be nice if what I was told was the "Gold Standard" last election actually was, infact, worthy of the label. Far as I'm concerned they are closer to Zogby after giving Kerry the race, than they are RASS that nailed the election. The bright spot is that more outlets are FINALLY giving RASS the credit he deserves for being the one that, you know, nailed the election. GALLOP used to be THE poll. Their bias has weakened their rep rightly.

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

Since this favors what other outlets more credible have stated, looks like Hillary's attempt to indoctrinate the public with Geena was successful. Just not in the direction she had hoped.

"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."

So disapproving they favor one of his closest cabinet members continuing his "legacy"? Interesting how they arrive at that tainted conclusion, isn't it? BTW, there are only two women that could theroetically be in the race for 2008 so the odds of a woman President isn't high. Hillary is only able to win if we hate our candidate on the GOP side, and Condi hasn't declared at all. Should she declare, then the calculations would change. As it stands if the only woman in the race is Hill, it isn't a real possibility,

[ALOHA RONNIE]

.

There's another News picture of HILLARY & CHELSEA just beaming widely from ear to ear while visiting a village in Communist enslaved Vietnam.

Happy faces like we've never seen from them while in the Good Ol'USA.

.

[Soul Seeker]

Rudy has already stated that while Alito is a fine selection, and to his credit defended him, Alito is not the type of Justice he'd choose.

There are two issues that currently dominate our base. Judges and the WOT. He's good on WOT, the best candidate in the '08 race on the WOT by far, but on judges his record would be probably akin to Arnold given his selection of whom should replace Brown. O'Connor types, though perhaps of better qualifications and minds.

Condi isn't perfect, but she's probably the best candidate though she isn't running. Simply because she's strong on WOT generally and hasn't completely sabotaged herself on the abortion issue. As could be seen, she has objectors because she declared herself moderately pro-choice but she hasn't defined it. Unlike Rudy, yeah, she could get away with the promise to appoint Alito's and Roberts, and say R v W was wrongly decided and come across a bit like a politician but not a flip flopping one.

The question then becomes, do enough pro-lifers trust her, or conservatives all around for that matter, to be strong on the type of Judges and pro-life policies the admin as advanced? Even if she might personally favor abortion in the first three months. Well, considering so many of them are willing to embrace Allen who is for stem cell researh and has his own questionable comments on abortion, I'd find it..interesting if they come out with a double standard on Condi.

I'm personally not that easy with Allen. I find him to float his finger far too often in the air. Condi seems more cosistent, but then Condi serves the admin and doesn't have a political record. How much of that is her view, and how much is it G.W.B.'s? Credible question.

Still, if the FR poll and my own family is a barometer they'd really like Condi to run. My dad also likes Allen. I'm more conservative then them, but I'd say on average they are pretty representative of the typical base voter that isn't as involved actively as those of us here. IMO, that means Allen, Condi who has said she isn't running, and Rudy are the frontrunners with McCain a frontrunner with the remaining Rockefellar types. No one else has distinguished themselves yet.

[Cecily]

I don't believe Condi will ever run, but if she did, she would trump the Hildebeast and any other Dem by default on the "who cares more about minorites?" issue.

[chilepepper]

i think she can be persuaded -- eisenhower didn't want to run either. she by far the most attractive candidate for 2008...

[AuH2ORepublican]

"The more interesting statistic implied is that 21% were NOT willing to vote for a woman president. Which means the female candidate would be competing for votes only within a 79% subset of the population."

---

21% may have answered the poll question that way, but I doubt it's true for more than 5% of those polled (and most of those are probably non-voters). If you ask a question about whether you'd vote for a woman 5 seconds after asking people if Hillary should run for president you're bound to get some crazy answers.

If a pro-life, pro-marriage, pro-gun, pro-tax cuts, pro-war on terror female Republican was running for president against John Kerry, even the most sexist conservative would gladly pull the lever for the female Republican.

[KMAJ2]

The mischaracterization of Condi's abortion views distorts the fact that her view actually reflects the mainstream. She supports a ban on partial birth abortion and parental notification, those are significant positions in the abortion debate. It is only a small portion of the electorate that supports an outright ban on abortion. Any politican who runs on supporting a 'ban' will lose. The focus should not be on a ban, but on returning the rights to states to decide the issue. Partial birth abortion and parental rights notification are avenues to accomplish that goal, as most Americans support restrictions and not a ban. If those single issue abortion voters cannot see the advantage of Rice's position versus that of any democrat, especially Hillary's, they are cutting off their nose to spite their face.

[Alamo-Girl]

Thanks for the ping!

[strategofr]

"If the majority of antiwar groups back Hillary, then we will know."

Except those same groups are aware of your scrutiny and the scrutiny of other conservatives. Hence, I can pretty much guarantee that some antiwar groups will very loudly opposed Hillary. This will enhance her credibility with swing voters and build up her image as a "mentally tough" leader who believes in a "strong military". (In times of threat, the Left always believes in a "strong military." but 1) they also believe the greatest strength is in a multicultural, political correct military and 2) they'd ever want to USE the military, at least not in situations was anything dangerous about it.)

Meanwhile, the Left has literally hundreds of different relatively private, non-media channels via which they will spread the message to their dumber members (who haven't already figure this out) that Hillary is in fact, still Leftist and needs to be fully supported by a majority of Leftists. Look for some of the Lefties to even make the ultimate sacrifice in the months leading up to the election---taking out their metal facial implements, and re-dying and cutting their hair---so they can go door-to-door for her.