Posted on 08/21/2007 6:04:36 AM PDT by PilloryHillary
No other candidate running for President in 2008 has a higher negative rating than Senator Hillary Clinton. Most polls currently show Hillary with a 49% negative rating.
Rasmussen Reports, who had one of the most accurate polling results prior to the 2004 Presidential race, has Hillarys unfavorable rating at 54%, with a 45% favorable rating.
Gallup has Barack Obama, on the other hand polling at only a 34% negative rating. While Hillary is the current front runner for the nomination, Barack Obama is polling head to head better against top Republicans, and therefore could fair better to win the national election because of his lower negative ratings.
No Presidential candidate has ever won the Presidency with a negative rating as high as 49%. Yet Senator Clinton claims that her negatives wont keep her from winning . While she blames her negatives on the "right wing" attack machine against her, its her trustworthiness, and authenticity that is also a key factor in her unfavorable ratings.
In 2000, Al Gore had overwhelming popularity and won the popular vote, yet it was not enough to win the national election, and he lost the electorate vote. In 2004, John Kerrys negative rating was averaging 43% before the election. He of course was able to win the Democratic nomination, but he was unable to win the general election.
Polls indicate that Hillary is favorite to win the Democratic nomination. While not impossible to overcome these numbers, having such high unfavorables 14 months before the general election may not be a good starting point for Hillary. Many people have not yet begun to focus on the Presidential election this early, and negative numbers could increase as voters begin to focus on the candidates as the election draws near.
Currently, Hillary is struggling in some blue states against Rudy Guiliani. In Colorado, Rudy has a 10 point lead over Hillary. In Oregon, 52% of the states voters currently have an unfavorable opinion of the Democratic frontrunner.
In the latest Rasmussen Report poll Hillary trails Rudy by seven points nationally.
As the primaries approach, Democrats will need to consider her negative ratings as a factor in winning the national election. If her negative numbers continue to rise over 50% and she wins the Democratic nomination, she will have an uphill battle to keep her negative numbers from rising further during the national campaign.
I agree. It would be a chance to finally drive the Clintons out of our lives, once and for all. Sort of like driving a stake through Dracula’s heart...
There’s always Marcy Park.
All the dem candidates are beatable...even Obamalamadingdong....
What to do?
The bitch wins the nomination and is struck by lightning {allah akbar}.
If Julie Annie wins the Republican nomination, I think the Beast can win.
“Those who cast the votes decide nothing.
Those who count the votes decide everything.”
- Stalin (attributed)
She need only win the nomination, which is more a matter of connections and string-pulling and feeding competitors enough rope to hang themselves - all of which she is doing quite well right now.
Then she need only persuade about 3% of the population, and that in the right areas.
49% disapproval? So? 47.5% were going to vote Republican anyway.
Look at the numbers carefully, and how the votes are counted. She only need convince a very few people in the right places; the rest were predisposed to vote D or R regardless of candidate.
As usual, you have the issue backwards. The GOP would lose by running someone from the left side of the party, as opposed to the center of the party.
How about how many dead people and pets and dead pets ACORN can register?
She’s got the nomination sewn up already. Look at her opponents: Edwards and Obama give new definition to empty-suits and lightweights. Richardson, Dodd, and Biden? Pathetic. She’s amassing a lot of money too. She will get one-hundred percent cooperation and love from the MSM. OTOH, her nomination will cause Republicans and conservatives to rally against her like no other candidate. She is dangerous and, I think moreso than any other candidate, a true threat to the future of the country.
I changed that to disapproval and fair to fare.
I suspect it will go higher than 49% once she starts trying to sell tax increases to the American public.
Notice no war experience has come up in this campaign. What I have is a distinct memory of is Hillary with Russert...after we started for Iraq: "It is the policy of the Democratic Party to get rid of Saddam". They were hoping to use the attack on Iraq as "their idea" from the beginning.
Excuse me for sleeping during high school civics class.
I know Bubba can not be President again. However, could he be Vice President ?
A Rodham Presidency is just too dangerous for the Nation. We must hope for her to be stopped at every turn. We must hope she loses the Primary. Failing that, we must make sure she loses the General Election.
Frankly, we can endure President Obama. But President Rodham would be an unmitigated disaster that we might not be able to recover from.
No...
Gotta watch the FR grammar police...they can be brutal.
It would be a chance to finally drive the Clintons out of our lives, once and for all. Sort of like driving a stake through Draculas heart...LOL!
She'll have to cater to him no matter what because if Hillary wasn't married to Bubba, we'd all be going "Hillary, who?"
The law is whatever some dumb-a$$ judge says it is.
But there is a requirement that the nominees for President and Vice President be from different states. It might be too much of a burden for the Clintons to admit that they do not live in the same state. Kind of ruins that "happy marriage" myth...
In a word, NO!
I don’t know about that...all the dead will be voting.
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.