Hillary is no less electable than Obama or Edwards

[UrbScotty]

As a matter of fact, she actually leads McCain by a point. Statisticially insignificant, but it shows she can win.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/16712630/site/newsweek/


3. Suppose you had to choose between Hillary Clinton, the Democrat, and John McCain, the Republican. Who would you be more likely to vote for? As of today, do you lean more toward Clinton, the Democrat; or McCain, the Republican?


Total Clinton Total McCain Undec./Other
Current Total 48% 47% 5%
Republicans 9% 87% 4%
Democrats 81% 17% 1%
Independents 43% 49% 8%
________________________________________
3b. Suppose you had to choose between Barack Obama, the Democrat, and John McCain, the Republican. Who would you be more likely to vote for? As of today, do you lean more toward Obama, the Democrat; or McCain, the Republican?
Total Obama Total McCain Undec./Other
Current Total 46% 44% 10%

Republicans 11% 83% 6%
Democrats 79% 16% 5%
Independents 40% 44% 16%
________________________________________
3c. Suppose you had to choose between John McCain, the Republican, and John Edwards, the Democrat. Who would you be more likely to vote for? As of today, do you lean more toward McCain, the Republican; or Edwards, the Democrat?
Total Edwards Total McCain Undec./Other
Current Total 48% 43% 9%

Republicans 7% 86% 7%
Democrats 84% 14% 2%
Independents 44% 42% 14%
________________________________________
6a/b. Suppose you had to choose between Hillary Clinton, the Democrat, and Rudy Giuliani, the Republican. (Choices rotated) Who would you be more likely to vote for? As of today, do you lean more toward Clinton, the Democrat; or Giuliani, the Republican?
Total Clinton Total Giuliani Undec./Other
Current Total 47% 48% 5%

Republicans 5% 92% 3%
Democrats 84% 15%% 1%
Independents 42% 50% 8%

[hijinx87]

1. polls at this point are probably irrelevant.

not all of the candidates have declared, and Iowa is still
more than a year away.

hillary will be a formidable candidate. if the primary was
tomorrow, she would be my choice.

[nosmokes]

2. if the two major parties come up w/ clinton and mc cain i'll rejoice

because that means a third party candidate will win the presidency.

[The Magistrate]

3. It Would Not Mean That, Sir: It Would Mean Sen. Clinton Would Become President Clinton

And do it without breaking too much of a sweat....

[David Dunham]

4. Correct. McCain by 2008 will be a doddering, 72-year-old man.

[Pyrzqxgl]

22. There are a hell of a lot of 72 year olds who aren't doddering!

maybe age will be a factor, but I hope that the fact that citizen's are sick of a Republican in the White House will be the major one.

[MonkeyFunk]

5. I agree

the notion that Sen. Clinton is unelectable because a handful of far-left malcontents won't vote for her is nonsensical.

That group doesn't decide elections in this country.

[SaveElmer]

16. Yes I agree with that as well...

Would put Arizona out of play, but I believe Hillary would garner a minimum of 297 electoral votes...possibly as high as 351.

[Clark2008]

19. I think it'd be the other way around.

I guess it depends on where one lives as to what one thinks about Clinton v. McCain.

[The Magistrate]

20. McCain, Sir, Would Prove An Extraordinarily Weak Candidate

He has staked himself out the ground of being the pro-war candidate with his open supoport for the escalation resolved on by the current administration, and that position has been rejected by the people, and will be repudiated next year at the polls in November.

The cries from some on the left that Sen. Clinton is "pro-war" will be greeted with vast bemusement by the mass of the electorate, and have no effect whatever on the polling. The people will understand that the only way to express their displeasure with the incompetence of the present administration, and the defeat its folly has dealt the country, will be to repudiate the Republican party at all levels in the national election, and they will do so.

[Eurobabe]

8. bullshit. n/t

[OneBlueSky]

6. the presidency is the Democrats' to lose . . . and Hillary just might do it . . .

at a time when we desperately need an environmentalist and a populist in the White House, Hillary Clinton epitomizes the corporate wing of the Democratic Party, which is neither . . . she is precisely who we do NOT need to lead our ticket in 2008 -- not if we want any real change . . .

[MonkeyFunk]

7. Why do you think Sen. Clinton

is not good on the environment?

http://www.vote-smart.org/issue_rating_category.php?can_id=WNY99268&type=category&category=Environmental%2BIssues&go.x=10&go.y=11

[AJH032]

9. I'm curious too

n/t

[OneBlueSky]

26. didn't say she wasn't . . . but Al Gore is FAR more informed and involved with the issue . . .

and has, in fact, made it his life's work over the past several years . . .

[mtnsnake]

13. No. The presidency WAS the Democrats to lose in 2004, and we did the impossible.

We lost to an imbecile who had already proven to be the country's worst president ever.

If Hillary can't win in 2008 in everyone's minds, then we better turn to Obama because no one else currently running has a chance.

[Divernan]

10. Thanks for not blocking all but your candidate's supporters.

That makes your thread worth reading.
As I just posted in another thread re the new block feature on DU:

Blocking feature seems to result in Home Shopping Network type threads.
Posted by Divernan in General Discussion
Sun Jan 21st 2007, 06:24 AM
At least, when it comes to these cheerleader threads for some candidates. As an example, the thread starts with something like, "Won't it be great when (candidate x) is in the White House?" Then you get a series of replies reminiscent of Home Shopping Network dialogue. (And I've only caught a minute or so of Home Shopping Network at a time; never bought anything from it).

What I mean is you get a series of comments euphorically praising to the skies Candidate X, and with all the scripted, non-spontaneous quality you'd fine on Home Shopping. There are no doubts expressed, or comments offering qualified support, let alone a comment (rational or irrational) criticizing said candidate. These well organized supporters' groups have easily figured out that to block all DUers known to prefer other candidates, or to oppose Candidate X is to turn DU forums into Pimp My Candidate/Home Shopping Network promotional forums. I don't bother to read ANY of them - and have not selected a candidate yet. I'd like to read some intelligent, fact-based, unemotional debate comparing and contrasting potential presidential/vice-presidential tickets. These blatant promotional threads insult my intelligence.

I know that when I volunteered on a congressional campaign last year, the professional staff were really psyched about finding local blogs where they could push their candidate and attack the opposition.

There have even been DUers who have admitted in passing that they "came to DU" to push "their" candidate. No way to stop this, but why enable basically free advertising with all debate or disagreement blocked?

[Divernan]

11. Delete - dupe

(sorry)

[Solo_in_MD]

12. Indeed, they all have issues, but there does not seem to be an alternative out there right now

[skipos]

14. Most polls that I have seen show her getting beaten by McCain

There is no other Dem candidate that is considered so conservative by the left and so progressive by the right. I do not personaly know a SINGLE person who is excited by her, and I come from family full of progressive and moderates, and I live in a very progressive town. She may do better in some polls because of name recognition.

Why do you think so many Republicans want her to be our nominee? A few weeks ago, I think it was Dobson who said he was particularly enthusiastic about her being the nominee, as she would really inspire Republicans do get off their butts and go vote against her.

[Riddler]

15. Hilary's run will open up a new cottage industry in right wing smear machines

They are salivating at the prospect of smearing her on a daily basis, and having their MSM lap-dogs echo their talking points. As First Lady it was obvious to see how afraid and threatened these assholes are of a woman with brains and ability, so it's no doubt they will pull out all stops in their negativity and hatred of her. I just don't think, given the volume of their voices and the echo chambers they have in the press, that she's electable.

[ElizabethDC]

21. A *new* cottage industry??

They've been smearing her for years, and no one's taken her down yet. I honestly think that her advantage is that she knows the kind of accusations they're going to level at her, so the Swift Boat-type attacks won't come from out of no where.

[rhett o rick]

17. Yes, but what's your point?? nm

[rhett o rick]

18. More importantly, does she support the middle class or is she a corporatist.

She continues to support the Iraq War which profits the corporations the run this Country.

[mnhtnbb]

25. She's a corporatist--through and through. Even her attempt at

health care reform--which was perceived as a disaster by those of us favoring universal health care--was skewed toward managed care companies.

Edwards, on the other hand, is in favor of universal health care.

[Apollo11]

23. No - the poll proves that Edwards is more electable than Hillary

It has John Edwards beating McCain by 5 points. It also has Edwards beating Guiliani!

(and I am not even an Edwards supporter at this point)

Unless and until Gore endorses another candidate, we have to assume that he is keeping his options open. So it is too soon for those of us who prefer Gore to switch our allegiance.

The Washington Post -- Sunday, September 17, 2006

Gore's 2008 Plans May Become Clearer After Release of Book

By John F. Harris and Shailagh Murray

Although saying he has no plans to run for president in 2008, former vice president Al Gore has nonetheless left the door ever so slightly ajar. It's a good bet that door will swing open a good bit wider come next May.

That is when Gore is scheduled to publish his next book. With no fanfare, he signed a few weeks ago with Penguin Press to write "The Assault on Reason."

As described by editor Scott Moyers, the book is a meditation on how "the public arena has grown more hostile to reason," and how solving problems such as global warming is impeded by a political culture with a pervasive "unwillingness to let facts drive decisions."

While that may sound abstract, both the subject matter and the timing of the release have an unmistakable subtext. In 2004, Gore cheered liberals when he lashed at President Bush for allegedly falling captive to right-wing special interests and taking flight from "fact-based analysis." If the book strikes a chord, it will produce new momentum for Gore to make another bid for the White House, presumably fueled in large part by anti-Iraq-war Democrats.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/09/16/AR2006091600877.html

Let's all find ways to show our support for Al Gore!

In Gore We Trust :)
www.algore.com
www.algore.org
www.draftgore.com - Sign the petition!
www.draftgore2008.org
www.patriotsforgore.com

[Imagevision]

24. How many times has it been written that Hillary is sweating Obama? many, very many!!