Clinton Says Negatives Won't Keep Her From Winning

[DeepModem Mom]

NYT/Reuters: Clinton Says Negatives Won't Keep Her From Winning
By REUTERS
Published: August 19, 2007

DES MOINES, Iowa (Reuters) - Democratic presidential front-runner Hillary Clinton acknowledged on Sunday that many voters do not like her, but she blamed it on years of Republican attacks and insisted she has a record of winning despite her negatives.

Clinton's remarks came as the eight candidates for the Democratic presidential nomination debated in the critical early voting state of Iowa and just days after President George W. Bush's political adviser Karl Rove said the former first lady was flawed for having high negative ratings.

Clinton and top rival, Illinois Sen. Barack Obama, came under fire early in the debate at Drake University when other candidates were invited to comment on their perceived weaknesses -- Clinton's high negative ratings in the polls and Obama's inexperience in foreign policy....

She tackled the issue of her high negative ratings head-on, saying, "The idea that you're going to escape the Republican attack machine and not have high negatives by the time they're through with you, I think, is just missing what's been going on in American politics for the last 20 years."

Polls have shown Clinton holding double-digit leads over Obama in their effort to be the Democratic candidate in the November 2008 election. But a recent CBS News poll showed 39 percent of all voters nationwide had an unfavorable view of Clinton, while only 20 percent viewed Obama negatively. Other polls have had Clinton's negative rating even higher....

http://www.nytimes.com/reuters/news/news-usa-politics-democrats.html

[saracat]

1. Dupe!

[Deja Q]

2. No, she's disliked because of her own actions. Not because of her perceptions.

I thought Democrats never listened to Republicans, nor vice-versa? So her excuse of "Republicans made negative comments is why few like me" is extremely feeble.

[sandnsea]

3. Oh, they succeeded with her too, just like Gore & Kerry

So she didn't fight back effectively.

Why are we suppoed to elect her again??

[FreakinDJ]

4. Tell Hillary - Free Trade isn't Free when it cost so many US Jobs

She won't get my vote

[ripple]

5. The error in her thinking is that because she already has very high negatives,

once the republican attack machine gets fired up, they are destined to go much higher.

Those of us who are concerned about this have every right to be. In fact, given what's at stake in the 2008 election, even her supporters should find Hillary's unfavorable ratings downright alarming.

[BenDavid]

6. I disagree....The assumption you

put forth is that HRC will sit with her hands in her lap and not fight back like kerry and gore did....Here is the way I see it. The more HRC gets out in front of the people and they see her as the polling indicates her negatives fall....They were in the mid 40's and now in the high 30's.....By your reasoning with HRC's high negatives then Obama and Edwards should be leading not only in the state polls but in the national polls as well....Sorry to disappoint you, but seems once folks see and hear HRC she gains in the polls as her negatives come down.....
I do thank you
Ben David

[Windy]

7. Look, we don't need the perverbial clinton /lewinski affair coming up again

which it will....We don't need the distraction of all things Clinton that dogged the country for the last few years of the Clinton presidency coming back. We NEED a new start in this country. No more Bushs and no more Clintons...

I don't want a candidate who is already at a disadvantage with the repub slime machine coming in to try and take back this country from the neocons. What's at stake in 2008 is FAR too important to even take a chance at squandering the dems opportunity to take the Whitehouse back and turning this country around.