Hillary’s reign at the top of the polls for the Democratic primary has always worried party activists, knowledgeable of her negatives in a general election. The sense of her inevitability has been tempered with the recognition of the high hurdles between winning a nomination and winning a general election with a large number of voters hostile to her candidacy. Now NBC reports that a new poll puts that number at a majority:
According to a new Mason-Dixon survey, given exclusively to NBC/MSNBC and McClatchy newspapers, Clinton is the only major presidential candidate — either Democrat and Republican — for whom a majority of likely general election voters say they would not consider voting. In addition, she’s the only candidate who registers with a net-unfavorable rating.
In the poll, 48% say they would consider voting for Clinton versus 52% who say they wouldn’t. By comparison, majorities signal they would consider voting for all other major presidential candidates or possible candidates: Giuliani (64%-36%), Fred Thompson (62%-38%), Bloomberg (61%-39%), Obama (60%-40%), Edwards (59%-41%), McCain (58%-42%), Biden (57%-43%), Richardson (57%-43%), Huckabee (56%-44%), and Romney (54%-46%).
Moreover, 39% say they recognize Clinton favorably, while 42% say they recognize her unfavorably. By contrast, every other candidate has a net-positive favorable rating: Giuliani (43%-17%), Obama (36%-21%), McCain (33%-28%), Edwards (32%-28%), Thompson (25%-12%), Romney (24%-20%), Biden (21%-20), Bloomberg (20%-18%), Richardson (19%-15%), and Huckabee (16%-12%).
Will the Democrats nominate someone demonstrably unelectable in this primary? Or will these numbers have the party desperate for a white-knight, eleventh-hour bid from an established national figure — like Al Gore? Has anyone ever gotten elected to significant office with numbers such as these?
this liberal Libertarian will NEVER vote for Billary. That fake broad is unworthy to serve in the Office or for our Nation in any capacity – including her present one.
Edward is phoney – send him packing.
Bidon – I really like him the best – but like Howrd Dean his mouth is his worst enemy, and so will not win the nomination nor the general election ;-/.
Obama lacks experience but he is smart and articulate and excudes AUTHENTICITY (he is the one I’ll vote for – and I hope the rest of America will give this man at least a listen). BTW he outperformed Billary in last nights “debate”.
Richardson – OMG – what is wrong with this man? He is supose to have all this experience and last night he was more incoherent than that nutball Kusinisch! He blabbed and rambled and truthfully look down right drunk! – had sweet all over his forehead (maybe the guy had the flu????????). Needless to say he actually underperformed GRAVEL!!!!!! and come in LAST in the debates.
Richardson – if this is as good as he can do stick a fork in the guy, he’s outta there!
Bidon and Billary did second best in the debates IMO.
Obama 2008 – nice wring to it ;-).
Hope the dems are not dumb enough to gowith Billary (if they do millions of us will sit this one out ALSO/AGAIN).
Hmmm Hillary or Al, Hillary or Al….it’s like asking if the nation should be neutered with a salad fork or an ice cream scoop.
“The Goracle” is waiting in the wings to be summoned forth as soon as a majority of the Dems wake up to the fact that Hillary is a loser no matter how much she believes she’s entitled to the nomination.
Anyone who votes for Obama is buying a pig in a poke and hoping it will turn out well. He may be bright, he may be articulate, but he has no track record. So the question is, “Do you feel lucky?”
Shouldn’t the headline read: Hillary’s Butt Bigger Than Previously Thought?
gaffo said:
“this liberal Libertarian will NEVER vote for Billary. That fake broad is unworthy to serve in the Office or for our Nation in any capacity – including her present one.”
FYI, I actually voted for Harry Browne a few elections back.
The troubling thing is that despite your correct observation about the lady, the fact remains that she WAS able to get herself elected to the US Senate from the third most populated state in the US-on her very first try. How was she able to fool so many people?
It helps to have the media in your pocket, as she does. They’ve never asked her any serious questions, have never reported any negatives from her past, and have even been known to edit out people booing her from a commercial video release (the Concert for NYC shortly after 9/11, where she was roundly booed when she came on to introduce some performer. Viacom edited the boos out for their later DVD release of the show).
I wouldn’t be surprised if some of those 900 FBI files that she and Bill purloined were on prominent members of the “objective” media. Why else would they cover for her for all these years?
Shouldn’t that read: Hillary’s Behind Bigger Than Previously Thought?
I hope Al Gore gets into the race; I want there to be a fight for the soul of the Democratic Party just as there needs to be a fight for the soul of the Repulican Party.
See a Conservative can win our fight, but if Al Gore wins theirs, then the Dems will be out in the wilderness for a very long time.
I voted of Ron Paul in 88 – he got 2-percent.
Good that you voted 3-rd party for pres. my state had no third party option (newer State law wiped out the older one that allowed Ron Paul and others on the ballot).
more should vote 3-rd party – maybe it would remove the corruption from the two entitlement parties.
why do so many like her? i really don’t know ;-/. many 9more) love that fake sociopathic husband of hers too.
– look around!! Romney (another fake fart) is looking stronger and stronger. americans like the fake polish with no real conviction candidates (seems obvious to me).
lets looks at the fakes and then the the genuines (and lets forget for a minute about their positions and/or nuttyness).
DEM Fakes:
1. Billary – like husband a pole based positioner – never had a true conviction in her life. one position on friday and the opposite on monday if the polls say it should be so. All done with a straight face (American Sheople lap it up like milk.
2. Edwards – wouldn’t know “poor” if a homeless man walked up to him and decked him silly. Lives in a multi million dollar home with 30 rooms and according to the Captain here has a non-profit foundation to help the poor but looks to be helping hmself more with the funds. In a way he is more repulsive than Billary (can’t beleive i said that), but the utter hypocracy of playing the champion of the poor while playing the poor. there may be a place reserved for him – should be IMO. total phoney.
Dodd/Bidon/Richardson in the dem field are ok – same old same old – not total frauds, but not too inspiring either ;-/.
True Beleivers:
1. Kusinkich – a nut, but I think he has real conviction in what he beleives. and I respect that.
that it. I don’t think Obama fits as a “true beleiver” but I do think he is near enough there to hear him out. I do not think he is a panderer nor a fake candidate in the least. His lakc of experiece bothers me – but there simply is no other candidate i can stomach (on the dem side – and only Ron Paul on the Rep side I like).
Republicans:
Fake f$%kers:
Romney -fake through and through. Pro-chioce before he was pro-life, pro-gay marriege before he was anti-gay marriege…………..etc………………..and it ain’t an evolution like Reagans over 20 yrs time – its a 5-minute quicky “road to Domascus” conversion on par with the WWF in beleivability. Boy he sure has the GQ look too!!! Tall, black hair (dyed probably) chisel strong chin – the guy looks like he belongs on a f$%king SuperHero’s comic book. total phoney but he “looks presidential” and he is a smooth talker. He is basically Billary candate of the Republican Party.
Guliani seems a little fake – playing the 911 card endlessly, but that is his strong suit so I can let that go a little. He’s not too fake – not like Romney.
McCain – same a Guliani – opportunist, but there is a remnant of conviction – he had the balls to stand by the emigration bill and the Iraq war – not all that popular in some circles but i think he showed conviction to stand against the popular will in these two areas – and i respect that. Too bad he kiss Bush’s arse so much these last 5-yrs, I would have voted for him had he not pussed out after losing in 2000.
True Beleivers:
Ron Paul is one.
I think Buckabee is another (I’d vote for him even though he is a bible thumper and the polar opposite of what I believe) why? he’s genuine – and this Nation needs a real flesh and blood person in the WH – BAD. no more sociopaths.
Gingritch is a true beleiver and the most frightening man of all. A total sociopathic true blue beleiver (the most dangerous animal on earth- history is full of these types).
Fred Thompson seems authentic but I’m not sure about him yet.
……………………….
All vote for Ron Paul, Mike Buckabee, or Barack Obama.
none of the other dwarves do a thing for me.
………………………….
only Gingrich would be perilous to our continued existence should he be elected IMO – though Billary would be mighty depressing
only thing i like about Billary is her big butt.
I like em big ;-). pearshaped ;-).
its just me I guess………….
Ron Paul did NOT get 2% in 1988. It was actually 0.47%. The ONLY LP candidate to ever break the 1% barrier was Ed Clark in 1980. NO LP candidate for President ever managed 2%.
This sort of info about Hillary is almost like the National Review cover on Dean – “PLEASE nominate this man!” – except that M-D isn’t a conservative mag. Still, nominations aren’t won with polls. They are won with delegates. Hillary will have ’em, Obama and Gore will not.
Convincing committed delegates to switch is almost impossible. There are always a couple who do, but never nearly enough to affect the outcome. They won’t beat Hillary with this sort of poll.
Please oh please nominate Hillery come on you Dhimmi’s you know you want to, just imagine you get a twofer Bill and Hill back in the white house again what libtard could ask for more? And Obama Smart? Excudes authenticity? Bwahahahaha are you really that delusional? Oh right yeah you are after all you would vote for Ron Paul!
I have this odd idea that if/when Algore is awarded the Nobel Prize for Peace, he’ll leap flailing into the race with the Global Warming issue. The other Little Three Dhims are racing promises of the quickest defeat in the Iraq theater of the War of Global Jihad. When and if Bloomberg , astride his billionaire stallion, Transfat the Wonder horse, and with his sidekick issue, Smoke ‘n’ Guns, ever pays his into the race, William Macy ought to reprise his role from Seabiscuit to call the shennanigans! The Dhim candidates have all the color and importance of the Italian Ligation officer who greeted Victor Lazlo’s plane in Casablanca. If only they would wear those hats with all the plumes, we’d know for certain they are both comic and straightman
explain to us why you think Obama is a dumb guy Oldcrow.
-here- if you will.
or you just spouting off with zilch to back it up with?
Gaffo, you wrote:
“why do so many like her? i really don’t know ;-/. many 9more) love that fake sociopathic husband of hers too.”
I’ll have you know that Bill is NOT a fake sociopath…he’s the real thing….