Skip to main content

View Diary: Republicans think November is theirs, but women have other ideas (98 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  Her ratings were higher before (18+ / 0-)

    The Republican and conservative entertainment complex turned their gaze toward her.  Some Republicans supported her in polls as compared to Obama.  Partisanship is such that Rs will hate her by the time of the election.  

    Poll favorability is different from winning an election against an opponent, as Obama showed in 2012.  

    As Clinton is seen more and more through a political gaze, the polls will reflect the partisan split.  But she still wins against all Republican candidates.

    HRC will not win like LBJ or FDR.  A modern landslide looks more like Obama in 2008 (or even 2012).

    I think HRC still is our strongest candidate at this time.    

    Join us on the Black Kos front porch to review news and views written from a black pov—everyone is welcome.

    by TomP on Wed Jun 18, 2014 at 12:37:21 PM PDT

    [ Parent ]

    •  With HCR you get ... (6+ / 0-)

      Hillary will also pull in a lot of Dems to the House and Senate too. That is the real power.  Without a majority in the House and Senate (not by a couple of points either), we all know it makes it very hard to get anything done.

      •  That's another fantasy (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Patango, askew

        Hillary has no magic power (or coattails) to pull anyone along. The House is gerrymandered to a point where not many races are competitive; the Senate races depend more on the candidates for those races, and I believe THEY are more likely to coattail our presidential candidate than vice verse.

        Ed FitzGerald for governor Of Ohio. Women's lives depend on it. http://www.edfitzgeraldforohio.com/

        by anastasia p on Wed Jun 18, 2014 at 03:41:51 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  The house is gerrymandered (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Patango

          based on Obama-era alignment, that could change with another candidate, be it HRC or someone else. Seats that aren't competitive, especially in the South and Midwest, could suddenly become competitive.

      •  "Hillary will also pull in a lot of Dems to the (0+ / 0-)

        House "

        IMO that is incorrect , old school voters still believe in split government , if anything , they will lean more towards voting GOP into congress

        I hope I am wrong

        Beer Drinkers & Hell Raisers

        by Patango on Wed Jun 18, 2014 at 04:59:44 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

    •  Agree with almost all you said (4+ / 0-)

      However, I would have phrased. . .

      I think HRC still is our strongest candidate at this time.
      This way:   "Currently un-challenged front runner HRC, remains well positioned to not lose a general election race against one of the comically weak field of unimpressive potential Republican nominees."

      sláinte,
      cl
      -- Religion is like sodomy: both can be harmless when practiced between consenting adults but neither should be imposed upon children.

      by Caoimhin Laochdha on Wed Jun 18, 2014 at 01:12:51 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  I hear what you are saying, (3+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Penny GC, puakev, Caoimhin Laochdha

        but the billions of dollars Rs bring make even as ass like Romney a potential president.  We can lose 2016.  That doe snot mean HRC is the only possible winner.  We won't know until or if there are viable opponents to her in a primary.  

        Dems could lose the presidency in 2016.  Reagan was as big a dumbass as Rand Paul or Rubio or Cruz, and he won twice.  

        Many people thought Reagan was a weak candidate in 1980, until the debate, when he pulled ahead.  

        Join us on the Black Kos front porch to review news and views written from a black pov—everyone is welcome.

        by TomP on Wed Jun 18, 2014 at 02:09:26 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  And it only takes one debate (3+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Vwhite, TomP, Caoimhin Laochdha

          , remember Obama's 1st debate boner with Romney

          Beer Drinkers & Hell Raisers

          by Patango on Wed Jun 18, 2014 at 05:02:44 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  RE: "Obama's 1st Debate w/Romney (0+ / 0-)
            And it only takes one debate, remember Obama's 1st debate boner with Romney
            Correct.  Barack Obama took the stage and presented the historically accurate "Senator Obama" and "President as we've known him since 2004.  He was, essentially, "acting" like himself, which burst his bubble for many voters - particularly many of his.

            In the second -- more closely watched debate -- the President jettisoned his comfort zone (which we saw in Debate #1), and successfully portrayed Romney as another GOP retread of failed policies.

            Debates (i.e. 'joint media appearances') are not generally high-impact events. However, they can create a big doubt in voter's minds - think Gerald Ford's re-hanging of the Iron Curtain on the wrong side of Poland's borders in 1980 combined with Bob Dole's snarling rant in his VP debate w/Walter Mondale that same year.  

            Mostly, however, modern era TV "debates" only help solidify the vote of "leaning" voters when their likely candidate does well enough (Obama '12, Reagan '84) or demonstrably better than expected (Bill Clinton' 92, H.W. Bush v. Ferraro 1988, Kennedy '60); or merely avoids looking like he's nuts (Reagan '80, Perot '92).

            sláinte,
            cl
            -- Religion is like sodomy: both can be harmless when practiced between consenting adults but neither should be imposed upon children.

            by Caoimhin Laochdha on Thu Jun 19, 2014 at 06:13:28 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

        •  Was 16 years-old & remember that 1980 evening well (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          TomP

          Reagan's only job in his first face-to-face with Jimmy Carter was to disprove the perception that he was a wing nut.  

          Many people thought Reagan was a weak candidate in 1980, until the debate, when he pulled ahead.
          Yes, but it was even worse than that.  It was the reason(s) voters and reporters (back when reporters played a legitimate role covering important elections) believed Reagan's candidacy was Swiss cheese.

          In 1980, millions of voters harbored fears (appropriately & accurately) that Reagan was dangerously far-right, incompetent and completely unfit to serve as President. His age was an issue too.  Reagan's advisers successfully coached him  - for days & days before the debate -  to come across as a non-threatening former Governor with a rudimentary, or at least non-radical, understanding of the issues.  (Ronnie "smile confidently, stick to generalizations about making the U.S. a better & stronger nation, say the economy is horrible and blame Pres. Carter and don't say anything stridently reactionary").

          Reagan was able to convince people, during the minutes he spoke, that he wasn't nuts. The bar was low and he successfully stepped over it.  

          Reagan's performance successfully dispelled people's intuitively accurate understanding of him and the subsequent press coverage shifted as well.

          33 years since the Reagan's inaugural and we've seen  institutionalized burden shifting on non-millionaires (medical, educational, state/municipal erosion, etc) onto and extremely inflated taxation obligations on working people. This is the New Normal starting-point  governmental policy and conservative philosophy, which has been the foundation of every Congress/Presidential Administration since January 1981. Our economy has worsened every year since then by every rational measure.

          One debate in 1980 did not cause all this, but it sure deserves its own chapter in the history of how the U.S. Gov't and illiberal national leaders created and maintained an inexorable death march for the U.S. working class.

          sláinte,
          cl
          -- Religion is like sodomy: both can be harmless when practiced between consenting adults but neither should be imposed upon children.

          by Caoimhin Laochdha on Thu Jun 19, 2014 at 05:05:32 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site