View Story | 69 comments
Comments: Expand Shrink Hide (Always) | Indented Flat (Always)
All the Rs need to do, strategically, is activate the latent or overt anti-Clinton sentiment with some targeted messaging. To do that, all they need to do is tie in to the earlier concerns people had about the Clintons - "sleazy" fundraising, stone-walling on records, etc. - and presto, 45% becomes 51%, and the election's over. All they need to do is shift a few baseline points, because dislike of her is already so strong.
I can see scenarios where she can pull off a win, especially if the Rs continue their wholesale collapse, but I see Hillary creating a uniquely difficult messaging environment for us. We saw this in 2004, which I'm convinced Bush won not because people voted for him, but against Kerry.
"How eager you are to be slaves." - Emperor Tiberius to the Senate of Rome, in response to their offer to pass any legislation he wished.
by MBNYC on Fri Nov 09, 2007 at 08:06:34 AM PDT
[ Parent ]
the anti-clinton vote is already locked in. i will admit to being surprised by the polls that show her doing so well against rudy and the other repugs, but they are what they are- and it's a consistent pattern. i also think rudy's positives are hyperinflated by the media fluffing, so he has nowhere to go but down. she can beat him, and badly.
now at the left coaster and docudharma
by Turkana on Fri Nov 09, 2007 at 08:10:57 AM PDT
She has universal name rec and a lot of both pro- and ant- votes locked in. It would almost be like running an incumbent-type campaign.
Incidentally, how come it's taken as basically a given that Bill Clinton would have trounced Bush in 2004 and would walk away with it in 2008, but Hillary Clinton is supposedly "unelectable" because "people hate the Clintons"?
The frogurt is also cursed. -8.25, -6.51
by Superribbie on Fri Nov 09, 2007 at 08:24:16 AM PDT
the other night, talking about including everyone in community works globally. The man explains liberal values on this issue better than anyone I've ever heard, He argued that it was impossible to fight everyone who was against us, but that when we build healthy gcommunities globally where everyone helped make the community work, then people are less likely to terrorize their own people or others because they have too much to lose-too much to risk.
He is truely awesome.
All behold the tamed Maverick, at his master's feet.
by coigue on Fri Nov 09, 2007 at 08:38:57 AM PDT
far from synonymous--though the Hillary campaign probably wishes that weren't so...
Billy is articulate and affable--wordy to a fault...
HRC is not especially affable, her charm--if we can call it that-- is rather subtle-- and although she's wordy she rarely hammers a message with the same precision and nuance that Bill does...HRC comes off as evasive, Bill expansive...subtle, perhaps, but it's all the difference in the world when it comes to politics.
Half the time, Bill can't lose even though he maybe should because people just like him at a personal level-he exudes warmth.
Hillary, sorry to say, not so much. She has to work against her own natural personality, Bill has his personality naturally working for him.
All the difference in the world.
Dump Steny Hoyer
by DelicateMonster on Fri Nov 09, 2007 at 08:46:20 AM PDT
...there is no rational reason whatsoever to make a prediction that she's topped out in terms of negatives. I can't think of a single precedent for that.
One thing I see that's persistent in polls is that she underperforms Kerry and the generic Democrat, Case in point, the Oct. 31st Quinnipiac poll.
Former New York City Mayor Rudolph Giuliani, the Republican front-runner, leads New York Sen. Hillary Clinton by a razor-thin 45 - 43 percent, but voters say 58 - 37 percent that President George W. Bush's low approval ratings will make it difficult for any Republican to be elected President, according to a Quinnipiac University national poll released today. Giuliani's lead reverses a 46 - 43 percent Sen. Clinton lead in an August 15 poll by the independent Quinnipiac (KWIN-uh-pe-ack) University, but Giuliani was up 49 - 40 percent May 3. Illinois Sen. Barack Obama gets 43 percent to Giuliani's 42 percent. And Arizona Sen. John McCain ties Clinton 44 - 44 percent, wiping out a 47 - 41 percent Clinton lead August 15. Clinton also has seen her favorability among American voters drop from 48 - 43 percent August 15 to 46 - 46 percent today.
Former New York City Mayor Rudolph Giuliani, the Republican front-runner, leads New York Sen. Hillary Clinton by a razor-thin 45 - 43 percent, but voters say 58 - 37 percent that President George W. Bush's low approval ratings will make it difficult for any Republican to be elected President, according to a Quinnipiac University national poll released today.
Giuliani's lead reverses a 46 - 43 percent Sen. Clinton lead in an August 15 poll by the independent Quinnipiac (KWIN-uh-pe-ack) University, but Giuliani was up 49 - 40 percent May 3.
Illinois Sen. Barack Obama gets 43 percent to Giuliani's 42 percent. And Arizona Sen. John McCain ties Clinton 44 - 44 percent, wiping out a 47 - 41 percent Clinton lead August 15.
Clinton also has seen her favorability among American voters drop from 48 - 43 percent August 15 to 46 - 46 percent today.
So there's definitely room for movement in her unfavorables, because that's precisely what we're seeing.
by MBNYC on Fri Nov 09, 2007 at 08:25:46 AM PDT
Gray Davis won an election with unfavorables over 60%; Bush's were right around 50% in 2004 IIRC.
Bottom line: do I think Hillary will have a tougher time winning the general than John Edwards? Yes. Do I think she is doomed? Far from it.
by Superribbie on Fri Nov 09, 2007 at 08:35:51 AM PDT
is that her unfavorables can't go higher. I have just demonstrated that they can.
QED.
by MBNYC on Fri Nov 09, 2007 at 08:43:35 AM PDT
but you also started with the premise that once they hit 51%, "the election is over", which is incorrect.
Of course all polling numbers fluctuate in both directions. I think it's unlikely that Hillary's unfavorables get significantly higher because of her universal recognition.
by Superribbie on Fri Nov 09, 2007 at 09:11:24 AM PDT
for Presidential elections closely track favorable/unfavorable numbers. Again, Bush and Kerry.
Is this still the reality-based community? Sometimes, I wonder.
by MBNYC on Fri Nov 09, 2007 at 11:39:46 AM PDT
which is not the same as a rise in unfavorability. but there will always be movement of a handful of percentage points.
by Turkana on Fri Nov 09, 2007 at 09:03:54 AM PDT
a five pint swing: favorables down two, unfavorables up three.
by MBNYC on Fri Nov 09, 2007 at 11:37:29 AM PDT
both are within the margins- a swing like that means nothing.
by Turkana on Fri Nov 09, 2007 at 11:38:38 AM PDT
agree to disagree, I'm afraid.
by MBNYC on Fri Nov 09, 2007 at 11:41:17 AM PDT
I never thought bush won, and if this next election is close, they will adjust it again (think Ohio). We got the house and senate back because the margins were not as amenable to fixing. this election needs to be a blow out so it can't easily be adjusted
by lanikai on Fri Nov 09, 2007 at 09:13:05 AM PDT
wide narrow
View Story | 69 comments