Survey USA head to head. Have fun.
[QUOTE=ElvisL1ves]
Survey USA head to head. Have fun.
[/QUOTE]
So where is the surveys support your broad statement? This is a list only in your link.
You made the statement, so far you have not even shown one major poll, never mind “Every major Poll”.
Jim
[QUOTE=What Exit?]
So where is the surveys support your broad statement? This is a list only in your link.
You made the statement, so far you have not even shown one major poll, never mind “Every major Poll”.
Jim
[/QUOTE]
I am going to help you out.
The most recent polls show HRC winning, but as recently as August Rudy was leading in some polls.
Jim
I’m a loyal Dem who is very distrustful of Hillary, in light of Pardongate, her overnight fortune in commodities trading, the disappearing and reappearing Rose Law Firm records, the WH Travel Office firings and the healthcare reform debacle. But I would still, with nose firmly held, prefer her to any of the Republicans in the field. Particularly after reading the interesting analyses of the Electoral College math, this thread has actually made me think she just might win. Whodathunkit?
[QUOTE=Jonathan Chance]
I just looked at the 2004 electoral map and I could see New Hampshire switching. It went for Kerry but <>1% and there’s a habit of being contrarian in voting there. Otherwise, the close Kerry states:
Pennsylvania
Michigan
Wisconsin
Minnesota
Oregon
I concur will likely stay blue. The close Bush states:
Ohio
Iowa
New Mexico
Nevada
could switch. Especially if Hillary (the presumptive nominee at this stage) chooses someone like Bill Richardson as her VP. I hate to say it but he’d likely put NM, AZ, and maybe NV in serious play just by doing commercials En Espanol.
[/QUOTE]
I agree with this, but Ohio is the only one that really matters, because of the low electoral votes that other 3 have. If Ohio stays Red, and the Dem gets IA, NM ** and** NV, ** as well as** holds every single EV they got in 2004 (not forgetting about the fractional EV states), the Dem only gets a tie.
Although that tie would likely convert to a Dem win in the HoR, sweeping the 3 small states in play, while holding every single 2004 EV, is an uphill battle against a good Republican candidate.
[QUOTE=Leaper]
As I mentioned in another thread, I sometimes browse conservative blogs to get a sense of what the other side of the aisle is talking about. A factoid here that came up while discussing a separate issue got my attention:
So I wonder… Hillary Clinton doubtlessly know these numbers. How is she planning to overcome them? How should she? For that matter, how relevant are these “negatives”? Is she truly “unelectable” with them?
[/QUOTE]
In my humble opinion, I think the best way H.C. can overcome these negitive numbers and achieve the position of power she so greatly desires is to move to Cuba and stage a cue aginst Castro. Thatway, she will fall right into a country comfortable with a communist leader and it will be a natural fit for her.
[QUOTE=IWasNeverHere]
Thatway, she will fall right into a country comfortable with a communist leader and it will be a natural fit for her.
[/QUOTE]
Interesting view. Which of her politicies and actions would you classify as “communist”?
To me she seems right of center, relying on her party affiliation and family connection to draw Democratic voters while saying and doing things that appeal to Republican voters. Especially her stance on the Iraq war and the Iran situation.
I have voted for third party candidates in most recent presidential elections. I have a strong Libertarian slant. That said, I would like to vote Democrat this time around, but could never vote for HRC, sorry. I am currently strongly undecided.
I don’t think she’s going to have to overcome them. Come election day the choice (in the eye of the voting public) is going to be crystallized. She’s going to win (warts and all) because she’s not the Republican candidate. George W. Bush’s complete fuck up of everything he’s touched is going to be the tar-baby that gives the Democrats the White House and and bigger majorities in both the House and Senate.
It isn’t going to matter what her voting record in the Senate has been, who gave who a blow job, who did what in Arkansas or what Rudy did on 9/11. The Democrats are going to vote for her in droves (no way they’ll sit this one out or vote third party - there’s too much bad blood) and the independents are going to have to watch the continued carnage from Iraq between now and November 2008 - they won’t have the stomach to put another Republican in the White House (even if the Republican nominee isn’t a fire-eating, you’re with us or against us type). The Republicans have had there 8 years in the big chair.
I don’t even think it’ll be as close as polls show now.
[QUOTE=scr4]
Interesting view. Which of her politicies and actions would you classify as “communist”?
What dosn’t. Here are just a few of her quotes:
(AP) Sen. Hillary Clinton outlined a broad economic vision on Tuesday, saying it’s time to replace an “on your own” society with one based on shared responsibility and prosperity.
“There is no greater force for economic growth than free markets. But markets work best with rules that promote our values, protect our workers and give all people a chance to succeed,” she said. “Fairness doesn’t just happen. It requires the right government policies.”
The Democratic presidential hopeful said what the Bush administration touts as an “ownership society” really is an “on your own” society that has widened the gap between rich and poor."
“The unfettered free market has been the most radically disruptive force in American life in the last generation.”
“We can’t afford to have that money go to the private sector. The money has to go to the federal government because the federal government will spend that money better than the private sector will spend it.”
“Too many people have made too much money.”
And finaly, my personal favorite:“Many of you are well enough off that [the] tax cuts may have helped you. We’re saying that for America to get back on track, we’re probably going to cut that short and not give it to you. We’re going to take things away from you on behalf of the common good.”
Open your eyes man!
Its not like she is trying to hide it!!!
To me she seems right of center, relying on her party affiliation and family connection to draw Democratic voters while saying and doing things that appeal to Republican voters. Especially her stance on the Iraq war and the Iran situation.
[/QUOTE]
Which one of her views on Iraq would you like me to point out. The one where she voted for and supported the war, or the one where she is speaking out aginst the war, or the ones where she has decided she if for it again. Let me know what quotes you would like and I would be glad to find them for you.
Right of center, you mean now that she has changed her position on abortion and claims to be pro life? That right of center? ya right! I believe that as much as you believe Sadam has WMD’s
[QUOTE=IWasNeverHere]
What dosn’t. Here are just a few of her quotes:
(AP) Sen. Hillary Clinton outlined a broad economic vision on Tuesday, saying it’s time to replace an “on your own” society with one based on shared responsibility and prosperity.
“There is no greater force for economic growth than free markets. But markets work best with rules that promote our values, protect our workers and give all people a chance to succeed,” she said. “Fairness doesn’t just happen. It requires the right government policies.”
The Democratic presidential hopeful said what the Bush administration touts as an “ownership society” really is an “on your own” society that has widened the gap between rich and poor."
“The unfettered free market has been the most radically disruptive force in American life in the last generation.”
“We can’t afford to have that money go to the private sector. The money has to go to the federal government because the federal government will spend that money better than the private sector will spend it.”
“Too many people have made too much money.”
And finaly, my personal favorite:“Many of you are well enough off that [the] tax cuts may have helped you. We’re saying that for America to get back on track, we’re probably going to cut that short and not give it to you. We’re going to take things away from you on behalf of the common good.”
Open your eyes man!
Its not like she is trying to hide it!!!
[/QUOTE]
All of those things she says are perfectly true and none of them sound very much like things Communists would say. Do you know anything about Communists?!
Taking things away for the common good is not called Communism, it is called taxation; it is practiced in some form by almost every government regardless of ideology, the sole exceptions being states where the government owns the whole economy anyway (North Korea) or owns its own productive property (Saudi Arabia).
[QUOTE=plnnr]
I don’t think she’s going to have to overcome them. Come election day the choice (in the eye of the voting public) is going to be crystallized. She’s going to win (warts and all) because she’s not the Republican candidate. George W. Bush’s complete fuck up of everything he’s touched is going to be the tar-baby that gives the Democrats the White House and and bigger majorities in both the House and Senate.
[/QUOTE]
Didn’t we hear this exact same speech about 2004?
-Joe
[QUOTE=Merijeek]
Didn’t we hear this exact same speech about 2004?
-Joe
[/QUOTE]
I did from many places. I am still trying to figure out how the Dems picked Kerry and how Kerry could run such an awful campaign as to lose to as bad a President as Bush.
I am fearful of another upset unless the Republican doing the upsetting is Rudy. 
Damn, I hated voting for Kerry, but of course I hate Bush/Cheney even more.
Clinton vs. Giuliani is a big step up from Bush vs. Kerry. It basically looks like a pair of centrists.
Jim
[QUOTE=What Exit?]
Clinton vs. Giuliani is a big step up from Bush vs. Kerry. It basically looks like a pair of centrists.
[/QUOTE]
Or opportunists?
[QUOTE=IWasNeverHere]
In my humble opinion, I think the best way H.C. can overcome these negitive numbers and achieve the position of power she so greatly desires is to move to Cuba and stage a cue aginst Castro.
[/QUOTE]
BTW, it’s spelled “coup.”
Well, she’s not going to Cooba anyway, so it’s a mute point.
[QUOTE=BrainGlutton]
Or opportunists?
[/QUOTE]
Well Rudy is a politician, but he has always been towards the center by today’s standards. He has basically been a Nixon Republican. This might work as I think it defines his general political leanings and those who dislike him will like the comparison.
Hillary strikes me as someone that has been very ambitious for a long time, but her and her husband always struck me as much closer to the middle than lets say Ted Kennedy or even Kerry.
I am not sure if either are any more an opportunist than almost any other fairly successful candidate for President. Most are opportunist, some make their opportunities, other have 9/11 happen on their beat and rise to the occasion.
Jim
[QUOTE=IWasNeverHere]
Which one of her views on Iraq would you like me to point out. The one where she voted for and supported the war, or the one where she is speaking out aginst the war, or the ones where she has decided she if for it again.
[/QUOTE]
Exactly. She’s been inconsistent in her support for the Iraq war, and never apologized for supporting it in the past. This puts her to the right of the majority of Americans who think it was wrong to go to war in Iraq.