That’s what this (admittedly biased) blogger claims, citing a 9 point overall drop (and reductions in lead against any Republican) and a fourteen point lead reduction in New Hampshire.
Granted, it’s still very early in the campaign, although the primaries are right around the corner, and who knows how this news might affect those voting in them? What I’d like to know is how significant or accurate these numbers really are. If they’re right, and actually mean something, where does it come from?
She’s in “serious trouble” relative to where she was a month or so ago. There are still plenty of candidates who would love to have her poll numbers, though. Still, you can tell she’s getting desperate when she starts ragging on Obama for what he did in Kindergarten. Man, that was a stooooopid move.
Never write off a Clinton, though. She’s got a powerful organization, and she’s whipping that up in Iowa-- a place where having the right organization can make or break you. A caucus is just a completely different animal than a primary. I think it would drive me absolutely crazy if I had to campaign there.
Captain’s Quarters?
Hillary is DOOMED, and the GOP will retake the senate.
All they need is Two Seats.
It’s too damned early to take any of these polls very seriously.
Wow. I learned a lot from that video. I learned that the Democrat Congress passed the largest tax increase in US history shortly after assuming power. And that they want to tax everything that moves. And that they are anti-labor. And that their name is the Democrat Party, not the Democratic Party. And then I stopped the video because I was about to hurl.
Isn’t this just silly. The Republicans spent a year and a half promoting Hillary Clinton as the Democratic front runner because they believed they had enough dirt on her to bring her down when the election swung around, only to find that they don’t have any new dirt to fling, and people are tired of hearing about the old dirt over and over again. Now they are panicking and trying to cast doubt through the blogosphere on what was their favorite Democratic front runner, because their own candidates have more current baggage then Hillary ever had. Maybe if they spent their time and energy on their own campaigns instead of trying to influence their enemys’, they wouldn’t be in the mess they’re in today.
Geez, can you at least wait until the election year begins?
That’s why I mentioned the primaries. 
If this trend continues (and if it exists), it might be the best chance Obama or Edwards have of getting the nomination.
That was a really big pile of un-cited garbage. A vast Republican conspiracy to promote Hillary stretches even my imagination, and I watched more Star Trek than I would admit on a first date.
yeah, that’s the thing about hillary, she’s a powerful machine. and people want an actual human being as their president, not a political animal who will sell her soul for her political ambitions. she scares the freak out of me.
and who here is buying into her little “I’m a moderate” act. she’s only acting this way to win over people. that’s right, it’s an act. she’s a far left “it takes a village” socialist, and she always will be.
If hillary is in serious trouble, than my faith in humanity is being restored.
How could people not see through the clinton “lets take a poll to decide where we stand” antics. :rolleyes:
You’re absolutely right , of course. All I’ve got to go on are a year or so of Mrs. Clinton being talked about as a Democratic front runner on right-wing radio shows, newspaper columns and on-line articles. The Republicans grabbed onto that bone pretty damn early and chewed it to death. I wouldn’t(and didn’t) call it a “vast Republican conspiracy”-it’s more a case of a few of the louder mouths promoting the idea and a lot of wannabes running it into the ground.
Nope, I never saw articles promoting ideas like this, way before she actually announced her candidacy.
And they use the term “knee-jerk” when it comes to Liberals. Sheesh!
I’ve said all along that Hillary is not going to win the nomination. Her core supporters, women, are starting to defect to Obama. I believe that it’s ironic but true that better news from Iraq (better meaning less bad) is bad news for Hillary. Less concern about Middle East means more focus on domestic issues and less on her perceived strength as a hawk. Couple that with the news that there indeed is no current nuclear threat from Iran and her vote condemning Iran’s military as terroirsts is biting her in the butt. Add to that Obama taking a page from Rove- attacking your opponent’s strength. She talks up and down about her experience. Well, what was that experience? He’s very deftly sown that seed of doubt. She wasn’t Secretary of State nor of Treasury. Up till now she has used the mantle of inevitability to avoid having to throw a punch. When you finally start to punch and you swing wildly and miss by a mile, you look both desperate and silly, which is precisely how she looks now. I see her coming in third in Iowa. After Iowa, Biden and Dodd drop out and their supporters flock to Obama and Edwards. Another third place Hillary finish in New Hampshire and Richardson drops out, and his backers go to Obama. Obama scores the knockout blow in SC and the ballgame is over.
Is W a far left “it takes a village” socialist as well?
Well, she was leading all the polls, so do you expect “right-wing radio” to pretend as if someone else is the front runner? I read about her being the front runner in the MSM for the last year, and now that same media is talking about her being in trouble. Well, her poll numbers are slipping.
Not everything bad that happens to Hillary is due to “right-wing radio”.
Believe me, 99% of Americans wish we could.
If only. If she actually were to the far left, there’d be a lot less stink-eye toward her from the far left. She’s the seriously “hold-your-nose-and-vote” candidate for the general election for anyone on the actual left.
We Americans are too smart to be held up by some arbitrary Jan 1 date. Think about it. What is an “election year” anyway? The general election is in Nov, so it’s less than a year away.
Seriously, though, we’re in the meat of the primary season. The Iowa caucuses are about 5 weeks away, and then we roll into NH and SC right after that. If Hillary slips in in Iowa and NH, Obama will almost certainly surge in SC, and then he’ll have the big mo. Now, I still think Hillary is the likely nominee, but the press loves it when there’s an actual horse race instead of a clear front-runner. They finally have something to talk about instead of whether any GOP pol can beat Hillary. And Obama makes really good copy. Hillary slipping in the polls, no matter how little, is every reporters’ wet dream.
Wait…she’s a “far left socialist” whose position is dependent on polls? If that’s the case, it seems to me that the people of the USofA are also a bunch of “far left socialists”.
In that case, the people would be getting what they want by voting for her.
Could you, perhaps, get Rush to explain your position to you a little better, so that way you can elucidate it a little more clearly? Thanks.
-Joe
[Nitpick]
The Iowa caucuses are 27 days away.
[/nitpick]
Which reinforces, rather than detracts from, your point.