# The Great Un-Fork Hillary Thread **URL:** \ **Category:** Politics & Elections\ **Created:** [April 12, 2015, 12:17am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-great-un-fork-hillary-thread/717458 "2015-04-12T00:17:49Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 29
**Author:** ![Diceman](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/22d042/32.png) [@Diceman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diceman)\ **Post date:** [June 4, 2015, 3:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-great-un-fork-hillary-thread/717458/561 "2015-06-04T15:01:02Z")
The morning news (NBC, I think) was talking about the presidential race this morning. Mostly about the five hundred Republicans currently in the field or expected to join, but they did mention Hillary’s falling poll numbers. Something that’s definitely worth note: supposedly, a “firm majority” of Americans consider Hillary to be untrustworthy. They didn’t give the actual numbers, but if it’s true that Hillary is generally considered to be an untrustworthy person, then really the Dems would be well advised to dump her now, rather than set themselves up for defeat by trying to run a campaign that amounts to “She’s honest! Really! Please believe us! Pretty please?” ---
**Author:** ![Gyrate](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gyrate/32/3588_2.png) [@Gyrate](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Gyrate)\ **Post date:** [June 4, 2015, 3:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-great-un-fork-hillary-thread/717458/562 "2015-06-04T15:10:43Z")
> [@Diceman](#): > > The morning news (NBC, I think) was talking about the presidential race this morning. Mostly about the five hundred Republicans currently in the field or expected to join, but they did mention Hillary’s falling poll numbers. Something that’s definitely worth note: supposedly, a “firm majority” of Americans consider Hillary to be untrustworthy. They didn’t give the actual numbers, but if it’s true that Hillary is generally considered to be an untrustworthy person, then really the Dems would be well advised to dump her now, rather than set themselves up for defeat by trying to run a campaign that amounts to “She’s honest! Really! Please believe us! Pretty please?” I refer you to the bear attack metaphor: Hillary doesn’t have to be trustworthy; she just has to be more trustworthy than her opponent. So far it’s looking pretty good by that metric. ---
**Author:** ![Lance\_Turbo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lance_turbo/32/6156_2.png) [@Lance\_Turbo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lance_Turbo)\ **Post date:** [June 4, 2015, 4:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-great-un-fork-hillary-thread/717458/563 "2015-06-04T16:42:39Z")
> [@Gyrate](#): > > Hillary doesn’t have to be trustworthy; she just has to be more trustworthy than her opponent. I don’t know if she even has to do that. Was Bill Clinton considered more trustworthy than Bob Dole in 1996? I don’t know the answer or where to look it up, but I would be surprised if he was. I’d also be surprised if Bush was considered more trustworthy than Kerry in 2004, but I think that one might be closer. ---
**Author:** ![Jas09](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/d07c76/32.png) [@Jas09](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jas09)\ **Post date:** [June 4, 2015, 4:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-great-un-fork-hillary-thread/717458/564 "2015-06-04T16:51:58Z")
> [@adaher](#): > > If you look at those same polls compared to what CNN found one month ago, it’s pretty clear her numbers have seen significant degradation: > > [WH2016: General](http://pollingreport.com/wh16gen.htm) > > She lost 9 against Jeb, 19 against Walker, and 14 against Cruz, 11 against Rubio, and 18 against RAnd Paul. And if you compare to the previous month Quinnipiac she gained 3 against Jeb, 3 against Walker, 4 against Cruz, 2 against Rubio, and was level against Paul. Look, GE polls at this point are somewhat useful, but cherry-picking one poll to identify a trend is meaningless, especially as new candidates keep entering the race. All the polls can really tell us is that (a) Hillary in a much stronger position in the primary than she was in 2008 and (b) the general election race against any of the top-tier GOP candidates will be close. ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [June 4, 2015, 10:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-great-un-fork-hillary-thread/717458/565 "2015-06-04T22:38:59Z")
[Hillary Clinton Calls For Automatic, Universal Voter Registration.](http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2015/06/04/hillary-clinton-voting-rights_n_7513858.html) ---
**Author:** ![adaher](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/dec6dc/32.png) [@adaher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/adaher)\ **Post date:** [June 4, 2015, 11:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-great-un-fork-hillary-thread/717458/566 "2015-06-04T23:07:20Z")
That’s fine, as long as it’s done right, and as long as the databases are maintained, as in purged regularly and automatically. This should not be a problem if the database is national and precincts just use it to generate voters lists. So say someone moves from one area to another, the database would automatically move their registration as well. ---
**Author:** ![DSeid](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/dseid/32/20194_2.png) [@DSeid](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DSeid)\ **Post date:** [June 5, 2015, 2:46am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-great-un-fork-hillary-thread/717458/567 "2015-06-05T02:46:53Z")
> [@BrainGlutton](#): > > [Hillary Clinton Calls For Automatic, Universal Voter Registration.](http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2015/06/04/hillary-clinton-voting-rights_n_7513858.html) Interesting where she is investing her first chunks of time … South Carolina and Texas … both states that went for Romney hard. Any thoughts why? I understand Texas … as I said before, till the soil for future plantings … but _North_ Carolina is the one she could possibly flip. ---
**Author:** ![adaher](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/dec6dc/32.png) [@adaher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/adaher)\ **Post date:** [June 5, 2015, 3:00am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-great-un-fork-hillary-thread/717458/568 "2015-06-05T03:00:29Z")
According to her staff she’s focused like a laser on the primary, and if we get a repeat of 2008, repeating her strong performance in Texas will be critical. ---
**Author:** ![Gyrate](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gyrate/32/3588_2.png) [@Gyrate](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Gyrate)\ **Post date:** [June 5, 2015, 8:54am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-great-un-fork-hillary-thread/717458/569 "2015-06-05T08:54:26Z")
> [@Lance\_Turbo](#): > > I don’t know if she even has to do that. Was Bill Clinton considered more trustworthy than Bob Dole in 1996? I don’t know the answer or where to look it up, but I would be surprised if he was. > > I’d also be surprised if Bush was considered more trustworthy than Kerry in 2004, but I think that one might be closer. Also, as I’ve said before, it depends on what exactly you trust them on. I would rather vote for someone I wasn’t sure would do the right thing than someone I could trust to do the wrong one. But I’m sure this is just the break the [del]McCain[/del] [del]Romney[/del] [insert GOP candidate name here] campaign has been waiting for. ---
**Author:** ![adaher](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/dec6dc/32.png) [@adaher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/adaher)\ **Post date:** [June 10, 2015, 11:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-great-un-fork-hillary-thread/717458/570 "2015-06-10T23:38:21Z")
Latest set of polls, this time from Ohio: [http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/latest\_polls/](http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/latest_polls/) Mostly it’s about what you’d expect if we were two months out from the election: very close between GOP candidates and Clinton, but two striking exceptions: 1. Paul leads by 3 points. Yet another poll showing Paul leading the GOP field by a significant margin in trial heats against Clinton. Rubio is the only one tied, which shows him to be solidly second best. 2. Kasich leads Clinton in Ohio by 7. Given how important it is for the Republican to win Ohio, that’s a big point in his favor. His presence would probably also protect Rob Portman’s Senate seat. ---
**Author:** ![BobLibDem](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/boblibdem/32/3149_2.png) [@BobLibDem](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BobLibDem)\ **Post date:** [June 11, 2015, 11:43am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-great-un-fork-hillary-thread/717458/571 "2015-06-11T11:43:36Z")
The nominee isn’t going to be Kasich or Paul, it’s going to be Jeb. Polls say a lot of silly things this far out, Rand Paul’s support is likely as overblown as was the support of his father. When you get down to the nominee being apparent say in 8 months, then that nominee will be subject to the same scrutiny and negative campaigning for 8-9 months that Hillary has endured for 20+ years. Keep in mind that NONE of the Republican hopefuls have been subject to any attacks yet. Wait till they hook their claws into each other and Hillary gets to land her blows on a wounded Jeb. ---
**Author:** ![ElvisL1ves](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/5daacb/32.png) [@ElvisL1ves](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ElvisL1ves)\ **Post date:** [June 11, 2015, 12:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-great-un-fork-hillary-thread/717458/572 "2015-06-11T12:52:10Z")
On the Republican side, always bet on the money. The money is going to Jeb, unless he blows up so spectactularly in the very near future that Walker or Rubio actually starts to look good. It’s already too late for Kasich to get in, and there aren’t any other saviors out there for \*\*adaher \*\*to hope for. ---
**Author:** ![DSeid](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/dseid/32/20194_2.png) [@DSeid](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DSeid)\ **Post date:** [June 11, 2015, 1:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-great-un-fork-hillary-thread/717458/573 "2015-06-11T13:09:46Z")
It’s hard to take a poll too seriously that comes up with Cruz and Carson doing better against Clinton than Bush, that has Carson preferred for the GOP nod over Bush or Rubio, tied with Walker behind favorite son Kasich. C’mon. Well other than blow-out polls like HRC +48 for the Democratic nomination it is hard to take any polls too seriously yet. And that magnitude is hard to take seriously too. Two months out from the general yes, I expect the polls will be close, and I would be very very surprised if this is a blow out popular vote win for HRC. But I would also be surprised if this is not a modest popular vote and a solid electoral vote win for her … at this point based on the fundamentals more than any polling data. ---
**Author:** ![adaher](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/dec6dc/32.png) [@adaher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/adaher)\ **Post date:** [June 13, 2015, 2:34am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-great-un-fork-hillary-thread/717458/574 "2015-06-13T02:34:43Z")
Polls this early don’t predict anything, but that’s not the same as them being meaningless. Clinton leading by only a few points despite a massive name recognition advantage actually tells us a lot. Some Republicans polling better than others also tells us a lot about potential electability. I don’t know that Rand Paul is actually more electable than any other Republican, but the fact that he’s different from the rest of them and that his “brand” is more appealing than the typical Republican is important to know. ---
**Author:** ![DSeid](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/dseid/32/20194_2.png) [@DSeid](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DSeid)\ **Post date:** [June 13, 2015, 11:46am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-great-un-fork-hillary-thread/717458/575 "2015-06-13T11:46:05Z")
We’ve had this discussion but sure let’s repeat it … as to the lot it tells us: the degree that Clinton has name recognition versus others who have much less is the degree to which this is Clinton vs the generic not-Clinton GOP candidate who has not yet been put under the microscope. The lesser known almost always goes down as they become more known. Paul represents this same sort of aspect in a more abstract sense … he is also “other” than the usual suspects of the GOP so more hope to pin on what that “other” means. Most of the public does not have any real idea what the Paul brand represents, they just believe that it is none of the above. ---
**Author:** ![adaher](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/dec6dc/32.png) [@adaher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/adaher)\ **Post date:** [June 13, 2015, 11:53am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-great-un-fork-hillary-thread/717458/576 "2015-06-13T11:53:22Z")
If the lesser known candidate goes down, then why did almost all of the Senate challengers gain ground between Sep and Nov 2014? I agree that a lesser known candidate CAN lose popularity, but that’s just the thing: a lesser known candidate can do better or worse. Clinton, on the other hand, is pretty much stuck at 47-48%. That’s close enough to a majority that she MIGHT be able to get another 2-3% that she’s not getting now, but it means the GOP candidate doesn’t have a very high bar to clear. Just be acceptable and every Republican candidate since 1968 has met that bar. We saw this in the 2014 and 2010 Senate races: Democratic incumbents polled between the low 40s to the high 40s and most led their challengers until the fall. At which point the bulk of the acceptable GOP candidates overtook the incumbents. Most of those who fell short were the Sharon Angle-types(and even she came pretty close). ---
**Author:** ![Chronos](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/chronos/32/134_2.png) [@Chronos](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Chronos)\ **Post date:** [June 13, 2015, 3:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-great-un-fork-hillary-thread/717458/577 "2015-06-13T15:37:38Z")
> [@](#): > > Just be acceptable and every Republican candidate since 1968 has met that bar. A great many of them have not. Romney was not acceptable in 2012, McCain was not acceptable in 2008, Dole was not acceptable in 1996, Bush was not acceptable in 1992 (but was in 1988), and so on. ---
**Author:** ![DSeid](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/dseid/32/20194_2.png) [@DSeid](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DSeid)\ **Post date:** [June 13, 2015, 11:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-great-un-fork-hillary-thread/717458/578 "2015-06-13T23:09:15Z")
> [@adaher](#): > > … I agree that a lesser known candidate CAN lose popularity, but that’s just the thing: a lesser known candidate can do better or worse. … I’ll grant that. And even [cite](http://fivethirtyeight.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/02/16/what-early-presidential-polls-tell-us/) something proving your point. Early in the cycle in 1991 Bill Clinton was barely known. 15 favorable to 12 unfavorable. And “just weeks before the election, found 33 percent of voters with a favorable view of him but 39 percent unfavorable.” Yet he won with a 5.5% popular vote margin and an overwhelming electoral margin. Still Hillary is in a similar situation as Obama was at the time that article was written and she > [@](#): > > … will not run against “the Republican field” but instead against one Republican in particular. How one predicts the popularity of the Republican nominee after the primary battles gets complicated, since the winner of the primary will not be determined by fiat but instead by the candidates’ (and the voters’) behavior. Some things that a candidate can do to help him win the primary (like performing strongly in debates) should also help him in the general election. But for other choices, such as moving away from the center to cater to the party base, just the opposite is true. … Pay particular attention to that last bit. Do you think that any of the GOP candidates running _won’t_ cater to the party base under the current circumstances? Note [this](http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/clinton-is-polling-like-an-incumbent-and-that-could-help-her-in-2016/) also: > [@](#): > > … what if Clinton in fact wins the Democratic nomination in a landslide, while the Republican nominee does so only after a long and close race? … > > … As the graph shows, general election success has usually followed primary strength. Each extra margin-of-victory point for the incumbent party in the primary season equals a little less than an extra .2 points come the general election. > > If the primary votes were held today and the polling was accurate, Clinton would win the Democratic nomination by 57 points, while the Republican nominee would win by the slimmest of margins. Based on the graph, Clinton would then win the presidency by about 7 points. > > Of course, the eventual primary result is likely to be different from current poll results. That means the model has a relatively wide margin of error. Still, Clinton’s lead is large enough that even if her primary margin of victory dropped by 30 points (or the Republican nominee’s rose by 30 points), she’d still be expected to win the general election. … ---
**Author:** ![adaher](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/dec6dc/32.png) [@adaher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/adaher)\ **Post date:** [June 15, 2015, 7:47am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-great-un-fork-hillary-thread/717458/579 "2015-06-15T07:47:10Z")
> [@Chronos](#): > > A great many of them have not. Romney was not acceptable in 2012, McCain was not acceptable in 2008, Dole was not acceptable in 1996, Bush was not acceptable in 1992 (but was in 1988), and so on. They were quite acceptable. “Acceptable” is not a synonym for “winner”. Each candidate you mention fell before the best two Democratic candidates of the post-war era. All of them would have won easily against HHH, Mondale, McGovern, Dukakis, Kerry, or Carter. Whereas if we kept nominating Goldwater types we’d only have a prayer against McGovern, the Democrats’ Goldwater. Hillary is no McGovern, not even a Dukakis, but she reminds me a lot of HHH. She faces the prospect of trying to win a third straight term for her party, a formidable task, and she’ll be facing someone not spectacular, but probably quite credible. Plus she’ll face a split base. She’s decided to side with Pelosi over Obama in the recent trade dispute, which will probably help her with unions but doesn’t bode well for keeping the Obama coalition together. Dissing him is not the way to win their hearts. Granted, it’s not Vietnam and civil rights level disruption within the Democratic party, but the Democrats are as unsure of their identity in 2016 as the Republicans are. Clinton seems to want to move them in a very progressive direction. She gets points for actually taking stands, but her past doesn’t really match up to her current rhetoric(very Romneyish of her), and I’m not convinced that running hard left gets her enough Obama voters. Obama ran as enough of a centrist to pull in a lot of moderates. Clinton is conceding the center if the Republican wants it. ---
**Author:** ![BobLibDem](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/boblibdem/32/3149_2.png) [@BobLibDem](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BobLibDem)\ **Post date:** [June 15, 2015, 11:47am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-great-un-fork-hillary-thread/717458/580 "2015-06-15T11:47:59Z")
> [@adaher](#): > > Plus she’ll face a split base. She’s decided to side with Pelosi over Obama in the recent trade dispute, which will probably help her with unions but doesn’t bode well for keeping the Obama coalition together. I think she’s siding with most Democratic voters on this issue. For some reason, Obama has chosen the Republican side of the issue. I don’t think too many Democrats are thinking “OMG- she disagreed with Obama! I’m outta here!” Unlike Republicans, who think the party should be unanimous on every issue, Democrats tolerate, nay even encourage, disagreements on issues. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-great-un-fork-hillary-thread/717458.md?page=28) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-great-un-fork-hillary-thread/717458.md?page=30)