Washington Post On Hillary and Donald’s Unfavorable Ratings: ‘There Is Just No Comparison’

[BootinUp]

The media are fond of reminding us that Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump both have high unfavorable ratings. However, the reasons for those unfavorables couldn’t be more different – not to mention that Donald’s are “setting modern records for political toxicity.”

By BNR Team
June 17, 2016

Much breathless discussion has been had among members of the national media about the high unfavorable numbers attached to both major-party presidential candidates. But one of these things is not like the other.

For one, Hillary’s high unfavorables are, as explained by Peter Daou, “the result of a billionaire-funded conservative effort to destroy her image.” For decades, she has been subjected to a relentless campaign of character assaults and rank sexism, until demonstrably false narratives about her get repeated – even and especially by journalists ostensibly reporting only facts – as though they were true.

--------snip

Greg Sargent took a look at an analysis of Donald’s “historically high” unfavorables and notes: “While Hillary Clinton is also disliked, there is just no comparison to Trump.”


--------snip

Conversely, most of the people who don’t like Donald can articulate precisely why without hesitation. There’s no invocation of some hazy unease based on something they might have heard once upon a time. It’s a concrete list of objections, a litany recounting any number of his myriad failings.

And this despite the fact that over the past year, the media have been tipping the scales in his favor.

Full Article at BNR

[SaschaHM]

1. I've yet to see an unfavorable poll in which...

any group actually likes the guy. They both have high unfavorables, but Hillary's tends to break down as such loved by democrats, loathed by republicans, mixed-hate from Indies. Donald on the otherhand tends to be loathed democrats and more or less hated by republicans and independents. That's a big issue if your own party, more or less hates you.

[The_Casual_Observer]

2. Best analysis I've seen on this topic

[David__77]

3. I think Clinton's unfavorables will decline.

...particularly among Democrats.

[Cha]

4. Thank you, Boot.. love the pic of our zany Hill fans. lol

[Maru Kitteh]

5. That's a great image! Very fun :-)

[ismnotwasm]

6. K&R

[LiberalFighter]

7. Aided and abetted by the media.

[HumanityExperiment]

8. HRC and her unfavorables...

if HRC can't do better than a 5 point diff against Trump's current optics debacle she's in for a very tough road ahead...

folks may despise Trump but if she can only eek out a 5 point spread against that guy at this point... YIKES

http://www.cnn.com/2016/06/21/politics/hillary-clinton-donald-trump-national-cnn-poll/

[BootinUp]

9. Good thing its a 7.6% lead then.

http://elections.huffingtonpost.com/pollster/2016-general-election-trump-vs-clinton

Thanks for your concern though.

[grossproffit]

10. +1

[HumanityExperiment]

11. you should be concerned...

why sin't HRC doing better than 7.6 points against Trump... and a Trump that's been making such a fool of himself these past few weeks?

Like I stated, HRC should be doing much better against a candidate like Trump, if it's this close when he's at his worst... well, that's cause for concern

[BootinUp]

12. We are a long way from November. Quite satisfied with

the current polls. Thanks for sharing your concern over and over again.

[HumanityExperiment]

13. We aren't a 'long way' from optics...

current optics has Trump in the basement yet HRC is only polling 7 points ahead, commenting about the 'WHY' should be first and foremost here

Understanding the facts and dealing with them should matter to clear that so the point spread can grow, why would you deflect conversation about that?

Unfavorables matter, to ignore them would make you part of the problem, and I know you want to help the candidate beat Trump in NOV so, how can you be 'satisfied' with the current polling spread?

[BootinUp]

17. rofl. nt

[whatthehey]

14. Why? Shrub was President just like Reagan.

There's no goal difference tiebreaker in politics. 271 gets you the gig even without a popular vote win let alone a 7+pt one, and any sensible EV projection at this point is showing 320+

[HumanityExperiment]

15. ..why...

so the goal is 'just enough'... got it

thx for the clarification that 'just enough' matters more

[TwilightZone]

16. 320 is more than "just enough"

Intentional obtuseness is not a terribly compelling argument.

[HumanityExperiment]

19. neither is 'just enough'

'There's no goal difference tiebreaker in politics. 271 gets you the gig' ---- reads as 'just enough'

when party principles, and policy and issues matter to me, then I speak to that... 'just enough' doesn't cut it for me and it shouldn't to any other DEM

Trump by all reasoning is tanking his candidacy currently, yet the current polling has HRC only 7 points ahead, any reasonable person would look at that and wonder about the 'WHY'... hence my point, since folks will be looking at the qualities of both sides, so understanding the unfavorables on both sides factor into those polling numbers....

[whatthehey]

24. WHAT difference does it make

a 50, 100 or 200 EV margin don't give the President a single extra item of power or authority. She won't be able to veto a single extra bill, appoint a single extra judge, sign a single extra treaty with 471EVs over 271. It just doesn't matter in any material way in the presidential election.

[HumanityExperiment]

30. 'single extra item of power or authority'

yeah, continue to be dismissive of the power of engaged citizenry

yeah, continue to not get the electorate involved after elections...

it DOES matter, this is the fallacy that establishment tries to spin and why they still don't understand what's going on within both sides of the parties this primary cycle

[NastyRiffraff]

18. I know this is a waste of my time posting

but I'll try, anyway, given you're so concerned. National polls, particularly at this early stage, tend to be not only wrong but in many cases spectacularly wrong. We don't elect presidents by raw popular vote, as I assume you know (or, maybe not).

But I add my thanks for your deep concern.

[HumanityExperiment]

20. ..unfavorables..

either address them or don't, I'm merely pointing out the facts

feel free to debate that, otherwise your 'concern' is noted

[NastyRiffraff]

21. Okay, I'm done with you.

Sheesh.

[whatthehey]

23. Winning matters. Nothing else. Either POTUS or not, no margin standards.

[HumanityExperiment]

29. ...winning at what cost...

but yet there's that attitude of 'win at any cost' again

maybe it's time to pay attention to the 'costs' and stop the wrongs these 'costs' impose

[magical thyme]

25. we don't know that anybody is at their worst at this point

a lot can happen between now and November. Rumors are that the GOP will find a way to replace Trump...some say with Mittens, others with Ryan.

The Mittens rumor was backed up with some facts or other...iirc, Mittens people have taken over top roles at Convention and may some other spots.

[Goblinmonger]

27. I've thought for some time Trump will drop out.

But I don't think it will be Ryan. Whoever goes in now is a sacrificial lamb whose main goal is to not lose the Senate and House. Ryan wants to make a real run down the line and getting hammered this year isn't going to help that.

[magical thyme]

28. I'm leaning towards Mittens myself

he's dumb enough to not recognize he's a sacrificial lamb and still smarting over his 2012 drubbing.

I'll never forget the look on his face...and Obama's.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2012/oct/16/obama-romney-second-debate-live

[Goblinmonger]

26. First, I think that link shows that the difference is 3.4% lead.

Second, the 43.7% number is troubling. That's what the model says she is pulling right now. In a two person race. Her unfavorables are hurting here, clearly. That's why I think the VP pick is insanely important right now. She has to give those that don't like her a reason to vote for her more than that she "isn't Trump."

[Garrett78]

22. "It’s a concrete list of objections." Ding, ding, ding.

While there's a valid leftist critique of the Democratic Party (including Clinton, Obama, etc.), so many of the anti-Clinton folks are the product of "a relentless campaign of character assaults and rank sexism" that goes back decades, as well as "some hazy unease based on something they might have heard once upon a time." Well said, BNR Team.