Are polarizing candidates more successful?

[Pushed To The Left]

I've been thinking about something. People have been talking about the possibility of Hillary Clinton running for President in 2008. Many of us, including me, think this would be a bad idea because she is such a polarizing figure. But I got to thinking: Could this be the strategy? It seems to me that polarizing figures seem to be very successful

George W. Bush: Very publicly HATED by many people ...2 terms

Bill Clinton: HATED by the right-wing, millions were spent to impeach him...2 terms.

Could it be that the more hated a candidate is by one side, the better he or she does at the polls? I suppose there could be a backlash effect among swing voters to attacks and more turnout for the base.

[sangh0]

1. It depends on the situation

and what you're trying to achieve. Basically, politics is too complex to boil down into one factor.

[PretzelWarrior]

2. Yeah. remember how well Buchanan did? oh...wait.

never mind.

[Lefty48197]

3. Is this a rhetorical question?

I think it was Bush's appeal to the extremist Christian right-wing that decided this election.