Public Gives Clinton Best Odds of Being Elected President

[DemocratSinceBirth]

More than 8 in 10 say she has excellent or good chance of being elected.


http://www.gallup.com/poll/102481/Public-Gives-Clinton-Best-Odds-Being-Elected-President.aspx#3

[Kurt_and_Hunter]

1. DSB, did you see the internal in a poll yesterday showing

Edwards doing worse among self-identified progressives than among all Dems? Hard to believe.

Among progressives: Obama 41 Clinton 33 Edwards 8

So once again, even among engaged Dems most people seem to have have only off-hand impressions of candidates without much specific knowledge.

That helps explain why Edwards is running so agressively left... there are a ton of progressive votes he doesn't have yet for him to shoot for.

Those who ask why Hillary leads among people who want to stop the war can also ponder how Obama (who is rapidly shaping up to be the most conservative Dem in the race) crushes progressive firebrand Edwards among progressives.

It's all puzzling.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

2. Well

He's only polling at twelve or so percent so it's not surprising he isn't doing well in any one demographic.

[Kurt_and_Hunter]

4. It suggests that self-identified progressives aren't as left as I would have thought.

I guess "progressive" is a pretty vague term to most folks, and some moderates might seize on that label in a poll to distinguish themselves from "liberals"

(Like Hillary did a while back)

[DemocratSinceBirth]

5. I don't like the term progressive

I call myself a liberal at times, a center/left leaner at other times, and when I'm feeling ballsy a welfare state liberal but hardly anybody knows what that really means...

[Kurt_and_Hunter]

6. I'm a self-identified "radical civil libertarian"... nobody ever knows what to make of that

To most folks, they can't even deduce a party affiliation from that... (probably figure I'm a gun nut or something)

[rucky]

11. It's only puzzling when you look at the issues.

But you've got to admit - without any deeper examination - that the prospect of a woman or Black president is pretty damn exciting.

[rinsd]

3. Ras has a similar result

Tuesday, October 30, 2007

Seventy-seven percent (77%) of American adults say that New York Senator Hillary Clinton is at least somewhat likely to win the Democratic Presidential nomination in 2008. A Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey found that, among Democrats across the nation, 85% hold that view.

Forty-four percent (44%) of all adults, and 47% of all Democrats, say it is Very Likely that Clinton will be the eventual nominee.

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/election_2008__1/2008_presidential_election/77_see_hillary_as_likely_nominee

[ChiciB1]

7. I Don't KNOW Who Started Using "Progressive" But I Think It Was The DLC

because they felt saying you were a LIBERAL branded you. Well, I'm a Liberal... and I don't care what anyone says! I don't call myself Progressive, but the band wagon sure got filled up!

However, I MUST say... far too many Democrats in Congress are now DLC, Moderates or use Progressive to define themselves. Maybe that's why so many of them won't stand up to THE IDIOT, DECIDER!!

[BigDDem]

8. but but but

Hillary cant win, I read it everyday on DU.

[zalinda]

9. Because this is what the media has been telling

them for months. Damn, if any of the other candidates had the press that Clinton and Obama have had, you would see them higher in the polls. And, yes I know, not all of it has been positive, but any press is better than no press at all. At least with press, someone knows you are running and may look up your positions.

zalinda

[ChiciB1]

10. Any Press Is Better Than No Press At All Makes A Lot Of Sense... If They

aren't talking about you, YOUR message is ignored or in some cases not even true!

I live in an area that still has many older people who either live with their children, live in a Nursing Home or if you have enough money live in an Assisted Living Facility. THESE people vote, or have people vote for them and the signature isn't really examined. Then there many who watch the evening news, no cable just the basics and hear only a few names so they make a decision depending upon "who" they interact with... I think it's called "group think" and for the most part they'll stick with "the group's decision." Many really aren't very informed, so if John/Jane Doe think a certain way, they're influenced by what John/Jane Doe says, because they're good honest people and they've known them for a long time.

So IF you don't hear a name, HOW can you vote for them?? And I also need to say, there ARE many older citizens who still check the facts and make a decision based on what appeals to them. THEY vote and still think America means love of country no matter what, and "we must protect it" by any means to be FREE!

Sorry for going on here, just saying that we don't seem to have a fair playing field anymore, especially for those of us who have a "need to know" so we don't pay attention to what they think or have to say.

[William769]

12. Very good odds.