48% of Americans would definitely vote against Senator Clinton.

[Clarkie1]

That's just too close...we can't take the risk. Democrats need to get educated on the political facts and choose a candidate that can swing the middle. Those who are supporting Senator Clinton are walking the Democratic Party onto very thin ice.

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/Political%20Tracking/Dailies/April%202007/fororAgainst20070417.htm

[elocs]

1. Well, I'll vote for her if she is the nominee. Apparently many Democrats won't.

Seems they would prefer a Republican to Clinton. These are the same people we have to thank for voting for Nader in 2000. We do need votes from independents and there is nobody who motivates Republicans to get out and vote for their candidate like Senator Clinton. For example, I have a Republican friend who will not vote for McCain, except if he is running against Clinton. I am sure he is not alone in that thinking.

[skipos]

17. Yep. Most polls shows Clinton as a weak gen elec candidate

compared to Edwards and Obama, and that is definitely been my experience talking to friends and family. Maybe that will change. Maybe not.

[SharonAnn]

34. Many voters haven't really heard or seen her. "The bogeyman" scares them but they

don't really know why or what.

Hillary Clinton is a very accomplished, capable, warm, humorous, very intelligent and extremely experienced person.

When she campaign for the general election, more people will see and hear her and they will vote for her.

We have good candidates and Hillary is one of the best.

[elocs]

36. We would need both independents and disaffected Republicans to vote for Senator Clinton.

As it stands now there appears to be a good number of Democrats who would refuse to vote for her. Too many willing to bite off their nose to spite their face. If she is the Democratic nominee for president, I will vote for her.

[alfredo]

56. The greatest danger is to underestimate her. I have little doubt that

she will go right after the independent and moderate Republican vote. She's been building her moderate credibility for the past few years. She has positioned herself in the middle. It may have pissed off us activists, but it was what she needed to do.

I always heard that she was the brains behind Bill. I think they have stayed together because they complete each other. Bill could make real the strategies she formulated. It's kind of like Steve Jobs and Jonathan Ives. Both Geniuses, but with different skill sets.

[jakem]

38. We have seeb and heard more of her than any other Dem candidate! nt

[draft_mario_cuomo]

57. Apparently, the more they see of her the less they like her

That is what has been happening over the past few months as she has been getting wall-to-wall coverage in the MSM (she went from a net +18 in favorables/unfavorables just two months ago to a net negative 7 in the latest Gallup poll).

[aquart]

2. Thank you for your concern.

I'll vote for whom I damn well please.

[aquart]

3. Rasmussen???? Oh, please.

So 52% WILL vote for her? Statistics at this point are worthless.

It would be helpful to mention your own candidate up front. Instead of pretending concern for us all.

[draft_mario_cuomo]

37. Many other polling organizations have found a similar result (ranging from 45% to 52%)

No what that means is that 52% of people would consider voting for her. In order to win she would have to win slightly more than 96% of that 52%...In other words, she is unlikely to win a general election.

[Big Pappa]

4. Can I just sit and watch?

:popcorn:

[rodeodance]

5. i tire of the constant negitives against Sen. Clinton!

[LiberalFighter]

10. I'm tired of all the negatives and polls when we are 7 months before the REAL campaign begins

[primative1]

14. Unfortunatly that is not the case ...

Used to be true but the schedual has been completly revamped for 08.
Why? Who knows. I dont like it because I will have no say via my late primary state. They will decide this by February which means the "real campaign" is right now.

[merwin]

6. You're quoting Rasmussen polls about Clinton? How about some Faux news polls also?

Just as reliable!

[skipos]

18. Did you look at the 2005 or 2006 pre-election Ras polls? What did you think

of the results?

[Name removed]

7. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[MrSlayer]

8. All I know is that she would lose PA.

And I don't see her flipping any "Red" states.

[MonkeyFunk]

9. it's a little early

to draw that conclusion, don't ya think?

[MrSlayer]

12. No, I know that my city will not vote for her the way they did for Kerry.

Philadelphia will still go blue no matter who it is but not in the same numbers and the suburbs will certainly not go anywhere near as blue as they did in 2004. Unless the Republicans run someone who is completely inappropriate and unelectable she'll lose this state. Even then I'm not sure. Bookmark this post, I'd be more than happy to have some crow lo mein if I'm wrong. I'll be here.

[tigereye]

54. sadly our state does not have the greatest track record of electing progressive

women. However, I do think that she would get plenty of Dem, Union, etc. support here if she were the nominee.

[Alamom]

19. Maybe not and "it could happen".......

I'm not one to count on polls (completely) at any time and certainly not this early, but I was surprized with some states results posted here and decided to check out a few more.....interesting to say the least.



http://www.presidentpolls2008.com/primary-election-poll-results/pennsylvania-democratic-republican-polls.html

Quinnipiac University Poll

Pennsylvania
Updated 4/13/07
American Research Group

3/19-25/07

Hillary Clinton 36
Barack Obama 17
Al Gore 13
John Edwards 9




Rudy Giuliani 33
John McCain 18
Newt Gingrich 7
Fred Thompson 6
Mitt Romney 5





http://www.presidentpolls2008.com/primary-election-poll-results/alabama-democratic-republican-polls.html


American Research Group Poll
Alabama

Feb. 8-13, 2007 (updated 3/30/07)


Hillary Clinton 44
Barack Obama 13
John Edwards 11


Rudy Giuliani 31
Newt Gingrich 25
John McCain 19


Capital Survey Research Center/Alabama Education Association


Feb. 19-22, 28 & March 6, 2007



Hillary Clinton 35
Barack Obama 19
John Edwards 9


Rudy Giuliani 28
John McCain 23
Newt Gingrich 18




edsp

[Hawaii Hiker]

43. I don't know, Allegheny & Philadephia counties

are extremely democratic areas, especially Philadelphia, & those 2 areas are where all the people live, is it not?....

Besides, I checked, PA hasn't gone Republican since 1988, I don't think Hillary would lose PA...

But having said this, the big question is can she win the dreaded Florida & Ohio states?

[MrSlayer]

55. Yes they are.

But she has very lukewarm support at best here. People would vote for her but many of those who turned out bigtime in this area for Kerry would not. They'd either stay home or go back to the Republicans they usually vote for. The statewide poll the Philadelphia Daily News did here a month or so ago showed her being trounced by 18 points by Rudy. She'll lose PA to any of their candidates except the most extreme.

[LiberalFighter]

11. Gee whiz! Some of those might die before the election is held in 2008.

How many of them are going to vote in 2008?

[MasonJar]

13. The American people will vote for the Democrat; otherwise they

can continue on the road to destruction of the world and the country. We need to make sure that they know this in spades. It is up to us to stand tall when our candidate is selected. We, the people, cannot fail this time; the end game is too crucial.

[Catchawave]

15. WTF Clarkie1 ?

just stop it...from the DU rules:

Constructive criticism of Democrats or the Democratic Party is permitted. When doing so, please keep in mind that most of our members come to this website in order to get a break from the constant attacks in the media against our candidates and our values. Highly inflammatory or divisive attacks that echo the tone or substance of our political opponents are not welcome here.

You are not permitted to use this message board to work for the defeat of the Democratic Party nominee for any political office. If you wish to work for the defeat of any Democratic candidate in any General Election, then you are welcome to use someone else's bandwidth on some other website.

Democratic Underground may not be used for political, partisan, or advocacy activity by supporters of any political party or candidate other than the Democratic Party or Democratic candidates. Supporters of certain other political parties may use Democratic Underground for limited partisan activities in political races where there is no Democratic Party candidate.

[Kahuna]

21. We don't have a democratic party nominee yet so what rule

was broken? :shrug:

[Catchawave]

29. I should have put more emphasis on the first paragraph

Constructive criticism of Democrats or the Democratic Party is permitted. When doing so, please keep in mind that most of our members come to this website in order to get a break from the constant attacks in the media against our candidates and our values. Highly inflammatory or divisive attacks that echo the tone or substance of our political opponents are not welcome here.

I think this diary crossed that line. Replace Mrs Clinton with your favorite candidates name, how would you feel?

[Name removed]

23. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Catchawave]

31. I adore Wes Clark, but

You represent him poorly :cry:

[Clarkie1]

42. Spare me the crocodile tears. I don't represent Clark. nt

[Catchawave]

45. Avatar and sig line tells me otherwise.

My apologies :eyes:

[ultraist]

16. Trashing Democrats...is that all you post?

Just wondering.

[Clarkie1]

24. I don't trash Democrats.

Criticizing Edwards for his "Two Americas" haircut is not trashing Democrats, nor is pointing out Senator Clinton's high unfavorability rating. Choices candidates make, good or bad, and political realities are important topics of discussion. It's only through discussions like this that the Party can be made stronger by electing the best possible candidate. If you can't take it, then perhaps you should leave DU until the primary season is over.

[Catchawave]

47. Whoa ! n/t

[PresidentObama]

20. If Hillary is *so* unelectable our party won't nominate her.

Right?

So nothing to worry about. If you don't support Hillary, don't support Hillary. I personally don't support her in the primary, but I respect her and her abilities as a Senator and candidate for President. She's running a great campaign, and she should be proud of herself whether she gets the nomination or not.

I'm not worried about Hillary at all. If she wins the nomination, she's the President. Plain and simple. And none of these poll numbers a year from the primary, and a lot longer from the general election, are going to change my mind about that!!

[elocs]

22. George McGovern. Nominated. Unelectable.

Reality check: getting elected is the whole point, not just being the noble and righteous candidate. The first presidential vote I ever cast was for McGovern, but what choice did I have since he was the nominee of my party?

[Catchawave]

30. Who do you think is the McGovern of our Dem field right now?

He was neither a woman or minority candidate, so that leaves Edwards?.... and oh so 1972 :) He was my first Presidential vote too, but we don't have a War President Nixon (sound familiar?)we'll be knocking heads with. :toast:

[elocs]

32. Nobody who has a chance of getting the nomination now is a McGovern.

Although with Democrats you never know. How often are we willing to sacrifice an election in order to be idealistic, righteous, and noble and then bitch and complain when a Republican is elected? Winning the election is the point and everybody cannot have their own personal perfect candidate. Sometimes it seems that Democrats, more than Republicans who seem more pragmatic about their candidates, will go home and pout if they cannot get their way or their candidate loses.

[nadinbrzezinski]

25. One correction to you

those who voted for Nader would not, I repeat would not, have voted for gore. They woudl have staid home

Another thing they tended to be indies.

So this is a myth that no nader gore woudl ahve been president

Why don't you blame the right target for that? (The United States Supreme Court)

[PresidentObama]

46. That's funny. I know about ten different Nader voters, and all regret not voting for Gore. Hmmmm.

And I've heard a lot of Nader supporters say the same thing in the past eight years.

[Vickers]

26. Garsh, hopefully Superma...ummmm, Gen. Clark will step up to the plate!

:rofl:

[Clarkie1]

27. I don't know if he will or won't, but I know he'll be fighting for the nominee.

And so will I.

Clark did more work for Democrats than anyone else in 06', and I'm grateful we have his voice in the Party. Whether or not he runs, he's an important asset. The Party would do well to nominate Obama, Richardson, or Clark. Those are our three strongest candidates, in my opinion.

[Catchawave]

28. You left out Gore, if you're going to include undeclareds.

Or is that your next trash diary?

[Clarkie1]

41. I like Gore a lot. I campaigned for him in the primary before he was VP. nt

[mitchtv]

33. yada yada yada

anti Democratic whiner.
I'll stick to the primaries, thank you

[illinoisprogressive]

35. her negatives are very troubling with a general election to face

[draft_mario_cuomo]

39. It is obvious she can't win. People have seen 15 years of her and many people just don't like her

We deserve to lose if we nominate such a weak candidate. A vote for HRC is a vote for President Giuliani or President Thompson--and the replacement of Justice Stevens with another Alito/Scalia/Thomas...

Do the math. Only 52% of people according to this poll would even consider voting for her (some polls put this figure as low as 48%). In order for her to win she would have to win over 96% of that 52% to win. In other words, it would take a miracle for her to win...

[Alamom]

40. Weak? Another stunning endorsement and so early....

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x3228145

[draft_mario_cuomo]

44. That will not help her in the general election

She is weak in the general election. No one disputes her ability to win the nomination.

[PaDem]

53. Agreed, recipe for disaster............

I'll never understand why so many folks here, regardless of how they feel about her, don't see the futility in nominating her.

[LaPera]

48. I'd vote against her...I'd vote liberal Green for the first time instead.

[Skip Intro]

49. You'd rather help the repuke nom win than vote for Hillary? n/t

[draft_mario_cuomo]

50. Voting for HRC in the primaries is more helpful to the repukes than voting Green

[Skip Intro]

51. How do you vote Green in a Democratic primary?

on edit, if that's what you're saying. Surely you're not saying voting Hillary in the general would be more helpful to the pukes than voting Green.

[draft_mario_cuomo]

52. Voting for HRC in the primaries helps the Reps more than voting Green in the general

If HRC is the nominee the Greens will be irrelevant to the result.