Clinton Widens Poll Lead By Using Experience Card

[Alamom]

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB118593574230084340.html?mod=hpp_us_whats_news

Clinton Widens Poll Lead By Using Experience Card
By JACKIE CALMES
August 1, 2007

WASHINGTON -- New York Sen. Hillary Clinton continues to pad her lead in the Democratic race for the presidential nomination, benefiting from high marks for experience and competence, while her chief rivals lose ground and the rest of the field lacks traction, according to the latest Wall Street Journal/NBC News poll.


Mrs. Clinton's steady rise in the Journal/NBC polls since spring follows well-received performances in a series of candidate debates. Also, she has blunted opposition among many Democrats for her 2002 Iraq-war vote by stepped-up antiwar moves in recent months, including a vote against war funding.

She has opened a 21-point edge over her closest contender, Illinois Sen. Barack Obama, leading him 43% to 22% among Democrats, the poll suggests. That is up from a 14-point lead in a June poll. Former North Carolina Sen. John Edwards is third with 13%. Four other Democrats are in single digits.

>

The current poll was conducted days after the Democratic candidates' most-recent debate,.









The Clinton campaign's effort to underscore her experience in government is paying off, according to the survey.

Respondents ranked "her experience and competence" at the top of six traits they were asked about, with 53% holding positive views and 22% negative. Ranked lower were "her values and character," and the fact former President Bill Clinton is her husband. Next, still with positive margins, were "her warmth and compassion" and "her personality and style." Last, with near-equal percentages of positive and negative views, was the response to "her positions on the issues."

In the three Journal/NBC polls since late April, Sen. Clinton has added several points to her national support each time, and Messrs. Obama and Edwards have seen several shaved each time. Her current 43% support is up from April's 36%, while Mr. Obama's 22% is down from 31% in April, and Mr. Edwards' 13% is a drop from April's 20%.

[democratsin08]

1. she is doing well

i wish obama would stop the attacks and be more positive.

[flpoljunkie]

2. Hillary's "experience" did not help her when she cast her vote for the Iraq War Resolution--a vote

for Bush's war--make no mistake about that.

Dick Cheney, Donald Rumsfeld and their neocon ilk have shown that it is judgment, not experience, that truly matters.

[rodeodance]

3. Hil Clinton's 'experience" with the war vote WILL improve her future "judgements"

[flpoljunkie]

4. Wishful thinking, with the Clintons' record of triangulation and polling.

[wyldwolf]

6. just a reminder

Clinton UP...Obama down.

[flpoljunkie]

8. Just a reminder...

[wyldwolf]

14. again, you're neglecting one important detail

There is ZERO evidence, zip, nada, goose egg, that the GOP wants Hillary as a candidate any more or less than any other Dem.

I challenge you to present the evidence. What you feel in your heart doesn't count.

[flpoljunkie]

16. "Denial" is not just a river in Egypt, wyldwolf.

A number of Republicans have admitted they pray she is our nominee--as she is their best chance to rouse their base and pull off a win in 2008--when so much is working against their party--their sorry record, to be precise.

[wyldwolf]

17. "A number of Republicans have admitted they pray she is our nominee" Like who?

...

[Clark2008]

21. Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, Michael Savage, Newt

Gingrich.

Is that enough?

All I have is rightwing radio in these parts. I've heard each of these men say those very words, personally.

[wyldwolf]

23. Souces? Links? Exact quotes?

[flpoljunkie]

22. "Hillary is our best shot to win the White House. That's pretty much consensus by Rep. insiders."

Clinton's conservative kudos have many scratching heads
Support from the right may be a strategic move

By MATT STEARNS
McClatchy-Tribune
July 27, 2007, 9:11PM

WASHINGTON — Since when is Hillary Rodham Clinton the conservatives' pinup gal?

After Clinton delivered a foreign-policy cold-cock to Barack Obama's head during a Democratic presidential debate on Tuesday:

• Fred Barnes of The Weekly Standard, a neo-conservative weekly, wrote that she responded "firmly and coolly " to the now-famous "would-you-meet-with-despots" question.

• Rich Lowry of National Review, a conservative weekly, gushed like a schoolboy with a crush: "She excels ... Clinton has run a nearly flawless campaign and has done more than any other Democrat to show she's ready to be president."

• David Brooks, the conservative columnist at The New York Times, wrote that Clinton "seems to offer the perfect combination of experience and change" and said she's changing perceptions in a way that may persuade voters to give her a second look.

• Charles Krauthammer, the conservative columnist of The Washington Post, summed up the Clinton-Obama smackdown: "The grizzled veteran showed up the clueless rookie."

All this from members of a crowd that has spent the better part of two decades demonizing Clinton and her husband, former President Bill Clinton.

Is the conservative chattering class just hedging its bets, wary that Clinton might win and banish them all?

Or is it a setup: The vast right-wing conspiracy pumping up the polarizing candidate they really want to face in the general election?

Naturally, no one in politics wants to talk about that with their names attached, lest they alienate people whose favor they need. But here's what some political strategists said when given anonymity:

"Absolutely," said one Democrat, citing Clinton's high unfavorable ratings (42 percent in a recent New York Times/CBS News poll, twice Obama's 21 percent). "Look at Fox News. They play her up all the time. Image-wise, they think she's the one Democrat they can beat right now."

"A plausible theory," said a Republican strategist with a top-tier GOP candidate. "Hillary Clinton is our best shot to win the White House. That's pretty much consensus by Republican insiders. It's a really crappy environment for us right now. What she does, and what Obama doesn't do yet, is single-handedly solve our base problems. Because of who she is."

Could the plaudits of the right hurt Clinton with the left-ish voters who dominate the Democratic primaries? That's clearly what Obama thinks, as he mocks Clinton's position as "Bush-Cheney lite."

http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/politics/5007251.html

[wyldwolf]

24. "Rep. insiders." Who?

[flpoljunkie]

25. Read the post. "No one in politics want to talk about that with their names attached..."

Naturally, no one in politics wants to talk about that with their names attached, lest they alienate people whose favor they need. But here's what some political strategists said when given anonymity:

"Absolutely," said one Democrat, citing Clinton's high unfavorable ratings (42 percent in a recent New York Times/CBS News poll, twice Obama's 21 percent). "Look at Fox News. They play her up all the time. Image-wise, they think she's the one Democrat they can beat right now."

"A plausible theory," said a Republican strategist with a top-tier GOP candidate. "Hillary Clinton is our best shot to win the White House. That's pretty much consensus by Republican insiders. It's a really crappy environment for us right now. What she does, and what Obama doesn't do yet, is single-handedly solve our base problems. Because of who she is."

[wyldwolf]

26. In other words, you can't give names.

[flpoljunkie]

33. From Salon's Michael Scherer article: Stalking Hillary

She is, in many ways, the glue now keeping the Grand Old Party from further splintering into disarray after the 2006 elections.

"It unifies the party. It motivates a part of the base," explains Grover Norquist, a longtime party activist who runs the group Americans for Tax Reform. "Hillary can be scary."

http://www.salon.com/news/feature/2007/08/01/hillary_obsession/

More from the Salon article...

The Republican focus on Clinton may say more about the Republican Party than it does about her inevitability as the Democratic nominee. Though she polls better nationally than her Democratic rivals, she currently trails slightly in most Iowa caucus polls to John Edwards, and she has been surprisingly outstripped in fundraising by Barack Obama. But this has not stopped Republicans from referring regularly to the Democratic Party as a shell organization at the beck and command of the Clinton family, even if that's a flimsy caricature at best.

Norquist, for one, insists he is confident that Clinton will come out on top. "The Clintons run the Democratic Party the way the Bhutto family runs the PPP," he said, in a reference to the corrupt and dynastic Pakistan People's Party. Republican leaders, such as former House Majority Leader Tom DeLay, long ago elevated the Clinton family to nearly mythic stature, claiming that the Clintons are backed by a vast "George Soros-funded, Harold Ickes-led shadow party." But Republicans have a history of glaring disconnection between their strategic prognostications about the Democrats and the way things actually turn out. As recently as the fall of 2003, presidential advisor Karl Rove was betting hamburgers in the White House that Howard Dean would be the Democratic nominee. A few months later, Dean's campaign deflated after the first caucus returns in Iowa.

[wyldwolf]

39. but you said ""A number of Republicans have admitted they pray she is our nominee"

This article states only states Norquist "is confident that Clinton will come out on top." It doesn't say he's wants it or that he's "praying" for it. I'm confident Clinton will come out on top, too. Like Norquist, I see the campaign machine, the money, the polling, and the name and can make a reasonable assumption.

Further, the article never states Norquist thinks a Clinton nomination will rally the Republicans. It only states how some Republicans have elevated the Clintons to a mythical status and that "Republicans have a history of glaring disconnection between their strategic prognostications about the Democrats and the way things actually turn out."

This piece doesn't come close to saying what you want it to say. And I won't even say "nice try," because it wasn't.

[SaveElmer]

27. And for some reason left this off...

Others laugh off the "set up Hillary" theory.

"The vast conspiracy is not that well-organized," said John Hinderaker, co-founder of Power Line, a popular conservative blog.

"We couldn't pull that off if we tried."

Conservative admiration for Clinton -- on the foreign-policy debate question specifically and the way she's running her campaign generally -- is real, Hinderaker said.

[SaveElmer]

20. And in 2004 the Republicans prayed we would nominate Dean...

So we put up Kerry, the electable one, instead...

How'd that work out for us...?

It's a ridiculous meme put out by Hillary bashers when they are confronted with evidence that contradicts this notion...

In fact if Republicans truly wanted Hillary they would simply keep quiet knowing any praise from their quarter would simply arouse suspician...

[SaveElmer]

19. As are you...

[riqster]

5. "Good judgment comes from experience

...and most of that comes from bad judgment." (I think it was Baxter Black who said this)

[flpoljunkie]

7. Hillary's "bad judgment" in voting for the Iraq War Resolution is not a small thing--neither is her

recently repeating Bush's line that "we are safer now." No, Hillary, we are not safer now. Bush's occupation of Iraq has undeniably created more jihadists and made us less safe.

[riqster]

11. My quote was not a small thing.

It is actually quite serious, and when phrased in a more hifalutin manner is used in psychotherapy, management, rehabilitation, etc.

Consider, too, that when a Senator fucks up, the impact is much larger than if, say, I fuck up.

If we were to shred every person who ever made a huge mistake and then handled it badly, we'd lose 90% of the human race. I know how Hillary voted, and what she said afterwards and says now. I see progression there-not as much as I would like, but there is improvement happening.

I haven't decided yet which candidate to support, but am really weary of the virulent anti(fill in the blank) posters hereabouts. "Fill I. T. Blank is demon spawn" is not debate, it is spewing of irrational hatred and I treat it as such. There are people whose posts I just skip over, because all they will do is blast one FITB or another. Finding the best candidate is most useful. Trying to destroy them is not.

Eating our own is not the way to evolve successfully.

[Tellurian]

10. Arbitrary statement..

The vote wasn't close enough to rationalize your response as worthy of merit.

[JVS]

9. being first lady, winning an election against a lame replacement when Giuliani quit the race...

due to cancer, and voting for the IWR. some experience

[sniffa]

12. ...

:rofl:

:thumbsup:

[BigDDem]

13. Ill save the usual suspects some time.....here goes...

"but but but, that's a right wing corporate media poll, it means nothing!"

oh and who could forget..... "I dont know ANYONE who supports Hillary"

and my favorite...... "They didnt poll me!"

[flpoljunkie]

15. You left out the MOE in this poll is almost 5%, BigDDEm.

[wyldwolf]

18. And Clinton rise nearly beats the spread.

[slick8790]

29. Nearly.

So you admit this is basically nothing more than statistical noise?

[The Backlash Cometh]

28. I think the reason why Hillary will never really appeal to the Democratic base

is because she has Republican roots. She was born to it and it defines her character and choices in ways she probably isn't even aware of. She isn't a true Democrat because she never lived the life that gives you that kind of community-minded perspective. Her Democratic ideas are derived academically and not forged by hard, life-altering experiences.

[riqster]

31. The Base is not enough to get you to the White House nt

[The Backlash Cometh]

32. I bet it would be if the media wasn't such an obstacle.

[riqster]

34. I hate the MSM too, but disagree

It's all about numbers, and the fact is, most Americans are not affiliated with either party.

The Dem Base is not gonna give us 60% of the Presidential votes come fall of 2008. If we fall below that, we'll see another Theft.

[The Backlash Cometh]

38. I disagree. I believe the next Dem candidate is going to get an easy

win because the Republican corruption problem is snowballing.

[riqster]

41. If we had free and fair elections, I would agree.

But we must have a significant plurality of votes in order to overcome fraud. 50% plus or minus a few isn't gonna get it.

[The Backlash Cometh]

43. Well, you got me there.

[Perky]

30. Nation Primary polls do not mean diddlely : IA. NH and SC

Will obliterate the national polling data.

[Totally Committed]

35. Yes, but does it say WHOSE experience?

Did you know her husband is a former POTUS? :)

Imagine that.

TC

[rinsd]

36. Wow over the 40% mark in the 2nd poll in the last week (nt)

[FiveGoodMen]

37. We're doomed.

[Broke Dad]

40. Clinton is losing ground in Iowa . . .

Research 2000/KCCI
7/26/2007

See poll details

A new poll from KCCI in Des Moines shows John Edwards and Mitt Romney leading their respective parties.

Edwards was tops among Dems, favored by 27 percent of respondents. He was followed by Hillary Clinton (22 percent), Barack Obama (16 percent) and Bill Richardson (11 percent). Clinton and Obama both saw their numbers drop by 6 percentage points compared to the same poll in May, while Richardson for a boost of 4 percentage points.

On the Republican side, Mitt Romney was favored by 25 percent of respondents, followed by Fred Thompson at 14 percent, Rudy Giuliani at 13 percent and John McCain at 10 percent. Romney saw his numbers jump by 9 percentage points since the May poll, while Giuliani dropped by 4 percentage points and McCain dropped by 8 percentage points.

The telephone poll of 600 likely voters was conducted July 23-25 by Research 2000 and has a margin of error of plus or minus 4 percentage points.

[rinsd]

42. She's up in ARG's poll, down in Research 2000's.

Polls in IA are tough because of the nature of caucuses.

Here are the last 5 polls from different polling firms

American Res. Group 07/26 - 07/30 600 LV 30 21 15 13 Clinton +9.0
Research 2000 07/23 - 07/25 400 LV 22 27 16 11 Edwards +5.0
Strategic Vision (R) 06/22 - 06/24 600 LV 20 26 21 11 Edwards +5.0
Fairbank, Maslin, Maullin & Assoc (D) 06/18 - 06/20 500 LV 24 34 17 13 Edwards +10.0
Mason-Dixon 06/13 - 06/16 400 LV 22 21 18 6 Clinton +1.0