That "Polarizing" Hillary's negatives vs. "America's Mayor"

[bunkerbuster1]

Happened upon this while reading the NY Times: Among potential Democratic voters, Hillary's "Unfavorable" percentage is a whopping... 14%. (as is, curiously, that for Barak and John.)

Rudy's is DOUBLE that.

Funny how our corporate media isn't real interested in mentioning this, huh?

see also:

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/12/11/us/politics/11poll.html?_r=1&hp&oref=slogin

[The_Casual_Observer]

1. Journalists aren't interested in Hillary, Hillary would win easily,

so there's no story to write, no horse race.

[bunkerbuster1]

2. Maybe my post shoudn't be so Hillary-centric...

Given that the "unfavorable" percentage is 14% for Edwards and Obama as well, I think the story is basically what the Times says it is--that Republican voters really aren't happy at all with their field, and Democratic voters are.

But still, it wouldn't kill them to admit that the conventional wisdom is more or less BS about HRC. I have plenty of reasons not to like HRC for President, but her potential for "polarization" ranks about 1,000 if not lower.