1. Welcome to SportsJournalists.com, a friendly forum for discussing all things sports and journalism.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register for a free account to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Access to private conversations with other members.
    • Fewer ads.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Hillary's negatives are too high? Um, no.

Discussion in 'Sports and News' started by jboy, Aug 17, 2007.

  1. jboy

    jboy Guest

    Be afraid, be very afraid.


    When Karl Rove said yesterday that Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton’s unfavorable rating was in the “high 40s,” maybe he hadn’t seen the most recent CBS News poll. And when he said no one had been elected with negatives as high as hers, he had apparently forgotten some recent history.

    The CBS News poll, conducted from Aug. 8 to Aug. 12, showed Mrs. Clinton’s unfavorable rating at 39 percent. That number has been falling bit by bit since its high mark of 46 percent in April...

    Mr. Rove’s point was this: “There’s nobody who has ever won the presidency who started out in that kind of position.”

    In fact, Mrs. Clinton’s husband was in that very position and did win. And Mrs. Clinton’s numbers are better than his were at this point in his first campaign for the White House.
  2. Football_Bat

    Football_Bat Well-Known Member

    The problem with the comparison between campaigns, though, is Bill Clinton was virtually unknown in 1991. His long-winded speech at the 1988 convention didn't do too much to make him famous or infamous. His negatives would've been high in the state of Arkansas, but only because he'd been governor for most of 14 years and people were sick of him.
  3. Let's not waste our time. There's no fucking way she wins in '08. Case closed
  4. Glad you cleared that up for us.
  5. writing irish

    writing irish Active Member

    Oh, how I wish that flippant bullshit were true.
  6. Boom_70

    Boom_70 Well-Known Member

    Look - do you really want Hillary Rodam Clinton as your President for 4 years? Most will have trouble pulling the lever for that vote.
  7. Point of Order

    Point of Order Active Member

    I've felt for a while that Hillary will be the next president (see also: my bet with Slappy giving him very foolish odds), but lately I have been refining more clearly my thinking as to why she will win, which also makes me believe she's known this a long time.

    Josh Marshall at TPM has a very intriguing (and I think accurate) theory of Karl Rove's and the GOP's recent success he terms the republican "bitch slap" theory of politics in which Democrats have been the repeated victims of the bitch slap for well over a decade now. The examples of the theory are numerous:

    - John Kerry being swift-boated: It wasn't that the public necessarily believed anything the Swiftboat Veterans for Truth were alleging that sunk Kerry (pun intended) so much as it was his apparent ineptness to mount a sufficient counter-attack against the claims. In short, he got defined as WEAK.

    - Al Gore: He was attacked for wearing earth toned suits and for being associated with Bill Clinton. Instead of telling the GOP to go f*** itself, he went back to a dark suit and put Clinton out to pasture instead of having Clinton campaigning for him. Instead of counter-attacking, he went of defense.

    - Other: I think similar things could be said for the congressional gains of the GOP in the 90s and the defeat of Tom Daschle. The Democratic loser gets defined as a puss.

    - Obama: Inexperienced, they say. Has too many gaffes on foreign policy to be trusted (specifically, the recent statement on civilian casualties in Afghanistan Obama made that merely reiterated what Bush, Karzai and a U.S. military general had also said.) It doesn't matter that the charges against him are false. He fails to punch back hard and he looks weak.

    - Edwards: $400 dollar haircut, anyone? Ann Coulter calling him a fag? Mike Huckabee taking a shot at him (Mike Huckabee for Christ's sake.) And how did Edwards respond? By sending his wife out to attack and giving fashion commentary on Hillary's coat in the debate. That's how you fight back against statements against you that basically infer that you're a homosexual.

    Hillary, on the other hand, relishes the opportunities when she is criticized. The Pentagon slams her by saying she's undermining morale by writing a letter to DoD and she calls them on the carpet, demands and receives an apology for SecDef and support from Congressional republicans. Carl Rove trashes her on Limbaugh and she can't wait to bring it up at her campaign rally. She voted for the war, probably against principle and better judgment. Tough. She refused to apologize for this even when basically everyone in the Democratic party was demanding she do so. Unpopular with the base, but maintaining that toughness.

    Ironically, the message she is sending is that she's the only one in the race on the Democratic side with balls big enough to win a general election and make her critics her bitch, instead of being bitch slapped. The last national Democratic candidate to respond to the bitch slap with a pimp slap? Bill Clinton of course. She ain't dumb, and neither is her hubby. Strictly because of her strength and refusal to be bitch-slapped, she gets gradually more popular as the campaign wears on.

    Her negative approval ratings will never be higher than they were in the past. What else are they going to bring out on her? She's probably the most opposition researched candidate in the history of American politics.

    Could it all fall apart with one false step? Sure. But who's the least likely candidate on either side to make a false step? Hillary. I don't see how Obama or Edwards keep her from the nomination, and I don't see how the GOP nominee can bitch slap her into defeat in a general election. Some might say she's walking a tight rope, but I think she's like a locomotive on a sturdy track straight to the White House.
  8. Mizzougrad96

    Mizzougrad96 Active Member

    Hillary may be the most polarizing candidate we've ever had. I think Rove is correct about the negatives, but I think dismissing her as unelectable is ignorant. There are plenty of people who would never vote for her under any circumstances, but there are a lot of people who think she's the greatest thing going.

    I'm not a Hillary fan on any level, but I definitely think she is capable of winning the election. If she plays it smart during the primaries and then picks the right running mate (Obama) that's a damn strong ticket...
  9. Ace

    Ace Well-Known Member

    Just you wait. Hillary will get you pulling your lever.
  10. Mizzougrad96

    Mizzougrad96 Active Member

    I hope anybody but Hillary wins, but I would be lying if I said I wasn't worried...
  11. Ace

    Ace Well-Known Member

    Why does she worry you? How could she be worse than Rudy, for example?
  12. Mizzougrad96

    Mizzougrad96 Active Member

    Well, considering I like Rudy best of all of the candidates, it's safe to say we'll have to agree to disagree...
Draft saved Draft deleted

Share This Page