Another Hillary poll, not good news for her

[killerbush]

Rasmussen reports has a new poll on Hillary. In the poll, just 29% say they will definitely vote for her, 40% say they definitely will not, and 24% say it depends on who the Republicans run. Also, 10% consider Hillary a conservative, 32% consider her a moderate, while 45% say she's a liberal.
I know people on this site hate Hillary polls a full 2 and a half years out, but these numbers are not good for someone considered the front runner.

[BOSSHOG]

1. Is the poll of Democrats only?

I think many of that 40% would come around if she and frist are the nominees. It will be a battle of negatives.

[killerbush]

5. I don't know if it's Democrats only

go to rasmussenreports.com to see the poll.

[Warpy]

11. Yeah, battles of negatives have worked really well in the last

two presidential elections, haven't they?

Insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting a miraculously different outcome.

It's time to stop running conservative DLC types who take the party base for granted and offer them nothing. It's time to stop running corporatist candidates who don't acknowledge the beating most people in this country have taken and who don't offer any hope at all for a better future to anyone but the upper middle class.

There's a reason 51% of the electorate stays home on election day, and it's spelled c-o-n-s-e-r-v-a-t-i-v-e-s. Why bother for the lesser of two conservative evils when the outcome will be nearly the same: offshored jobs, declining wages, climbing prices, increased wealth concentration away from the people who work to create it, and the destruction of any hope for the future.

What the party has been doing for the past few decades has not been working. Why is there so much resistance to changing it? Why is there still support for a business as usual conservative like Hillary Clinton?

Any party that ignores its base deserves to lose. Bad numbers for Clinton are good numbers for the rest of us. Let's hope the party catches a clue.

[SaveElmer]

2. Meaningless...nt

[Hobarticus]

3. Link, please.....n/t

[MemphisTiger]

4. I like her but she is too polarizing to win a general election

in my opinion.

[electionhistorian]

6. Hillary's going to have a hard time winning ANYone over

as long as she keeps talking about sending more troops to Iraq on foreign policy and flag burning, of all things, here at home.

[mattclearing]

7. Link?

I honestly don't care. All the hubbub about McCain and Hillary is media whores' wet dreams intermingling with reality, which dictates that neither of them is going anywhere near their parties' respective convention stages on the last night.

[mtnsnake]

8. 29% is actually a very high number, is it not, considering we're still

jockeying for the primaries, and many of the people polled are pulling for other Democratic candidates for the time being. Can you name any candidates who polled higher?

[FrenchieCat]

9. I don't give a fig about the polls....Question is what is Hillary doing

to help out 2006 candidates. That's what I want to know!

[BootinUp]

12. fund raising for the DSCC I guess

I just got a letter.

[opihimoimoi]

10. Under Bill Clinton, the National debt was paid off and a surplus

imminent. Under the Pubs, the National Debt has reached 8.2 TRILLION Dollars...in 5 freaking years no less.

They should run a graph of this...The Pub party has been an anchor around Americas neck while they pose as the good guys...

Look at the evidence...its all around us...

Hilliary will do just fine and the Pubs know it.

[election_2004]

13. This is funny.....

Everytime a poll comes out showing Hillary with high negatives, her supporters laugh and write it off as "just a meaningless poll"....

And then when polls come out showing Hillary outpolling all other Democrats in a presidential primary, her supporters use that as "evidence" to show why she's the "strongest" candidate...

Hmmmmm........