Several New Polls: Hillary is Fading

[sharkman]

With one poll result giving Hillary a fourth place finish, the chances of her winning the office her husband once did look anything but sure. Her handlers insist her poor showing in Iowa is due to her efforts concentrated on recent re-election to the senate, and the fact that she hadn't visited there last year. However, Obama hadn't either, and he beat her in the poll.

Personally, I hope the Clinton 'legacy' does not get added to.

[moderateamericain]

With one poll result giving Hillary a fourth place finish, the chances of her winning the office her husband once did look anything but sure. Her handlers insist her poor showing in Iowa is due to her efforts concentrated on recent re-election to the senate, and the fact that she hadn't visited there last year. However, Obama hadn't either, and he beat her in the poll.

Personally, I hope the Clinton 'legacy' does not get added to.

I could not vote for her at all. If she became president id move to canada. . Theres no way in hell the south would elect a women president, i just dont think we are there yet.

[sharkman]

I hope you are right, but she'd win in places like California and New York and simpleminded Clinton groupies would follow her into the abyss. If the left got an independent to run and split the right of center vote like Nader did the left, it could happen.

It's just good for me to see her sink in the polls.

[sharkman]

I just saw in the news yesterday something that proves she's concerned about Obama. She is quoted as saying his candidacy will diminsh over time as people realize how inexperienced he is.

Thats a good one. Make a press release and tell people what to think.

[Drea]

I could not vote for her at all. If she became president id move to canada. . Theres no way in hell the south would elect a women president, i just dont think we are there yet.

Aw come on now. Wouldn't you just loooove to see Condi Rice as Pres?

And why indeed can't a woman be pres?

[Big Blue Machine]

I think that Obama is a bit overrated.

[sharkman]

I think that Obama is a bit overrated.

He may be overrated, but he's got Hillary worried.

[jdobbin]

Aw come on now. Wouldn't you just loooove to see Condi Rice as Pres?

And why indeed can't a woman be pres?

With Peter MacKay as first man?

[geoffrey]

With Peter MacKay as first man?

That's an ugly thought. Never quite understood how he always won those sexiest MP awards... then again, I'm not a woman or gay, so perhaps I just don't understand.

[Guest American Woman]

....Theres no way in hell the south would elect a women president, i just dont think we are there yet.

I hope you are right, but she'd win in places like California and New York and simpleminded Clinton groupies would follow her into the abyss. .....

Yep. California and New York are chuck full of "simpleminded" Clinton supporters as opposed to the profound thinkers in the South who would "no way in hell elect a woman president."

[blackascoal]

....Theres no way in hell the south would elect a women president, i just dont think we are there yet.

I hope you are right, but she'd win in places like California and New York and simpleminded Clinton groupies would follow her into the abyss. .....

Yep. California and New York are chuck full of "simpleminded" Clinton supporters as opposed to the profound thinkers in the South who would "no way in hell elect a woman president."

Is there an APPLAUSE and AMEN button here?

[sharkman]

....Theres no way in hell the south would elect a women president, i just dont think we are there yet.

I hope you are right, but she'd win in places like California and New York and simpleminded Clinton groupies would follow her into the abyss. .....

Yep. California and New York are chuck full of "simpleminded" Clinton supporters as opposed to the profound thinkers in the South who would "no way in hell elect a woman president."

Apparently you misunderstood my post. I made a distinction between New York and California voters, and simpleminded Clinton groupies who would follow her anywhere. Good point, however, on narrowminded bigots in the south.

[bush_cheney2004]

Hillary Clinton is unelectable as US president, not because she is a woman, but because she is Hillary Clinton (too much baggage). Obama eloquently demonstrated in a post Bush speech tonight why he would be a better choice. If the goal is Ms. President, there are better candidates available.

[blackascoal]

Hillary Clinton is unelectable as US president, not because she is a woman, but because she is Hillary Clinton (too much baggage). Obama eloquently demonstrated in a post Bush speech tonight why he would be a better choice. If the goal is Ms. President, there are better candidates available.

If it comes to it, and although I hope for a better choice, I will hold my nose and vote for Hillary in a heartbeat over ANY republican candidate .. and I'm sure that most of America shares that sentiment.

Her campaign is based on the knowledge that republicans are so corrupt and dysfunctional that none of them deserve to be president.

[bush_cheney2004]

If it comes to it, and although I hope for a better choice, I will hold my nose and vote for Hillary in a heartbeat over ANY republican candidate .. and I'm sure that most of America shares that sentiment.

Her campaign is based on the knowledge that republicans are so corrupt and dysfunctional that none of them deserve to be president.

Then she will surely fail....most of America wants more of a choice than defaulted Democrats. That's how the system works. Just ask John Kerry.

[blackascoal]

If it comes to it, and although I hope for a better choice, I will hold my nose and vote for Hillary in a heartbeat over ANY republican candidate .. and I'm sure that most of America shares that sentiment.

Her campaign is based on the knowledge that republicans are so corrupt and dysfunctional that none of them deserve to be president.

Then she will surely fail....most of America wants more of a choice than defaulted Democrats. That's how the system works. Just ask John Kerry.

How about I ask the parade of republicans walking out the door?

After 6 years of near total control of government, how about you educating me on the love and appreciation of the American people for the right-wing and republicans?

Perhaps you can educate me on the shrinking ranks of republicans and how that's the democrats fault?

Somehow, I missed "America wanting more choice than democrats" in the 2006 elections. Perhaps you can educate me on how you arrived at this unsupported opinion.

After 6 years of near total control, perhaps you can educate me on all the wonderful achievements by the Bush Administration .. other than ..

failure to protect America on 9/11,

failure to capture the oerson said to be responsible for it,

failure to destroy the Taliban,

the monumentally miserable failure of the war on Iraq/"terror",

the loss of American influence, power, stature, and respect all over the world,

failure to maintain American support for this mindless attack,

failure to keep even republicans on board with the sinking ship,

and the failure to keep the "coalition" together.

for starters ...

[bush_cheney2004]

After 6 years of near total control, perhaps you can educate me on all the wonderful achievements by the Bush Administration .. other than ..

failure to protect America on 9/11,

failure to capture the oerson said to be responsible for it,

failure to destroy the Taliban,

the monumentally miserable failure of the war on Iraq/"terror",

the loss of American influence, power, stature, and respect all over the world,

failure to maintain American support for this mindless attack,

and the failure to keep the "coalition" together.

for starters ...

Nobody has total or near total control...that is the point...neither do defaulted Democrats. Who "protected America" in 1993 (WTC) or 1995 (OKC) or 1998 (overseas)? It's a dead-end tit for tat argument. The American political system is more sophisticated than that.

The history of American "influence" is not a zero sum gain, with plenty of self serving wreckage long before Dubya came along. America is the same as it ever was. A superpower's work is never done.

[blackascoal]

After 6 years of near total control, perhaps you can educate me on all the wonderful achievements by the Bush Administration .. other than ..

failure to protect America on 9/11,

failure to capture the oerson said to be responsible for it,

failure to destroy the Taliban,

the monumentally miserable failure of the war on Iraq/"terror",

the loss of American influence, power, stature, and respect all over the world,

failure to maintain American support for this mindless attack,

and the failure to keep the "coalition" together.

for starters ...

Nobody has total or near total control...that is the point...neither do defaulted Democrats. Who "protected America" in 1993 (WTC) or 1995 (OKC) or 1998 (overseas)? It's a dead-end tit for tat argument. The American political system is more sophisticated than that.

The history of American "influence" is not a zero sum gain, with plenty of self serving wreckage long before Dubya came along. America is the same as it ever was. A superpower's work is never done.

You can call it whatever you want, but control of the White House, Senate, Congress, and the Supreme Court sounds like near-total control to most humans. .. and the American political system wasn't sophisticated enough to prevent this mindless blunder.

Comparing the OKC Bombing, which was done by a right-wing American to Iraq is a stretch at best .. although I do understand your need to do so .. AND .. even after the attack on the WTC under Clinton's watch, America still maintained its leadership positiion in the world, which is far different than under Bush.

Superpower?

Oh .. you mean because we have a lot of nukes .. which is about all that makes us a "superpower"

China and Japan own the US .. superpower?

In spite of our nukes, shiny new jets and tanks, we've gotten our asses handed to us by small nations the size of Ohio (Iraq, Vietnam) and got our asses kicked by a stone age nation using slingshots (Afghanistan). Iraq was depleted under sanctions for 12 years and their citizens fought back with rifles and made-up bombs and we still lost .. superpower?

North Korea has no more than 1 or 2 nukes but we still treaded lightly and had to rely on the rest of the world to save us from our bluster. Can't deal with Iran without help from China and Russia and we're still unable to isolate them because the rest of the world wants no part of so-called American "leadership" .. superpower?

We are a debtor nation that cannot pay its bills .. superpower?

The euro is about to replace the dollar as the international monetary standard as the dollar goes the way of the british pound .. superpower?

No longer wage an effective military action .. superpower?

Can't protect our own citizens in a disaster .. superpower?

I coild go on .. and on .. but we've been stripped of our "superpowers" by the Bush/Cheney Administration which has ensured the fall of the American Century. All the good will America built during WWII has been squandered by an inept and ignorant administration.

But feel free to call it whatever you want.

[bush_cheney2004]

I coild go on .. and on .. but we've been stripped of our "superpowers" by the Bush/Cheney Administration which has ensured the fall of the American Century. All the good will America built during WWII has been squandered by an inept and ignorant administration.

But feel free to call it whatever you want.

Excellent.....you have effectively defeated your own argument....all things "superpower" were true before President Bush was ever elected. All of the "good will" built during and after WW2 involved many more millions dead than in Iraq or NYC. Cold War trillions laugh at puny WoT billions.

[blackascoal]

I coild go on .. and on .. but we've been stripped of our "superpowers" by the Bush/Cheney Administration which has ensured the fall of the American Century. All the good will America built during WWII has been squandered by an inept and ignorant administration.

But feel free to call it whatever you want.

Excellent.....you have effectively defeated your own argument....all things "superpower" were true before President Bush was ever elected. All of the "good will" built during and after WW2 involved many more millions dead than in Iraq or NYC. Cold War trillions laugh at puny WoT billions.

Sure.

America is in the same position globally as it was before the Bush Administration.

Sure we are.

I'd imagine that is the same "logic" that caused you to support the worst president in history .. who has been completely rejected by the American people and planet earth.

Sure.

[bush_cheney2004]

Sure.

America is in the same position globally as it was before the Bush Administration.

Sure we are.

I'd imagine that is the same "logic" that caused you to support the worst president in history .. who has been completely rejected by the American people and planet earth.

Sure.

So you want it both ways? The restored power, status, and hegemony of a post WW2 superpower, complete with imperialism, domination, interventions, proxy wars, globalism, bombings, etc. etc. while pretending that the Bush Administration frittered all those "good times" away?

[blackascoal]

Sure.

America is in the same position globally as it was before the Bush Administration.

Sure we are.

I'd imagine that is the same "logic" that caused you to support the worst president in history .. who has been completely rejected by the American people and planet earth.

Sure.

So you want it both ways? The restored power, status, and hegemony of a post WW2 superpower, complete with imperialism, domination, interventions, proxy wars, globalism, bombings, etc. etc. while pretending that the Bush Administration frittered all those "good times" away?

Are you high?

Where did you read any comment of mine saying I want "imperialism, domination, interventions, proxy wars, globalism, bombings, etc. etc."?

Read slower.

[Guest American Woman]

Yep. California and New York are chuck full of "simpleminded" Clinton supporters as opposed to the profound thinkers in the South who would "no way in hell elect a woman president."

Apparently you misunderstood my post. I made a distinction between New York and California voters, and simpleminded Clinton groupies who would follow her anywhere. Good point, however, on narrowminded bigots in the south.

I realized after making my post that you did make a distinction between NY and Cali, but I didn't bother editing it because it really didn't affect the point I was making. Whether the "simple minded Clinton supporters" were in NY or Cali or other states really makes no difference. But at least you got my point regarding the South vs Clinton supporters. Now perhaps you could explain to me why people supporting Clinton would be "simple minded groupies" as opposed to non-Clinton supporters supporting the candidate of their choice.

[Liam]

Now perhaps you could explain to me why people supporting Clinton would be "simple minded groupies" as opposed to non-Clinton supporters supporting the candidate of their choice.

Because, AW, don't you see? It's a case of inverse elitism -- Republican voters are the true guardians of all that is good and American and people who live in Blue America or who would vote for any Clinton is to be looked down on, demeaned, their patriotism is to be insulted, they have no values, heck, they are barely entitled to live under the system Republicans guard for "real Americans".

[Canadian Blue]

Because, AW, don't you see? It's a case of inverse elitism -- Republican voters are the true guardians of all that is good and American and people who live in Blue America or who would vote for any Clinton is to be looked down on, demeaned, their patriotism is to be insulted, they have no values, heck, they are barely entitled to live under the system Republicans guard for "real Americans".

Wow, the Republican's sound alot like the Federal Liberal's.