Can anyone explain why Hillary is slipping in the Polls?

If i had to guess, it's just her generally cold exterior, and some good politicking on Obama's part.

You can read the latest here:
http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_con...r_46_obama_d_43

More than ever, i think this election is going to be all about who is going against whom, and less about a particular candidates strengths. Which ever side wants to win will have to pick their candidate based on the candidate the other side picks - whoever can do that the best will win the election. If you look at the following pages:
http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_con...ential_matchups
http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_con...ential_matchups
You immediately see that currently only Giuliani has a chance of winning against the Democratic candidates, and that by a very slim margin.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(eagle33199 @ May 3 2007, 09:17 AM) [snapback]434654[/snapback]</div>

One of the things I found interesting looking at those results is that, with Hillary, there's almost no middle ground. Her favorable/unfavorable split is 48/50. So people truly either like her or hate her. Everyone else has at least 6% in what would be the "undecided" category.

You can also see which candidates people know the least about. Mitt Romney has a split of 32/32, leaving 36% undecided.

I'd also like to know how John Edwards is favored over all the Republicans. :huh:

 

she is not trustworthy? She has no moral or ethical compass? She comes across as cold, ruthless, mean spirited, calculating? She cannot connect with people? Her negative ratings are over 40% in the polls and the polls are usually wrong - I think her negative ratings are higher :lol:

No matter what her husband did, people still like him - genuinely liked him - and still do. Nobody really likes Hillary - they mostly view her (those that support" her) as a vehicle to promote their own ideologies/views over competing ideologies/views.

It is tough being called the smartest woman alive and then having to live up to it :lol: I have never heard her called the most ethical or moral woman alive, nor has anyone said she posesses the most common sense for her sex either.

I just do not see her winning the nomination - and if she does i do not see how she wins the general election when she starts off the race with over 40% of Americans NOT liking her.

Maybe she will go quitely into the night.... probably not.

Another thought - she has been tauting the fact that if she wins Bill will be back too - I think there are enough people who do not want that - and that might be a reason for Obama Hussein Barak to be doing well now.

Either way - it is tooooo early to tell. My opinion is that the '08 Dem Pres nominee is still not in the top 3 of candidates now.

 

The reason is clear: Hillary won't promise to return the stolen silverware if elected.

The public is looking at this as if they are going to have to buy new silverware either way, why put that old cow back in our nations house?

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Danny @ May 3 2007, 10:43 AM) [snapback]434715[/snapback]</div>

Dont neglect those in the north that do not like her too.

 

Hmmmm I thought it was because someone saw Hillary trying on bathing suits and the person said she gave up because her testicles kept falling out of the sides.... :lol: :lol:


I'm wondering how this election is really going progress, as it seems people just want the present staff out of office and are willing to vote for anyone.... :mellow:

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(dbermanmd @ May 3 2007, 09:32 AM) [snapback]434667[/snapback]</div>

Well that about sums it up! B)

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(hycamguy07 @ May 3 2007, 11:09 AM) [snapback]434734[/snapback]</div>

Hell, that's the reason Kerry did as well as he did in '04. If there weren't such antipathy for Bush, he probably wouldn't have even sniffed the nomination, much less got 49% of the vote in the general election.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(dbermanmd @ May 3 2007, 08:59 AM) [snapback]434729[/snapback]</div>

Don't forget the west (or whatever Colroado is considered)!

I think putting Hillary up for the democratic candidate would be the one way the democrats would get their a**es handed to them next election despite growing resentment of Republicans over the war.

Hillary was involved in, and orchestrated the defense for, many of the scandals and lies of the last Clinton administration (not just Monica Lewinski). She flip-flopped on the war and strikes me as a big business democrat.

Obama, on the other hand, is talking about issues like social justice and corruption in Washington and things I can actually get excited about.

If Obama runs I'll vote for him, if it's McCain vs. Clinton I'm voting for McCain and if it's Clinton vs. Giuliani I'm voting for Mickey Mouse.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Boulder Bum @ May 3 2007, 11:53 AM) [snapback]434769[/snapback]</div>

Lol I’ll back you on that. :lol:

 

I don't much care for Clinton, but I find it interesting the names neo-cons choose to throw at her. One poster above makes a joke about testicles. These folks generally say that women lack the strength to be president, but when a really strong woman comes along, they make jokes that turn on the suggestion that she's trying to be a man, or is too masculine. They also call her ugly (as in "that cow") as if only attractive women should be permitted to run for public office.

The left makes jokes about Bush's stupidity: a trait that is extremely relevant to his ability to govern. The right makes jokes about Clinton's attractiveness or her supposed masculinity, traits that are irrelevant to her ability to govern. Sadly, the latter tactic is probably more effective with a voting public so zoned out on television that their brains have turned to mush and an off-color joke sways them far more than a reasoned answer to a hard question, and a 30-second ad exhausts their attention span.

As for the question in the topic title, polls go up and polls go down. There are times when you can pin them to a specific event or revelation or ad campaign. I think at other times it can be just a sort of random public-opinion drift. Note that different polls often give very different results. Maybe Dems are moving from Clinton towards Obama because they are beginning to see that he is intelligent and believes that America is one country, not two irreconcilable ideologies.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(daniel @ May 3 2007, 12:04 PM) [snapback]434780[/snapback]</div>

a really strong woman would NOT let her husband CHEAT on her and let him get away with it. She is only strong in the pursuit of her own ambitions! That makes her more calculating and cold than strong.

My wife would have had me out the front door and 50% of assets + in a heartbeat if I had done a clinton to her. I am sure there are tons of STRONG women like that all over America.

 

I like Hillary and she is still my favorite for the nomination. I know a lot of people who also like Hillary. Maybe it is because I like strong women - like my wife, or maybe because she seems to have a notion of what economic stability and national security is, two things I don't feel from Obama yet. Obama is great for social issues and change, but if comes an economic depression or tough international issues, I have a problem with seeing him succeed in the same way that Hillary does. It is still early in the election season and actual policy statements and ideas are a bit sparse so it is difficult to feel strongly for one candidate over another yet. I don't think the polls will mean much until next February, which is still 9 months away.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(dbermanmd @ May 3 2007, 11:15 AM) [snapback]434787[/snapback]</div>

Making judgments on her relationship with her husband is unfair to her and irrelevant. They probably love each just as much as any other old married couple. And why fault her for ambitions when EVERY candidate for president has ambitions - why else would they run?? Does McCain not have ambitions - he runs for president on a regular basis and takes every chance he can get to get on TV and the media. Also, calculating is what a lot of people do - it is called thinking to us who do it. Everyone except perhaps Biden, calculates their stratey, responses and positions before talking.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(MarkMN @ May 3 2007, 12:34 PM) [snapback]434794[/snapback]</div>

I back you bro - i want her to be the dem nominee too - i will even contribute to her relection fund - not that she needs it. because in times of war and security threats i tend to vote republican. she is as sure a thing to cause a republican landslide that i can think of with B. Hussein Osama a close second.

whatever makes her happy is fine by me - in fact, like i said, we share the same goals right now

Good luck.

 

For me HRC lacks authenticity; not to mention a few other things. Everything is about her goals, her dreams, her desire, her "right" to be the first woman president. Respectfully, I'd rather vote for Joseph Stalin.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Bill60546 @ May 3 2007, 02:49 PM) [snapback]434887[/snapback]</div>

little difference there bro

and i finally figured out the answer as to why she is slipping in the polls - she's slimey :lol:

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Wildkow @ May 3 2007, 02:57 PM) [snapback]434947[/snapback]</div>

HUH? The democrats started losing the south when they went along with the civil rights movement. You're a bit behind on the whole democrats losing the south thang.

I read the reason Hillary slipped in the polls against her other contenders is the inclusion of Gore (who's not actually running). A recent NBC News/Wall Street Journal poll suggests that Obama and, to a lesser degree, Edwards poll much closer to Clinton if Gore isn't part of the question. (This point stolen from Salon.com)