Media forces for and against Hillary Rodham Clinton

[MarcATL]

I think the problem is, Hillary is the only Democrat who is polling well at this time.

The obvious thing people point to was that Obama came out of nowhere and swiped the nomination right out from under her.

Clearly, Hillary has people who've hated her for decades. They are making Chris Stevens into the new Vince Foster, but they will get just about as far- which is to say, nowhere.

I still think the GOP's biggest problem is the GOP. They still don't understand why they lost a winnable election in 2012.

I just don't understand Republicans

Hillary has been on the political scene for 20 years. Her act has gone stale and she jumped the shark quite a while ago. She is electable, but far from inspiring. Run a candidate who looks fresh, new ideas, a real compassionate conservative. Beat Hillary on the contrast

But, no

The Republicans insist on being Republicans. Overplay your hand once again. Trot out a four year old Benghazi story that nobody cared about at the time. Turn Hillary into a victim of an obvious witch hunt. See how that works

I think it is a mistake to elect someone who looks 'fresh, new' etc. That's what we thought about Obama, but it could have turned out better had we elected the older and more experienced Mrs. Clinton. It is a mistake to elect as president the new, inexperienced candidate. The best ticket is an older, more experienced candidate with a younger, fresher person as a running mate. Four years of being VP could, should, prepare someone to be a better President. That's what we should have done last time. If only they'd listened to me!!

I disagree...

It's a false belief that one has "experience" no one has experience to be a U.S. President, the job is the most unique and most powerful position in the world.

The only prerequisite is character. Your character is the most important and most determining factor as to how good or bad they will do.

Think of all the good Presidents in your mind, they all possessed character.

Think of all the bad Presidents in your mind, they all lacked character.

Experience, IMO, is a BS media-driven idea for ratings and excitement. However, it's not true.

With that said, I still believe that folks will be talking about experience well into more elections.

I am pretty much done with discussing politics. This thread is one example why. Both sides just throw darts at each other. Neither side listens. Issues are not logically discussed or debated. Just flame throwing. No use talking to brick walls. I am not going to change your mind and you won't change mine. I will vote and keep my mouth shut.

I feel your pain. I often have the same sentiments, but then I realize that I'm too opinionated to just sit and be quiet.

I just stated that Hillary is not fresh

I also note you cannot identify anyone who could defeat her

The fact you say no one can defeat her speaks to the ignorance of the left. She is a failure as a politician. She hasn't done anything except yell and get people killed because of her incompetence.

If Republicans can't beat her, how does that speak to the ignorance of the left?

I'm an Elizabeth Warren man myself. Would LOVE to see her run.

 

[SFC Ollie]

It simply amazes me how the Left tells the right not to attack their candidates when that is all the left has done since 08......

 

[rightwinger]

It simply amazes me how the Left tells the right not to attack their candidates when that is all the left has done since 08......

Welcome to politics

 

[rightwinger]

Look up Richard Nixon

Indeed: he won the nomination in 60, lost the GE, said in 62 that no one was gonna have "Richard Nixon to kick around any more", then he chopped of George Romney's balls in late 1967, and in spite of being arguably the most hated man in the GOP, won the nomination and sqeaked by in the GE 1968, by +0.70% over Humphrey and that fucking racist bigot Wallace. It was 5 pm on the day after the GE when Illinois was called for Nixon and put him over the top. And of course, he won re-election in 1972 with 60.80% of the vote and 520 EV and then jumped ship in 1974.... but he never lost a nomination and then came back to win four years later.

Hillary Clinton is no Ronald Reagan. I don't think she'll run. We have 3 more years of Obama. Most Americans are already tired of the liberal bullshit. Please... Can we actually adhere to the Constitution

Reagan adhered to the Constitution?

 

[Spoonman]

I would have voted for Hillary had she run in 2008. I think she was a much better candidate than Obama. history has proven my opinion right on Obama. I wasn't real happy with Hillary as a NY Senator, but where she really disappointed me was as Secretary of State. Still, I think a lot of her ineptness there fails squarely on Obama who was a megalomaniac and interfered far too much. never the less, I have lost the confidence I once had in her to be an effective leader. there are a lot better choices out there.

 

[Spoonman]

Indeed: he won the nomination in 60, lost the GE, said in 62 that no one was gonna have "Richard Nixon to kick around any more", then he chopped of George Romney's balls in late 1967, and in spite of being arguably the most hated man in the GOP, won the nomination and sqeaked by in the GE 1968, by +0.70% over Humphrey and that fucking racist bigot Wallace. It was 5 pm on the day after the GE when Illinois was called for Nixon and put him over the top. And of course, he won re-election in 1972 with 60.80% of the vote and 520 EV and then jumped ship in 1974.... but he never lost a nomination and then came back to win four years later.

Hillary Clinton is no Ronald Reagan. I don't think she'll run. We have 3 more years of Obama. Most Americans are already tired of the liberal bullshit. Please... Can we actually adhere to the Constitution

Reagan adhered to the Constitution?

I don't recall him trying to change it

 

[MarcATL]

Indeed: he won the nomination in 60, lost the GE, said in 62 that no one was gonna have "Richard Nixon to kick around any more", then he chopped of George Romney's balls in late 1967, and in spite of being arguably the most hated man in the GOP, won the nomination and sqeaked by in the GE 1968, by +0.70% over Humphrey and that fucking racist bigot Wallace. It was 5 pm on the day after the GE when Illinois was called for Nixon and put him over the top. And of course, he won re-election in 1972 with 60.80% of the vote and 520 EV and then jumped ship in 1974.... but he never lost a nomination and then came back to win four years later.

Hillary Clinton is no Ronald Reagan. I don't think she'll run. We have 3 more years of Obama. Most Americans are already tired of the liberal bullshit. Please... Can we actually adhere to the Constitution

Reagan adhered to the Constitution?

Was Iran Contra Constitutional?

Hillary Clinton is no Ronald Reagan. I don't think she'll run. We have 3 more years of Obama. Most Americans are already tired of the liberal bullshit. Please... Can we actually adhere to the Constitution

Reagan adhered to the Constitution?

I don't recall him trying to change it

It is Constitutional to try to change the Constitution if you do it the Constitutional way.

 

[Statistikhengst]

It simply amazes me how the Left tells the right not to attack their candidates when that is all the left has done since 08......

Wait a minute: exactly WHO here on this thread is telling you that you cannot attack a DEM candidate? Who?

 

[Statistikhengst]

Now, to some actual data since "Bridgegate": Chris Christie is slumping all over in polling, and the slump is uniform.


Nationally:

NBC / Marist / McClatchy, released 01/15/2014:

http://msnbcmedia.msn.com/i/MSNBC/Sections/A_Politics/_Today_Stories_Teases/ChristiePoll.pdf

Clinton 50
Christie 37

Margin: Clinton +13


Quinnipiac, released 01/21/2014:

National (US) Poll - January 21, 2014 - Bridgegate Takes Toll On Chris | Quinnipiac University Connecticut

Clinton 46
Christie 38
Margin: Clinton +8

Also:

Clinton 49 / Paul 39 - Clinton +10
Clinton 49 / Bush, J. 38 - Clinton +11
Clinton 50 / Cruz 35 - Clinton 15


And in NY State:

Siena Poll, 01/20/2014

http://www.siena.edu/uploadedfiles/...nity/community_page/sri/SNY0114 Crosstabs.pdf

Clinton 60
Christie 32
Margin: Clinton +28

But the shocker, released TODAY, is Rutgers/Eagleton, for NEW JERSEY:

http://www.rci.rutgers.edu/~redlawsk/EP/Tables2014/ChristieRatingsGWBScandalJan2014.pdf

Clinton 55
Christie 34
Margin: Clinton +21

The poll before this one, from Monmouth, one month ago, had Christie up by +3.

How good is Rutgers/Eagleton? Well:

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet...0U3aFBuT09zQ2xXQ29fTjlJRlE&usp=sharing#gid=61

In 2012, the final Rutgers/Eagleton poll for New Jersey showed Obama +17. He won by +17.68 (+18). So, Rutgers was the closest to the actual results in this state and actually had a very slight CONSERVATIVE mathematical bias.

So, Rutgers is currently the GOLD STANDARD for New Jersey, and that is mathematically provable.

Little tidbit for you. Obama and Bill Clinton's electoral records in New Jersey are almost perfect mirror images of each other.

http://uselectionatlas.org/RESULTS/compare.php?year=2012&fips=34&f=1&off=0&elect=0&type=state

Clinton won NJ by almost +18 in 92 and by close to +16 in 96.
Obama won NJ by close to +16 in 08 and by almost +18 in 12.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Now, if this were just one poll in the last days, I would say, pfft, one poll.

But here are four, three of them in the last 48 hours, and they ALL show a shift. And if Christie cannot even be close to competitive in his home state of New Jersey, a state he would desperately need if he cannot pry Virgina away from Clinton (there have been 9 polls of VA so far with 21 match-ups and Clinton has won 20 of them), then he cannot win nationally.

Those are the current numbers.
[MENTION=31057]JoeB131[/MENTION] [MENTION=20450]MarcATL[/MENTION] [MENTION=45104]WelfareQueen[/MENTION] [MENTION=20321]rightwinger[/MENTION]

 

[Jroc]

Hillary Clinton is no Ronald Reagan. I don't think she'll run. We have 3 more years of Obama. Most Americans are already tired of the liberal bullshit. Please... Can we actually adhere to the Constitution

Reagan adhered to the Constitution?

Was Iran Contra Constitutional?

Reagan adhered to the Constitution?

I don't recall him trying to change it

It is Constitutional to try to change the Constitution if you do it the Constitutional way.

Changing laws passed by congress is unconstitutional...Declaring congress not in session is unconstitutional. the President doesn't have such power. Ignoring immigration laws because you don't feel like enforcing them is unconstitutional. Obamacare in an if itself is unconstitutional. That spineless Judge Roberts rewrote it declaring it a tax when it was never sold as such.

 

[SFC Ollie]

It simply amazes me how the Left tells the right not to attack their candidates when that is all the left has done since 08......

Wait a minute: exactly WHO here on this thread is telling you that you cannot attack a DEM candidate? Who?

Allow me to rephrase then. Change the word tells to advises. And not only in this thread,

 

[Zander]

]I'm an Elizabeth Warren man myself. Would LOVE to see her run.

So if you had to choose between Hillary and Elizabeth Warren who gets your vote in the primary?

 

[Zander]

Now, to some actual data since "Bridgegate": Chris Christie is slumping all over in polling, and the slump is uniform.


Nationally:

NBC / Marist / McClatchy, released 01/15/2014:

http://msnbcmedia.msn.com/i/MSNBC/Sections/A_Politics/_Today_Stories_Teases/ChristiePoll.pdf

Clinton 50
Christie 37

Margin: Clinton +13


Quinnipiac, released 01/21/2014:

National (US) Poll - January 21, 2014 - Bridgegate Takes Toll On Chris | Quinnipiac University Connecticut

Clinton 46
Christie 38
Margin: Clinton +8

Also:

Clinton 49 / Paul 39 - Clinton +10
Clinton 49 / Bush, J. 38 - Clinton +11
Clinton 50 / Cruz 35 - Clinton 15


And in NY State:

Siena Poll, 01/20/2014

http://www.siena.edu/uploadedfiles/...nity/community_page/sri/SNY0114 Crosstabs.pdf

Clinton 60
Christie 32
Margin: Clinton +28

But the shocker, released TODAY, is Rutgers/Eagleton, for NEW JERSEY:

http://www.rci.rutgers.edu/~redlawsk/EP/Tables2014/ChristieRatingsGWBScandalJan2014.pdf

Clinton 55
Christie 34
Margin: Clinton +21

The poll before this one, from Monmouth, one month ago, had Christie up by +3.

How good is Rutgers/Eagleton? Well:

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet...0U3aFBuT09zQ2xXQ29fTjlJRlE&usp=sharing#gid=61

In 2012, the final Rutgers/Eagleton poll for New Jersey showed Obama +17. He won by +17.68 (+18). So, Rutgers was the closest to the actual results in this state and actually had a very slight CONSERVATIVE mathematical bias.

So, Rutgers is currently the GOLD STANDARD for New Jersey, and that is mathematically provable.

Little tidbit for you. Obama and Bill Clinton's electoral records in New Jersey are almost perfect mirror images of each other.

http://uselectionatlas.org/RESULTS/compare.php?year=2012&fips=34&f=1&off=0&elect=0&type=state

Clinton won NJ by almost +18 in 92 and by close to +16 in 96.
Obama won NJ by close to +16 in 08 and by almost +18 in 12.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Now, if this were just one poll in the last days, I would say, pfft, one poll.

But here are four, three of them in the last 48 hours, and they ALL show a shift. And if Christie cannot even be close to competitive in his home state of New Jersey, a state he would desperately need if he cannot pry Virgina away from Clinton (there have been 9 polls of VA so far with 21 match-ups and Clinton has won 20 of them), then he cannot win nationally.

Those are the current numbers.

Wowsa!! that that surely is impressive.....especially 3 years before the 2016 Presidential election and before either one of them has announced their candidacy.

 

[Jroc]

Now, to some actual data since "Bridgegate": Chris Christie is slumping all over in polling, and the slump is uniform.


Nationally:

NBC / Marist / McClatchy, released 01/15/2014:

http://msnbcmedia.msn.com/i/MSNBC/Sections/A_Politics/_Today_Stories_Teases/ChristiePoll.pdf

Clinton 50
Christie 37

Margin: Clinton +13


Quinnipiac, released 01/21/2014:

National (US) Poll - January 21, 2014 - Bridgegate Takes Toll On Chris | Quinnipiac University Connecticut

Clinton 46
Christie 38
Margin: Clinton +8

Also:

Clinton 49 / Paul 39 - Clinton +10
Clinton 49 / Bush, J. 38 - Clinton +11
Clinton 50 / Cruz 35 - Clinton 15


And in NY State:

Siena Poll, 01/20/2014

http://www.siena.edu/uploadedfiles/...nity/community_page/sri/SNY0114 Crosstabs.pdf

Clinton 60
Christie 32
Margin: Clinton +28

But the shocker, released TODAY, is Rutgers/Eagleton, for NEW JERSEY:

http://www.rci.rutgers.edu/~redlawsk/EP/Tables2014/ChristieRatingsGWBScandalJan2014.pdf

Clinton 55
Christie 34
Margin: Clinton +21

The poll before this one, from Monmouth, one month ago, had Christie up by +3.

How good is Rutgers/Eagleton? Well:

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet...0U3aFBuT09zQ2xXQ29fTjlJRlE&usp=sharing#gid=61

In 2012, the final Rutgers/Eagleton poll for New Jersey showed Obama +17. He won by +17.68 (+18). So, Rutgers was the closest to the actual results in this state and actually had a very slight CONSERVATIVE mathematical bias.

So, Rutgers is currently the GOLD STANDARD for New Jersey, and that is mathematically provable.

Little tidbit for you. Obama and Bill Clinton's electoral records in New Jersey are almost perfect mirror images of each other.

http://uselectionatlas.org/RESULTS/compare.php?year=2012&fips=34&f=1&off=0&elect=0&type=state

Clinton won NJ by almost +18 in 92 and by close to +16 in 96.
Obama won NJ by close to +16 in 08 and by almost +18 in 12.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Now, if this were just one poll in the last days, I would say, pfft, one poll.

But here are four, three of them in the last 48 hours, and they ALL show a shift. And if Christie cannot even be close to competitive in his home state of New Jersey, a state he would desperately need if he cannot pry Virgina away from Clinton (there have been 9 polls of VA so far with 21 match-ups and Clinton has won 20 of them), then he cannot win nationally.

Those are the current numbers.

Wowsa!! that that surely is impressive.....especially 3 years before the 2016 Presidential election and before either one of them has announced their candidacy.

The last thing I'm worrying about is Chris Christie...Just saying

 

[Zander]

Now, to some actual data since "Bridgegate": Chris Christie is slumping all over in polling, and the slump is uniform.


Nationally:

NBC / Marist / McClatchy, released 01/15/2014:

http://msnbcmedia.msn.com/i/MSNBC/Sections/A_Politics/_Today_Stories_Teases/ChristiePoll.pdf

Clinton 50
Christie 37

Margin: Clinton +13


Quinnipiac, released 01/21/2014:

National (US) Poll - January 21, 2014 - Bridgegate Takes Toll On Chris | Quinnipiac University Connecticut

Clinton 46
Christie 38
Margin: Clinton +8

Also:

Clinton 49 / Paul 39 - Clinton +10
Clinton 49 / Bush, J. 38 - Clinton +11
Clinton 50 / Cruz 35 - Clinton 15


And in NY State:

Siena Poll, 01/20/2014

http://www.siena.edu/uploadedfiles/...nity/community_page/sri/SNY0114 Crosstabs.pdf

Clinton 60
Christie 32
Margin: Clinton +28

But the shocker, released TODAY, is Rutgers/Eagleton, for NEW JERSEY:

http://www.rci.rutgers.edu/~redlawsk/EP/Tables2014/ChristieRatingsGWBScandalJan2014.pdf

Clinton 55
Christie 34
Margin: Clinton +21

The poll before this one, from Monmouth, one month ago, had Christie up by +3.

How good is Rutgers/Eagleton? Well:

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet...0U3aFBuT09zQ2xXQ29fTjlJRlE&usp=sharing#gid=61

In 2012, the final Rutgers/Eagleton poll for New Jersey showed Obama +17. He won by +17.68 (+18). So, Rutgers was the closest to the actual results in this state and actually had a very slight CONSERVATIVE mathematical bias.

So, Rutgers is currently the GOLD STANDARD for New Jersey, and that is mathematically provable.

Little tidbit for you. Obama and Bill Clinton's electoral records in New Jersey are almost perfect mirror images of each other.

http://uselectionatlas.org/RESULTS/compare.php?year=2012&fips=34&f=1&off=0&elect=0&type=state

Clinton won NJ by almost +18 in 92 and by close to +16 in 96.
Obama won NJ by close to +16 in 08 and by almost +18 in 12.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Now, if this were just one poll in the last days, I would say, pfft, one poll.

But here are four, three of them in the last 48 hours, and they ALL show a shift. And if Christie cannot even be close to competitive in his home state of New Jersey, a state he would desperately need if he cannot pry Virgina away from Clinton (there have been 9 polls of VA so far with 21 match-ups and Clinton has won 20 of them), then he cannot win nationally.

Those are the current numbers.

Wowsa!! that that surely is impressive.....especially 3 years before the 2016 Presidential election and before either one of them has announced their candidacy.

The last thing I'm worrying about is Chris Christie...Just saying

But, but, but...HE'S THE PRESUMPTIVE GOP NOMINEE!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[SFC Ollie]

3 years out? I hope both parties have better choices by then.........

 

[Zander]

3 years out? I hope both parties have better choices by then.........

Silly SFC Olllie!! This is already decided!

It's gonna be Triple C from the NJZ
VERSUS
Hill -a-ree from the (carpetbagger) NYC.

PS- there is no N/E liberal bias in the media- none!!

 

[MarcATL]

]I'm an Elizabeth Warren man myself. Would LOVE to see her run.

So if you had to choose between Hillary and Elizabeth Warren who gets your vote in the primary?

Warren all the way.

Warren is for the People.
Clinton is a corporatist.
Hillary over any Republican of course.
At least any Republican on the scene today.

 

[MarcATL]

Now, to some actual data since "Bridgegate": Chris Christie is slumping all over in polling, and the slump is uniform.


Nationally:

NBC / Marist / McClatchy, released 01/15/2014:

http://msnbcmedia.msn.com/i/MSNBC/Sections/A_Politics/_Today_Stories_Teases/ChristiePoll.pdf

Clinton 50
Christie 37

Margin: Clinton +13


Quinnipiac, released 01/21/2014:

National (US) Poll - January 21, 2014 - Bridgegate Takes Toll On Chris | Quinnipiac University Connecticut

Clinton 46
Christie 38
Margin: Clinton +8

Also:

Clinton 49 / Paul 39 - Clinton +10
Clinton 49 / Bush, J. 38 - Clinton +11
Clinton 50 / Cruz 35 - Clinton 15


And in NY State:

Siena Poll, 01/20/2014

http://www.siena.edu/uploadedfiles/...nity/community_page/sri/SNY0114 Crosstabs.pdf

Clinton 60
Christie 32
Margin: Clinton +28

But the shocker, released TODAY, is Rutgers/Eagleton, for NEW JERSEY:

http://www.rci.rutgers.edu/~redlawsk/EP/Tables2014/ChristieRatingsGWBScandalJan2014.pdf

Clinton 55
Christie 34
Margin: Clinton +21

The poll before this one, from Monmouth, one month ago, had Christie up by +3.

How good is Rutgers/Eagleton? Well:

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet...0U3aFBuT09zQ2xXQ29fTjlJRlE&usp=sharing#gid=61

In 2012, the final Rutgers/Eagleton poll for New Jersey showed Obama +17. He won by +17.68 (+18). So, Rutgers was the closest to the actual results in this state and actually had a very slight CONSERVATIVE mathematical bias.

So, Rutgers is currently the GOLD STANDARD for New Jersey, and that is mathematically provable.

Little tidbit for you. Obama and Bill Clinton's electoral records in New Jersey are almost perfect mirror images of each other.

http://uselectionatlas.org/RESULTS/compare.php?year=2012&fips=34&f=1&off=0&elect=0&type=state

Clinton won NJ by almost +18 in 92 and by close to +16 in 96.
Obama won NJ by close to +16 in 08 and by almost +18 in 12.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Now, if this were just one poll in the last days, I would say, pfft, one poll.

But here are four, three of them in the last 48 hours, and they ALL show a shift. And if Christie cannot even be close to competitive in his home state of New Jersey, a state he would desperately need if he cannot pry Virgina away from Clinton (there have been 9 polls of VA so far with 21 match-ups and Clinton has won 20 of them), then he cannot win nationally.

Those are the current numbers.
[MENTION=31057]JoeB131[/MENTION] [MENTION=20450]MarcATL[/MENTION] [MENTION=45104]WelfareQueen[/MENTION] [MENTION=20321]rightwinger[/MENTION]

Right now Crispy, I mean uh...Christie is toast.

However, we have 3 years to go.

A LOT can happen in that time.

 

[Barb]

]I'm an Elizabeth Warren man myself. Would LOVE to see her run.

So if you had to choose between Hillary and Elizabeth Warren who gets your vote in the primary?

Warren all the way.

Warren is for the People.
Clinton is a corporatist.
Hillary over any Republican of course.
At least any Republican on the scene today.

Absolutely correct