Posted on 05/15/2015 8:37:59 AM PDT by SeekAndFind
Quick: When was the last time Hillary Clinton had a "good" week? I don't remember either.
The last big media stories about Clinton have been:
1.) She runs a shady foundation that burns a lot of money and doesn't do much real-world good.
2.) She had exchanges that looked like pay-for-play while acting as secretary of state.
3.) Because of these problems, she's been ducking the media like crazy.
4.) And don't forget there's that private email server that she shouldn't have been running that would have totally exonerated her about everything if she hadn't nuked it.
As Jack Reacher would say, not good.
And yet, in the face of what has been three solid months of bad news, Clinton's poll numbers aren't bad. Not bad at all.
Among Iowa Democrats, for instance, she's in basically the same place she was in late February: 60 percent support today compared to 61 percent back then. Nationally, things aren't quite as good. A New York Times poll last week showed her favorability numbers holding reasonably steady_35 favorable/36 unfavorable, compared to 37/26 in March.
What interests me most is what's going on underneath the top-line numbers. An NBC/Wall Street Journal poll asked respondents several questions about Clinton's character. The number most people paid attention to was "honest and straightforward"-where only 25 percent of respondents said they believed she was honest (versus 50 percent who said she wasn't).
That sounds pretty grim and Nixonian. But here's the thing: A couple questions before that, people were asked if Clinton was "effective" at "getting things done"-here the split was 44-34 in her favor. Is she "easygoing and likable"? People said yes by a margin of 41-37.
The craziest response: Does she "have high moral standards that set the proper moral tone for the country?"
(Excerpt) Read more at weeklystandard.com ...
One word, female and you thought I was going to use the “v” word.
Because so far it’s only her and the socialist Sanders on the Dem side vs. 6 declared and 7 undeclared candidates on the GOP side. Yeah, odds are she will poll well.
She always does well when she’s been out of the public eye for a while. It’s being seen and/or heard that causes problems for her.
If you were a Bond villain you wouldn’t hire a boy scout to do your evil deeds. In this case it’s the Bond minions looking for a new Bond villain to work for who are being polled. They think they’ve got a evil villain who will strap Bond to a table and stay there watching while the improbable GOP-gutter does its horrible, bloody work. They’ll cheer as the villain takes over the world and even cheer as she kills a few of them for good measure. (Presumably, there’s a Clinton shark tank below the trap door floor.)
Polls are not polls.
Polls are well-funded publicity campaigns.
The poll company has a saved called database. They came take that data and predict an outcome using any combination of profile they want. Polls are crap. Ignore them.
Because the poll numbers are irrelevant at this point in time — for both the Dems and Pubbies.
The polls will not have any meaning until all wannabes who are going to announce actually do so. Then, the polls will start having some meaning.
Additionally, they will take on significance when the actual primaries voting starts.
==
At this point, anyone or organization can commission a poll to produce the results they want to publicize. That is why various polls show Jeb ahead, Huckabee ahead, Cruz ahead, Walker ahead, Hillary ahead, Rubio ahead, etc.
I have actually conversed - without revealing my political views - with persons who receive one or more gubmint checks.
Some of them are decent persons but a subset of those are of the ‘if it’s offered, I’ll take it’ mindset and are glad to claim disability while finding a miracle cure each morning about 10 AM that allows them to play 36 holes of golf before they return to the ranks of the disabled.
‘Retail politics’ is a cutesy phrase favored by DC journos of all stripes but it’s more accurately, if cynically, termed transactional politics - vote for me and the gravy train will continue.
Throw in a long list of imaginary racial and sexual grievances and people are not only happy to be on the dole, they exalt at sticking it to their compatriots.
This is Romney’s 47%. No mystery here.
Yes, the same “Confederacy of Fools” who twice elected a homosexual Kenyan Muslim to the Presidency of the United States will undoubtedly turn out for Hillary Clinton.
“The danger to America is not Barack Obama, but a citizenry capable of entrusting a man like him with the presidency. It will be far easier to limit and undo the follies of an Obama presidency than to restore the necessary common sense and good judgment to a depraved electorate willing to have such a man for their president. The problem is much deeper and far more serious than Mr. Obama, who is a mere symptom of what ails America. Blaming the prince of the fools should not blind anyone to the vast confederacy of fools that made him their prince. The republic can survive a Barack Obama, who is, after all, merely a fool. It is less likely to survive a multitude of fools, such as those who made him their president.”
Who actually STILL believes pols?
The election is in 536 days. The time frame in which voters make up their minds starts in about 450 days.
The idea that a poll taken now has ANYTHING to do with the outcome of the 2016 Presidential election is ridiculous.
In December 1979 (not MAY, for God's sake, DECEMBER) Jimmy Carter had a 62%-33% lead over Ronald Reagan. On LABOR DAY 1988 (not Labor Day 1987, and certainly not May 1987) Michael Dukakis led George HW Bush 49%-42%. In May of 1992 (again, NOT May of 1991) Bill Clinton was at 25% in the polls.
Stop, stop, STOP posting these absurd polls that have nothing to do with anything.
The only real poll occurs on election day and even that is getting more and more suspect each time.
There are a lot of old, bitter, ugly women who will vote for her no matter what.
Would you rather have Hillary who will increase your welfare and give you lots of free stuff;
Or a nasty Republican who will kill children, allow them to live in squalor, take away all your free stuff and give it to the military to kill other countries children?
To understand the poll you have to read the questions that were asked.....
Because the American people are stupid.
I tease my lib coworkers all the time. They say they aren’t voting for her; they’re voting for the Supreme Court justices she’ll appoint for her.
Anything that helps them sleep at night..
RE: They say they aren’t voting for her; they’re voting for the Supreme Court justices she’ll appoint for her.
2016 will be THE year when the Supreme Court will be remade.
It will either be more justices like Ruth Ginsburg or more like Scalia or more like the mushy John Roberts, and we’ll be stuck with this legacy for the next generation.
because many Americans are stupid and dishonest, thus she really is the perfect candidate for them.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.