Posted on 04/12/2007 9:01:38 PM PDT by FairOpinion
Go away. Even your post makes you an idiot.
No this is a push poll for edwards.
We are not privy to what is going on in the back scenes now.
This is not about the presidency, this is about Edwards Beating Hillary Clinton.
Edwards has deep support behind him. (know a few trial lawyers working for him)
The plaintiff’s bar wants Edwards very much because they see it as money in their pockets.
This poll is about Edwards counting the fact ANY top republican will beat Hillary.
This is a push edwards over hillary poll.
HAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH!!!! Rasmussen must have only polled GIRLS!!
At least let the guy get in the race before you declare him the loser.
Looks like a sympathy ‘bounce’ after Elizabeth’s announcement, interesting to see if the numbers will go back to normal.
Come on admit it you are a paid operative for Rudy.
You're a hoot. Breck Girl is clubbing "The only guy who can beat Hillary," and you turn this against Fred, who hasn't even entered the race officially yet.
Rudy is too busy imploding over the contradictions between the imaginary pro-life Rudy and the real-world pro-abort Rudy to ever regain his lost ground.
Don’t worry the facts you post won’t get in the way of opinions.
“At this time in 2002, we all thought Howard Dean was the man to beat.” Unfortunately for that statement Dean was barely on the radar screen at this time in 2002. And how many primaries did he win?
Man, is your screenname completely at odds with your agenda.
***Yes, well stated. As “Just a Dumb Blonde” says, where is the barf alert in FO’s tag line?
Anyone who wins a major party’s nomination is a legitimate candidate because so many unexpected things can happen in a presidential campaign and because many states are locked up for each party before the campaign begins.
We have to fight hard whether it’s Hillary, Obama, or Edwards.
I have been saying for a while that if Gore doesn’t get in then Edwards will be the Rat nominee. He’d be a stronger candidate that either Shrillary or Osama Obama.
This poll was from April 5th, and has already been discussed multiple times on this forum.
Don’t we have enough new meaningless stuff to talk about that we don’t have to dredge up old polls we’ve already discussed?
I don’t see how he could be any stronger than he was running for VP in 2004, when he was so inconsequential we forgot he existed, especially after Cheney cleaned the floor with him.
His wife attacking the poor neighbor who lives next door isn’t really going to help him, either.
So, do you get assigned the really stinky jobs that areafiftyone won’t do?
The people who honestly think Thompson can win in this anti-Bush atmosphere amaze me. Its like they think Ohio and the rest of the midwest will vote Republican as long as we nominate any social conservative.
Presuming the “anti-Bush” atmosphere has merit, which I don’t know yet how it will be in 2008, Thompson is the better candidate.
After all, Rudy is closely tied to Bush. He campaigned for Bush in 2004, and stood by him publicly on Iraq. He’s also tied to the republican fiasco of 2006, having spent months running around the country stumping for all of our candidates, many of whom lost.
Rudy would be a lot easier for the democrats to tie to Bush than Thompson will be.
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.