Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Clinton preferred over Giuliani in US race: poll
AFP ^ | October 4, 2007

Posted on 10/04/2007 6:43:43 AM PDT by presidio9

Democrat Hillary Clinton would beat Republican Rudolph Giuliani in the race for the US presidency if the election was held now, according to poll data released Thursday.

Senator Clinton, wife of ex-president Bill Clinton and the strong front-runner for the Democratic nomination for next year's election, held a 51-43 percent margin over Giuliani in a Washington Post-ABC News poll.

The poll showed Democrat voters favoring Clinton over Giuliani by 88-9 percent while independents were for Clinton 48-44 percent. Republican voters preferred Giuliani, the former New York City mayor, 88-10 percent.

The poll also showed that two-thirds of voters believe Clinton would take the country in a different direction compared with her husband during his 1993-2001 presidency, with most considering that "a good thing."

Another Washington Post-ABC News poll released Wednesday showed Clinton was the solid favorite for the Democrat nomination in the November 2008 election.

She held a 33 point lead over her closest rival, fellow Senator Barack Obama.

Giuliani, meanwhile, leads most polls in his party's race,but is more closely dogged by rivals Mitt Romney and Fred Thompson.


TOPICS: Front Page News; News/Current Events; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: 2008polls
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 81-100101-120121-140141-158 last
To: Fishrrman
Since you are a defeatist and believe that we are going to lose... why don’t you leave FR and let those of us that have the will to fight our enemies do so without having to fight those on our side too?

LLS

141 posted on 10/05/2007 7:28:11 AM PDT by LibLieSlayer (Support America, Kill terrorists, Destroy dims!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 136 | View Replies]

To: NKStarr
If things go badly, this will be a very different country in the next decade, hardly recognizable.

Yes it will, and "things will go badly" if either Hillary or Rootytoot is elected. Two candidates from two parties with one basic agenda, more big government and more jackbooted authoritarianism.

142 posted on 10/05/2007 7:28:48 AM PDT by epow ("The best we can hope for the people is that they be suitably armed" Alexander Hamilton)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: Beatthedrum
And if enough Americans sit back and buy the lie, elect this unqualified hack, like the Germans, we will get exactly what we deserve.

No, if enough Americans buy the lie and elect this unqualified hack THEY will deserve what they get. Those of us who would never vote for a Democrat in 1000 years WON'T deserve what we will get if she or any other Democrat is elected, which I believe will happen if her opponent is Rudy.

143 posted on 10/05/2007 7:37:15 AM PDT by epow ("The best we can hope for the people is that they be suitably armed" Alexander Hamilton)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: biff
He couldn’t beat her in 2000. He saw the handwriting on the wall and caved.

He had cancer for Christ's sake! What a ridiculous thing to say.

144 posted on 10/05/2007 7:40:32 AM PDT by Alissa
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 49 | View Replies]

To: epow

If you think there is no difference between Hillary and ANY of the Republican candidates then you deserve to live under her regime for the 8 years. But I don’t deserve it.


145 posted on 10/05/2007 7:42:18 AM PDT by NKStarr
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 142 | View Replies]

To: P-Marlowe
If the former, then why should we discourage abortion at all?

If the latter, then why should we permit abortion at all?

Why indeed? Excellent questions and sound logic P-M.

146 posted on 10/05/2007 7:43:37 AM PDT by epow ("The best we can hope for the people is that they be suitably armed" Alexander Hamilton)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 138 | View Replies]

To: P-Marlowe
At one time it was a crime for a woman to get a abortion.

“Why? If the thing being aborted is not a human being, then why would you care if it is removed from the womb? If it were just a glob of tissue, then nobody would care if it were removed. The fact that you don’t believe in “abortion on demand” suggests to me that you believe that there is a human being in the womb, and if that is true, then abortion is murder.”

This is an excellent question, and I have had this discussion on several occasions with doctors, religious leaders and ethicists. Your view is that at conception there is human life. That view is not absurd to be cast aside as out of hand. However, is a 24 hour fertilized egg a human being? Many doctors will tell you that they do NOT believe that is a human being. My Episcopal Priest explained to me once that the Catholic Church once condoned early term abortions. I know that many Catholics get very angry when this argument is used, but there is some historical evidence of this.
Of course, history does not decide this issue. Does science? I tend to think so, but I am not 100% sure on that. I suppose it many depend on faith.
Obviously, some believe based on faith that a newly conceived fetus is a human being, even before the brain or basic organs are formed. Some do not believe this?
My Daughter had a an ectopic pregnancy. She could have died from that had the physician not ended that pregnancy. Is that taking a human life. By your definition, I would presume it would. Was the doctor a murderer because he saved my Daughter’s life. I know some might believe so. Of course, you might justify ending the ectopic pregnancy on the basis that it was doomed, however methphysicially, this there was still, according to your definition, a human being.
On another note, I frequently ask freepers that respond to the abortion issue as you have what they would do if their Wife or Daughter was raped and became pregnant. 99% of them NEVER respond to this question. Is abortion the better choice than continuing a pregnancy that may psychology damage a loved one?

147 posted on 10/05/2007 7:50:30 AM PDT by GeorgefromGeorgia
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 138 | View Replies]

To: NKStarr
If you think there is no difference between Hillary and ANY of the Republican candidates then you deserve to live under her regime for the 8 years. But I don’t deserve it.

That's not at all what I said, I said that I don't believe Rudy can defeat Hillary. And if that's the way it turns out those of us who tried to warn Rudytooters will NOT deserve what WE get. Clear now?

148 posted on 10/05/2007 7:52:15 AM PDT by epow ("The best we can hope for the people is that they be suitably armed" Alexander Hamilton)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 145 | View Replies]

To: GeorgefromGeorgia; P-Marlowe; Salvation; NYer; Coleus; narses; cpforlife.org; 8mmMauser; xzins
My Episcopal Priest explained to me once that the Catholic Church once condoned early term abortions. I know that many Catholics get very angry when this argument is used, but there is some historical evidence of this.

This is categorically UNTRUE. It might be a lie spread by anti-Catholic bigots, but there is no evidence of this.

I have debated with many non-Catholic FReepers and I think we would all agree that things get heated at times and I think it would be fair to say that both sides have been guilty of at least stretching the truth. But I have NEVER heard any of my Evangelical FRiends suggest that the Catholic Church EVER supported abortion in any form.

On another note, I frequently ask freepers that respond to the abortion issue as you have what they would do if their Wife or Daughter was raped and became pregnant.

I'll respond. I have a dear family friend who was raped and became pregnant. She will tell you that keeping the baby was the most best thing she ever did and it has helped her heal from the rape.

Let me ask you this, what civilized country that follows the rule of law has ever suggested that an innocent child should be executed for the crime of one their father?

149 posted on 10/05/2007 8:02:53 AM PDT by wagglebee ("A political party cannot be all things to all people." -- Ronald Reagan, 3/1/75)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 147 | View Replies]

To: presidio9

Polls , Polls , Polls . At this point in the game , They are not much more than wishfull thinking ,In the 13 months remaining before the election , I am shure there will be 1000 more polls . Mostly by the Liberal news media . I guess they tend to soothe the Liberal mind . But little else , Also please remind yourself of the Sept & Oct Polls in 2004 . Kerry by a Landslide .


150 posted on 10/05/2007 8:08:22 AM PDT by Haze Grey Forever (Haze Grey Forever)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: presidio9

Polls , Polls , Polls . At this point in the game , They are not much more than wishfull thinking ,In the 13 months remaining before the election , I am shure there will be 1000 more polls . Mostly by the Liberal news media . I guess they tend to soothe the Liberal mind . But little else , Also please remind yourself of the Sept & Oct Polls in 2004 . Kerry by a Landslide .


151 posted on 10/05/2007 8:11:06 AM PDT by Haze Grey Forever (Haze Grey Forever)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: epow

>>That’s not at all what I said, I said that I don’t believe Rudy can defeat Hillary.<<

LOL.
But if you thought he could win, then you’d be all for him, right?


152 posted on 10/05/2007 8:12:09 AM PDT by NKStarr
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 148 | View Replies]

To: GeorgefromGeorgia
My Daughter had a an ectopic pregnancy. She could have died from that had the physician not ended that pregnancy. Is that taking a human life. By your definition, I would presume it would. Was the doctor a murderer because he saved my Daughter’s life. I know some might believe so. Of course, you might justify ending the ectopic pregnancy on the basis that it was doomed, however methphysicially, this there was still, according to your definition, a human being

Not many pro-life advocates believe that ending a pregnancy that would otherwise take the mother's life constitutes murder or any other crime.. There is a vast difference between taking human life in defense of one's nation or family and shooting down an innocent man on the street because he was an inconvenience to the shooter. The Judeo-Christian bible gives many examples of Godly men such as David or Gideon who killed other men in defense of themselves or their nation and were apparently justified in th eyes of God in so doing. The same basic principle applies to a life threatening pregnancy and the life of the mother.

Of course the fetus in such a case is not at fault and is no less an innocent, living human being than the fetus who is killed simply for the mother's convenience, but the situations are so different that comparison between the two situations is invalid.

153 posted on 10/05/2007 8:15:52 AM PDT by epow ("The best we can hope for the people is that they be suitably armed" Alexander Hamilton)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 147 | View Replies]

To: LibLieSlayer
Since you are a defeatist and believe that we are going to lose... why don’t you leave FR and let those of us that have the will to fight our enemies do so without having to fight those on our side too?

I'll answer that.

You call me a "defeatist" when I explicitly stated in my original post to you that I intend to support and vote for the Republican candidate for president (all ALL other offices) this coming election. And I intend to do exactly that.

Yet YOU are the one who specifically stated that you WOULD NOT support the Republican party and their candidates, if the candidates are not exactly the candidates you wish for. Instead, you will pick up your toys and let the Democrats win.

Who is the "defeatist" here? Who is the realist?

- John

154 posted on 10/05/2007 8:33:04 AM PDT by Fishrrman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 141 | View Replies]

To: NKStarr
No, I didn't say that either. Let's try it again.

I would not vote for Rudy under any circumstances other than him totally and truthfully renouncing his positions on the issues that are most important to me, but that isn't what I said in the post you referred to. I don't expect all or even most of those who oppose Rudy at this point to not vote for him in the general election.

But I still maintain that there will be a significant number of socially conservatives who oppose him on so many crucially important issues such as 2nd Amendment rights, abortion, homosexual "rights", illegal immigration, globalism, etc, etc, that they can't in good conscience vote for him, and that without those votes he will lose the election if he's nominated and Hillary is his opponent.

If I haven't made myself clear by now I doubt that I could with another explanation, so let's just agree to amicably disagree, OK?

155 posted on 10/05/2007 8:47:40 AM PDT by epow ("The best we can hope for the people is that they be suitably armed" Alexander Hamilton)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 152 | View Replies]

To: Fishrrman
I will NOT have to vote for rootie because he will not be the candidate. I would not vote for rue paul either. I could hold my nose for mitt or mcinsane... but I will NOT vote for a baby killing gun-grabber... EVER! I intend to face GOD when my day comes... and face him with the knowledge that I did not support those that supported the murder of innocents.

LLS

156 posted on 10/05/2007 9:02:46 AM PDT by LibLieSlayer (Support America, Kill terrorists, Destroy dims!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 154 | View Replies]

To: Alissa

No it is not. My dad at 73 had the same thing and took radiation treatments. It slowed him down for about a week and ever since he is going strong at the tender age of 87. What the truth of the matter is Rudy had too many negatives from his private life and saw the hand writing on the wall that he could not beat her.
Look historically at both Bill and Hillarys election won/loss records and you will see why the big money is on Hillary. We are in deep doodoo.
Rudy cannot beat her in 08 just like he couldn’t in 00.


157 posted on 10/05/2007 10:47:49 AM PDT by biff
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 144 | View Replies]

To: biff
I don't want to argue, but I don't think it's possible to compare all cancer cases as equal. I believe Rudy had the best chance against Hillary in that election as anyone. If he didn't, it was due to corruption that he couldn't prove.

Hillary is the most hated candidate I've ever seen that is ahead in the polls. Something is not passing the "smell test!"

I personally believe the HUGE DIVISION in our nation is because Clinton should have resigned during impeachment. He put himself above his country. Nixon, in history, will have more honor!

158 posted on 10/07/2007 4:56:36 PM PDT by Alissa
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 157 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 81-100101-120121-140141-158 last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson