Clinton preferred over Giuliani in US race: poll

AFP ^ | October 4, 2007

[Kenny Bunk]

You guys leave Rudy alone!

Of course, he's not going to be the GOP nominee. He came on the field much too early and with all the wrong equipment. But right now he's doing a dirty job that no other Republican wants to do, i.e., he is ripping strips off Hillary's wrinkled hide!

It's a dirty job, but somebody's gotta do it.

[Miss Didi]

Rush: But I'm telling you, you put Mrs. Clinton in the White House, and every damn one of these little minions and all these little organizations of hers that are out trying to destroy her enemies right now are going to be given high-government positions to do their investigations and their seek-and-destroy missions from high-government positions. Make no mistake, this is the bunch that had 500 FBI files during their eight years, make no mistake that that's what's happening here. You can choose to believe it or ignore it. It's tough to face. "Gosh, I didn't think it would be this bad." It is. It portends a real problem.

[xzins]

I will never vote for Giuliani.

He is losing to Hillary. The only reason given for voting for this liberal pervert is that he can “beat” Hillary. Well...obviously not!

Time to get a different CONSERVATIVE candidate.

[Pinkbell]

The “progressives” are not going to vote for Rooty because of his stance on the war. They may agree with him on social issues, but they don’t agree with him on terror. They’ll all vote for the Hildabeast anyway. Now Guiliani may get the support of some independents and moderate Republicans, but the most loyal voting base, the Christian Right, will have the majority sitting out or going third party. All in all, it smacks up a win for the Hildabeast.

[LibLieSlayer]

I do not ignore THE POLLS... I ignore ARG and Washington Post/ABC and hildebeast's big fund raiser pollster that works for CNN. This poll is bogus because it is NOT of REGISTERED or LIKELY voters. No poll of adults is accurate for voting purposes.

LLS

[Norman Bates]

If you go to Real Clear Politics, in the first half of 2004 Kerry is leading marginally in most polls.

[Kevmo]

If familiarity is breeding comtempt in NYS, and it is, she’s screwed nationally.
***Your post gives me a warm feeling inside. Good enough place to bump this thread.

[LS]

Well put. You know, in the process of “hammering Hillary,” the differences WILL come out between the GOP candidates, and people can decide.

[LS]

Well, Ras has (in one poll) Hillary winning every state except AL, KY, and tied in WI (of those he’s polled). Rudy loses OH, FL, PA, NJ, and PA. Fred loses worse.

[LibLieSlayer]

President kerry proved ALL of those polls to be correct. You are so right... we are losing and with no hope! Should we kill ourselves now or wait until the actual vote? If you (and other Conservative activists) want to buy into abc and their ‘toon machine (without even questioning their motives and process)... then we are lost. America will die... the beast will rule.

LLS

[freespirited]

"The oversampling of blacks is legitimate."...

I am not sure I quite understand that? Is it because they vote in a larger percentage than other groups?

It's because of their residency patterns.

If you were to randomly dial 1000 numbers, making sure that you had X number from each area code, you would probably get the white population in proportion to its representation in the U.S. population. But not so for blacks. They are not spread out all over the country, but rather tend to live in urban population centers. For this reason, pollsters oversample them, then make an adjustment for having done so. This way they feel confident that they have surveyed enough people from the group to accurately capture their opinion while not not allowing the oversample to give them more representation than is actually the case.

I hope this makes sense. I know it can be confusing.

[avacado]

Thanks for the answer. It does makes sense but looking at the actual percentage of black voters in the 2004 presidential election it was 11%. This poll has a guaranteed 15% blacks by adding 212 and has probably more in the 1,114 sample. that would put them past 15% in this sample and they only represent 11% in the 2004 presidential election.

The polled is skewed with an oversample of blacks.

[freespirited]

The results are adjusted to make up for this. When all is said and done, the responses of the group oversampled should be in line with their actual share of the population.

[avacado]

"The results are adjusted to make up for this. When all is said and done, the responses of the group oversampled should be in line with their actual share of the population."

How do they adjust it? Blacks make up about 12% of the US population.

[LS]

Actually, no, but I do believe the polls. That’s why I will work to change them. I suggest going with people who have a reasonable shot at beating Hillary. Right now, that’s only Fred and Rudy.

[monday]

The election is going to come down to who is hated more. If more Democrats hate Hildebeast more than Rudy then Rudy will win. If on the other hand, if more Republicans like you two, hate Rudy more than Hildebeast, then Hildebeast will win.

BTW, I am with you guys. I won’t vote for either of them either, but not because I hate Rudy. I just think he’s another socialist bozo who will say anything to get elected. Hildebeast I hate.

[GeorgefromGeorgia]

The “I will never vote for Rudy” folks would have had a problem voting for Nixon over McGovern in 72. I voted for Tricky Dickey twice. After the first election, he created the EPA, instituted Wage and Price Controls, and proposed the guaranteed income. Nixon was more liberal than Rudy. McGovern look a lot like Hildebeast, except that McGovern was honest.

If Rudy is the nominee and you adhere to your promise, YOU will be part of the reason that a vicious, extreme socialist armed with tons of minions and dollars is elected President.
Sometimes holding your nose when you vote is the best choice.

[xzins]

Actually, if YOU vote for Giuliani YOU will be the cause of Hillary’s win.

You already know that we will never vote for Giuliani.

Just get that through your head and realize that Giuliani is dead in the water so far as a Pub victory in 08 is concerned.

[wagglebee]

The “I will never vote for Rudy” folks would have had a problem voting for Nixon over McGovern in 72. . . . Nixon was more liberal than Rudy. McGovern look a lot like Hildebeast, except that McGovern was honest.

Uh can you show us where Nixon EVER promoted militant homosexualism, abortion, infringement of Second Amendment rights, illegal aliens? Not only is Rooty Toot more liberal than Nixon, except for the war he's more liberal than McGovern was back in 1972.

Whoever came up with this absurd idea that the GOP could win by running a candidate more liberal than most 'Rats is insane!

[LibLieSlayer]

I understand but let me say this in my defense. I have never stated that I hate rootie. I do not. I will not vote for anyone that is not solidly Second Amendment and anti-Abortion.

LLS