Posted on 04/28/2008 1:02:17 PM PDT by Behind Liberal Lines
WASHINGTON (AP) -- Hillary Rodham Clinton now leads John McCain by 9 points in a head-to-head presidential matchup, according to an Associated Press-Ipsos poll that bolsters her argument that she is more electable than Democratic rival Barack Obama.
The survey released Monday gives the New York senator and former first lady a fresh talking point as she works to raise much-needed campaign cash and persuade pivotal undecided superdelegates to side with her in the drawn-out Democratic primary fight.
Helped by independents, young people and seniors, Clinton gained ground this month in a hypothetical match with Sen. McCain, the GOP nominee-in-waiting. She now leads McCain, 50 percent to 41 percent, while Obama remains virtually tied with McCain, 46 percent to 44 percent.
Both Democrats were roughly even with McCain in the previous poll about three weeks ago.
Since then, Clinton won the Pennsylvania primary, raising questions anew about whether Obama can attract broad swaths of voters needed to triumph in such big states come the fall when the Democratic nominee will go up against McCain.
Added Steve Lombardo, a GOP pollster: "This just reinforces the sentiment that a lot of Republican strategists are having right now -- that Clinton might actually be the more formidable fall candidate for a lot of reasons, not the least of which is that Obama can't seem to get his footing back."
(Excerpt) Read more at nv.clari.net ...
Time will tell. But, with a growing lead over McCain, the Super Delegates are going to go with the candidate with the best chance of winning back the WH.
That so many are so eager to count the Clintons out after all this time simply amazes me.
This isn’t a place for you to try and get the vapid Obama elected by trying to demoralize Republicans.
I wonder who you vote for? I vote Republican and I will in November. I vote for the guy who is against abortion. I vote for the guy who is for cutting taxes. I vote for the guy who is for fulfilling our needs and obligations in Iraq, Afghanistan and (if need be) Iran. I vote for the party of Reagan.
Bullcrap, as you put it, is claiming to be a conservative and not voting for the Republican as it is the Republican (and ONLY the Republican) that puts those positions into law. To do otherwise only assists in electing a Democrat to office.
You remind me of the old British Army during the American Revolutionary War that would only fight a battle in formation while the Americans used gorilla tactics to kick their ass. You have no concept of the strategy being used to defeat the enemy ( the Democrats). If your that afraid of the Clintons you need to go back down into your bunker and stay there until this election is over.
“I wonder who you vote for? I vote Republican and I will in November”
I vote Conservative. I DO NOT vote for a lib pretending to be a pubie.
“To do otherwise only assists in electing a Democrat to office.”
The only one voting a democrat into office is YOU by pulling the lever for mclame.
Let’s try something. How old are you? How old were you during the eight years of the Clintons co-presidency?
Check the above post to me, and then see my response. I’m going to try to find out if that theory somebody came up with here is right or not. It does seem to be divided between those who cannot stand the thought of another Clinton term and those who laugh about it and think it’s nothing. I want to know how old the poo-poohers were in the 90’s. I just can’t believe that WACO, if nothing else, means nothing to any of them. But maybe it is as simple as age-I don’t know.
Was it you that came up with the age theory?
Some of the most vehement McCain bashers and Rushbots on the thread have said they are in their 60s so it can’t be that they’re too young to remember WACO. I think those people are simply either ignorant of what the Clintons are capable of and/or consumed with hatred for McCain.
I’ve predicted in another thread a civil war on this website the likes of which it’s never seen if the Clintons manage to get the nomination. There’s discord now, and there was during the republican choices (particularly the Rooty and Huckster lovers and detractors)-but you ain’t seen nothin’ yet.
Never said I was blowing FR off, as you can see I’ve been a longtime member myself. just have to take a break for my own reasons for awhile.
Cannot believe anyone could possibly fall for the Clinton black magic again. Or play with their brand of nuclear fire.
And pray tell, what part do you consider the forest, and what part do you consider the trees?
I tell you the forest is the Clinton Machine and what the Clintons say it is, and the trees (Obama?) are merely diversions.
And when it comes to pass that the Hildabeast is elected president and Bill is thrust back into power with her, I will remember your name. And remind you what I’ve been saying all along.
And if you are right and operation chaos is successful (and that must equal CLINTONS GONE FOREVER in order to be successful), I will also remember you and remind you of that.
Let me tell you, I truly hope you’re right, but unfortunately I think you’re deluded like so many other conservatives.
This is the Clinton party, not the Obama party. Enemies are not interchangeable, they don’t all have the same propensity and track record of evil just because they’re typical liberal moonbats. The Clintons are the true enemy.
Those Clintons and their spawn...
To paraphrase General Patton: God help me I do hate them so......
As you have well-illustrated, some things - indeed some beliefs are not mutually exclusive.
I am something of a Rushbot, in that I believe he is a whole lot smarter and calculating and flexible in his “OC” approach than many on this thread give him credit for.
He did not get to where he is as a radio host, in-demand conservative speaker and guest, consultant to political movers and shakers, etc... by being slow in the head, nor by staying on track with losing ideas or strategies for too long.
That said - neither did the Klintons. It behooves us all not to forget the circumstances under which Slickster took office:
1) a divided vote caused at least in part by the contrarian, idiot, billionaire spoiler - H. Ross Perot
(a wild card that not Rush, nor anyone else could have foreseen or controlled)
2) the broken “no new taxes” pledge by Bush Sr, and
3) a string of transparent lies, and calculatedly muddy cover-ups employed by the Klinton machine and their willing media accomplices.
All it took for Willie so stay in office was a politically weak, older candidate in Bob Dole (who still would have been a better choice IMHO).
I am old enough to remember - I was there. For the record, I voted for Reagan twice, for Bush Sr. twice, for Dole, and for George W. twice
I take the threat/risk of a Klinton co-Presidency (unimproved v.3.0) seriously, even though it seems right now as if bu-Rockstar Hussein Obamessiah has the upper hand in delegate count.
Of course Hillary has the ear of more than a few so-called ‘SuperDelegates’ - and I would bet with her triple-trailer load of confidential FBI files and other assorted dirty tricks, she has more than one “by the short hairs”.
She is power-hungry, ruthless and will hold back nothing in her quest for the Oval Office, IMHO - but...
IF Obama goes into the convention with a significant enough lead in the delegate count, AND more than a smattering of support from several powerful, mainstream ‘Supers’, Hillary may not have the degree of say-so in the matter which she would otherwise expect.
Unless she can then turn around, and with 100% verifiability substantiate the rumours about Obama’s birth and citizenship (that his mother was somehow detained/delayed in Kenya, and flew from there to Hawaii immediately following his birth to register his birth and gain him the status of a natural-born US citizen), thus permanently disqualifying him out-of-hand.
That would WELL and TRULY be a bombshell for the ages in Amrican Presidential politics, and I would not put it past the Klintons to be holding back something exactly like that, awaiting an opportune moment.
There would be intense, enormous and protracted grumbling from within the community of black American Democrats (despite the fact that Obama is - I know - 50% white, 43% Arab, 6% black african), yet in the end they would have no choice but to step back in the face of a clear Constitutional issue.
If, on the other hand, she engineers some sort of ‘SuperDelegate’ coup d’etat at the Demo convention, I would expect all of the black voters, and a significant number of Obama’s “other” voters to do at least one of three things:
1) protest and riot violently in the streets,
2) sit on their hands and sit out the general election entirely
3) some would sit out, while most others would defect to McPain or Nader in spiteful “protest voting”.
The million dollar question is: which way will the leaders in the party of weasels go?
My nightmare scenario: Hitlery meets with Obama’s people and the ‘S-Ds’ behind closed doors at the convention.
She discloses her ammo vis-a-vis his non-citizenship, and issues her demands.
She gets the first seat on the ticket in ‘08 AND ‘12, Obama accepts the second seat with the promise of full support from the Klintons and their campaign apparatus come ‘16 (at which time Obama will still be just 54 years old, but much more politically experienced and seasoned and dangerous himself).
Obama’s only requirements? To give the most electrifying speeches of his careerat the convention, laden with charm, conciliatory tones, and of course - vague pretty-sounding promises of a bright, shining future that includes ALL Americans...
And to stump solidly for “President-in-waiting” Hillary, bringing ALL of the black Democrat voters home to the plantation.
That is my own NIGHTMARE, WORST-CASE SCENARIO.
The G.O.P. ought to use it as a template for the sake of assuming what they WILL be up against in November - and then do EVERYTHING to prevent it.
I don’t “love” McCain - certainly not nearly so well as I do other candidates in the GOP, but for the life of me, I fail to see the value in withholding my vote from a Republican/Rino who votes and talks most often like a moderate Democrat and thereby handing the election to either one of two extreme Socialists.
Either one could, and very well would wreck this country in short order.
At this point, as Conservatives - we see no “good path” and we have no firm guarantee as to who the opponent will be. Best to be prepared for either, and turn out in droves for the moderate Democrat, and former POW with an (r) by his name.
A.A.C.
He's now basing this resumption in "operation chaos" on the flimsy premise that "a TV station in Indianapolis thinks they caused the operational pause in Operation Chaos."
Sh'yeah. Right.
At this point, I see no reasonable doubt: Rush Limbaugh is pushing for a Clinton victory.
Excuse me while I get physically sick over what happened to someone I used to admire.
He was probably waiting for ratings. If the ratings were tanking, he would have come up with a genious reason for dumping operation chaos.
I raised the question, but I am still in doubt as to why. I think that one can offer at least two reasonable options as to why Rush is doing what he is doing:
A. Take Rush at his word. He sincrely wants to create so much havoc in the DemocRAT race that it will destroy any chance of a DemocRAT victory by either Hillary or Obama.
B. Rush is in the tank for Hillary. He has been bought out, or coopted, coerced, or for some external reason been pushed to make her the candidate.
C. He knows how much easier his job is when a Clinton is in power.
D. His animus against McCain really is that strong.
I think we have more than a few trolls on this thread who are obama supporters and who are just outright rush haters.
Operation Chaos is working because McCAin is a WEAK CANDIDATE AND A WEAK LEADER. McCain can’t cut it.
The more democrats fight the better it is for out DOWN TICKET CANDIDATES!
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.