Posted on 08/27/2015 10:10:49 AM PDT by Laissez-faire capitalist
A new poll shows Joe Biden performing a little better than Hillary Clinton against the leading GOP candidates in a general election matchup, and his favorability is better than that of any candidate - Democrat or Republican.
Quinnipiac University's national poll [link at URL], released Thursday, finds that Clinton remains the Democratic frontrunner with 45%, but her lead over Bernie Sanders has slipped by 10 percentage points. sanders has 22 percent, and Biden comes in third at 18 percent. ...
On the Republican side, Trump broadened his lead - he's now at 28 percent, with Ben Carson trailing at 12 percent, and Jeb Bush slipping back into a three-way tie fort third with Ted Cruz and Marco Rubio (they each have 7 percent).
But Trump is also the candidate with the highest percentage (26 percent) who say there's 'no way' they would support him. ...
When voters were asked what they thought of Clinton, the word "liar" came to mind more often than others, and "dishonest" was second. The word most associated with Trump was "arrogant," followed by "blowhard." ...
(Excerpt) Read more at cbsnews.com ...
Oh oh, Joe getting in Hitlerys way. He better up the secret service protection.
What word do they most associate with Uncle Joe?
How about “plagiarism?”
anyone remember that? It’s what finished his candidacy in ‘88.
Martin O’Malley has some heavy Baltimore baggage hanging around his neck
(pardon the mixed metaphors...)
Biden is a grade-a retard that got caught plagiarizing and gropes little girls.
He is a nothingburger. Warren would be a much bigger threat.
Doesn’t Biden have a health problem (brain aneurism)? Will that be off limits for debate if he enters the race?
If Hillary gets the nod, the first thing I would start talking about was her stroke. I would ask her to release her medical records.
He’s gonna make her an offer he can’t refuse.
Even with a Hillary indictment, Webb won't get any traction or visibility because he harks back to a bygone era when Democrats were liberal but still patriotic and comparatively sane (i.e. in the style of Truman, JFK, or Tip O'Neill rather than Marxist radicals). Webb tries to appeal to a demographic of working and middle class whites who have written off the Democratic party long ago and who the DNC has written off as well.
You are very likely right on that. It wouldn’t surprise me if today’s ‘RAT Party would reject George McGovern if he were alive and running for President, if only because he was a bomber pilot in World War II and to today’s leftist mindset, that translates as a ‘militarist’ and not anti-American enough.
The Democrats are banking on being the party of militant racial minorities and college campus radicals.
Webb won't get anywhere because the DNC doesn't want a veteran, nor does it want a pro-gun candidate who takes pride in his Scotch-Irish heritage. To be a successful white Democrat, you have to grovel in front of "minorities" on cue. Even O'Malley and Sanders got into trouble for saying "all lives matter." Hillary knows how to shamelessly play this game better than most other Democrats.
The internals of this poll are truly frightening.
It looks like so far with the 2016 election, ideology reigns as #1, with popularity #2, with specific competencies and trustworthiness far behind. In 2008, popularity was king.
Look at the 18-34 year old, 35-49 year old, and college educated vote. All Democrat candidates have the strongest support in these three cohorts. The age groups have shifted from In 2008, younger people supported Obama first and foremost because he was charismatic, young, hip, and cool (popular). Clinton, Biden, and Sanders have none of Obama’s charisma, youth, or hipness, but all are ideologically left.
Even among the college educated, Bush fares poorly against all three. So the supposedly nuanced, educated voters, when faced with a totally untrustworthy Clinton, or a socialist flake Sanders, prefer them to a GOPe Bush.
The Republicans, conservatives, and the populists have lost the future.
How damaged is the Republican brand at this point? How much damage did George W. Bush, Iraq, and Katrina do to the Republican party? The answer is enough to insulate the Stuttering Clusterf—k or a Miserable Failure that is Obama from any repercussions of his failures, and the ossified Democrat party.
Is this a vote for liberal policies, or is this a vote against Republicans? I think it is both. Republicans were still a tarnished brand in 1980, but Reagan was able to win against a failed Democrat president by selling conservatism as the answer.
We have a problem. Rubio’s youth, charisma, and optimism cannot move the scale with the under 50 and the college educated. Bush’s supposed broad appeal cannot move the scale with the under 50 and the college educated. Trump’s populism and brashness cannot move the scale with the under 50 and the college educated.
Everyone in the political class is worried about the Hispanic vote, but Bush or Rubio getting 35% of the Hispanic vote is not going to be enough to win the election. But I think the under 50 vote is far more important, as is the college educated.
That was a big part of it, but an equally big part of it was the desire of white liberals to prove their progressive stripes by putting a black politician in the White House. Hillary Clinton is riding on a similar mindset, i.e. those who desire to have a female President.
Everyone in the political class is worried about the Hispanic vote, but Bush or Rubio getting 35% of the Hispanic vote is not going to be enough to win the election. But I think the under 50 vote is far more important, as is the college educated.
The tiresome "GOP needs Hispanic vote" trope is the reason most Republicans have embraced amnesty for illegals. Why would this suddenly cause Democratic Hispanic voters to switch over to the GOP if they're already getting pro-amnesty policies from Democrats. It isn't as though Democrats are immigration restrictionists. All Hispandering Republicans really accomplish is alienating anti-amnesty conservatives who already vote Republican.
As to winning the under 50 vote, there is a certain fraction that's ideologically committed to liberalism and won't budge. The rest are the type of people who vote for the incumbent party if the economy is doing well and vote against the incumbent party if it's doing badly. The Republican's job in 2016 is to convince voters that the economic recovery isn't nearly as rosy as Obama and his supporters like to claim.
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.