Gallup: George W. Bush Is Most Admired Man in 2004 (Hillary is most admired "woman")

Gallup News Service ^ | December 29, 2004 | Joseph Carroll

[RWR8189]

 Hillary Clinton tops list of most admired women; Oprah Winfrey a close second

PRINCETON, NJ -- President George W. Bush tops Gallup's annual survey of the "most admired man" for the fourth year in a row. Hillary Clinton leads the most admired woman list, with Oprah Winfrey close behind. Republicans and Democrats differ significantly in their views of this year's most admirable men and women. Republicans overwhelmingly say the president is the most admired man, and also name first lady Laura Bush and national security adviser Condoleezza Rice as the most admired women. Democrats, meanwhile, are most likely to mention Bill and Hillary Clinton as the most admired man and woman.

Most Admired Men

Nearly one in four Americans name George W. Bush, without prompting, as the most admired man this year, according to the Dec. 17-19 CNN/USA Today/Gallup poll. Former President Bill Clinton, who recently underwent a quadruple bypass and opened his presidential library in Little Rock, Ark., comes in second place, with 6% of respondents mentioning him. Rounding out the top five most admired this year are Secretary of State Colin Powell, at 5%, former President Jimmy Carter, at 4%, and the Rev. Billy Graham, at 3%.

[neoconjob]

I don't really buy that the "MSM" polls were cooked... Bush taking 23% - a fact which has been repeatedly pointed to in this thread - does not suggest a "liberal" leaning. I know it's an uncomfortable concept, but Hillary Clinton actually IS very - some might say "inordinately" - popular across the country, and not just in the so-called "blue states". There really is no accounting for popular tastes.

The suggestion that Condoleeza Rice run as the Republican is interesting and an indication that we are truly evolving as a society. What if these two women really were the D and R candidates? I'm reminded of the recent Illinois (US Senate) race, wherein both the D and the R candidates were African-American; a first, I believe, in American history (could be wrong, correct me if so). I wasn't totally sold on either Obama or Keyes but they were both head-and-shoulders above their respective D and R competitors, and both bring a certain outsider edge to the discussion, an edge that's healthy and necessary. Maybe it's time for a high-profile political "girlfight"! heh. sorry, ladies. that was probably uncalled for.

[Soul Seeker]

Shhh, people want to believe that 13% name identification makes Hillary unbeatable. Common sense has no place here.

The reality is as you stated. No one comes close to the President in his ranking. The closest is Bill at 6 %! While Oprah, Condi and Laura are all very near Hillary AND only Oprah is competitive in amount of face time given to register on the public's radar. Even Maggie and Barbara at 3% and 2% respectively barely rank beneath Bill.

To me, this isn't encouraging news for Hillary. This poll is largely centered among name recall, in this she should have a far higher percentage of name recognition among her Liberal constituents. Yet only 13% overall ranked her number one with a talk show host almost pulling even? A respectful showing would have had her in the top teens at least.

[neoconjob]

If by BEAST you mean the "beast" of Revelation... do you really think that the real-world incarnation of "Nicolae Carpathian" (or "Damien Thorn" for our horror-movie fans) will be kept out of office due to political unpopularity? That doesn't jibe with Scripture, if Scripture carries any weight with you (and I won't ASSume that it does).

"...And I saw one of his heads as it were wounded to death; and his deadly wound was healed: and all the world wondered after the beast. And they worshipped the dragon which gave power unto the beast: and they worshipped the beast, saying, Who is like unto the beast? who is able to make war with him? And there was given unto him a mouth speaking great things and blasphemies; and power was given unto him to continue forty and two months." This is the entity (whether a person or perhaps even an Institution of some sort) who "deceive[s] many through peace" in a sea of unrest.

Does the description fit anyone in the current political sphere? I'm not asking rhetorically in order to then provide MY answer... I don't know the answer. But it seems pretty unlikely that Billary Clinton or John Kerry or any other limping Democrat carries the kind of world-wide social credibility that the "Beast" is alleged to have. Mayhap we should reserve accusations of such import for more plausible targets.

[Aetius]

I don't put much stock in Morris' early analysis of 08. For a supposed expert, he accepted Bush's clearly over-stated performance with Hispanics much to readily, and apparently is one of the few people who hasn't accepted that it was indeed overstated by the first exit polling data.

Morris is generally right that demographics are making things harder and harder for the GOP, but in my opinion it will take a few more cycles before a liberal has a natural electoral advantage. Its true, of course, that Kerry did uncomfortably well for such a leftwinger, but I think in the absence of Iraq, Bush would have clobbered him. I think if the economy is doing well, if the deficit is under control, if the situation in Iraq is at least mostly stabilized, and if no terrorist attack occurs under Bush's watch (thereby undercutting the GOP advantage on the issue); then I think a decent GOP candidate should be able to beat Hillary.

Rice is probably too liberal on social issues, though I dont' know that for sure.