Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

wyldwolf

(43,869 posts)
Thu Jan 22, 2015, 09:53 AM Jan 2015

Clinton Holds Solid Leads Over All GOP Challengers

Hillary Clinton’s “potential place in history and her husband’s tenure in the White House boost her presidential prospects, while Jeb Bush’s political legacy and Mitt Romney’s 2012 run for the office are negatives,” a new ABC News/Washington Post poll finds.

“Clinton leads both in hypothetical head-to-head matchups at this early stage – as well as Rand Paul, Chris Christie and Mike Huckabee alike. The national survey finds 53 to 56 percent support for Clinton among registered voters against each of these potential Republican candidates, while they get 39 to 41 percent. One reason is that Clinton is stronger in her political base, given the far more fragmented nature of the current GOP field.”

As with Barack Obama, the recovery helps Clinton. About three-quarters of registered voters who rate the economy positively support her, and she leads overwhelmingly among those who say they’ve gained ground financially under Obama’s presidency. But she also leads, by 16 to 20 points, among those whose finances have just held steady.

Clinton has a strong advantage among those who see income inequality as a major problem, and she runs essentially evenly vs. these potential Republican nominees among those who think it’s a problem, but not a major one. She trails only among those who don’t think the income gap is a problem – just 16 percent of registered voters.

Women favor Clinton by 20- to 24-point margins, men by non-significant 2- to 7-point margins. She’s also strong among racial and ethnic minorities, adults under 40 and lower-income voters.

http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2015/01/historys-a-positive-for-clinton-not-so-for-bush-or-romney/

162 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Clinton Holds Solid Leads Over All GOP Challengers (Original Post) wyldwolf Jan 2015 OP
Is it 2016 already? Damn that cheap alarm clock! Fred Sanders Jan 2015 #1
Presidential election season always starts after midterms. Always. wyldwolf Jan 2015 #3
When is the time to govern, is all I am implying? To the media it is always election season, what Fred Sanders Jan 2015 #4
To the political parties, traditionally, presidential election season starts after the midterms. wyldwolf Jan 2015 #6
Yes, but that is not a campagin, that is preparation. What country has a two year campaign? Fred Sanders Jan 2015 #7
Who said it was a campaign? I said it was election 'season.' wyldwolf Jan 2015 #9
Thank for the well wishes. I will keep up the argument for ending the endless election/campaign Fred Sanders Jan 2015 #11
I've had a Clinton/Castro 2016 bumper sticker on my car since mid 2014. McCamy Taylor Jan 2015 #149
kick samsingh Jan 2015 #2
It's so early and the public is so fickle FLPanhandle Jan 2015 #5
that's nice wyldwolf Jan 2015 #8
Is is the season for the massive cash needed, folks are confusing money grovelling with campaigning. Fred Sanders Jan 2015 #12
All possible, of course.... Adrahil Jan 2015 #54
Please Run Liz, Bernie, Joe, Al, Ham Sandwich....ANYONE but Hillary!!! n/t benz380 Jan 2015 #10
Won't happen. Maybe Bernie will mount a symbolic campaign. That's all. nt stevenleser Jan 2015 #13
Maybe so, but Hillary won't get my vote if she's the candidate. My conscience won't allow it. n/t benz380 Jan 2015 #15
That's fine. She won't need it. nt stevenleser Jan 2015 #23
Re: That's fine. She won't need it. SFnomad Jan 2015 #141
+10 (nt) PosterChild Jan 2015 #154
Nor mine. Fuddnik Jan 2015 #29
It will happen. You will be wrong again. n/t Dawgs Jan 2015 #33
No, I won't. nt stevenleser Jan 2015 #35
Looks like she is on track to be our next president. hrmjustin Jan 2015 #14
The Corporatist track is the only one she rides on. n/t benz380 Jan 2015 #16
Your opinion, not mine.n/t. hrmjustin Jan 2015 #17
It's a fact, not an opinion, but have a good day. n/t benz380 Jan 2015 #18
You have a great weekend. hrmjustin Jan 2015 #19
Apparently you have a different definition of 'fact.' Unless... wyldwolf Jan 2015 #20
I'm sure you know she is a corporatist without me posting a wall of text. You're not stupid. n/t benz380 Jan 2015 #21
ah, a cop out. Typical. wyldwolf Jan 2015 #22
Some so called Dems are just fine and dandy with the oligarchy. L0oniX Jan 2015 #28
Yep. Phlem Jan 2015 #41
Almost two years and you think it's over? Dawgs Jan 2015 #34
Did I say I thought it was over? No I did not. n/t. hrmjustin Jan 2015 #36
No. You said she's "on track", which is just as dumb. n/t Dawgs Jan 2015 #37
Since you are only looking to insult, I have no desire to continue. hrmjustin Jan 2015 #38
$$$ L0oniX Jan 2015 #24
^ wyldwolf Jan 2015 #25
You are for big money in politics to get the win? Got it. L0oniX Jan 2015 #27
You're for ceding elections to Republicans because of money? Got it. wyldwolf Jan 2015 #30
right Phlem Jan 2015 #43
Irrelevant reply. wyldwolf Jan 2015 #48
Of course. Phlem Jan 2015 #55
it diverts from the topic wyldwolf Jan 2015 #69
No, we are being overran by big money, there is a difference nolabels Jan 2015 #150
I'm happy. William769 Jan 2015 #26
Both Warren and Obama don't mind if she gets it... freshwest Jan 2015 #147
Great Pic! (nt) PosterChild Jan 2015 #155
SC Nominees! Gamecock Lefty Jan 2015 #31
+1 SunSeeker Jan 2015 #44
I'll see your 1, and raise you 9 - +10 (nt ) PosterChild Jan 2015 #156
So there we were...way back when... BrainDrain Jan 2015 #32
I'll be writing in Elizabeth Warrens name ProudProg2u Jan 2015 #39
That will have the same effect as writing in the GOP candidate's name. SunSeeker Jan 2015 #42
So your saying Hillary's Progressive? Phlem Jan 2015 #45
Most liberals/Dems appear to think she is. SunSeeker Jan 2015 #50
" Most liberals/Dems appear to think she is." Phlem Jan 2015 #57
Cash! Prizes!! It's time to play "Which warmonger said it?"!! RufusTFirefly Jan 2015 #62
+1 The new meme, Hillary's a progressive says the Thirdway Phlem Jan 2015 #63
Do you know what issues are impirtant to progressives? Thinkingabout Jan 2015 #64
I'm going to stab in the dark Phlem Jan 2015 #65
Has the negotiations and content of TTP been released? Thinkingabout Jan 2015 #66
Why are you asking me the obvious. If you don't know the answer to that Phlem Jan 2015 #67
Then we do not know what is being negotiated so the answer of whether it is Thinkingabout Jan 2015 #71
Bullshit. Phlem Jan 2015 #87
BS back to you, you dont know $hit about what TTP contains. Thinkingabout Jan 2015 #92
Well if it's so damn good Phlem Jan 2015 #103
The content hasn't been released... PosterChild Jan 2015 #159
Jobs andlivable wages... PosterChild Jan 2015 #157
Agreed. But Phlem Jan 2015 #158
Thanks for sharing your perspective (nt) PosterChild Jan 2015 #160
All I'm saying is refusing to vote for the Dem is a vote for the GOP. SunSeeker Jan 2015 #68
Ah I see. Phlem Jan 2015 #74
Just because you're married and have a daughter does not prove your priorities. SunSeeker Jan 2015 #77
OK then, you've got me all figured out. Phlem Jan 2015 #82
These polls are meaningless raindaddy Jan 2015 #61
I see. Any polls you disagree with are "meaningless." SunSeeker Jan 2015 #72
Another network poll in 2007 had Hillary leading Obama by 22pts. raindaddy Jan 2015 #116
Yes, that poll reflects a public that did not yet know Obama. SunSeeker Jan 2015 #117
You're making my point sunseeker.. raindaddy Jan 2015 #118
My point is there's no Obama in the wings this time around to upend the polls. SunSeeker Jan 2015 #119
Well actually... BrainDrain Jan 2015 #134
So the 72% of liberals who support Clinton don't have eyes? SunSeeker Jan 2015 #139
I'm saying so far there's two candidates that refelect what the Democratc party stands for. raindaddy Jan 2015 #140
Thanks Professor Peabody MyNameGoesHere Jan 2015 #129
These Hill-bots forget their history. She was expectedd to have a coronation cake walk once before peacebird Jan 2015 #126
Maybe she can invite her pals Henry Kissinger and Rupert Murdoch to her inauguration. BlueStater Jan 2015 #40
George Bush in a dress easychoice Jan 2015 #106
Call me a traitor. Pelt me with garbage if you want.... RufusTFirefly Jan 2015 #46
May i steal your energizer bunny please? peacebird Jan 2015 #127
Be my guest! n/t RufusTFirefly Jan 2015 #135
Kind of tired of SOS Ferd Berfel Jan 2015 #47
With those kind of leads she is a shoe-in to win the GOP primaries LondonReign2 Jan 2015 #49
LOL! Perfect response! peacebird Jan 2015 #125
Looking forward to the primaries and election, I will be backing Hillary who is progressive, Thinkingabout Jan 2015 #51
"Hillary Clinton is..." RufusTFirefly Jan 2015 #53
You can play Thinkingabout Jan 2015 #56
Two year's until the election and Hillary's already being stuffed down our throats... raindaddy Jan 2015 #52
as you can see. Phlem Jan 2015 #59
WINNING! AtomicKitten Jan 2015 #70
She is leading......on what exactly? mylye2222 Jan 2015 #58
this OP is a joke. Phlem Jan 2015 #60
Your reply is a joke wyldwolf Jan 2015 #73
ouch, it's been a long time since 3rd grade and it still hurts. Phlem Jan 2015 #76
Quit acting like you're in third grade and the pain might go away wyldwolf Jan 2015 #79
Oh so good! Who writes your material? Phlem Jan 2015 #84
It writes itself. wyldwolf Jan 2015 #86
Yes and that image just proves how pathetic our choices are Phlem Jan 2015 #90
Perhaps you'll like this one better wyldwolf Jan 2015 #93
Brushing up on Republican tactics? Phlem Jan 2015 #95
Posting a DU pick of the moment is a Republican tactic? wyldwolf Jan 2015 #96
Now is that what I said? Phlem Jan 2015 #99
It is, actually wyldwolf Jan 2015 #100
ah we have some revealing truth now. Phlem Jan 2015 #102
I'm glad you agree. wyldwolf Jan 2015 #104
she is? Please prove that! VanillaRhapsody Jan 2015 #101
The op posted a legit news story. hrmjustin Jan 2015 #75
She is not a progressive, She is Third Way. Phlem Jan 2015 #78
hey wyldwolf Jan 2015 #80
I'm sure this was the motivation for your OP. Phlem Jan 2015 #83
It was the opposite. My OP was the motivation for the image. But don't forget... wyldwolf Jan 2015 #85
Thanks Bud. I'll make sure to print it throw Phlem Jan 2015 #89
Don't mention it! wyldwolf Jan 2015 #91
And I respect your honest view. i don't agree with you but you don't like her and i say speak your hrmjustin Jan 2015 #81
haha, if we go by popularity on DU Kucinich should have easily been the nominee JI7 Jan 2015 #122
I would hope so! Her GOP rivals are all clowns. Rex Jan 2015 #88
Great news! The republican clown car is just getting underway and workinclasszero Jan 2015 #94
It's interesting that the numbers are almost the same for all contenders. Chemisse Jan 2015 #97
Meaningless. Dems don't vote. She will lose. Period. broadcaster75201 Jan 2015 #98
Ridiculous statements. Both of them. wyldwolf Jan 2015 #105
So Dems did not vote for Barack Obama during both his presidential elections? MoonRiver Jan 2015 #130
"Dems don't vote" is a ridiculous comment... brooklynite Jan 2015 #132
Again this is posted, and again I'll say..... vi5 Jan 2015 #107
Only on DU, a supposedly pro-Democratic party forum, would good news like this get so few recs. Metric System Jan 2015 #108
Crazy ain't it? workinclasszero Jan 2015 #111
Absolutely sad! hrmjustin Jan 2015 #114
DU does not represent most Democrats Algernon Moncrieff Jan 2015 #138
Actually.... elzenmahn Jan 2015 #146
Yep, that's why this site has become a joke. Beacool Jan 2015 #161
Ok. What about Bernie Sanders or Elizabeth Warren? Or Grayson? Or even Sherrod Brown? silvershadow Jan 2015 #109
Warren doesn't want to run (but you knew that) brooklynite Jan 2015 #131
You forgot to mention that Bernie Sanders is not a registered Democrat Algernon Moncrieff Jan 2015 #137
Don't forget the 1% also supports her davidn3600 Jan 2015 #110
That will change once the campaign starts. Still early. Autumn Jan 2015 #112
The more she's out there, the less people like her. AtomicKitten Jan 2015 #113
Yeah, that's what I think. And lately she has been very quiet. Autumn Jan 2015 #115
This is not a revelation, it is true of any public figure. tritsofme Jan 2015 #120
as in how can I miss you if you won't go away? AtomicKitten Jan 2015 #121
not only is it not a revelation. It's a contradictory statement wyldwolf Jan 2015 #123
Great. The 99% get fucked regardless of who wins eridani Jan 2015 #124
War and Wall Street 2016 MannyGoldstein Jan 2015 #128
K&R! stonecutter357 Jan 2015 #133
22 months is an eternity in American politics, but I'm happy to see this Algernon Moncrieff Jan 2015 #136
She'll need a big lead to make up for all the REAL DEMS that won't vote for Queen of the Blue Dogs blkmusclmachine Jan 2015 #142
snicker... wyldwolf Jan 2015 #145
gop are terrified that many gop women will cross over Liberal_in_LA Jan 2015 #143
Don't expect to many Clinton supporter here.. Tommy2Tone Jan 2015 #144
Women, under 40, minorities and low income voters. Sounds like my kind of folks. McCamy Taylor Jan 2015 #148
She's a shoe-in to be the Republican nominee. :D nt silvershadow Jan 2015 #151
Hillary Clinton? sus453 Jan 2015 #152
But she still kicks every Republican's ass by double digits, which is the point of the OP wyldwolf Jan 2015 #153
Why does a Democrat beating the pants off Republicans make members of a board for Democrats upset? DemocratSinceBirth Jan 2015 #162

Fred Sanders

(23,946 posts)
4. When is the time to govern, is all I am implying? To the media it is always election season, what
Thu Jan 22, 2015, 10:33 AM
Jan 2015

would they blabber on about if they could not pretend it is always election season and make it a game?

It should not be a two year campaign....I do not accept that.

wyldwolf

(43,869 posts)
6. To the political parties, traditionally, presidential election season starts after the midterms.
Thu Jan 22, 2015, 10:39 AM
Jan 2015

I know it's cute to say "it isn't 2016," but it's also irrelevant. Even unannounced candidates are busy doing research, competing for staff, etc. etc. You may not like it. You may not accept it. But it is a fact and political reality.

Fred Sanders

(23,946 posts)
7. Yes, but that is not a campagin, that is preparation. What country has a two year campaign?
Thu Jan 22, 2015, 10:40 AM
Jan 2015

Amswer: one that does not require you to raise 1 billion dollars because there are no election fiance laws.

To just accept an endless election cycle is to accept the results of the Citizens Undermined decision, to me.

wyldwolf

(43,869 posts)
9. Who said it was a campaign? I said it was election 'season.'
Thu Jan 22, 2015, 10:44 AM
Jan 2015

And, frankly, I don't give a rat's ass what other countries do during the election seasons.

If you're trying to argue against the FACT that election season begins after the midterms, your arguing against decades of factual data. Good luck. And I can't WAIT to let my daughter press the button for Hillary.

Fred Sanders

(23,946 posts)
11. Thank for the well wishes. I will keep up the argument for ending the endless election/campaign
Thu Jan 22, 2015, 10:55 AM
Jan 2015

season.

FLPanhandle

(7,107 posts)
5. It's so early and the public is so fickle
Thu Jan 22, 2015, 10:38 AM
Jan 2015

I remember midway through Bush I term and everyone thought he was unbeatable against the field of Democrat contenders.

Berlin wall had come down.
The Soviet Union was collapsing.
The whole "Peace Dividend" was being discussed.

Then Clinton came along and won.



 

SFnomad

(3,473 posts)
141. Re: That's fine. She won't need it.
Fri Jan 23, 2015, 05:43 PM
Jan 2015

Just what we need, people to sit on their hands.

You'd rather a RepubliCON win than Hillary, eh?

wyldwolf

(43,869 posts)
20. Apparently you have a different definition of 'fact.' Unless...
Thu Jan 22, 2015, 11:09 AM
Jan 2015

... you have evidence. Nah! Not usually the mark of a 'progressive' argument.

Phlem

(6,323 posts)
41. Yep.
Thu Jan 22, 2015, 02:45 PM
Jan 2015

especially people who make a living riding the Neo Liberal Train to oligarchy town.

Reading this thread, they could give a rats ass what other people think and how they might be economically hurt, you know, just like Republicans.

nolabels

(13,133 posts)
150. No, we are being overran by big money, there is a difference
Sun Jan 25, 2015, 12:24 PM
Jan 2015

It doesn't matter if it's Hillary or any other politician that is being used to purchase your vote, if your integrity can be obtained in this matter, eventually what you have will be worthless and or you will have nothing. It's analogous to playing a game of Monopoly where you are dealt all of money and another person was dealt all the property pieces. The point being at the time when you have went around the board enough, you will eventually be defrocked

The only question i would like to ask is if you still be around about three or four years from now,
so we can tell you and the rest of the cheerleaders 'we told you so'?

freshwest

(53,661 posts)
147. Both Warren and Obama don't mind if she gets it...
Sun Jan 25, 2015, 12:35 AM
Jan 2015
From the White House Correspondents Dinner:

POTUS:


"Let's face it Fox, you'll miss me when I'm gone. It'll be harder to convince the American people that Hillary was born in Kenya."

And after hearing all the fear and hate about Bill and her, the blue dress, and on and on and on...

I'm deliberately going tone deaf on their complaints. That is what they have accomplished with the hyperbole, as she was nowhere my first choice. Not in 2008, and not anytime recently.

Remarkably, only a few that like Obama have that attitude. She supported him in the end, and not in a mealy mouthed way, and he may very well support and campaign for her.

That will seal the deal for me, and for those of us who care about civil rights issues for ALL. And her support for women is going to blow a lot of people out of the water, plain and simple.

We are 51% of the population and are tired of being looked down upon and our issues tossed to the side like minorities and LGBTs in favor of those celebs that are celebrated who belittle us for their 'rights.'


Gamecock Lefty

(700 posts)
31. SC Nominees!
Thu Jan 22, 2015, 01:53 PM
Jan 2015

For those refusing to vote for Hillary if she wins the nomination, keep this in mind . . . Supreme Court Nominees! We cannot let a conservative tilt the court any more to the right. Cannot, must not!

Go get ‘em, Hillary!

 

BrainDrain

(244 posts)
32. So there we were...way back when...
Thu Jan 22, 2015, 01:57 PM
Jan 2015

everyone said HRC was going to be the 1st Woman Prez of the good ole US of A. She was.....what was the word? oh yeah..inevitable. Then along came this kid...ummmm..lemme think..Barak Obama...and we all know what happened then....don't we?

HRC is NOT inevitable..ever. Holding double digit leads now is nothing....she would have a double digit lead over Bugs Bunny, (well maybe not) but you get my point.

Sorry..she is a lost cause....others here had already said anything I would have so I won't add to the pain.

 

ProudProg2u

(133 posts)
39. I'll be writing in Elizabeth Warrens name
Thu Jan 22, 2015, 02:38 PM
Jan 2015

Next round I'll be writing in Elizabeth Warrens name on the ballot. A waste you say...? Not in my view.

SunSeeker

(51,662 posts)
42. That will have the same effect as writing in the GOP candidate's name.
Thu Jan 22, 2015, 02:47 PM
Jan 2015

Which of course is not a waste in the GOP's view. But it is a huge betrayal of the progressive cause.

SunSeeker

(51,662 posts)
50. Most liberals/Dems appear to think she is.
Thu Jan 22, 2015, 03:11 PM
Jan 2015
A CNN/ORC International Poll from June found that only 11% of Democrats want a more liberal option to Clinton. Twenty percent want someone more conservative and 63% want Clinton. What's more, a Washington Post/ABC News poll from the same time showed that 72% of self-described liberals supported Clinton, a number that was larger than moderate and conservative Democrats.
http://www.cnn.com/2014/07/25/politics/clinton-liberals-trust/

My point is that if you refuse to vote, or vote for anyone other than the Dem candidate on the ballot, it is the same as voting for a Republican. And you know it. Of course, you want to change the subject.

The fact is, if you let a Republican gain the presidency by either refusing to vote or writing in some protest vote, it IS a betrayal of progressive values. A Republican will appoint more Sam Alito's, who will outlaw abortion, and continue to eviscerate the Bill of Rights. You can post all the silly emoticons you want, it won't change that fact.

Phlem

(6,323 posts)
57. " Most liberals/Dems appear to think she is."
Thu Jan 22, 2015, 05:32 PM
Jan 2015

your opinion.

The fear mongering over is supreme court seats is bullshit. What's it going to matter anyway once the TPP is passed, by a Democrat.

Yes the TPP, a very progressive piece of legislation in your opinion.

I see the third way supporters are out in full force huh, Hillary or nothing?

RufusTFirefly

(8,812 posts)
62. Cash! Prizes!! It's time to play "Which warmonger said it?"!!
Thu Jan 22, 2015, 05:55 PM
Jan 2015

See if you can differentiate the saber-rattling quotes of President-elect Hillary Clinton from those of John "Bomb Bomb" McCain. It may not be as easy as you think!

http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2014/08/hillary-clinton-john-mccain-quotes-foreign-policy-quiz

Phlem

(6,323 posts)
63. +1 The new meme, Hillary's a progressive says the Thirdway
Thu Jan 22, 2015, 06:19 PM
Jan 2015


And guess what, if she loses it's going to be all our fault for not supporting her. I'm sure it has nothing to do with her 1% policies and support.

It'll be the folks on DU, all of us who are aware of the third way and the damage they have caused for not supporting Hillary.

and the wheel goes round and round, round and round.

Phlem

(6,323 posts)
65. I'm going to stab in the dark
Thu Jan 22, 2015, 06:22 PM
Jan 2015

Jobs and livable wages. I'm sure there's a hell of a lot more but your going to have to look it up.

The opposite of the TPP.

Phlem

(6,323 posts)
67. Why are you asking me the obvious. If you don't know the answer to that
Thu Jan 22, 2015, 06:31 PM
Jan 2015

then we have bigger issues. The TPP? You know secret closed door negotiations, could be why the content hasn't been released? It's so damn good we don't need to know and we must fast track it!

Try this:

https://www.citizen.org/tpp

Thinkingabout

(30,058 posts)
71. Then we do not know what is being negotiated so the answer of whether it is
Thu Jan 22, 2015, 06:48 PM
Jan 2015

Good or bad can not be judged.

PosterChild

(1,307 posts)
159. The content hasn't been released...
Mon Jan 26, 2015, 03:26 PM
Jan 2015

...because to do so would poison the negotiations by preventing the participants from being frank with one another and forcing them into theatrical posturing.

The point of a negotiation is to craft a deal that has something for everyone. By putting it out as a whole people are given the opportunity to decide based on the pluses balanced against the minuses, as opposed to a piecemeal evaluation that only considers the detrements of one provision without an understanding of other counter balancing provisions.

If you are simply against any and all potential deals and think we should build a moat around America and become a hermit kingdom, well fine. Say so. If you think that America should be , has to be, an active participant in the world and engaged with it in order to enjoy peace and prosperity, then support confidential negotiations so that we can establish relationships that are, overall , to our advantage.

PosterChild

(1,307 posts)
157. Jobs andlivable wages...
Mon Jan 26, 2015, 03:07 PM
Jan 2015

...are only obtainable in the context of vigoris participation in a world market. Trade deals like the TTP are the only progressive alternative.

That is, if by progresive you mean actually making progress.

Phlem

(6,323 posts)
158. Agreed. But
Mon Jan 26, 2015, 03:09 PM
Jan 2015

it's how they are written the affect us. Your also talking to someone who lost his career cause of NAFTA.

SunSeeker

(51,662 posts)
68. All I'm saying is refusing to vote for the Dem is a vote for the GOP.
Thu Jan 22, 2015, 06:35 PM
Jan 2015

You have yet to dispute that.

Instead, you keep trying to put words in my mouth so you can change the subject.

My concern over who sits on the Supreme Court is not "bullshit." That person determines whether women, half our population, will be subject to being forced to give birth against their will. Choosing if and when to be a mother is the most fundamental liberty to me as a woman. That is more important to me than whatever the TPP ends up being. I can do nothing if I cannot control my own body. Your dismissal of that is a dismissal of women.

You think you have a better candidate than Hillary? Get them on the Dem primary ballot.

Phlem

(6,323 posts)
74. Ah I see.
Thu Jan 22, 2015, 06:52 PM
Jan 2015

your particular issues don't compare to the misery of the rest of the nation. But yeah, go ahead and put words in my mouth. I'll check in with my wife and daughter tonight and see if I dismiss women.

They can try and will continue to try but I'm pretty confident Roe vs Wade will not be overturned unless the powers that be want a nation full of women and men taking up arms.

Here's a secret, I don't want anyone telling my daughter what she can and can't do with her body, period.

Also it takes votes on both sides to confirm a Supreme Court Judge. Remember during Bush junior reign how the Democrats bent over backwards for Republicans, including Supreme Court positions.

Your going to want to tell the Senators and Representatives you employ with your tax dollars to do the right thing and actually support their constituents cause I promise I cannot single handedly overturn RvW on my own, sorry.

This is why I push the third way away. We need people we can count on, not Republican lite.

SunSeeker

(51,662 posts)
77. Just because you're married and have a daughter does not prove your priorities.
Thu Jan 22, 2015, 06:58 PM
Jan 2015

Exhibit 1: George W. Bush.

It is not just my liberty. It is all women’s liberty that is at stake. Your refusal to acknowledge that speaks volumes.

Phlem

(6,323 posts)
82. OK then, you've got me all figured out.
Thu Jan 22, 2015, 07:06 PM
Jan 2015

volumes upon volumes. Whatever SunSeeker, I should have know information does not go in, it only comes out no matter. Just because we don't elect a woman president equals the upending of Roe v Wade. it's not like any President hasn't protected it till now. For your information I would take Warren or Sanders over corporate Hillary any day. But I'm pretty sure that's also going to fall on deaf ears.

raindaddy

(1,370 posts)
61. These polls are meaningless
Thu Jan 22, 2015, 05:52 PM
Jan 2015

The fact is when people are asked, they claim to be moderates but when confronted with specific issues they are liberals.

Hillary continues to be framed by the media and the republicans as a liberal which she is not. Let's subject Hillary to a real primary and get her to be specific on the issues. If she want to lead the Democratic Party it's time to demand that she drops her allegiance to Wall Street, military contractors and global corporations and support the poor and middle class.

SunSeeker

(51,662 posts)
72. I see. Any polls you disagree with are "meaningless."
Thu Jan 22, 2015, 06:50 PM
Jan 2015

Gosh, all those pollsters should save a lot of time and just talk to you.


raindaddy

(1,370 posts)
116. Another network poll in 2007 had Hillary leading Obama by 22pts.
Thu Jan 22, 2015, 11:00 PM
Jan 2015

Did you believe that one as well? Who really cares about a poll two years before an election when we have don't even know who the candidates will be? Other than people who want to see Hillary become such an institution she can get away with as little challenge from the left as possible.... Personally I want to see her debate Elizabeth Warren or Bernie Sanders at least three times...

SunSeeker

(51,662 posts)
117. Yes, that poll reflects a public that did not yet know Obama.
Fri Jan 23, 2015, 01:19 AM
Jan 2015

He is a masterful campaigner, and as people saw and heard him, they liked what they saw. Then when he did well in Iowa, it was the beginning of the end for Hillary. As much as I love Bernie and Elizabeth, I don't think either of them have the carisma to pull off what Obama did. There is no new Obama-like candidate I am aware of waiting in the wings this time around.

raindaddy

(1,370 posts)
118. You're making my point sunseeker..
Fri Jan 23, 2015, 02:22 AM
Jan 2015

These early Hillary polls reflect a public that doesn't know "any of the candidates" because no one has formally declared yet. They're also reacting to her popularity and name recognition, not the issues.

I think you're wrong about Warren. She not only has charisma but she's developing a track record of fighting Wall Street corruption and standing up for public interest. Something Hillary can't come close to.

SunSeeker

(51,662 posts)
119. My point is there's no Obama in the wings this time around to upend the polls.
Fri Jan 23, 2015, 02:44 AM
Jan 2015

I get it, you think Warren and/or Sanders are the Obama of 2015. I disagree. We'll know soon enough.

 

BrainDrain

(244 posts)
134. Well actually...
Fri Jan 23, 2015, 09:26 AM
Jan 2015

Except for his home state, and oh yeah his speech at the Democratic convention, no one "knew" or predicted Obama in 2007..yet he happened anyway.

To say at this point that there "is no Obama in the wings this time" is to close your eyes to history, and the unpredictability of the political process. Remember, everyone, and I literally mean, everyone "knew" HRC was going to be the Democratic nominee in 2008.

Just because the certain Dem's are determined to control the meme about her, does not mean it will happen. She is NOT a progressive, anyone with eyes knows this. So lets all sit back and enjoy the show. I suspect that for HRC it is going to wind up being a replay of the "Titanic" for her once again.

SunSeeker

(51,662 posts)
139. So the 72% of liberals who support Clinton don't have eyes?
Fri Jan 23, 2015, 02:05 PM
Jan 2015

The 83% of Dems who either want Clinton or someone more conservative are also without eyes? Only the 11% of Dems who want someone more liberal than Clinton have eyes?

http://www.cnn.com/2014/07/25/politics/clinton-liberals-trust/






raindaddy

(1,370 posts)
140. I'm saying so far there's two candidates that refelect what the Democratc party stands for.
Fri Jan 23, 2015, 02:42 PM
Jan 2015

And Hillary Clinton isn't one of them....And if we end up with a Hillary vs Romney or Bush election it'll not only be the most boring and meaningless election in my lifetime, it'll probably be the last chance for the party to lift itself out of the muck of triangulation and actually stand for something again. Stand up and "fight" for it's traditional values and people will line up to support them. You won't get that with Hillary Clinton..

People that identify with the Dem party are a dwindling 32% down from 35%... Less than a third of Americans now identify themselves as Democrats. Even less for the Republicans.. What is that saying? A growing number of people don't relate to either party anymore. With an off the map insane GOP this is a time when you'd expect the Democratic party to shine! Do you really think another Wall Street owned third way Democrat is going to turn that trend around?

peacebird

(14,195 posts)
126. These Hill-bots forget their history. She was expectedd to have a coronation cake walk once before
Fri Jan 23, 2015, 07:28 AM
Jan 2015

It didn't work out so well for her then either.

RufusTFirefly

(8,812 posts)
46. Call me a traitor. Pelt me with garbage if you want....
Thu Jan 22, 2015, 02:50 PM
Jan 2015

... but I absolutely will not vote for her.

I wasn't born yesterday. I realize politics isn't about ponies; it's about compromise.
In the past, I've actively supported and voted for candidates with whom I had significant differences. But we all have our limits, and I've reached mine.

No more warmongering, corporatist, neo-liberal Wall Street suckups for me.

Enough is enough.

Ferd Berfel

(3,687 posts)
47. Kind of tired of SOS
Thu Jan 22, 2015, 02:59 PM
Jan 2015

BTW, I heard a little bit of Hartmann and Pap this morning talking about the (Dershowitz) Douche-o-witz scandal.



Thinkingabout

(30,058 posts)
51. Looking forward to the primaries and election, I will be backing Hillary who is progressive,
Thu Jan 22, 2015, 03:29 PM
Jan 2015

smart and capable. Facts of Hillary's stand on the issues are on record, she has fought for Civil Rights since her college days and fought for working Americans. These are issues which are important to uplift American workers and this is good for the economy.

RufusTFirefly

(8,812 posts)
53. "Hillary Clinton is..."
Thu Jan 22, 2015, 05:16 PM
Jan 2015

"... the kindest, bravest, warmest, most wonderful human being I've ever known in my life."

Now, how about a nice game of solitaire?

raindaddy

(1,370 posts)
52. Two year's until the election and Hillary's already being stuffed down our throats...
Thu Jan 22, 2015, 04:35 PM
Jan 2015

The corporate owned media can't get enough of Hillary, they'll continue to clip the wings of the party of the people until everyone forgets what the party once stood for!

The best thing that could happen to this party is a series of debates, including Elizabeth Warren and Bernie Sanders outlining each candidates vision for the future of the party in detail.. Because third way, Hillary's vision of a Corporatocracy won't hold up to the traditional Democratic party ideas of Warren and Sanders.

 

AtomicKitten

(46,585 posts)
70. WINNING!
Thu Jan 22, 2015, 06:48 PM
Jan 2015

There are no candidates yet but it's pretty clear Clinton supporters don't want a primary:

"... create a situation where Hillary has to face a potentially damaging primary."

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=6122080

* Sorry Steven, once posted it's in the public domain.[ /div]

Phlem

(6,323 posts)
60. this OP is a joke.
Thu Jan 22, 2015, 05:39 PM
Jan 2015

almost 900 views and only 13 recs. But go ahead and keep trying to shove Hillary down our throats, we'll just puke it back up.

wyldwolf

(43,869 posts)
73. Your reply is a joke
Thu Jan 22, 2015, 06:51 PM
Jan 2015

You equate posts with popularity contests.

It's such a joke the DU admins made it their pic of the moment.

Phlem

(6,323 posts)
76. ouch, it's been a long time since 3rd grade and it still hurts.
Thu Jan 22, 2015, 06:57 PM
Jan 2015

She's thirdway, you know, the people who helped us lose the midterms. I'm sure you have the data on how there's 0% chance she'll fuck it up again.

But go ahead, live your fantasy, it's still a free country.

Phlem

(6,323 posts)
95. Brushing up on Republican tactics?
Thu Jan 22, 2015, 07:31 PM
Jan 2015

Sorry, you can repeat it forever and put a shine on it but it still looks like shit. Putting her up against a bunch of monkeys does make her look slightly palatable in a puke-ish kind of way. Sorry don't you have more Hillary re branding to do?

Phlem

(6,323 posts)
99. Now is that what I said?
Thu Jan 22, 2015, 07:47 PM
Jan 2015

Repeating an idea, ideology, bullshit that's all dressed up with no where to go? That's classic Republican tactic or did you not know that?

wyldwolf

(43,869 posts)
100. It is, actually
Thu Jan 22, 2015, 07:48 PM
Jan 2015
Repeating an idea, ideology, bullshit that's all dressed up with no where to go? That's classic Republican tactic or did you not know that?

Sounds like the typical progressive mentality.

Phlem

(6,323 posts)
102. ah we have some revealing truth now.
Thu Jan 22, 2015, 07:53 PM
Jan 2015

But I thought Hillary was progressive?

"Sounds like the typical progressive mentality." I knew you were anti progressive. Thanks for the confirmation.

And we are done.

 

VanillaRhapsody

(21,115 posts)
101. she is? Please prove that!
Thu Jan 22, 2015, 07:51 PM
Jan 2015

she is nearly as Left as EW.....so please continue with your proof...

Phlem

(6,323 posts)
78. She is not a progressive, She is Third Way.
Thu Jan 22, 2015, 06:59 PM
Jan 2015

No amount of fantasy talk will convince me otherwise.

 

hrmjustin

(71,265 posts)
81. And I respect your honest view. i don't agree with you but you don't like her and i say speak your
Thu Jan 22, 2015, 07:04 PM
Jan 2015

Mind.

JI7

(89,262 posts)
122. haha, if we go by popularity on DU Kucinich should have easily been the nominee
Fri Jan 23, 2015, 05:34 AM
Jan 2015

and Obama would have lost the primary by a huge amount.

 

Rex

(65,616 posts)
88. I would hope so! Her GOP rivals are all clowns.
Thu Jan 22, 2015, 07:12 PM
Jan 2015

A bacon sandwich would have a large lead over the GOP candidates.

 

workinclasszero

(28,270 posts)
94. Great news! The republican clown car is just getting underway and
Thu Jan 22, 2015, 07:19 PM
Jan 2015

democrats are way in the lead already!

I can't wait to vote for our next democratic President whoever he or she may be!

Chemisse

(30,816 posts)
97. It's interesting that the numbers are almost the same for all contenders.
Thu Jan 22, 2015, 07:45 PM
Jan 2015

It suggests that there is very little wiggle room in the middle - that both sides are entrenched and not likely to change their minds. It also suggests that the nation is heavily favoring the Democrats for 2016.

broadcaster75201

(387 posts)
98. Meaningless. Dems don't vote. She will lose. Period.
Thu Jan 22, 2015, 07:45 PM
Jan 2015

I'll vote. You'll vote. But amidst all the horror Dems don't vote.

I'll believe she, or any Dem, wins hen I see it.

MoonRiver

(36,926 posts)
130. So Dems did not vote for Barack Obama during both his presidential elections?
Fri Jan 23, 2015, 08:18 AM
Jan 2015

Then it must have been his vast Republican base that put him in the White House 2 times!

brooklynite

(94,713 posts)
132. "Dems don't vote" is a ridiculous comment...
Fri Jan 23, 2015, 08:46 AM
Jan 2015

...they may not vote in off-year elections. I seem to recall a lot of them voting in 2008 and 2012.

 

vi5

(13,305 posts)
107. Again this is posted, and again I'll say.....
Thu Jan 22, 2015, 08:33 PM
Jan 2015

...good for her. With such high levels of support she won't need my time, money, or vote. Glad to hear it. Best of luck to Mrs. Clinton.

 

workinclasszero

(28,270 posts)
111. Crazy ain't it?
Thu Jan 22, 2015, 09:22 PM
Jan 2015

I do not agree with Hillary on every issue but damn, if she gets the nomination I will back her one million percent!

Or any other democrat because....insane theocratic teabaggers!

Its going to be real interesting to see what happens around here after the democratic nominee is chosen.

Algernon Moncrieff

(5,790 posts)
138. DU does not represent most Democrats
Fri Jan 23, 2015, 12:05 PM
Jan 2015

It represents the activist wing of the party. The activist wings of both parties are further from the center than most of their fellow members.

The problem I see here at DU is that many can't see that Hillary supporters and Warren/Sanders supporters have broad agreement on a wide array of issues; instead, they delight in labeling Hillary supporters as third-way corporate shills. I saw many of these same attacks against Hillary supporters by Obama supporters in 2008. To be sure, I largely approve of Barack Obama's President, but many of those same supporters from 2008 can do nothing but express how disappointed they are in his President, and how we need a "true progressive." What America needs is an effective leader -- one who knows foreign policy; has served in the legislative branch; one who understands the way the White House (and a governor's mansion) works; and yes -- one who doesn't completely frighten business interests. Hillary Clinton fits that description. The fact that her husband is an extremely popular ex-President is a bonus.

elzenmahn

(904 posts)
146. Actually....
Sat Jan 24, 2015, 10:40 AM
Jan 2015

...I want somebody in there who FRIGHTENS THE HELL out of business interests!!!!!

That's precisely why I say that the only reason why I'll vote for HRC (assuming she's the nominee) is to keep the Repubs out. It will be with a gas mask on my face and with great trepidation.

But a vote is a vote, right, Hillary? (And the rest of the Turd Wayers)?

Beacool

(30,250 posts)
161. Yep, that's why this site has become a joke.
Mon Jan 26, 2015, 06:43 PM
Jan 2015

All the pissing and moaning because a potential Democratic candidate beats out every Republican candidate.

Crazy..........

 

silvershadow

(10,336 posts)
109. Ok. What about Bernie Sanders or Elizabeth Warren? Or Grayson? Or even Sherrod Brown?
Thu Jan 22, 2015, 09:12 PM
Jan 2015

You know, someone who gets it?

brooklynite

(94,713 posts)
131. Warren doesn't want to run (but you knew that)
Fri Jan 23, 2015, 08:37 AM
Jan 2015

Sherrod Brown doesn't want to run either (I actually asked)

Alan Grayson? Name a House member who's ever been a competitive Presidential candidate. (or is that not the point?)

Algernon Moncrieff

(5,790 posts)
137. You forgot to mention that Bernie Sanders is not a registered Democrat
Fri Jan 23, 2015, 11:51 AM
Jan 2015

....but I suspect the poster also knew that.

 

davidn3600

(6,342 posts)
110. Don't forget the 1% also supports her
Thu Jan 22, 2015, 09:18 PM
Jan 2015

Sure, they would rather a Republican win the general election. But the 1% will favor Hillary in the Democratic primary.

Wall Street does not consider Hillary a threat at all.

tritsofme

(17,398 posts)
120. This is not a revelation, it is true of any public figure.
Fri Jan 23, 2015, 03:35 AM
Jan 2015

Even someone like George W. Bush has increased his popularity markedly since leaving office and no longer being involved in the daily partisan scrum.

There is no doubt Hillary's numbers will come back down to earth as she reengages politically, but she remains the best shot of Democrats to win a third term in the White House.

 

AtomicKitten

(46,585 posts)
121. as in how can I miss you if you won't go away?
Fri Jan 23, 2015, 04:20 AM
Jan 2015

Not a revelation but it makes running a protracted political campaign a huge problem. Her unfavorables are high right out of the gate.

She was the "best shot" in 2008 too. According to her camp, nobody else could win. It's wasn't a particularly convincing argument then. It's laughable now.

Elizabeth Warren has the big mo. She's lightning in a bottle. She's the best candidate hands down.

wyldwolf

(43,869 posts)
123. not only is it not a revelation. It's a contradictory statement
Fri Jan 23, 2015, 06:58 AM
Jan 2015

People who despise Clinton comfort themselves with two contradictory crutches -

1. Her high ratings are just NAME RECOGNITION
2. The MORE she's out there, the LESS people like her.



Bill and Hillary Clinton remain two of the most investigated and written about people in history. As Bartcop once said, "We've never looked at (anyone) so close in all of history. Elvis, JFK, the Beatles and Jesus Christ combined never had so many scurrilous, untrue,
shit-for-brains lies told about them."

For as the ABC poll said, Hillary's history is a PLUS for her, not a negative.

eridani

(51,907 posts)
124. Great. The 99% get fucked regardless of who wins
Fri Jan 23, 2015, 07:01 AM
Jan 2015

Not to blow off reproductive rights, but there are lots of other issues.

Algernon Moncrieff

(5,790 posts)
136. 22 months is an eternity in American politics, but I'm happy to see this
Fri Jan 23, 2015, 11:43 AM
Jan 2015

Bill Clinton was easily the best President in my lifetime (caveat: too soon to tell with Obama -- I think you have to give it 5 years or so to really see with clarity). I like the fact that Bill would likely have a signifigant role in a Hillary Clinton administration, and I like that she brings experience as both Senator and SecState to the position. I also see her as our best shot at not waking up with President Christie in late January of 2017.

Tommy2Tone

(1,307 posts)
144. Don't expect to many Clinton supporter here..
Sat Jan 24, 2015, 05:52 AM
Jan 2015

It is afterall an "elitist" underground democratic site.

sus453

(164 posts)
152. Hillary Clinton?
Sun Jan 25, 2015, 09:31 PM
Jan 2015

I remember a little known thing called "vote your conscience". When I walk into the voting booth, and there is no one in the two major parties who represents my values, should I hold my nose and vote for the lesser of two evils, or should I cast my ballot for a third party who has little chance of winning?

Hillary Clinton is better than the Republicans on social issues, but on almost everything else, she does not represent my values or represent what I see as a way forward for our country. As a senator she enthusiastically voted for the Iraq War and tried to out hawk the Republicans. She only changed her mind when it became politically expedient. She continued this war-mongering as Secretary of State - she supports Israel right or wrong in its subjugation of the Palestinians, she sided with the neo-cons on Iran until that was politically expedient too. Her ties and sympathies with Wall Street, Goldman Sachs, etc, are well-documented, though I'm sure she may veer slightly left to try to forestall a Warren or Sanders candidacies.

She wears the air of inevitability like a badge, both for the nomination and the presidency. But should I or other progressives vote for someone in the primaries who doesn't represent our wishes for the country, or should we vote for someone who will actually fight for what we believe in?

Hillary Rodham Clinton speaks out of both sides of her mouth, and her message depends on which way the wind blows. I won't vote for a Republican, but neither will I vote for someone who betrays my beliefs. An I have a feeling I'm not alone in this.

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Clinton Holds Solid Leads...