Hillary, unpreconceived - Comments from Prof. Bert Rockman/Purdue

[Alamom]

http://www.pittsburghlive.com/x/pittsburghtrib/opinion/columnists/zito/s_519534.html

Pittsburg Tribune-Review

Hillary, unpreconceived

By Salena Zito
TRIBUNE-REVIEW
Sunday, July 29, 2007

Preconceptions are a powerful thing. And no candidate is surrounded by more preconceptions than Hillary Clinton.

Purdue University political science professor Bert Rockman says that lined up next to the other Democrat candidates Hillary has done an effective job of carving out the center for her party. In comparison, she is "a remarkably moderate figure with highly polarized perspectives about her ... that have become much more important than her actual behavior."

The first serious female candidate for president since Shirley Chisholm in 1972, Hillary gained strength in last week's CNN-YouTube debate. "She showed solid evidence why (her nomination) is inevitable," said one high-level Democrat insider, who has not yet picked a horse in the race. Rockman won't go that far. Yet. "I don't think that it is inevitable," he said. "Probable, but not inevitable.


But if I had to bet my money, I would certainly bet on her as the favorite and give it fairly short odds that she will come up with the nomination." Some of the preconceptions about Hillary are that she cannot capture the female vote, that her unfavorables are too high and that the "netroots" of the blogosphere will not throw their energy behind her.

But some political experts disagree.

>

"I think that you can get all kinds of juicy quotes from the Hillary haters," said Susan Hansen, a professor of political science and women's studies at the University of Pittsburgh. "But if you look at the raw data of how people voted in 2000 and 2006 in the New York (U.S.) Senate elections, you will see that she did not have a woman-problem. Quite the opposite."

The importance of progressive bloggers has increased geometrically. And despite the preconception that they will not support her, it turns out they are.

Markos Moulitsas Zuniga, founder of Daily Kos, the must-read political blog for progressives, dispelled the no-way notion: "I would not have a problem getting behind Hillary and I don't think that many people would."

http://www.polsci.purdue.edu/Directory/Faculty/rockman.html

Purdue University



Professor Rockman's fields of work are bureaucracy and political leadership, especially the US Presidency, and political institutions. He is a past President of the American Political Science Association's Organized Section on the US Presidency and also of the Midwest Caucus for Public Administration. He has won the Richard E. Neustadt Award for best book on the US Presidency and the Pi Sigma Alpha Award for best paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Political Science Association. He has been an editor of Governance: An International Journal of Policy, Administration, and Institutions . His current work involves the relationship between leadership and institutions and also analysis of reform and privatization of the public sector.

[Alamom]

1. John McIntyre, co-founder and president of RealClearPolitics.com

con't.

http://www.pittsburghlive.com/x/pittsburghtrib/opinion/columnists/zito/s_519534.html


>
When it comes to polling on a national level, the anti-Hillary argument has been that she has high unfavorables, a fact her campaign concedes. But Hillary's "unfavorables" -- ranging from 40 percent to 45 percent -- are not much higher than the 35 percent unfavorable rating of a generic Democrat.

John McIntyre, co-founder and president of RealClearPolitics.com, known for its dead-on polling data, believes Hillary has established a solid 10- to 15-point lead in the polls for the nomination. "Our national poll average for the Democratic nomination has had her at that range now for a fair amount of time," he said.

>


.........To that end, Purdue's Rockman says he doesn't "see a winner at the moment among the Republican candidates.

[earthlover]

5. Why bet everything on Hillary?

..." But Hillary's "unfavorables" -- ranging from 40 percent to 45 percent -- are not much higher than the 35 percent unfavorable rating of a generic Democrat".

Well, fact of the matter is that Hillary's unfavorable rating is higher than a generic Democrat by 5-10%.

What is it about Hillary that we should nominate her with a 5-10% anchor weighing her down compared to other choices?

Think about it.

Nominating Hillary would be like betting on someone trailing the pack in a race. Yes, she could win. But it will take a lot of catching up to do with the negatives she has.

[Captain Hilts]

2. I loved Shirley Chisolm, but her candidacy was not taken seriously in '72. nt

[nevergiveup]

3. Most of the Democrats

I know who dislike her will probably fall in line if she gets the nod but it is the independents I worry about. The lack of enthusiasm I see among independents mirrors that of John Kerry and look what happened to him. 2004 should have been a cake walk and it was one of the most disastrous campaigns I have seen in my 50 yrs as a political junkie. I would love to see someone with a little less baggage like Richardson or Obama. This election will be the Democrats to lose and it doesn't make a lot a sense to nominate someone with so many negatives. I will work for Hillary if she gets the nomination buy my enthusiasm for her and confidence in her chances are both severely lacking.

[MGKrebs]

4. Independents, pretty much by definition, are going to be unenthusiastic at this point.

If they don't identify with a party, mostly they will be waiting until the party candidates are selected.

Team Clinton has been doing a pretty good job to date of identifying and addressing areas of perceived weakness.

[Alamom]

6. I agree and I think the next few months will be very interesting. nm