Gallup Challenges Rove's Claim in Media That Hillary Has Highest 'Negatives'

[wyldwolf]

NEW YORK Karl Rove, the former White House aide, made the rounds of weekend talk shows last weekend declaring, among other things, that Sen. Hillary Clinton was a “fatally flawed” candidate for president because she had (he repeated several times) the highest unfavorable ratings of any frontrunner in the history of polling going into the party primaries.

It seemed plausible, and none of the many hosts challenged him on it. There was just one problem: It wasn’t exactly true.

Gallup, which was cited as a source at least once by Rove, decided to take a look back and in a report today agreed that her unfavorable ratings “are high” but disputed that this was unprecedented. Others had worse ratings and George W. Bush, in fact, had a 47% unfavorable rating in January 2004 – exactly one point less than the current mark for Clinton.

Bill Clinton’s unfavorable rating was 44% in January 1996 after hitting 49% in 1992.

Gallup concluded: “A review of Gallup poll data suggests that Hillary Clinton's current high unfavorable ratings are not unprecedented. Other candidates have had similarly high unfavorable ratings at various points in presidential election campaigns in previous years. Two of these candidates -- George W. Bush in 2004 and Bill Clinton in 1992 -- went on to win the election.

“Additionally, Rove's assumptions that Hillary Clinton's candidacy is 'fatally flawed' run counter to the historical finding that candidates' images often change, sometimes dramatically, as the campaign progresses. In other words, Clinton's ultimate electability will likely be determined more by what happens in the next 15 months while she campaigns than by what Americans think of her now. It is clear that Americans have been willing to revise their opinions of Clinton over time in response to current events, just as they have of other presidential candidates historically.

"Typically, a winning presidential candidate's favorable rating is only slightly more positive than negative on the eve of the election. Clinton would only need to boost her positives a few points to achieve that position."

http://www.editorandpublisher.com/eandp/news/article_display.jsp?vnu_content_id=1003629036

[Benhurst]

1. Bill Clinton went on to win in 1992. George W. Bush went on to steal an election

in 2004. The record is mixed. Still, the article does provide some perspective to counter KKKarl Rove's spin.

[alstephenson]

2. As usual Rove's lies were all over the MSM...

but you won't hear anything about Gallup's conclusion. God, I hate these people.

[Uncle Joe]

3. I believe Gallup is the poll that traditionally

gives Bush the highest ratings.

[AtomicKitten]

4. Rove's full of crap.

Surly that doesn't come as a surprise?

[juajen]

9. If the word doesn't look right, don't get surly, just

add an "e" and you will surely spell better.

Congratulations! You have been visited by The DU Spelling Police.

[AtomicKitten]

10. Aren't you supposed to leave a shiny quarter under my pillow?

B-)

[William769]

5. I hope he keeps up the attacks!

It's only helping her.

[antiimperialist]

6. Edwards and Obama supporters. Don't be hypocrites. You too think Hil can't win

And the most used talking points by Hillary opponents is "Hillary is unelectable. Her negative are too high.", as if negatives are permanent, or as if other winning presidents have always had low negatives.

[fightindonkey]

7. Hillary Will Win Easily If Winning The Nomination

[BadgerLaw2010]

8. If the Republicans remain seriously behind in Virginia and Ohio, Mr. Ed could win