WHY AREN’T THESE NUMBERS HIGHER?
So a new Washington Post-ABC News poll was just released which takes a look at the various candidates for president from an interesting vantage point … namely, the percentage of the electorate that will not vote for them.
Former U.S. First Lady/ Senator/ Secretary of State Hillary Clinton scored worse than we expected in the survey, with 37 percent of registered voters saying they would not vote for her (compared to only 25 percent who said they “definitely would vote for” her). Thirty-eight percent said they would consider voting for Clinton.
Still, Clinton’s “hate index” was lower than that of her main GOP rivals …
New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie appears to face the toughest challenge, with 30 percent of “Republican” voters already saying they would not vote for him (compared to 41 percent of all registered voters). Only seven percent of registered voters (and nine percent of “Republicans”) said they would definitely vote for Christie.
No contemplated “Republican” fared as poorly within his own party as Christie …
Another establishment GOP figure – former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush – did well among the GOP faithful but terribly in a hypothetical general election scenario, with 50 percent of registered voters saying they would not vote for him. Bush fares substantially better than Christie among the GOP faithful, though, with only 18 percent of “Republicans” falling into the “would not vote” category.
How did more pro-free market Republicans fare?
Eh … not so well. U.S. Sen. Rand Paul’s level of opposition in a hypothetical general election also stands at 41 percent among registered voters, while 39 percent said they “would not vote” for U.S. Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas). Meanwhile seventeen percent of “Republicans” said they wouldn’t vote for Paul, compared to 20 percent for Cruz.
Frankly, we’re shocked the numbers for all of these politicians aren’t higher …
Who do we like in 2016? Clearly it is far too early to tell … we like Paul and Cruz’s record on fiscal issues, but have been profoundly disappointed by several of Paul’s establishment endorsements (including support for GOP Senate leader Mitch McConnell and former “Republican” presidential nominee Mitt Romney).
Speaking of Romney, the socialized medicine backer was also polled by WaPo’s “hate index.” According to the results, he’s as toxic as Bush in a general election scenario – with 50 percent of registered voters saying they would not vote for him. Only 23 percent of “Republican” voters felt the same, though, and 34 percent of the GOP primary electorate actually said they “definitely” would vote for Romney.
Sheesh … “Republicans.”
46 comments
I’m sure the Republican strategists are thinking to themselves, “Tooting the Benghazi horn daily isn’t good enough, no! We need a Benghazi vuvuzela!”
I hope you guys are ready for another 8 years under a Clinton, because the Republicans are going to shoot themselves in the foot again. If you need any hint of the level of desperation the GOP has, look no further than them bringing up Monica Lewinski more than two years before the fucking election.
I won’t vote for her myself, but I’m resigned to the fate. Democrats won’t pick someone better, and Republicans won’t have anyone run who is better, not that they would win the primary anyways.
Sanders/Warren would be a good ticket. Benghazi, Benghazi, Benghazi. IRS, IRS, IRS.
Sanders/Warren would be a good ticket.</i.
Unfortunately the Col. and Mr Zevon are both deceased.
Sanders, unfortunately, is not very electable on the national stage. I do like him, though.
Warren might be electable, but far too early for her to run IMO.
Either would be worlds better than Hillary, that is for sure.
Bernie Sanders is a nut.
This from a Ron Paul supporter.
I could support Hillary Clinton. All republican hopefuls are pandering to the Koch brothers, Fox News and the Tea Party. Most Americans are not out on the far, far, far, extreme, extreme, extreme right (think “Tim Scott”). I agree with Smirks. The republican party is dominated with — driven by — extreme elements that are pushing the party to oblivion. Irrelevancy.
I can’t support Hillary for a number of reasons, many of them stemming from her legislative career and what she’s supported/attacked over the years.
I highly doubt she would turn out much different than Obama anyways, which is actually a bad thing for liberals at the end of the day.
While I would like to see a different Dem candidate than Hillary, I would still vote for her before I’d vote for the cray-crays being put forth by the GOP. Cruz? Paul? Ryan? Bush? Jindahl? Christie? Give me a damned break.
Well, Rich Co Election Commission has already begun preparing to suppress, to get the results their masters demand. I predict voter turnout in 2016 will be way down in particular parts of town, so they’ll have to screw with the other parts. Get ready for unapologetic 7 hour waits in the 2014 and 2016.
Sorry you feel that way, but I have no problem supporting Hillary. I think she will do a great job as President. An office I think she will hold come January of 2017.
I’m sure you’re a smart woman Jan, my mother is a smart woman and she still thinks Hillary would make a good president. Can’t wait for her to prove you all horribly wrong.
Why are Republicans always wanting people to fail?. Would we not all benefit if any President succeeds? But Republicans don’t care about that. They just want the people they hate to fail. For that reason the sooner we relegate them to the trash pile the better. Maybe then we can all start pulling together again.
I just loved the good old days when the liberals pulled together and supported Bush for the good of the country…remember that? But to your question, Democrats – like our current POTUS – have failed not because others have wished them to, but they have failed of their own accord, due to their own incompetence, ineneptness, lack of qualifications, lack of vision, lack of new ideas, lack of experience, lack of integrity, lack of backbone against our enemies…lack of ANYTHING it takes to actually LEAD people. If Hillary Clinton really is elected as the next POTUS, this country’s staggering decline into a third-world banana republic will be complete.
Deplorable… https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=whx_cZAWAuU
Hillary will never be POTUS. She missed her chance and is now too old*. TBG foresees a reclusive future involving cats and an increasingly seething bitterness towards Obama and what could have been.
*People age differently. TBG does not believe Hillary will even be the Dem. nominee because of age related health issues. She may not even run.
Actually, because Clinton screwed up so badly in Benghazi we are being forced to go to war with Russia. I’m sure you lefties won’t understand that.
No we “lefties” dont,nor does any other same person.Have another drink Tom.
Or when questioned about Benghazi and the deaths of American citizens, Hitlery’s response was, “What difference does it make?”. Apparently to her what’s done is done, and to move on. I wonder if the response would have been the same if that fugly child of hers had gotten killed.
Actually, because Clinton screwed up so badly in Benghazi we are being forced to go to war with Russia.
You might want too ‘spain a little more there, Hoss.
What dont you understand?I thought it was pretty plain.Hes a Republican,hates Hillary, so he made up a lie.Its pretty simple really.
Thats easy, we did not nuke Libya after they killed our ambassador, so now the Russians think we are weak. We need to bomb the hell out of someone for something.
Allrighty then….
*backs slowly away while maintaining eye contact*
“Ah, a United States ambassador died, let us begin our global takeover! For the Motherlaaaaaaand!”
You must live on another planet, and that planet must not have sufficient oxygen levels in the atmosphere.
Here’s a hint: The reason Russia doesn’t give a shit about the US here is because they know nobody wants to start a war with them over what’s going on. Period. Not even Dubya would be that dumb. This isn’t Iraq. This isn’t Afghanistan. This isn’t some po-dunk country with no defenses that we can just occupy, they are a military superpower.
Besides, they have no oil.
I don’t know, Dubya was pretty dumb. He listened to Cheney and Rumsfield.
Bet he can spell RESPECT.
Well spelling it is as close as he will ever come to it.
It’s interesting that just about ANY former president of the last 40 years gets any RESPECT, especially the husband of the goon pictured here.
Most Presidents have something positive they can point to in their Presidency. Consequently even those who do not agree with them can respect that. Bush has nothing in his Presidency he can point to. His entire Presidency was one disaster after another. An unnecessary war he lied to get us into, the collapse of the US Economy, starting with an annual budget surplus and ending in massive annual deficits, starting with a blazing economy and ending with an economy losing 500k jobs a month, starting with a soring stock market and ending with a market in the toilet.
1999 Gramm–Leach–Bliley Act, thanks Clinton. Although GWB could have tried to put a stop to predatory banks a lot earlier in his tenure, the economic downturn really has more to do with the guy that he replaced.
What a joke please note Mr. Gramm, Mr. Leach and Mr. Bliley are Republicans, and Republicans controlled the house and senate at the time. Clinton could have vetoed the bill, but this bill was Republican, through and through.
During the debates, Democrats led by Rep. John Dingell (Democrat) argued that the bill would result in banks becoming “too big to fail.” Dingell further argued that this would necessarily result in a bailout by the Federal Government.
Teapublicans have a very selective memory. The act you mention was indeed the cause of the crash, but that bill was a Republican bill and pushed through by Republicans. I am an independent, but Democrats have no responsibility for that bill.
What a joke? I know the details of the bill. You just made my point though, Clinton could have vetoed the bill and he fucking a right should have.
It was a Republican Bill, pure and simple. Clinton got other things he wanted and that is why he did not veto the bill. Even if he had Bush would have passed it the following year. Gramm went on to work for the banking lobby after this was passed. He and his wife were paid millions. Republicans pushed for this bill for years. Democrats have no responsibility for the Gramm–Leach–Bliley Act,
In our two party system, the only three things worse than gridlock are Republican control, Democrat control and, worst of all, Bipartisanship.
Bet he can spell RESPECT.
So can Aretha Franklin… but TBG ain’t voting for her.
Unless she runs for re-election as the Queen of Soul.
TBG would vote for her then.
Heh!
Just saw the story.
Somewhere in these 57 states, Dan Quayle and some buddies of his in the Marine Corpse are having a good laugh.
Cheney and Rumsfield are both pretty bright guys.
Nah, Dubya would have bombed the hell out of Belarus by now.
You mean like he bombed the hell out South Ossetia in August 2008 when the bullets started flying there? Oh, no, wait a minute…
Besides, there are easier places to attack to get our oil.
Besides, there are easier places to attack to keep oil prices high.
Fixed it for ya!
Its true, I know it is because I was watching an expert on Fox and he said this was true. Senator Graham understands the connection. If you guys did not watch the lame stream media you would know this.
The only person that can keep Hillary out of the White House is Hillary. Hopefully, she learned the right lessons from 2008. If so, she will make it look easy.
Them gonna’ be sum helluva TEA Parties ol’ Slick Willie be throwing!
YOU BETCHA!
She is still suffering from coming under fire in Bosnia.
At least she wasn’t coming under a desk like her husband.
Polls are like assholes, most of them smell like shit.
impossible to imagine what the person would look or sound like who could unite even 60% of this country. which is odd. 60% doesn’t seem so high. you’d think with only 2 choices it wouldn’t be unattainable.