Hillary Winning both Races: Most Popular & Most Unpopular
By JB Williams (10/24/07)
According to the latest CBS News poll (Oct. 12-16), Hillary Clinton is receiving 46 percent of the love from her party faithful and leading the Democrat primary race for the 2008 general election. But according to the latest Zogby poll, she's also leading the race for the most despised candidate in the country...
Zogby asked the question, “Whom would you NEVER vote for, for President of the U.S.?”
With the Presidents public approval rating around 30 percent and congress all the way down at 11 percent, what a great question! Zogby asked this question of 9718 “likely voters” (Democrats, Republicans and Independents) and Hillary tops the list of candidates people would NEVER vote for.
50 percent of those polled said that they would NEVER vote for Hillary Clinton under any circumstance, which means the other 50 percent who say they would, have lost their collective minds. Leading the other Party as the most unpopular Republican candidate is Libertarian Ron Paul. 47 percent of Americans said they would NEVER vote for him either.
It probably won’t shock anyone to learn that a high-profile polarizing figure like Hillary Clinton has more enemies than friends. She is highly popular among hardcore leftists now running her Democratic Socialist Party, but equally unpopular with everyone else, namely those still stuck on American principles like Life, Liberty and the Freedom to define and pursue Happiness, “legally.”
But how did Libertarian Ron Paul get so unpopular so fast, an obscure house member who most Americans never heard of before the first Republican debate? My guess is, his Democratic Socialist-like stance on the war, drugs, and the individual right to be wrong. Unlike Hillary, Paul is finding little love in either party.
Others didn’t fair much better
On the Democrat side, between 42 and 49 percent said that they would NEVER vote for Kucinich, Gravel or Edwards. On the Republican side, between 42 and 49 percent said that they would NEVER vote for Brownback, Tancredo, McCain, Hunter, Giuliani or Romney either, in that order.
So who are the least offensive candidates?
Former Clinton advisor and New Mexico Governor Bill Richardson ranks the least offensive in the race with a 34 percent NEVER rating. Republican Mike Huckabee is second with a 35 percent NEVER rating. But neither of these candidates is going to win anything. Richardson has 3 percent primary support from Democrats and Huckabee has 4 percent from Republicans.
Apparently, we’re not looking for the least offensive candidates.
Best positioned overall are Democrat Barack Obama, running second in the DNC primary race at 17 percent with a 37 percent NEVER rating and Republican Fred Thompson, also running second for his party nod at 21 percent, with a 41 percent NEVER rating. These two are the least offensive candidates with a chance of winning.
Offensive to whom?
According to these numbers, Hillary Clinton is the most polarizing individual in American politics today, with Kucinich, Gravel, Paul and Brownback running close behind in the unpopularity contest. I get all of them except Brownback. Clinton, Kucinich, Gravel and Paul have all tried to make a campaign out of anti-American ranting and raving and clearly, their rhetoric is NOT resonating with the average American. But how did Brownback get in this group?
The fact that almost as many say NEVER to McCain, Giuliani and Romney, the three RNC front-runners until Thompson entered the race, spells trouble for the RNC in 2008. The 29 percent supporting Giuliani is shaky at best. Six out of ten Giuliani supporters say they are not sure about their support and are still watching other candidates.
The difference between Hillary and the three Republican candidates is this…
Hillary offends all Republican and Independent voters. Her Democrat base is blindly intact though and united in their effort to elect the first female President, vote themselves free Hillary-Care or get Bill back into the oral office by hook or crook.
McCain, Giuliani and Romney not only offend Democrats, but Republicans and Independents too. Their efforts to appear “open minded” on social issues and the related spending has made enemies in the Republican base that must be on-board for any of them to win. The Clinton’s have always had enemies on the right, but they remain loved by Democratic Socialists everywhere. These three Republicans have made enemies on both sides of the aisle and that’s what makes a Hillary win possible.
History may repeat in 2008
In 1992, Ross Perot drew 18.9% of the vote to a third party ticket after George Bush Sr. angered the conservative base of the Republican Party and Bill Clinton became president with 43% of the popular vote, against the will of 57% of American voters.
In 1996, Perot pulled only 8.4% of the vote, but it was still enough to allow the re-election of Clinton with less than 50% of the popular vote.
In 2008, Hillary will not get 50% of the popular vote either. But after George Bush Jr. has spent much of his second term pandering to the left, Republicans are again divided between liberal party front-runners that they prefer not to support and second or even third tier candidates who are more conservative, but a long-shot to win anything in any party.
If Democrats offered a more formidable candidate than Hillary, like say Al Gore, I’d give Republicans NO chance of winning in ’08 at all. As it is, Hillary’s NEVER rating is so high that several Republican candidates have a real shot at defeating her, no matter what the polls might say today. The more public she becomes in the campaign process, the more people will be reminded of all the things they hate about her.
In the end, it’s an entire conservative nation against six very liberal cities
The vast majority of campaign funding across the nation comes from only six major U.S. metro centers. So far for the 2008 election cycle still a year away, in order, they are…
( In Millions from http://OpenSecrets.org/ )
NEW YORK $61.3
WASHINGTON, DC-MD-VA-WV $45.3
LOS ANGELES-LONG BEACH $28.5
CHICAGO $25.5
BOSTON, MA-NH $18.8
SAN FRANCISCO $15.7
These six cities are major players in campaign funding, each city giving more than the average state and they all slant heavily Democrat. The voting trends of these six cities follow the funding trend, no matter who the candidates are in any election. These cities are the most partisan cities in America today.
By comparison, the rest of the nation is pretty conservative, but not so engaged. The percentage of average American adults donating $200 or more to any campaign is only .16%, a little more than 1/10 of 1%. 99.84% give nothing at all and still they wonder why their voice is not heard. They leave the political funding to the BIG players and the election to them as well.
Democrats are the BIG players today
The top 527 groups are Democrat. The top individual donors list is Democrat. The top institutional donors list is Democrat. The top PAC recipients list is Democrat. Democrats even receive the most illegal international funding from foreign special interest groups and foreign governments. As a result, Democrats are out-raising Republicans almost 2-1 across the board and we all know that in American politics, he with the gold makes the rules…
With money to burn and a divided opponent in the Republican electorate, six cities have the ability to hoist Hillary Clinton into the White House in 2008, against the will of more than 50% of the nation.
When you are watching Hillary’s inauguration in January of 2009 and wondering how the hell it all happened, come back and read this column one more time. This is how it can happen and unless Republicans find a way to unite behind a candidate that the conservative base of the party can support; this is how the most disliked politician in American will become our next President.
(Printer friendly version) Email: JB Williams
