home

Fox News Poll: Hillary Preferred By Dems Over Obama and McCain

By Jeralyn, Section Elections 2008
Posted on Wed Apr 30, 2008 at 06:03:23 PM EST
Tags: Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama, John McCain, Bill Clinton (all tags)
Share This: Digg! StumbleUpon del.icio.us reddit reddit

Fox News has a new poll out. Full poll results are here. (pdf)

Nearly half of Democrats (48 percent) think Hillary Clinton has a better chance of beating John McCain in November — 10 percentage points higher than the 38 percent who think Barack Obama can win, according to a FOX News poll released Wednesday. This represents a significant shift from March, when Democrats said Obama was the candidate more likely to beat McCain.

Democrats continue to favor Clinton as their party’s leader, albeit narrowly: 44 percent want her to win the nomination and 41 percent want Obama. Last month Clinton was preferred by 2 percentage points.

There's also an NBC/WSJ poll out taken of all voters, not just Dems. It finds Bush is a liability to McCain and Obama's "bitter" remarks cost him in favorability, as did Rev. Wright.

More...

There's even a poll about Bill Clinton's effect at Harris Interactive. Taken two weeks ago, but released yesterdayh, it shows he's doing okay for Hillary.

Not surprisingly, President Clinton is perceived much more favorably by Democrats as two-thirds (66%) of Democrats believe he helps his wife’s campaign compared to 46 percent of Independents and 30 percent of Republicans.

...In this poll, a 63 to 35 percent majority gives him positive ratings for the job he did when he was president. Interestingly this is almost the same as the 65 percent positive, 34 percent negative rating that he received in the final Harris Poll before he left office in January 2001 (Harris Poll #5, 1/19/01). Even three in five (62%) Independents gave him positive ratings for his time in office.

< Wolcott on Progressives "Going Postal" | Weds. Night Open Thread >

  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft


    • Display: Sort:
    Fox News Poll: Hillary Preferred By Dems Over Obama and McCain | 121 comments (121 topical)

    Readers Must Login or Create an Account to Comment

    A stunning drop in averaged polls (5.00 / 1) (#1)
    by Cream City on Wed Apr 30, 2008 at 06:11:36 PM EST
    at realclearpolitics.com -- down from 10 points for Obama over Clinton less than a week ago to a 2-point margin with this poll earlier today, now back up a bit with another new poll . . . but only up to a 3-point margin.  That volatility in the averaging of polls simply has not been seen before this period.  Nor have two polls there had Clinton ahead, with this Fox poll plus the Gallup tracking poll for the last two days.

    The graphic there of the averaged polls tells the tale . . . well, quite graphically.  (And shows that the difference is more the post-Pennsylvania bounce, as the full impact of the recent actions of the Reverend Wright is just surfacing in the polls.)

    I agree with your (5.00 / 3) (#9)
    by waldenpond on Wed Apr 30, 2008 at 06:25:16 PM EST
    view.  Some of those polls have start dates of the 23rd, 24th and 25th... not enough time for Wright to filter through.

    I am just going to enjoy the positive poll results for Clinton before someone tries to harsh my mellow by jumping in with some other (irrelevant, poorly constructed, doesn't favor my candidate) poll.

    Parent

    WSJ poll? (none / 0) (#43)
    by lilybart on Wed Apr 30, 2008 at 07:03:38 PM EST
    that one you mean? the one that shows Obama doing better against McCain than Hillary???

    These national match-up polls are not relevent when the match ups  are theoretical, but you were fearing another not so good poll, so here ya go!

    Parent

    WSJ poll is in the averaged polls (none / 0) (#57)
    by Cream City on Wed Apr 30, 2008 at 07:36:32 PM EST
    at the site I cited, yes.  Or see the link below.

    As you will see, if you look, these are not the matchup, head-to-head polls against McCain.

    Parent

    I wasn't clear (none / 0) (#64)
    by lilybart on Wed Apr 30, 2008 at 07:50:27 PM EST
    the poll I sited was a national  match-up and not the one you were talking about. You said you were fearing a not so good poll so I posted one for you.

    There are too many, so many polls that I just can't get all emotional over these little up and down slips and slides.

    Parent

    Whaa? I never said I feared anything (none / 0) (#78)
    by Cream City on Wed Apr 30, 2008 at 08:15:24 PM EST
    whether it be a poll or you, lilybrat.  I specified exactly my source and said it was an average of polls.  If you are seeing things on your computer screen that aren't there, well, I can't fix that.

    But if it's just too much to keep up with slips and slides of oh-so-many polls, the solution could be to stay off, y'know, political blogs in a primary season.

    Parent

    Ok, not the exact word (none / 0) (#82)
    by lilybart on Wed Apr 30, 2008 at 08:25:58 PM EST
    but you did say you wanted to enjoy your poll before someone posted one that "bummed your mellow" or whatever.

    And I don't think direct name calling is allowed here. Unless you want me to believe that was a typo. :)

    Parent

    That was me (none / 0) (#94)
    by waldenpond on Wed Apr 30, 2008 at 09:19:18 PM EST
    I said I was going to enjoy the Clinton poll information before some jumped in to trash them and 'harsh my mellow'

    Parent
    No, that wasnt me, either (none / 0) (#127)
    by Cream City on Wed Apr 30, 2008 at 11:35:56 PM EST
    and I'm not going to engage further -- you clearly have problems, either in literacy or in lying.

    Parent
    I'll save my comment on "real" results (none / 0) (#44)
    by magster on Wed Apr 30, 2008 at 07:04:13 PM EST
    until tomorrow. Enjoy your evening.

    Parent
    Do you have the link for that? (none / 0) (#23)
    by jawbone on Wed Apr 30, 2008 at 06:40:03 PM EST
    I looked at realclear and wasn't sure which poll report you were referring to. Thnx much.

    Parent
    RCP polls (none / 0) (#34)
    by waldenpond on Wed Apr 30, 2008 at 06:54:48 PM EST
    are in a box on the upper right side.  Click on the one you want to see the detail.

    Here's the national.

    Parent

    The averaged polls (none / 0) (#55)
    by Cream City on Wed Apr 30, 2008 at 07:34:59 PM EST
    for the Dem nomination -- waldenpond has the link.  (Thanks, W. Pond.:-)

    Parent
    Interesting figures (5.00 / 4) (#2)
    by stillife on Wed Apr 30, 2008 at 06:14:46 PM EST
    about how Dems view Clinton.  I just read this piece by Eric Boehlert on Media Matters:

    So now the press tells the candidates when to quit?

    She's supported by half the Democratic party and yet the MSM says she's not a viable candidate?

    On MSNBC, they talked about the MSNBC/WSJ poll but spun it to minimize the negative effects on Obama.

    Thanks (none / 0) (#15)
    by Jane in CA on Wed Apr 30, 2008 at 06:30:26 PM EST
    for the link. Excellent and timely article.

    Parent
    Many Polls Now Favor Sen. Clinton...It's A (5.00 / 2) (#14)
    by PssttCmere08 on Wed Apr 30, 2008 at 06:30:05 PM EST
    good thing.  And I believe they are going to just keep getting better.  

    Many polls now favor Sen. Clinton (none / 0) (#38)
    by delacarpa on Wed Apr 30, 2008 at 06:59:03 PM EST
    and because I think he was in trouble before Wright. He IMO had peaked already and Wright will so hurt him. The new one from SUSA came out yesterday that put Obama by 5 only and the poll was from the 26 to 28 and released yesterday says that the Wright factor wasn't in the mix. Things could get better for Clinton

    Parent
    Wouldn't it be nice (1.00 / 2) (#45)
    by lilybart on Wed Apr 30, 2008 at 07:04:54 PM EST
    if you thought Hillary was ahead because people prefer her policies, not becaues Obama knows someone who is RADICAL?

    It feels like Red State here when I read the gloating over Wright.

    Parent

    Lilybart....Your Shift Over At HuffPo? (5.00 / 1) (#47)
    by PssttCmere08 on Wed Apr 30, 2008 at 07:08:20 PM EST
    Hillary is ahead because she is the better candidate; we all know that.  Of course, all of obama's missteps don't hurt.

    Parent
    As the poster said, as I said (5.00 / 1) (#58)
    by Cream City on Wed Apr 30, 2008 at 07:39:49 PM EST
    the drops in the polls began before Wright.  So, yes, it must be because the majority of likely voters can see that Clinton offers far better policies.  Bless your heart for pointing it out.

    But really, there have been so many posts here saying how sad the Wright situation is, if it brings down a good politician at the start of a potentially significant national career.  Have you really not read those many posts?  If not, why not?

    Parent

    His Popstar trend is downwards (none / 0) (#65)
    by ig on Wed Apr 30, 2008 at 07:52:00 PM EST
    Its like a new fad. Adore initially, but after 6 months, people move on to something else.


    Parent
    Why do you continue to lie? (5.00 / 3) (#61)
    by Dr Molly on Wed Apr 30, 2008 at 07:42:30 PM EST
    Do you think people are stupid here? You keep using phrases like "because Obama knows someone who is radical" or, in previous thread "guilt by association" in reference to Obama and Wright.

    Do we really seem so dumb that you think we're going to forget what their real relationship has been? 'Oh, lilybart says he only knows him so I guess I was wrong, it's no big deal at all'. Good grief, why don't you go insult other people who are stupid enough to listen to this over and over and over and over.

    Parent

    Same line on Young Turks (none / 0) (#66)
    by ruffian on Wed Apr 30, 2008 at 07:56:57 PM EST
    That this uproar is all about anyone who ever associated with Obama and said a stupid thing.  That must be the talking point.  Cenk Uygar has a rant about 'six degrees of Barack Obama'.

    Weird -  just as I typed that, Jon Stewart said it to Newt Gingrich in my TiVo replay.

    Such a false strawman.  Obama gave Wright's church $22,500 in 2006.  Not something you do for someone you have a vague association with.

    Parent

    You do not give money to the pastor (none / 0) (#135)
    by independent voter on Thu May 01, 2008 at 06:54:26 AM EST
    you give it to the church. I see this misconception quoted here often. If you believe in the church's programs that is enough reason to donate money to the church. You could disagree with everything the pastor says.
    I give money to churches I have never set foot in because they feed the poor, etc. I have no idea if I agree with the pulpit message or not. I like the philanthropy.

    Parent
    Sorry (none / 0) (#137)
    by Ga6thDem on Thu May 01, 2008 at 08:29:08 AM EST
    but you do give money to the pastor. Giving money to the church helps pay his the minister. Your excuse doesn't pass the smell test because there are plenty of secular organizations that you can give money to as well as other churches. Obama chose to financially support that church because he basically agreed with Wright and the agenda. Otherwise he would have gone somewhere else.

    Parent
    I strongly disagree. you are wrong. (none / 0) (#138)
    by independent voter on Thu May 01, 2008 at 09:20:12 AM EST
    giving to a church typically means a larger % of your donation reaches the desired cause.
    Clearly, you feel that you somehow "know Obama's heart". I am always suspicious of people that make statements declaring what some one else thinks and feels.


    Parent
    When (none / 0) (#139)
    by Ga6thDem on Thu May 01, 2008 at 09:43:06 AM EST
    you give money to a church you are supporting everything including the minister. I'm not saying that I know Obama's heart only that he chose a radical church over many other churches. It tells you something about his belief system imo. People don't sit in the pews year after year and take their kids to said church if it's something that they strongly disagree with. As far as what he thinks and feels? Who knows? We only can judge him by his actions and choices since we really just don't know that much about him.

    Parent
    So, Barak is Black separatist stalking horse? (none / 0) (#76)
    by lilybart on Wed Apr 30, 2008 at 08:12:48 PM EST
    Are you really concerned that Obama will take over the country and kick the white people out of their farms like in South Africa?

    Because if you don't think that, then why the heck does any of this matter anyway?

    Parent

    I'm concerned that I don't have a clue (none / 0) (#80)
    by RalphB on Wed Apr 30, 2008 at 08:16:53 PM EST
    what Obama really wants to do.  I sure don't trust him to tell me, with this kind of judgement.  

    Parent
    No, I'm not concerned at all (none / 0) (#83)
    by ruffian on Wed Apr 30, 2008 at 08:26:33 PM EST
    I think the whole Wright thing is irrelevant to how Obama would govern.  I happen to believe Obama truly could care less about Wright's theology.  He joined the church for political reasons, and I would bet he is not a frequent attendee - either that or he  lied yesterday when he said he had never heard anything like what he heard Wright say Monday.

    My only concern is about the damage to Obama's electability.

    Pretending that there is only a distant association between Wright and Obama is just lying.

    Parent

    Yes, that must be it lilybart (none / 0) (#96)
    by Dr Molly on Wed Apr 30, 2008 at 09:25:00 PM EST
    I called out your weird pathological lies because I'm scared of big black scary people kicking the white people out of the farms.....

    yeah.

    is your koolaid spiked with something really serious tonight?

    Parent

    But, But I Thought Bill Clinton's Legacy Had Been (5.00 / 3) (#18)
    by MO Blue on Wed Apr 30, 2008 at 06:31:55 PM EST
    damaged forever helping his wife campaign. I'm sure I read the claim that BJC's ratings had dropped more than 20%. <snark>

    but but bill clinton's Fox News poll (none / 0) (#40)
    by delacarpa on Wed Apr 30, 2008 at 07:00:51 PM EST
    There's even a poll about Bill Clinton's effect at Harris Interactive. Taken two weeks ago, but released yesterdayh, it shows he's doing okay for Hillary.

    Not surprisingly, President Clinton is perceived much more favorably by Democrats as two-thirds (66%) of Democrats believe he helps his wife's campaign compared to 46 percent of Independents and 30 percent of Republicans.

    ...In this poll, a 63 to 35 percent majority gives him positive ratings for the job he did when he was president. Interestingly this is almost the same as the 65 percent positive, 34 percent negative rating that he received in the final Harris Poll before he left office in January 2001 (Harris Poll #5, 1/19/01). Even three in five (62%) Independents gave him positive ratings for his time in office.


    Parent

    I'm Not Sure If You Are Returning Snark For Snark (none / 0) (#88)
    by MO Blue on Wed Apr 30, 2008 at 08:53:38 PM EST
    or if you missed my snark tag. Oh well, either way repeating facts (actual polls) to refute propaganda is always good.

    Parent
    Bill Is Doing Just Fine By Hill..... (none / 0) (#48)
    by PssttCmere08 on Wed Apr 30, 2008 at 07:09:20 PM EST
    He will be in Crown Pointe, IN, I believe tomorrow.

    Parent
    I listened to a speech he gave in NC (5.00 / 1) (#67)
    by ruffian on Wed Apr 30, 2008 at 07:59:57 PM EST
    on my XM radio today.  It was wonderful - talked to regular people in a regular tone and laid out the top 10 reasons they should vote for Hillary.  If that is what he is doing day after day, he must be helping her a great deal.

    Of course we will never see that in the MSM .  We'll only see when he gets rightfully testy with a reporter.

    Parent

    If Anyone Has The Right To Wag A Finger (none / 0) (#95)
    by PssttCmere08 on Wed Apr 30, 2008 at 09:23:22 PM EST
    (I would be using the middle finger) at the media, it is Bill Clinton.  They have been merciless; if there is no there there, they will make something up.

    Parent
    I have heard several comments from my (5.00 / 1) (#19)
    by athyrio on Wed Apr 30, 2008 at 06:32:02 PM EST
    neighbors about Wright and Obama that really aren't too favorable as far as the blue collar voter is concerned...I know this isn't a poll but it is sorta my "neighborhood pulse"...

    I think Fox News (5.00 / 2) (#20)
    by madamab on Wed Apr 30, 2008 at 06:32:56 PM EST
    is paying a lot of attention to what Democrats think because we are so obviously divided.

    It's oppo research. Who will they be smearing after the convention?

    The corporate media is too busy telling us what to do to find out what we really think.

    Also (none / 0) (#24)
    by stillife on Wed Apr 30, 2008 at 06:43:07 PM EST
    I think they sense the opportunity to snag more viewers and some journalistic credibility.  See: their ad with Terry McAuliffe giving Fox props for being the first to report her PA win.  

    Of course, I agree with you that once the primaries are over, they'll be totally in the tank for McCain.

    Parent

    Now for something to help increase positive (5.00 / 3) (#22)
    by jawbone on Wed Apr 30, 2008 at 06:36:46 PM EST
    feelings toward Sen. Clinton and keep the good poll results.

    That Is A Fanastic Ad (none / 0) (#26)
    by MO Blue on Wed Apr 30, 2008 at 06:44:29 PM EST
    Should definitely generate some warm feelings for our gal.

    Parent
    Go Maya and Go Hillary (none / 0) (#27)
    by bjorn on Wed Apr 30, 2008 at 06:47:02 PM EST
    thanks for the link

    Parent
    I loved that Maya endorsed her. (none / 0) (#32)
    by pie on Wed Apr 30, 2008 at 06:52:04 PM EST
    I remember how close she and Oprah have been.

    Parent
    I Still Have Issues With Toni Morrison... (none / 0) (#46)
    by PssttCmere08 on Wed Apr 30, 2008 at 07:05:36 PM EST
    She was the one who dubbed Bill the first black president.  They were all cozied up and then she backed obama.

    Parent
    Toni didn't do that (none / 0) (#63)
    by kayla on Wed Apr 30, 2008 at 07:44:34 PM EST
    Bill as First Black President was a sentiment buzzing around the AA community a while before Toni ever said it.  She just solidified it in an article where she mentioned Bill as the FBP.

    Also - Bill and Hillary aren't the same person.  You can have fond memories of Bill's administration and still not care to support Hillary.  Personally, I have no qualms about her supporting Obama.

    Parent

    kayla well, good for you. (none / 0) (#97)
    by PssttCmere08 on Wed Apr 30, 2008 at 09:25:11 PM EST


    Parent
    jawbone....thanks for that! (none / 0) (#54)
    by PssttCmere08 on Wed Apr 30, 2008 at 07:22:06 PM EST


    Parent
    I really don't trust Fox polls (5.00 / 0) (#25)
    by TeresaInSnow2 on Wed Apr 30, 2008 at 06:44:19 PM EST
    even if they report results I like.

    Who does Fox's polling? (none / 0) (#28)
    by pie on Wed Apr 30, 2008 at 06:48:23 PM EST
    Frankly, I'd go with SUSA mostly, since tey seem to be more accurate of late.  Polling has changed for many reasons.  It's getting harder to stay ahead of the curve, I would think.

    Parent
    TinS2, I'm with you---never trust the Faux (none / 0) (#41)
    by lookoverthere on Wed Apr 30, 2008 at 07:02:52 PM EST


    Parent
    Doubters can go to ABCnews.com (5.00 / 1) (#30)
    by bjorn on Wed Apr 30, 2008 at 06:50:52 PM EST
    They are touting a NYTimes poll with almost identical results to Fox.

    Do you think (none / 0) (#37)
    by TeresaInSnow2 on Wed Apr 30, 2008 at 06:58:36 PM EST
    that people are figuring this election out?

    Parent
    It Would Be Very Nice If Senator Obama Talked (5.00 / 1) (#117)
    by MO Blue on Wed Apr 30, 2008 at 10:49:54 PM EST
    in detail about how he planned to fix the problems facing the nation rather spending his time praising the Republicans, attacking health care and putting Social Security on the table.

    we've all seen these talking points before (5.00 / 2) (#121)
    by RalphB on Wed Apr 30, 2008 at 11:22:36 PM EST
    they are now officially inane and boring.

    Parent
    Why are these polls only relevant (1.00 / 0) (#3)
    by flyerhawk on Wed Apr 30, 2008 at 06:20:10 PM EST
    When Hillary is leading?  

    LOL, (5.00 / 2) (#4)
    by eleanora on Wed Apr 30, 2008 at 06:23:34 PM EST
    I never pay attention to Faux News polls, but I'll take any good news we can get. BTD posts other polls on a regular basis, last set was NC polls from SUSA and a few others which favored Senator Obama. I think it was yesterday if you want to search :)

    Parent
    Because (5.00 / 3) (#5)
    by cmugirl on Wed Apr 30, 2008 at 06:24:00 PM EST
    Other than here, you'd never know about them.  The MSM certainly isn't going to feature them.

    Parent
    You guys have perfected (1.00 / 1) (#10)
    by flyerhawk on Wed Apr 30, 2008 at 06:25:41 PM EST
    the "we are victims of the MSM" card.  You can rationalize ANYTHING by saying that you have no choice due to the big bad MSM.

    Parent
    Yes (5.00 / 9) (#12)
    by nell on Wed Apr 30, 2008 at 06:27:38 PM EST
    in fact, independent watchdog organizations have established that Hillary gets savaged by the press while Obama gets a free ride. This is true. It isn't about playing the victim card, it is about recognizing that she won't get a fair shot in the press and we should get our information elsewhere.

    Read the most recent media matters article someone posted above about how unprecedented it is for the press to push a candidate out of the race the way they do to her.

    Parent

    OK that's funny (5.00 / 5) (#13)
    by Nadai on Wed Apr 30, 2008 at 06:29:46 PM EST
    since you're on TL whining that news which favors your candidate isn't being reported here when, in fact, it is, as several people have pointed out with a specific post.  But we're the ones playing the victim.  Good job.

    Parent
    FL/MI (5.00 / 1) (#16)
    by cmugirl on Wed Apr 30, 2008 at 06:30:36 PM EST
    We're not playing the victim here.

    Case in point - never mentioned in the popular vote tally in the MSM. You can argue about delegates and the ROOLZ, but people actually voted, yet the MSM won't even give Hillary's claim any air time.

    Jeralyn and BTD do a good job of putting stuff up that shows both sides - polls included.

    But, you obviously won't agree.

    Parent

    Why are you creating straw men to attack? (5.00 / 3) (#6)
    by Lysis on Wed Apr 30, 2008 at 06:24:40 PM EST
    Polls are reported on all of the time here, good or bad for Hillary.  You're attempting to score points off an opponent that doesn't exist.

    Parent
    Polls were less relevant (5.00 / 1) (#7)
    by pie on Wed Apr 30, 2008 at 06:24:57 PM EST
    earlier in the process.

    The further we get into it, obviously, the more relevant polls become.

    Parent

    Well (5.00 / 1) (#8)
    by Nadai on Wed Apr 30, 2008 at 06:25:08 PM EST
    since there was a post just yesterday about Obama leading in NC polls (SUSA by 5, Rasmussen by 14), I think your premise is incorrect.

    Parent
    And (5.00 / 4) (#11)
    by nell on Wed Apr 30, 2008 at 06:25:46 PM EST
    because the conventional wisdom as established by the press is that Barack is leading and why is Hillary still in this race, she has no shot, Dems don't want her, she is stealing this, etc...

    But the polls show different.

    Parent

    Why do you only say that (5.00 / 1) (#17)
    by Cream City on Wed Apr 30, 2008 at 06:31:51 PM EST
    when you don't like them?  There have been plenty of polls posted here that go the other way.  So the facts are not with you, and we are left with your opinion . . . or perhaps it's some odd affliction that makes only some posts visible for you.

    If so, perhaps we could investigate TalkLeft in Braille?

    Parent

    Talk Left in braille? (5.00 / 1) (#21)
    by ccpup on Wed Apr 30, 2008 at 06:35:21 PM EST
    But wouldn't Dorito Fingers stain the computer screen?

    (snark)

    Parent

    Really? (none / 0) (#29)
    by flyerhawk on Wed Apr 30, 2008 at 06:50:13 PM EST
    When was the last time a Gallup poll was posted her before her recent run of positive success?

    You guys can do whatever you want.  You can trumpet whatever news bit you want to parade around.

    And when Obama continues to get more SDs, you can scratch you can say it was only because of the Big Bad MSM, especially MSNBC which has apparently become the leader of the MSM.

    Parent

    I assume (none / 0) (#36)
    by TeresaInSnow2 on Wed Apr 30, 2008 at 06:57:31 PM EST
    that DailyKOS, AmericaBlog, Atrios, TPM and Huffington post are all reporting this poll because TalkLeft is the only one that is slightly biased in a particular direction?

    Jeralyn is a Hillary partisan.  She's never hidden that.

    Parent

    I don't know ... why don't you ask Guam? (none / 0) (#49)
    by Ellie on Wed Apr 30, 2008 at 07:10:54 PM EST
    That's my Dem Primary version of "Why don't you go play in traffic?"

    (They're up next; 05/03/08.)

    Parent

    And Bill Clinton called Guam (5.00 / 1) (#99)
    by FlaDemFem on Wed Apr 30, 2008 at 09:27:06 PM EST
    and did a live radio interview. It was the first time ANY candidate in this country has done that. And Bill said that they will try to get someone from the campaign out there and that if he has the time, he will come himself. I figure Guam is going for Hillary.

    Parent
    You really think we are going to go (none / 0) (#62)
    by Cream City on Wed Apr 30, 2008 at 07:43:26 PM EST
    look that up because you don't keep up here?  What is wrong with your magic fingers on the search function?  Go get solid evidence for your plaint and then come on back with a contribution, bless your heart.

    Parent
    Cream City, I chuckle every time (none / 0) (#85)
    by Anne on Wed Apr 30, 2008 at 08:33:12 PM EST
    you say "bless your heart" to these people, since I went to school in southern Virginia and know what you're really saying...hee hee.

    Parent
    I owe it all to you Southruners (none / 0) (#110)
    by Cream City on Wed Apr 30, 2008 at 10:15:57 PM EST
    who taught me that here on this very blog.  I used it yesterday on another Northruner, who had tried to put me down, and it left him so nonplussed he thanked me.  I had not said something that merited gratitude. :-)  

    It beats Midwestern nice all to heck.  All we've got is "how 'bout dat weather, dere" and "how 'bout dem Bears/Packers/Vikings/etc., dere."  

    Parent

    it is easy to see (none / 0) (#31)
    by cy street on Wed Apr 30, 2008 at 06:51:17 PM EST
    how supers are going to be persuaded by fox, given the fuzzy relationship with dems and fox.

    not.

    i hope the house of clinton knows better than to build a back door strategy that goes through fox.

    Parent

    I'm no fan of Faux news. (5.00 / 1) (#33)
    by pie on Wed Apr 30, 2008 at 06:53:23 PM EST
    But more people watch O'Reilly than watch Olbermann.

    Parent
    What's with this (5.00 / 2) (#59)
    by RalphB on Wed Apr 30, 2008 at 07:41:03 PM EST
    House of Clinton BS in your posts?  Is that your immature way to be disrespectful or just a nervous tic?


    Parent
    No, it's just our way (1.00 / 3) (#69)
    by oxpecker on Wed Apr 30, 2008 at 08:03:02 PM EST
    of saying it's sad and pathetic to witness desperate Clinton supporters buddy up with wingnuts in their struggle to overturn Obama's victory in the dem nomination. You say disrespect, we say (I say) reality. But it's a free country, you can do what you want.

    Parent
    Coming from the desperation of (5.00 / 3) (#79)
    by waldenpond on Wed Apr 30, 2008 at 08:16:02 PM EST
    someone who's first comment was...It's over, so get over it (what a joke)

    second comment....The triangulating with the GOP by Hillary and others to attack Obama (oh poor baby, leave Obama alooooone and what a joke)

    third comment....I think you are deeply disappointed your candidate (what a joke)

    Someone seems to pop up every time his candidate is having a bad day.

    and for dessert, this special little ditty....The hatred, hysteria and detachment from realty is sad to say the least. Maybe you should do the party a favor and just leave and start your own.

    You brought your garbage attitude the first day and have been consistent in presenting it every time you post.  Bored of listening to yourself at Kos?  ha! ha!

    Parent

    You didn't list the comments (none / 0) (#84)
    by oxpecker on Wed Apr 30, 2008 at 08:31:29 PM EST
    I was responding to. But that's not surprising. I won't argue that I'm blunt, or even nasty sometimes, but the point remains about the buddying up with Fox and other wingnuts to attack Barack. I expect it from it from them, but not from alleged democrats.

    And BTW, my candidate was John Edwards and after that either Clinton or Obama. And now it's Obama because, well, I don't know, maybe because he has more votes, playing by the rules.

    Did I say he is still ahead.

    Parent

    So to be clear... (none / 0) (#89)
    by lookoverthere on Wed Apr 30, 2008 at 08:56:01 PM EST
    When Sen. Obama was on Fox, that wasn't buddying up?


    Parent
    No , it was not.. (none / 0) (#91)
    by oxpecker on Wed Apr 30, 2008 at 09:10:21 PM EST
    It was a professional interview with all the tough questions you'd expect from a professional interview. I haven't seen Hillary's interview O'Reilly and was not necessarily referring to that. Although, I hope your not comparing Chris Wallace with BillO. You aren't are you?

    Parent
    With lightweight Chris (none / 0) (#98)
    by waldenpond on Wed Apr 30, 2008 at 09:25:44 PM EST
    Wallace because Obama doesn't have the personality or the knowledge to be able to take on nor withstand anyone else on that program.  Ooops.... did I say that out loud?

    Parent
    Ah (none / 0) (#75)
    by RalphB on Wed Apr 30, 2008 at 08:11:51 PM EST
    it's a disrespectful nervous tic.  Silly but then again Obama hasn't won yet, no matter what the droids say.  :-)

    Parent
    What do mean back door thru Fox. (none / 0) (#56)
    by oxpecker on Wed Apr 30, 2008 at 07:35:47 PM EST
    She's moved the whole house in where Roger Ailes holds the title.

    Parent
    Little sick of (none / 0) (#73)
    by waldenpond on Wed Apr 30, 2008 at 08:09:20 PM EST
    the house of Clinton garbage.

    Parent
    Reframe it this way (none / 0) (#87)
    by Marvin42 on Wed Apr 30, 2008 at 08:53:17 PM EST
    When she gets the nomination and wins the GE the white house will be the house of Clinton(s) again, and that would rile up some people who shall remain unnamed... ;)

    Parent
    Read the last dozen posts on polls (none / 0) (#35)
    by Ellie on Wed Apr 30, 2008 at 06:57:26 PM EST
    You haven't done your homework, your question is nonsensical and the onus is on you to inform yourself.

    Parent
    Polls are not only relevant when HRC leads (none / 0) (#51)
    by Prabhata on Wed Apr 30, 2008 at 07:18:26 PM EST
    or when BO leads.  Polls are relevant for their movement.

    Parent
    Something for BTD to love in Fox poll (none / 0) (#39)
    by magster on Wed Apr 30, 2008 at 07:00:11 PM EST
    Unity ticket poll results:

    Obama/Clinton 47
    McCain/Romney 41

    Standing alone, each are virtually tied with McCain.

    And they didn't bother (none / 0) (#52)
    by TeresaInSnow2 on Wed Apr 30, 2008 at 07:21:19 PM EST
    asking the Clinton/Obama vs McCain/Romney question.

    However they did ask if Clinton is the presidential candidate how many Obama supporters would vote for Clinton/McCain/Don't Know.  The result:

    Clinton 66%/McCain 21%/Other 13%

    If Obama is the candidate, how many Clinton supporters would vote for Obama/McCain/Don't Know

    Obama 47%/McCain 32%/Other 20%.

    So interesting.

    Parent

    Say hello to our new commentor (5.00 / 1) (#101)
    by waldenpond on Wed Apr 30, 2008 at 09:32:20 PM EST
    everyone.  This is ...

    Name: proudliberalpatriot.
    Interests: adoring Obama
    Hobby: calling Clinton names...(basically she's a liar about the war) and telling Clinton supporters they should be ashamed.

    proud has made 4 comments and not been rated 1.

    Say hello to proud everyone and be sure to welcome his team members from Kos when they arrive.

    BTW: Who I vote for is none of your business so get off your high pony.

    Parent

    Would that include Michelle Obama?? (none / 0) (#108)
    by FlaDemFem on Wed Apr 30, 2008 at 10:00:38 PM EST
    She did say she would have to think about supporting Hillary if she got the nomination. And Obama, instead of calling on his supporters to support the nominee like Hillary did, said that he didn't think his supporters would vote for Clinton, but that hers would vote for him. So, would that make Michelle and Barack Obama traitors to the party??? Just askin' Heh.

    Parent
    If the 'Party' comes up (none / 0) (#109)
    by waldenpond on Wed Apr 30, 2008 at 10:06:42 PM EST
    with a qualified candidate I will vote for that person.  I don't walk lock step with any party that disenfranchises voters, calls for one candidate to withdraw, and has members that think they have the right to tell people how to vote.

    Absolutely not defensive nor judgmental.  Words such as 'hello' and 'pony' were a clue.  That's coming from you.  

    'Traitor' 'defensive' 'judgmental' 'abomination' 'sensitive'

    Dramatic?  Lighten up.  :)

    Parent

    Suck it up.. LOL (none / 0) (#123)
    by waldenpond on Wed Apr 30, 2008 at 11:24:32 PM EST


    Parent
    Proud? (none / 0) (#77)
    by RalphB on Wed Apr 30, 2008 at 08:14:42 PM EST
    No, it's just a poll number that means more people think he is not qualified to be president. Simple as that.


    Parent
    Who Dems support (none / 0) (#86)
    by Rashomon66 on Wed Apr 30, 2008 at 08:36:14 PM EST
    There are many ways to read this Fox Poll.
    Could mean that if their preferred candidate doesn't win Obama supporters are more open to voting for Clinton if she wins than the other way around. I'm not sure experience is the key to their reasoning.


    Parent
    It could be that they don't want to be party (none / 0) (#102)
    by FlaDemFem on Wed Apr 30, 2008 at 09:34:11 PM EST
    to foisting another incompetent narcissist on the American people. One is enough, thank you.

    Parent
    I am being respectful. I stated my opinion. (none / 0) (#107)
    by FlaDemFem on Wed Apr 30, 2008 at 09:55:00 PM EST
    I am entitled to my opinion, even if it doesn't jive with your particular view of Barack Obama. A man who insists on talking about himself and his life story rather than discuss the policies that he will have as President can easily be seen as a narcissist. A man who discards his long time friends for his own convenience can easily be seen as a narcissist. A man who thinks that he only has to present himself as a candidate to be swept into office not only can be seen as a narcissist, but quite probably meets the clinical requirements of the disorder. But, that is irrelevant. I think what I think for the reasons I state that I think them. And all the whining in the world by the Obama fans isn't going to change that. Sorry. You are just going to have to deal with it.

    Parent
    A Story Full Of Lies...That Is All Obama Has (none / 0) (#126)
    by PssttCmere08 on Wed Apr 30, 2008 at 11:32:34 PM EST
    told us so far.  

    Parent
    Maybe you should be proud (none / 0) (#93)
    by TeresaInSnow2 on Wed Apr 30, 2008 at 09:16:53 PM EST
    Since Obama apparently doesn't instill confidence in  whole lot of Clinton's supporters...or the negative coverage of Clinton made them rally by her.

    I didn't say I was proud.  I only said it was interesting.

    It is interesting.  It's pretty sad however.  It's sad what has happened to the net too.

    Parent

    That 21% Could Be Comprised Of Hillary's (none / 0) (#113)
    by MO Blue on Wed Apr 30, 2008 at 10:43:54 PM EST
    Independent voters who prefer McCain. You are making assumptions that all those voters are Democrats.  

    Parent
    Quite A Few Of The Regulars Here At TL Are (none / 0) (#122)
    by MO Blue on Wed Apr 30, 2008 at 11:22:47 PM EST
    Indies who are voting for Hillary, but we would want facts to get in the way of your unsubtantiated opinion.

    Parent
    Independent here (none / 0) (#125)
    by RalphB on Wed Apr 30, 2008 at 11:31:55 PM EST
    generally lean to democratic candidates, but the party itself,  uh no  :-)

    Parent
    Also A Dem Leaning Independent (none / 0) (#128)
    by MO Blue on Wed Apr 30, 2008 at 11:36:10 PM EST
    but the Obama supporter above is not open to information or facts that do not substantiate his/her preconceive opinions.

    Parent
    Obama Thinks That The Republicans Have (none / 0) (#136)
    by MO Blue on Thu May 01, 2008 at 06:58:42 AM EST
    better ideas on government regulations and I think that the Clean Water Act falls within that category. Go read the transcript of his Fox interview and read what he said about government restrictions.  Maybe that was the rationale behind him voting in favor of Cheney's energy bill. So far, Obama has really liked Republican ideas and policies. He has stated he would adopt the Reagan model of foreign affairs.

    Obama also thinks Reagan was an iconic president. Reagan, had he been as  effective as Obama portrays him, would have rolled back many of the provisions contained in the voting rights act. In fact, he was the white supremacists wet dream. Maybe you need to listen to what your candidate is saying when he isn't giving lofty speeches about hope and change.

    Parent

    I'm curious why you left out the part where 36% (none / 0) (#42)
    by independent voter on Wed Apr 30, 2008 at 07:03:05 PM EST
    question Hillary's truthfulness (more than have a problem with the bitter comment or Jeremiah Wright) and a significant number worry about Bill Clinton's influence in a Hillary CLinton presidency.
    It sure would be nice to get the whole story right here.

    36%? (5.00 / 1) (#50)
    by pie on Wed Apr 30, 2008 at 07:17:35 PM EST
    Wow!  That's great!

    Parent
    Inorite? (5.00 / 1) (#60)
    by eleanora on Wed Apr 30, 2008 at 07:41:07 PM EST
    I think that's actually gone down for her. This primary has been excellent for letting every state get to see the candidates personally and decide for themselves :D

    Parent
    Heck, 38% of my best friends (5.00 / 3) (#72)
    by ruffian on Wed Apr 30, 2008 at 08:07:56 PM EST
    question my truthfullness!

    Parent
    Some issues are not enough to lose votes (none / 0) (#53)
    by Prabhata on Wed Apr 30, 2008 at 07:22:02 PM EST
    Hillary still wins, even with low honesty numbers.  I think that there are some issues that are not too important.  It's not like they think she will take us to war on a lie.

    Parent
    So glad you brought up Kyl-Lieberman (5.00 / 3) (#90)
    by lookoverthere on Wed Apr 30, 2008 at 09:08:26 PM EST
    Sen. Obama did not vote on Kyl-Lieberman, because, as he said, he didn't know the vote was coming up. This appears to be untrue according to CNN.

    Whatever the reason, Sen. Obama had offered his own version of the bill six months prior.

    On October 8, 2007, ABC's Jake Tapper reported that on April 24, 2007, Obama had cosponsored the [binding] Iran Counter-Proliferation Act of 2007,which, like Kyl-Lieberman, would have designated the Iranian Revolutionary Guards as a Foreign Terrorist Organization.

    The Secretary of State should designate the Iranian Revolutionary Guards as a Foreign Terrorist Organization under section 219 of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1189) and the Secretary of the Treasury should place the Iranian Revolutionary Guards on the list of Specially Designated Global Terrorists under Executive Order 13224 (66 Fed. Reg. 186; relating to blocking property and prohibiting transactions with persons who commit, threaten to commit, or support terrorism).


    Parent
    Senator Obama Took His Usual Courageous Stand (5.00 / 1) (#115)
    by MO Blue on Wed Apr 30, 2008 at 10:46:25 PM EST
    when faced with a controversial issue. He did not vote

    Parent
    It Is Debatable Whether Or Not That Would (5.00 / 1) (#124)
    by MO Blue on Wed Apr 30, 2008 at 11:30:38 PM EST
    give Bush a green light to even bomb Iran, let alone nuke it.

    What is not debatable is that Obama said he would bomb Pakistan.

    So I guess you only favor bombing countries if Obama likes the idea. Or maybe, you are only in favor of bombing countries that have nuclear weapons.

    Parent

    Liar (none / 0) (#92)
    by mmc9431 on Wed Apr 30, 2008 at 09:12:45 PM EST
    What politician isn't a liar and panderer? Obama really isn't any different than the rest. If he stands there and says he has never heard Wright's comments. He's lying. He's been close friends for over 20 yrs. We would have been better off saying that he didn't agree with them rather than he never heard them. And he does his share of pandering too. Touring SC with gay basher McCurkin was pandering to the church crowd. His justification of that was that he believed in having an open dialogue. But he sure didn't take anyone from the KKK with him. McCurkin played to the base he was after.

    Parent
    What do you think the numbers on (none / 0) (#105)
    by FlaDemFem on Wed Apr 30, 2008 at 09:46:35 PM EST
    Obama's truthfulness are after the Wright debacle? First he spends 20 years in the church listening to Wright, getting married by him, and speaking of him as his mentor and spiritual advisor, then he turns around and claims he barely knew the man because it is politically convenient. And shall we discuss his resume? For instance, his name on 25 bills that he had nothing to do with. He "sponsored" 27 but only actually had anything to do with two of them. The rest Emil Jones put his name on to "give him credibility". Note the word GIVE. Obama didn't EARN his credibility, it was given to him. So when he said he got those bills through and that they couldn't have passed without him, he is lying. Flat out lying. So what about Barack Obama's truthfulness?? Does he have any?

    Parent
    We are discussing this one poll (none / 0) (#134)
    by independent voter on Thu May 01, 2008 at 06:39:58 AM EST
    and I don't have to "think" what his truthfulness numbers are, I can look at the poll and see. I know you want his numbers to be worse than Hillary's, but they are not.

    Parent
    at this point, mccain is mccain's worst (none / 0) (#81)
    by cpinva on Wed Apr 30, 2008 at 08:24:36 PM EST
    liability. once the real fun starts (assuming sen. clinton's the dem. nominee), she'll shred him like 1,000 year-old cabbage. sen. mccain has a bountiful closet full of skeletons, just ripe for the picking. no need to lie or distort, his truth is damning enough.

    Fickle People! (none / 0) (#100)
    by mmc9431 on Wed Apr 30, 2008 at 09:28:28 PM EST
    Polls show jusy how little people think about a situation. It's like impulse buying! 70% of us though Iraq was a great idea. Now 70% of us think is was wrong. Candidates rise and fall 10% in days. 2004 proved that we should never over estimate the American public. Bush won when there should have been no way of him getting a second term.  McCain could do it too.

    I will tell you your problem (none / 0) (#133)
    by dissenter on Thu May 01, 2008 at 12:53:19 AM EST
    You are naive just like Obama. Our policy has always been to bomb Pakistan. We just don't advertise it for good reason. When Obama did his little showboating on that issue last fall we all went on alert in Afghanistan.

    His careless statements and judgment are the issue but apparently his supporters just don't get it.

    Fox News Poll: Hillary Preferred By Dems Over Obama and McCain | 121 comments (121 topical)

    Readers Must Login or Create an Account to Comment