A major issue for the current primary elections is electability. Many Democratic voters are casting their lot with the candidate who they believe has the best chance at defeating the Republicans in the upcoming presidential election. The biggest controversies over electability have surrounded both Obama and Clinton's candidacies. A recent poll by CNN/WMUR gave Obama a
42 to 31 percent edge over Clinton on "electability."
Furthermore another CNN/WMUR polls gives Obama a 13 point lead over Clinton in the New Hampshire Primary. [Ibid]
A Gallop poll devoted to Clinton's electability recently came out and these were the results:
Hillary Clinton's campaign has gone on the offensive against the Obama campaign several times, calling his record into question and calling him "a talker" and saying that he lacked experience, among other remarks. Source
But according to recent poll data taken from a televised debate between Democratic candidates shows that negative comments, or perceived negative comments, losses rather than gains her favor.
Who will win the Democratic nomination, and the presidency for that matter, remains to be seen, but things don't look promising for the Clinton campaign.
pmonkeyEsquire said:
Hillary cried!!! Ha Ha!! Nobody wants a crybaby President!
She did kind of hurt her campaign with that. I don't personally care if a candidate cries, but among the male demographic crying = weakness. Especially for a woman who is taken less seriously because of her gender.
IDGAS said:
Didn't Edmund Muskie also "tear up" in New Hampshire?
The collapse of Muskie's momentum early in the 1972 campaign is also attributed to his response to campaign attacks. Prior to the New Hampshire primary, the so-called "Canuck Letter" was published in the Manchester Union-Leader. The letter claimed that Muskie had made disparaging remarks about French-Canadians%u2014a remark likely to injure Muskie's support among the French-Canadian population in northern New England. Subsequently, the paper published an attack on the character of Muskie's wife Jane, reporting that she drank and used off-color language during the campaign. Muskie made an emotional defense of his wife in a speech outside the newspaper's offices during a snowstorm. Though Muskie later stated that what had appeared to the press as tears were actually melted snowflakes, the press reports that Muskie broke down and cried shattered the candidate's image as calm and reasoned.[3]
Nessuno said:
She did kind of hurt her campaign with that. I don't personally care if a candidate cries, but among the male demographic crying = weakness. Especially for a woman who is taken less seriously because of her gender.
Yeah, and when she doesn't cry, she's considered to be a heartless bitch, which also isn't considered a good quality. Of course, if you're a heartless asshole and are a male, the public is pretty cool with that.
I think this is one of Clinton's biggest problems when it comes it electability.
Right now though, it's kind of backlashing since there's been so much venom thrown her way, people are starting to want to take the other side.
_Twitch_ said:
What's that pollsters? You don't know everything? Good, I'm glad we got that settled.
While pollsters don't know everything, I submit that they lack omnipotence, there are a lot of statistics, and a lot of personal experience on my part, which say that people will come out just to vote AGAINST Clinton in 08'. To many people, she's really not popular. Then again, people will come out against Obama because he's black, muslim and his name can be bastardized to Iraq Hussein Osama. I just seriously doubt Clinton will win the election against a Republican male. This isn't sexism, I just think too many people hate Clinton for valid reasons and, on the other side, the south wouldn't vote for her just out of sexist ignorance.
Nessuno
Washington, DC
May 2006
JAN 07, 2008 11:47 PM