MyDD :: How Clinton and Giuliani Are Looking Back Home

How Clinton and Giuliani Are Looking Back Home

by Todd Beeton, Tue Aug 28, 2007 at 09:09:16 PM EST

Since Hillary Clinton v. Rudy Giuliani head-to-head match ups seem to be all the rage, I thought it was interesting that both Rasmussen and SurveyUSA released polls of how the two New Yorkers would fare against each other back home where voters know them best.

Survey USA (8/10-8/12) (via Pollster):

Hillary Clinton 59%
Rudy Giuliani 37%

Rasmussen (8/23):

Hillary Clinton 58%
Rudy Giuliani 33%
Other/Not sure 9%

These numbers actually track pretty closely with the election results from 2004 when Kerry defeated Bush in New York 58% to 41% but Rudy's not even reaching Bush 2004 levels in his own state is notable (read: fairly pathetic.) Looking just at the Rasmussen numbers, once the I Don't Knows shake out, Rudy would be well under 40% while Clinton would end up several points ahead of Kerry's level of support. Their respective favorability ratings bear this out.

Again from Rasmussen, favorable/unfavorable:

Hillary Clinton 63/35
Rudy Giuliani 47/50

Of course, Giuliani's not mayor anymore and Clinton is currently senator, and an extremely popular one at that.

But what's got to be even more devastating for Rudy vis a vis his support back home, ya know, where 9/11 actually happened, is the result when Rasmussen asked respondents whom they trust more on the issue of terrorism:

Which of NEW YORK'S PRESIDENTIAL HOPEFULS do you trust the most to handle the War on Terror?

36% Giuliani

44% Clinton

19% Not sure

And this is a sample of voters that chose "War on Terror" as their number one issue (38%.)

The fact that Rudy attracts virtually the same exact level of support among all voters as he does among those that trust him on the "War on Terror" confirms what we've thought from the start -- terrorism really is all he has. Secondly, as Greg Sargent slyly observes, this result

would seem to make it tougher for Rudy to sustain his argument that he's the one who as GOP nominee would put reliably blue states -- such as his own -- in play.

In fact, looking at the most current statewide head-to-head match up polls around the country, Chris Bowers put together a handy electoral map of what a Clinton vs. Giuliani result would look like and the only state that went for Kerry in 2004 that he would manage to switch to red would be Connecticut. Clinton on the other hand would switch 15 Bush states to the Democratic column resulting in a rout of 335 - 203 electoral votes.

And she's supposedly the unelectable one...

Tags: hillary clinton, rudy giuliani, new york, 2008 presidential election (all tags)

Permalink :: 40 Comments :: Post a Comment

Re: How Clinton and Giuliani Are Looking Back Home (2.00 / 1)

Good points made.

I think the Republican brand is severely damaged, which is why GOPers don't look good against Democrats these days. Even Giuliani, who sports the best favorables of all candidates, does not look all that good, and that is at his zenith. It does not get any better than this for Giuliani, he won't be able to sustain lofty 63% to 29% fav./unfav. ratings for long. When he comes down to earth on those numbers he'll poll even worse than he does today, and today is no picnick for him.

This could be a realignment election. If she wins the nomination I expect Clinton to bring in a massive amount of new women voters, a share of the women demographic we have never seen for Democrats in our lifetimes (logically, given the historic implications) and also a record Hispanic vote, courtesy of the arrogant xenophobes in the GOP and Clinton's extremely high popularity in the Hispanic community. We will see very strong youth turnout and AA turnout. I strongly believe 2008 has the potential to be a realignment election of sorts.

by georgep on Tue Aug 28, 2007 at 09:36:17 PM EST

Re: How Clinton and Giuliani Are Looking Back Home (none / 0)

I have seen more than one commenter on this site suggest that if we're "foolish" enough to nominate Hillary, she might even lose NY to Giuliani. These poll results aren't all that make that view deluded.

"Another problem we have...is that in election years we behave somewhat as primitive peoples do at the time of the full moon." --Harry Truman

by Steve M on Tue Aug 28, 2007 at 09:38:43 PM EST

Re: How Clinton and Giuliani Are Looking Back Home (none / 0)

The more interesting polling would be from NJ. I believe that Clinton beats Giuliani there, but it is more competetive. I also think that in NJ Giuliani may do well against both Obama and Edwards.

Then again, as I said above, Giuliani is on top now with his fav./unfav. which is bound to change to normalcy at some point. Then his numbers should sink some more.

BTW, notice how it is only Clinton polled by all these outfits these days? I truly believe that the pollsters mean it when they write "This race is now Clinton's to lose," which then causes them to move on to polling according to that belief, namely that it is Clinton vs. one of 3 or 4 GOPers (yet to be determined.)

by georgep on Tue Aug 28, 2007 at 09:48:58 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: How Clinton and Giuliani Are Looking Back Home (none / 0)

I have to say that I have found the netroots really not too bright on the subject of Hillary Clinton. It has been very discouraging after the excellent job everyone did during the 2006 elections. Sure some of the candidates let us down after they got in office and we could have done more if the DCCC hadn't wasted so much money on Bush Dogs, still we did win back a lot of seats.

DON'T COUNT THE VOTES, DON'T COUNT THE VOTES.... Obama and the Obamaettes... spring 2008

by TeresaINPennsylvania on Tue Aug 28, 2007 at 11:08:23 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: How Clinton and Giuliani Are Looking Back Home (none / 0)

Hate to be a wet blanket, but...

Electoral College: Sen. Kerry makes huge gains, moving ahead in polls in Florida, Ohio and Pennsylvania among others. Troubles in Iraq have spelt a bad month for President Bush, and it has finally caught up with him. If the election were held today, Kerry would win big. Kerry 325, Bush 213

Evans & Novak
Human Events
May 24, 2004

Long way to go 'til election day.

by Will Graham on Tue Aug 28, 2007 at 09:42:41 PM EST

Re: How Clinton and Giuliani Are Looking Back Home (none / 0)

Kerry led during late spring and all the way after the democratic convention until he got swift boated in August. Despite that he managed 48.5%. Had he responded early to the repug noise machine and held on to his post-convention lead, he could have ended up with 51 or 52 % and the result would have looked like this.

by rinis74 on Tue Aug 28, 2007 at 09:54:42 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: How Clinton and Giuliani Are Looking Back Home (none / 0)

All I'm saying is that it's insane to think that this race (between whomever is nominated from each side) won't be incredibly tight come November 2008.

Back in 2004 I honestly thought that being a decorated Vietnam vet would earn John Kerry a few votes from traditional Republicans. But damn, the Kerry-haters came out of the woodwork like nothing I've ever seen for that election. It's crazy to think that Hillary will have an easier ride than Kerry did.

We underestimate the immense, consuming hatred that resides with the Republican Party at our peril. And last I checked, they were still about 50 percent of the country.

by Will Graham on Tue Aug 28, 2007 at 10:59:03 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: How Clinton and Giuliani Are Looking Back Home (none / 0)

Kerry was never running as good a campaign as Clinton is running now. You're not going to catch her wind surfing. And you will never catch her standing of both sides of an issue.

DON'T COUNT THE VOTES, DON'T COUNT THE VOTES.... Obama and the Obamaettes... spring 2008

by TeresaINPennsylvania on Tue Aug 28, 2007 at 11:10:27 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: How Clinton and Giuliani Are Looking Back Home (none / 0)

And you will never catch her standing of both sides of an issue.

Unfortunately, Hillary is in the same boat as Kerry regarding the Iraq War: Voted for it, supported it for a few years, backpedaled a bit for the Dem nomination, and now kinda/sorta supports it but kinda/sorta doesn't.

This is exactly the sort of stuff that ruined Kerry's credibility with independent voters and moderate Republicans and thus made the "flip-flopper" charge stick. But who knows. Maybe Hillary would get a free pass from the media. I guess we'll have to see.

by Will Graham on Tue Aug 28, 2007 at 11:21:32 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: How Clinton and Giuliani Are Looking Back Home (none / 0)

John Kerry did the amazing trick of standing on both sides of the issue in the same paragraph.
Clinton never supported the war. She supported the president having the power of going to war to bully Saddam in to cooperating with inspectors. Of course we now know that he was and Bush was pretending that he wasn't, but that is besides the point.

DON'T COUNT THE VOTES, DON'T COUNT THE VOTES.... Obama and the Obamaettes... spring 2008

by TeresaINPennsylvania on Wed Aug 29, 2007 at 08:27:08 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: How Clinton and Giuliani Are Looking Back Home (none / 0)

Notice how she didn't even fall for the stupid hard-hat photo trick when she visited the green building project in San Francisco. Everyone else wore hard-hats. She clearly pictured the photographs and decided that she'd take her chances with falling bricks.

by hwc on Tue Aug 28, 2007 at 11:47:53 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: How Clinton and Giuliani Are Looking Back Home (none / 0)

Schrum says he and others told Kerry not to go windsurfing because he would be photographed going back and forth in the wind. Kerry said, "there aren't any photographers...."

He was a truly dreadful candidate with a dreadful campaign organization. Maybe even worse than Mike Dukakis.

by hwc on Tue Aug 28, 2007 at 11:49:46 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: How Clinton and Giuliani Are Looking Back Home (none / 0)

Really amazing numbers for Hillary. I'm a Hillary supporter as is my family, and we've been making predictions since last Christmas but I have to say Hillary is exceeding all of our expectations.

Nobody in my family, however, has ever believed Hillary was unelectable in the general. We always believed she was - and she is - and she will beat the hell out of Rudy. And what a fine moment that will be for our country.

by samueldem on Tue Aug 28, 2007 at 09:51:06 PM EST

Re: How Clinton and Giuliani Are Looking Back Home (none / 0)

This is really getting to the level of reading the entrails of dead birds ala the Romans....

Please stop!
.

by Pericles on Tue Aug 28, 2007 at 09:51:25 PM EST

Re: How Clinton and Giuliani Are Looking Back Home (none / 0)

This is the poll that matters the most, unless Rudy doesn't win the GOP nomination.
Rudy's only real strength it that he is a prominent New Yorker who could take a very big blue state away from a Democratic candidate. If Rudy can't win in NY, it is not very likely that he as a pro-gay, pro-abortion rights, pro-gun control Republican will win anywhere else. Senator Clinton of NY turns Rudy's biggest strength into a weakness. If Rudy starts winning the early primaries, then I will switch my support totally for Senator Clinton, as she would be the most reliable and dependable candidate to beat Rudy.
Getting a progressive Democrat in the white house, and a Democratic majority on the hill is all I really care about, so I have been focusing more on the Republicans field, so that I can pick the Democrat that matches best against whoever emerges as the Republican's Front runner.
If it's not Rudy I think Senator Obama has the best chance to win (and win big), but if it is Rudy, then Clinton has the best chance to win (and win big).

"Please. How stupid do I look to you? World Domination. I'll leave that to the religious nuts or the Republicans, thank you." The Monarch (Evil Villain)

by fetboy on Tue Aug 28, 2007 at 09:53:58 PM EST

Re: How Clinton and Giuliani Are Looking Back Home (none / 0)

Those who know Rudy well like him least. These numbers are starting to look like Rudy's numbers on 9/10/01 when most NYCers were happy to see him leaving office. It actually says a lot that the guy can't break 40% against Hillary in their shared home state. I at least expected it to be competitive.

by John Mills on Tue Aug 28, 2007 at 09:54:27 PM EST

Re: How Clinton and Giuliani Are Looking Back Home (none / 0)

It's not that she is unelectable, rather she is just
less electable than Obama or Edwards.

bentheben

by bentheben on Tue Aug 28, 2007 at 09:58:23 PM EST

Re: How Clinton and Giuliani Are Looking Back Home (2.00 / 1)

no that isnt the argument -- or its the argument now, a few months ago it was the unelectability argument.

vote blue in 2008

by sepulvedaj3 on Tue Aug 28, 2007 at 10:17:48 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: How Clinton and Giuliani Are Looking Back Home (none / 0)

except that's not true.

DON'T COUNT THE VOTES, DON'T COUNT THE VOTES.... Obama and the Obamaettes... spring 2008

by TeresaINPennsylvania on Tue Aug 28, 2007 at 11:14:03 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Terrorism still matters to voters. (2.00 / 0)

That's what I take from this poll, and even Giuliani's ability to stay somewhat competitive both in most GE match-ups and within the Republican primary. I don't like the "war on terror frame", but I've read a number of comments where people are upset about Hillary's tough stance on terrorism because they personally are not concerned and abhor how the threat of terrorism has been used by this president. If people read her actual comments they would probably agree with her prescriptions; Diplomacy to quell anti-American sentiment in the Muslim world,enhanced intelligence gathering, tough talk on terrorism. On anti-american sentiment, she calls for an acknowledgement of errors in Iraq, and Abu Ghraib, Guantanamo, and that we've made life difficult for those in Iraq and the region.
She doesn't even hint at another ground war.

I have alot of family in NJ, right across the water from NYC. Very blue collar, very Democratic, and they take the terrorism issue seriously. I know there are people even in NYC who are not terribly concerned and think terrorism has been overemphasized by Bush(I think this is perfectly fair), but my family there, they really care about it.

by bookgrl on Tue Aug 28, 2007 at 10:00:16 PM EST

Captain of the Titanic (2.00 / 1)

Rudy was mayor of NYC when terrorists struck his city. Captain Smith was in command of the Titanic when an iceberg struck his ship. Rudy's credentials on terrorism are exactly the same as Captain Smith's credentials on icebergs. I am waiting with bated breath for just ONE of the Democratic candidates to point that out. Hillary could do it effectively if she chose to. What is she waiting for?

The one thing Karl Rove ever got right was that going after your opponent's "strength" is a winning strategy. He usually did it by lying. The Dems would not even have to lie.

No Democrat is going to get my primary vote by disparaging any other Democrat. The Democrat who gets my vote will be the one who outdoes the other Democrats at disparaging Rudy 9/11/24/7 Giuliani.

-- TP

by Rethymniotis on Tue Aug 28, 2007 at 11:00:00 PM EST

Re: Captain of the Titanic (2.00 / 1)

Yeah, I don't know why Republicans are so proud of 9/11. If this were a sane world, they would be ashamed that it happened on their watch--especially Pres. Bush.

by Will Graham on Tue Aug 28, 2007 at 11:10:58 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Captain of the Titanic (none / 0)

When Republicans look at Rudy they see NY state and all of its electoral votes as obtainable for him in the 2008 election. Turn NY red and the Democrats are history (probably).

"Please. How stupid do I look to you? World Domination. I'll leave that to the religious nuts or the Republicans, thank you." The Monarch (Evil Villain)

by fetboy on Wed Aug 29, 2007 at 03:20:51 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Captain of the Titanic (none / 0)

Hillary could do it effectively if she chose to. What is she waiting for?

Carl Bernstein told Charlie Rose that Clinton insiders are salivating at the thought of going head-to-head with Rudy.

I have no way of judging the accuracy, but Bernstein was confident of his sources on that one.

by hwc on Tue Aug 28, 2007 at 11:55:17 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Captain of the Titanic (none / 0)

Of course they want to run against Rudy. He doesn't wear well over the long term. The shine of 9/11 exists for Rudy b/c he was actually around and in charge that day while Bush was hiding in his plane. However, there are lots of mistakes that were made prior to 9/11 and afterwards which are coming to light and damaging his reputation on it. A group of 9/11 survivors and relatives of the deceased have asked that Rudy not participate in this year's ceremony b/c they believe he is exploiting it politically. How does that help his campaign?

Once you weaken Rudy on 9/11, the guy has tons of baggage both personal and from his terms as Mayor. Plus, he is an extremely prickly sort and I have no doubt that he will meltdown during the heat of the campaign.

by John Mills on Wed Aug 29, 2007 at 10:00:48 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Captain of the Titanic (none / 0)

The comparison of Rudy to CAPT Smith is one everyone knows about, but its a wild card that the Democrats can't play until later in the election year. Unlike Rudy the Democrats are going to keep their powder dry until they get a really good shoot, like in the debates.

"Please. How stupid do I look to you? World Domination. I'll leave that to the religious nuts or the Republicans, thank you." The Monarch (Evil Villain)

by fetboy on Wed Aug 29, 2007 at 03:24:56 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Captain of the Titanic (none / 0)

I don't think "everyone" shares our view of Giuliani. Plenty of people (Republicans and pundits, mostly) still fail to laugh when he presents himself as a terror expert. We need to let them in on the joke.

What I am really curious to know is why "it's a wild card that the Democrats can't play until later in the election year".

-- TP

by Rethymniotis on Wed Aug 29, 2007 at 02:15:31 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: How Clinton and Giuliani Are Looking Back Home (none / 0)

No way that Clinton loses Connecticut.

BTW, there's a David Letterman appearance by Hillary Clinton from 1999 when she was just starting her Senate campaign....before Rudy chickened out of the race.

Letterman asked her how she thought Rudy would do in the Senate. She chuckled and said, "I'm not sure. You know, David, in the Senate, you just can't go around arresting homeless people..."

I wonder if she might dust off that line in a debate sometime?

by hwc on Tue Aug 28, 2007 at 11:25:39 PM EST

Re: How Clinton and Giuliani Are Looking Back Home (2.00 / 1)

There is plenty of stuff just lying around that can easily be through at Rudy.

1. Rudy wanted an uneducated criminal, Bernie Kerik, appointed to head the DEPT of homeland security.

2. The man most responsible for the post-Katrina disaster, Michael Chertoff, was recommended by Rudy, because he was one of Rudy's old lawyer buddies.

3. In the days and months just after 9/11 he spent more time at Yankee's games than he did at ground zero, and then later bragged about how he was one of the rescue workers "guiding stuff."

4. He is the only mayor (or politician for that matter) in the entire nation that keeps World Series rings, because he believes that as mayor of NYC he was actually part of the Yankees.

5. He dropped out of the 2000 Senate race (a race he was favored to initially win), because his wife filed divorce papers, because he had not one but two extra-marital affairs.

6. Pro-war Rudy evaded the Viet Nam draft with 2 college deferments and then later by ill virtue of a letter that his then boss wrote to have him reclassified as 2-A.

7. Three words; "Farmersville's Garbage Scandal." This one is a little harder to pitch, but it goes like this; Rudy promised is a statement that he made during a campaign press conference in 1999 that any community that wanted to refuse taking garbage from New York City was free to do so. Farmersville in upstate NY was eager to get out of a contract that they believed was harmful to them, so they took Giuliani up on his offer, but. Giuliani then claimed that he never made the statement and threatened the town with legal action in retaliation. Rudy is not a man who honors his campaign promises.

That's just 7, and I know more can be found. Rudy loves baseball more than he does the needs and concerns of constituencies, is a braggart, throughly untrustworthy, and a very poor judge of character, who surrounds himself with cronies. Just imagine how disastrous he would be as president.

"Please. How stupid do I look to you? World Domination. I'll leave that to the religious nuts or the Republicans, thank you." The Monarch (Evil Villain)

by fetboy on Wed Aug 29, 2007 at 04:20:01 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: How Clinton and Giuliani Are Looking Back Home (none / 0)

Sorry I meant to say "can easily be thrown at Rudy."

"Please. How stupid do I look to you? World Domination. I'll leave that to the religious nuts or the Republicans, thank you." The Monarch (Evil Villain)

by fetboy on Wed Aug 29, 2007 at 04:25:49 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: How Clinton and Giuliani Are Looking Back Home (none / 0)

No way that Clinton loses Lieberman-loving Connecticut? After that two-faced windbag won as an independent, I realized that Connecticut was trending Red. Not praise-the-lord Red but no-taxes-for-the-rich Red.

by antiHyde on Wed Aug 29, 2007 at 09:20:06 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: How Clinton and Giuliani Are Looking Back Home (none / 0)

That's a mis-read of the Connecticut dynamics.

A longtime incumbent Senator brings a completely different set of dynamics to a race. Lieberman won as an independent because he split the Democratic vote and won the Republican vote.

That can't happen if Democrats unite behind the effort to win the 2008 Presidential election.

by hwc on Wed Aug 29, 2007 at 10:15:28 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: How Clinton and Giuliani Are Looking Back Home (none / 0)

And if Guiliani splits the Democratic vote?

pro-business, pro-abortion, pro-gay, anti-gun

Looks bad for Alabama but good for Connecticut.

I'm not saying anyone else looks better than HRC, but she is not a shoo-in.

by antiHyde on Wed Aug 29, 2007 at 06:32:46 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: How Clinton and Giuliani Are Looking Back Home (none / 0)

This is good news in New York. If this kind of lead sticks, Republicans aren't going to be beating John Hall and Kirsten Gillibrand and we will likely pick up NY-25.

by Toddwell on Tue Aug 28, 2007 at 11:28:16 PM EST

Re: How Clinton and Giuliani Are Looking Back Home (none / 0)

Polls schmolls, I know I know... But what strikes me about this is that Giuliani is the 9/11-we-have-to-protect-America-I-was-th ere candidate and he's being beaten by a girl (/snark). It's New York though... She doesn't fare as well in Kansas (yet).

While I could sit in church and pray all I want, I wouldn't be fulfilling God's will unless I went out and did the Lord's work ~ Barack Obama

by bowiegeek on Wed Aug 29, 2007 at 02:09:56 AM EST

Re: How Clinton and Giuliani Are Looking Back Home (none / 0)

NY is a swing state if Rudy is a nominee and Senator Clinton is not!

"Please. How stupid do I look to you? World Domination. I'll leave that to the religious nuts or the Republicans, thank you." The Monarch (Evil Villain)

by fetboy on Wed Aug 29, 2007 at 03:16:32 AM EST

Re: How Clinton and Giuliani Are Looking Back Home (none / 0)

Republicans have about as much chance of winning NY with Rudy as their nominee as Dems have of winning North Carolina with Edwards.

Neither is gonna happen.

by Will Graham on Wed Aug 29, 2007 at 07:44:57 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Al D'Amato? (none / 0)

"NY has Hillary and Schumer, which demonstrates they like to elect dems to go to Washington."

Al D'Amato (Senate Banking Chair) ruled NY for 18 years. He practically appointed Pataki as governor. A Republican superheavyweight, D'Amato was nevertheless endorsed by Human Rights Campaign (gay rights) and Harlem's Amsterdam News.

A major reason Schumer is in the Senate now is Hillary personally torpedoed D'Amato in 1998. My bet is the Clinton hit job on the powerful D'Amato scared Rudy out of the 2000 race. If it weren't for Hillary, NY might have 2 Republican Senators right now. These NY numbers reflect Hillary's strength, not Giuliani's weakness. He'll beat anybody except Hillary in NY.

If you're talking about Rudy as pro-gay, America's Mayor, anti-abortion, you don't know this guy. It's not 'the issues' with Rudy, it's the gut. Anti-gun? Rudy will show 'Death Wish' on the screens at the convention as "pre-Giuliani New York". His message to Charles Bronson is "good job, I'll take it from here."

by Canaan on Wed Aug 29, 2007 at 11:09:24 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Al D'Amato? (none / 0)

Yeah, its hard to imagine New Yorkers voting for a non-New Yorker over a New Yorker. Only once has a major party candidate not won his home state; Al Gore in 2000, though at the time it was hard to say if Tennessee was really his home state in that election. If Rudy gets the nomination, and Senator Clinton doesn't, then you count all of NY electoral votes going to Rudy. Rudy being the Republican's Front runner is the best reason to support Senator Clinton. A Democrat might win without NY's electoral votes, but it would a very very difficult battle for that Democrat.
When you are talking about electability, you're really talking about appealing match-up. Every candidate, Democrat or Republican, is electable, but what really determines whether a candidate will get elected is the strengths/weaknesses of the opposition that that candidate faces. Senator Clinton makes Rudy's Strength his biggest weakness, and Rudy makes Senator Clinton's weaknesses look like Strengths.
Like I said before; if it's Senator Clinton vs. Rudy, then Clinton and a lot of other Democrats will win big in 2008. In fact Rudy is the only Republican top tier candidate that gives Senator Clinton an easy to win match-up.

"Please. How stupid do I look to you? World Domination. I'll leave that to the religious nuts or the Republicans, thank you." The Monarch (Evil Villain)

by fetboy on Thu Aug 30, 2007 at 05:08:57 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Connecticut turn Red? (none / 0)

I don't buy that for a second. Come election day, if it's Hillary vs. Rudy, Hillary will take CT. No question in my mind.

If liberty means anything at all, it means the right to tell people what they do not want to hear. - George Orwell

by nilocjin on Wed Aug 29, 2007 at 08:01:49 AM EST

You are not logged in.

In order to post a comment, you must be logged in. If you have a member account, please log in to comment.

If not, you can make an account right here. It's quick and free.