Rasmussen's issue polls are quirk, to see the least. They told us democrats were for Obama's dictator meeting, it seemed that Obama campaign took heart of that poll. The end result, we all know...

I do believe next year is another tough battle. It's going to be a squeak even the strongest democrat gets the nod.

Many liberals are overconfident.

in the very latest polls is credible?  People trust this guy?  C'mon.  Methinks, just like Matt Sludge, Scottie just doesn't like Hillary Rodham Clinton.

Why would people trust Democrats? They just voted to give Bush the authority to tap anybody's phone and read anybody's e-mail without a warrant. Who would trust someone who would do something so stupid? I sure don't.

It is a Rassmussen poll.

Do you need to know more?

At first I was dismayed, and puzzled....it just did not compute.  But then I went to look at the breakdown of the numbers.  What can I say?    The format is idiotic, idiotic enough to prove that Rasmussen as usual was casting about for a way to engender just such a result.

I tried to copy it but it won't line up enough to display well enough to show why this is sheer idiocy. Below is the link.

It reminds of the Math comedians , ho would come onto Ed Sullivan and in the most laughable fashion show that 43-39 is 11, not 4.  They did this by subtracting the smaller numbers from the bigger no matter in what place they were.  this shows the same lack of rhyme or reason.    

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_c ontent/politics/election_2008__1/electio n_2008_best_candidate_to_handle_key_issu es

They list all the canodidates, Democratic and Republican, ask people to choose one and only one and then based on no rationale whatever add up the numbers for each candidate to get the total party numbers.  The sheer number of candidates alone almost guarentee this kind of result.

What they should have done, but didn't, was to do head to head match ups, candidate to candidate....Dem to Republican.  This of course might replicate the general presidential matchups anyway, but at least that would be legitimate and have some basis in prior polling history and procedures..

It could be a warning that we're overconfident.

The bottom line is that people want change, and we haven't seen it since Dems took Congress.

And with their surrender on Iraq, as well as the FISA vote, people are starting to believe that there is no difference between the two parties.

If the Dems are going to win in 2008, we need to make sure that people do see a difference.

How the hell do democrats see Hillary as the best on the environment? Anyways Im sick of polls, call me in late fall and I may care.

I agree with previous posters here.  The sheer mathematics make this virtually without value.  You can't take 3 Democrats and 4 Republicans and just add up all the numbers and you achieve your total.  It has to be weighted to make up for that 1 missing entry for our side.

The only fair way to do this would be as follows:

War on Iraq

Clinton 20%
Obama 16%
Edwards 6%

total 42%

weighted to allow for fourth GOPer, using the common denominator for 4 and 3 of 12:

Democrats 56%, Republicans 41%

There are similar advantages for Democrats across the board, which is reflective of similar findings in other polls that showed a Generic Congressional advantage and also a strong lead in most of the 10 important issues facing the nation.  

The only true way of making this poll would have been to put the top 3 Democrats up against the top 3 Republicans.  

Those top vote getter numbers prove just how IGNORANTLY MISLED the public is by the televison set.

When you look at "INFORMED PEOPLE" like those at MoveOn, John Edwards wins the environmental straw poll for having substance and believability.

When you poll idiots who get most of their info from the T.V. screen, you get Hillary having the best plans when she doesn't have ANY PLANS WHATSOEVER.

God people are so freaking stupid they get what they deserve.