by MBNYC, Wed Mar 26, 2008 at 03:57:50 PM EDT
As expected, one of the two major Democratic candidates saw a downturn in the latest NBC/WSJ poll, but it's not the candidate that you think. Hillary Clinton is sporting the lowest personal ratings of the campaign. Moreover, her 37% positive rating is the lowest the NBC/WSJ poll has recorded since March 2001, two months after she was elected to the U.S. Senate from New York.
So go ahead, explain how someone whom only a third of Americans even like is going to be elected to anything.
But wait, there's more. >>>
by Fichetail, Wed Mar 26, 2008 at 09:09:26 AM EDT
Is Hillary really maneuvering to damage Obama's electability so badly that he can't win a general election, thereby allowing her to run in 2012 before she turns too old to run?
Yes. 5 votes - 62 %
No. 3 votes - 37 %
Neither, she is trying to damage his electibility only so that she will be seen as the only viable nominee for 2008 in the eyes of Super Delegates. 0 votes - 0 %
Results above mirror the growing acceptance of the proposition that HRC is nailing Democratic Party chances in 2008 Fall election, so that she can return and prevail as nominee in 2012.
Increasingly, the Net community is demonstrating its ability to spot, identify and publicize nuanced interpretations of candidate behavior which would have remained mysterious in the 1990s and possibly propelled candidates to unmonitored success. Could it be that the sly, the Machiavellians, are now more likely to be caught in the act? Your opinion here please as replies.
by Fichetail, Tue Mar 25, 2008 at 07:35:14 PM EDT
Select tag "2012" and press "comment" under the "Monster Manipulations..." Diary. Then take the original Fichetail poll(March 15)that 10 days ago on MyDD launched an entirely new way of looking at the Clinton 2008 "kitchen-sink" strategy vs. Obama. The speed of the internet in communicating this original interpretation was clocked at 10 days from this obscure poll to a "Hardball" session last night reportedly dedicated to this entirely new Machiavellian view of Clinton's 2008 end game in 2012!
Another testimonial to the power of the internet and clear thinking!
by architek, Mon Mar 24, 2008 at 02:48:19 PM EDT
This is an interesting article.
Much as the Electoral College makes many see red, it is still with us.
Clinton Backer Points to Electoral College Votes as New Measure
"Senator Evan Bayh of Indiana, who backs Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton for president, proposed another gauge Sunday by which superdelegates might judge whether to support Mrs. Clinton or Senator Barack Obama.
He suggested that they consider the electoral votes of the states that each of them has won.
"So who carried the states with the most Electoral College votes is an important factor to consider because ultimately, that's how we choose the president of the United States," Mr. Bayh said on CNN's "Late Edition."
In a primary, of course, electoral votes are not relevant, but the Clinton campaign is trying to use them as an unofficial measure of strength.
So far, Mrs. Clinton has won states with a total of 219 Electoral College votes, not counting Florida and Michigan, while Mr. Obama has won states with a total of 202 electoral votes. "
by MBNYC, Tue Mar 18, 2008 at 09:56:41 AM EDT
Psst. Hey, you there. Yes, you. Don't tell anyone, but Hillary's campaign just died.