Some friendly advice for all the rabid anti-Hillary folks...

[calteacherguy]

Give up on the meme that she's not electable, too hated, too divisive, etc., etc., etc. It's old and nobody believes it anymore. The more people see of Hillary, the more the like her. She will be a very popular President, in the likely event she wins the nomination. And a very effective one.

[asthmaticeog]

1. "Shut up and do as we tell you" is not friendly advice.

[calteacherguy]

2. No, it certainly isn't. I would never say that. nt

[asthmaticeog]

19. 1) When someone offers "friendly advice" what follows is never friendly.

2) People can read between lines and they know when they're being told to submit.

3) We've seen suchlike from DLCers enough to know this shit at a distance.

[BenDavid]

56. 51% favorable-39% un-favorable....Great numbers!

[cyr330]

3. hmm

You must not be looking at her national unfavorable numbers. They're pretty dreadful.

[calteacherguy]

6. Link to the "dreadful" numbers, please. nt

[cyr330]

7. Let me get back to you--

I have the link-- but I'm at work right now-- I'll try to get it when I get home--They're very recent, and I was quite surprised.

[calteacherguy]

12. Thanks. nt

[PurityOfEssence]

44. She's the ONLY Democratic candidate who's gotten over 50% unfavorable in a poll

This is a bit old, but June's not that long ago. It's also a Mason-Dixon poll, so take it for what that's worth.

48% say they would vote for her; 52% say they would not.

Obama is 60/40, Edwards is 59/41.

How do you interpret this? I interpret it like this: saying that they'd vote for the candidate doesn't necessarily mean they will, but saying they WON'T vote for the candidate pretty much says they won't, period.

The poll goes on to ask whether the candidate is viewed favorably or unfavorably; she's the only one in either party to have a net unfavorable rating.

Clinton: 39% favorable, 42% unfavorable
Obama: 36% favorable, 21% unfavorable
Edwards: 32% favorable, 28% unfavorable

Please tell me how you win a two-way race if 52% won't vote for you. The polling was of "likely voters in the general election", by the way.

This was just a quick search; I'll see what else is out there.

http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/06/28/248165.aspx

[durrrty libby]

10. Here check out these "dreadful" numbers

Other candidates would kill for them

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x3539571

[calteacherguy]

13. I think the poster was talking about general favorability/unfavorability numbers.

Last poll I saw she was beating Ghouliani (I can never remember how to spell his name).

[durrrty libby]

18. Ok here you go

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/presidential_favorability_ratings

[calteacherguy]

29. "The top three Democrats are currently viewed favorably by 50% to 53% of voters."

And your point is?

Edit (this is interesting): "This week, for the first time all year, Giuliani’s favorables dipped below the 50% mark. Currently, 49% offer a positive assessment of him while 46% say the opposite."

[durrrty libby]

31. "And your point is?" Not me. Another poster was whining and lying

I just dug the stuff up for you

Hillary all the way:toast: :party: :woohoo: :applause:

[bluestateguy]

4. If she runs as good of a general election campaign as she is running now, she'll win

But she can't make any mistakes that bring back memories of the 1990's Hillary.

[ShortnFiery]

5. Resistance is futile. We will be assimilated into HRC's corporate, pro-war collective.

:eyes:

[FiveGoodMen]

8. Bookmarked.

We'll see...

[Sapphire Blue]

9. 'Friendly advice' from a rabid anti-Edwards person is not something I need or want.

Try listening to your own 'friendly advice' when it comes to Democratic candidates other than the one that you personally support.

[calteacherguy]

15. I like Obama. Edwards is irrelevant, in my view. nt

[Beaverhausen]

17. You are entitled to your view. You aren't entitled to tell me how to think or what to say

:hi:

[calteacherguy]

21. Of course not. I'm just offering advice...take it or leave it! nt

[Sapphire Blue]

If he's "irrelevant", why do you make such an effort to post repetitive negative comments about...

... him in so many pro-Edwards threads? It seems that you may fear that he is very relevant.

[calteacherguy]

22. Because I think he deserves the negative comments. He's lost my respect.

However, you are right. Best to just put him on ignore.

Edit: As for his supporters, I hope they will get behind the nominee, be it Clinton or (far less likely) Obama. In my opinion John Edwards has misled a lot of folks, but everyone is entitled to their opinion, and I respect the supporters of Edwards in their opinion. However, I have no respect for John Edwards.

In my opinion, he hasn't earned it.

[Sapphire Blue]

41. Your rabid anti-Edwards opinion is worth as much as a counterfeit penny.

[last_texas_dem]

55. If Edwards is as irrelevant as you claim

why is he the subject of so many of your posts? If he's irrelevant, shouldn't you just be ignoring him?

[ericgtr]

11. It seems to me

that her supporters can be just as rabid pro-Hillary. It's really a black and white debate with her, there is no middle ground for the most part, either they love her or hate her. If she stays on top as she has I think she will do well but if she drops, she'll do it like a rock.

[evlbstrd]

14. No.

And you can't make me.
Mom, calteacherguy is trying to tell me what to do!

P.S. I don't have rabies. You probably have cooties.

[abq e streeter]

16. Its not "old",

and I believe it more and more all the time. I don't "like her the more I see her", and there are a hell of a lot of people out here who like her a good bit less than me. Not electable, too divisive etc? Maybe , maybe not. You may very well turn out to be right about your predictions, but I RESPECTFULLY resent the smug , so far unsubstantiated certainty of your post. BTW , I'm NOT one of the unfortunately many progressives who at least threaten to refuse to vote for her should she be nominated. I'll reluctantly vote for her (but WILL vote for her) but very likely as an ex- registered Democrat. If she's the best we can come up with after all these nightmare years, its time for this longtime Democrat to leave this pathetic shell of a party.

[cyr330]

24. Amen

I really loathe the woman, but I, too, would hold my nose and vote for her after these awful, unbelieveable years under Bus*.

As much as I dislike Hillary C., I have no doubt about her intelligence or her capabilities.

[JuniperLea]

20. I don't like rabid anti-any-dem DUer's postings...

I'm sick of the condescension. I never liked Hill... but I haven't decided on a candidate yet. There is good and bad in all of them. But the rabid hatred, the condescension, the bashing of anyone who voices an opinion... all too Freeperesque for my taste.

I'd much rather see positive comments on how one might like another candidate's view better, or something of that sort.

[Mojambo]

23. Oh she'll be effective alright.

It's just a question of effective for whom?

Looking at her Health Care plan I can say insurance companies are on the list.

[FrenchieCat]

26. But, but, but......Hillary copied that health plan from John Edwards according to EE....!

Elizabeth Edwards: Clinton Copied John Edwards' Health Plan
http://www.wral.com/news/state/story/1837837/

[illinoisprogressive]

25. hillary is not electable. Nor does she have any coattails.

[durrrty libby]

30. Obama is not electable. He is an empty suit and he's tanking.

[PurityOfEssence]

43. In fact, it's more like an Eisenhower jacket.

I'd say she has "anti-coattails". It's quite likely that she'd energize many people who otherwise wouldn't vote, and other Dems will get hit with votes for their opponents that otherwise might not be cast.

[Bitwit1234]

27. The main thing is they are so damn jealous that she is beating

the pants off their guy they are messing their pants. So to compensate they have to bash....reminds me of the republicans.

[durrrty libby]

28. You hit the nail on the head

:toast: :thumbsup:

[Old and In the Way]

32. She's not my 1st, 2nd, or 3rd choice.

But, should she win the nomination, I'll be delighted to support her. The race for President is the Democratic primary. I get a chuckle out of of "electability" issues and "coat-tails", etc. At the end of the day, who wouldn't want to have another Democratic Clinton era over another 8 years of Bush Republicanism?

And the kicker this time is we have Howard Dean at the DNC who'll be a whole lot more active in making sure the elections are clean. Thanks Terry!

[Bjornsdotter]

35. Exactly

...that's exactly how I feel.

:toast:

[bbinacan]

33. Some friendly advice to you.

Quit using the term "meme". It's worn out.

[Sarah Ibarruri]

34. Have you looked around at the country you're living in?

If you haven't noticed that this is a sexist country that will not elect a woman as president, you're not paying attention.

[EV_Ares]

36. Not giving up and do not feel like Hillary is the best candidate. Not

impressed at all and we don't need another 4 years of no change, keeping the troops in Iraq and someone else beholden to the corporations and helping the insurance industry with her health care plan.

[Colobo]

37. Obama will be our next President.

[lojasmo]

38. Ummm....she is, almost definitively, devisive.

As for the rest, I don't say them.

[JeffR]

39. I'll drop it just as soon as

the HRC supporters stop accusing everyone who has any criticism of the Senator of being:

- jealous

- misogynist

- haters

- leftist nutjobs

Deal?

[blm]

40. I hate those memes. I prefer pointing out that she supports closed government

and is protective of secrecy and privilege. And that is EXACTLY the wrong kind of Democrat to follow Bush and Cheney.

What happened LAST TIME a Clinton followed the corruption of Reagan and Bush?

How did that work out for our country? For the world? For the 9-11 families?

http://consortiumnews.com/2006/111106.html

You want Bush2 held accountable or his crimes of office swept under a rug like Poppy's?

[PurityOfEssence]

42. It's hard to type with all this mouth foam dripping on my keyboard, but I'll give it a whirl anyway

Whatever else, your post certainly warrants a big, fat "sez you".

Meme, schmeme. Gravity's old and it's still pretty reliable. As for her dubious chances in a general election, plenty of people believe it. Plenty of people are deeply worried about it. The idea that she's unelectable isn't just the delusion of suckers who've been cowed by the reactionaries, there's hard evidence that points that way. I'm not saying she's ABSOLUTELY unelectable, but her chances aren't worth a tinker's cuss.

For all the energy she and her husband have spent courting the crossover vote, they've alienated many of them, MANY leftists and haven't done anything to the true primitives except stiffen their resolve.

This fatuous pronouncement is nothing short of whistling in the woods. I work in a big and highly social business with people of a broad range of political beliefs, and I continually find people across the spectrum who dislike her. There's some extreme disgust out there, both from those who incorrectly see her as some lefty and those who see her as an appeaser. This is literally everywhere. Sure, I know some supporters, but VERY few.

The cart is very much before the horse here; you're saying that she'll be a very popular president in the likely event she's nominated. You've skipped that tricky last step: the general election. Just to be a total snot, it's interesting to note that you put "popular" before "effective". I don't think her need to be loved by everyone is as soul-gnawing as her husband's is, but she's definitely got some heavy-duty compensation going here too.

Enough of that nastiness, though; I simply disagree completely with your contention. Just because certain claims are getting tiresome to you doesn't mean they follow the rules of mass culture and will die of their own saturation as we breeze on to the next fixation of our collective short attention spans. These issues will dog her forever because they're based in truth. Fair or not, she's roundly hated by a broad cross-section of people and she's VERY divisive.

[calteacherguy]

51. Show me "the hard evidence that points that way." nt

[PurityOfEssence]

53. Proceed to post #44, follow link, read

As recently as three months ago, her unfavorable rating was 52%. Short of a three-way race, how does she win with that number?

[calteacherguy]

58. That's a bit old, as #44 points out. nt

[MadHound]

45. Ah, switching back up to the Borg meme eh?

Resistance is futile, we're all going to be assimilated. Damn, and who says that Hillary supporters can't win friends and influence people:eyes:

[ginchinchili]

46. May I ask where you live?

If you think there's no truth to the charge that Hillary Clinton is strongly disliked in many segments of American society, much more so than any other candidate, then one would assume that you live outside the country. How can you not be aware of it? Do you just close your eyes to whatever you don't want to acknowledge? Bush supporters do the same thing with him, even though the truth is choking the hell out of us. Open your eyes. I'm not saying don't support Hillary Clinton, if that's who you choose to support, but come to grips with the reality of the situation and proceed accordingly. Don't stick your head in the sand.

[calteacherguy]

50. Show me the proof. nt

[zulchzulu]

47. Some of us don't drink that KoolAid

You can dismiss facts that Clinton would be the best nominee...for the Republicans all you want.

You can also dismiss the idea that her poll numbers are about to fall through the floor as more people become interested in the primary season.

You can also dismiss the probable conclusion that her campaign will not make it past March of 2008.

You can call people who can see the trainwreck of a Clinton nomination as "rabid anti-Hillary folks", but that doesn't work.

If you support her, get out in the streets and let people know. Get ready for a lot of questions.

[AtomicKitten]

48. People are entitled to choose their candidate --

without being pressurized. It may be that Hillary will win by default because the bounty of candidates will dilute the primary voter pool, but it ain't over yet. There is still plenty of space between now and when it's too late for something spectacular to happen that will change this race irrevocably and hopefully inspire the body politic across the board.

Paging Al Gore.

[Name removed]

49. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Forkboy]

52. Save it, Sparky.

No one needs advice from you.

[XemaSab]

54. Well that makes me a nobody.

n/t

[PretzelzRule]

57. Keep drinking

[Sandaasu]

59. It's not a matter of now many people like her...

It's a matter of how many hate her so much it makes their blood boil. The Repukes are in bad shape, with potential issues of turnout, unless they're up against Hillary. So much of winning such an election is getting turnout, and she would likely to quite a bit to get our opponents out there and voting, while perhaps suppressing some of our own.

Other than that, I dislike her on policy. She's still supportive of DOMA for Christ's sake!

[noamnety]

60. If you include insults in your friendly advice subject line

it's not really friendly.

[nealmhughes]

61. By "giving up on the meme," you are trying to construct a new one!

Memes that are "constructed" are rarely successful, save in certain true believer circles. They are "natural" and mutate. Politics are an open complex system, which means that they are impossible to analyze except for a short closed window. One speech, one sound bite, two endorsements and the prior assessment is out the window.

This is not a Hegeliann dialectic to which you refer, rather a dynamic constantly changing process. The human element, which is the irrational factor is what thwarts anything related to serious current assessment -- one must always access data that was garnered in the past. One can at most try to anticipate various actions based upon the factors most closely resembling the future factors, but that still does not include the fickle nature of humans.

The people will be divided, as they always are. Some will act upon information, others upon "gut feeling" and others out of loyalty.

The primaries are for the candidates and people, not partisan shreekers.

We as Democrats have the right to support whom we wish in our several states, any talking point be damned!

[William769]

62. No truer words spoken calteacherguy

But theres a reason they are rabid. Just use a rabid dog as an example.

[Dan]

63. This is a non-issue

You either vote for the Democratic candidate or you vote for the GOP. Binary choice....

If you love Bush, you will absolutely love the next GOP president.

[Cha]

64. I don't care how electable

she is..I don't want her as pres.

The more people KNOW about her the more they'll see what a corporate shill she is.