Jersey Devil
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Feb-22-08 10:47 AM
Original message |
Did Hillary really lose the lead or did she ever have it? |
|
The dynamics of this campaign have been extremely interesting. In one state after the other it seems that Hillary has had the lead in polls and then when the candidates hit the ground to actually campaign in that state the lead evaporated almost overnight and went to Obama. So how could that be if Hillary really was in the lead?
My thinking is that many in those states were influenced by the media that has opined for several years now that Hillary was the front runner and the person to beat for the nomination in 08. People just shrugged and assumed that was true and when asked agreed, because after all, people want to be a part of the group and don't want to be labeled as oddballs. Some may call it sheep mentality.
But once actual campaigning began in those states the people started really questioning themselves and said, in effect, "No, I like that other guy (Obama) better" and the polls magically went in the other direction.
So I don't know that you can really say that Hillary "blew" the lead or that she ever really had a lead in the first place. That being the case, I don't think you can say that she is being rejected or reviled, just that she is not the choice of a majority of voters after really looking at their choices.
Just my opinion, but I think it is valid.
|
DemzRock
(824 posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Feb-22-08 10:50 AM
Response to Original message |
1. A poll is always just a snapshot of a time influenced by how the questions are asked. n/t |
stahbrett
(855 posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Feb-22-08 10:54 AM
Response to Original message |
2. I agree with you - also, her early leads in the polls gave her a false sense of inevitability |
|
Early poll leads were primarily due to her high name recognition.
Her best bet would have been to have a one-day, 50-state primary.
|
grantcart
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Feb-22-08 10:58 AM
Response to Original message |
3. She had a floor of 40% and a ceiling of 42% |
|
As long as it was a 3 or more person race her 40% was great in a 2 person race it is a blow out loss.
This is no surprise. The one cardinal rule in politics is that you can move positives but negatives are mired in cement. The reasoning goes if someone says if they are for someone it may be that they really love the guy or "I think he's ok".
If somebody goes to the extent to say that they have a negative opinion of somebody it has to be a much firmer number than the positives. Hillary entered the campaign with historically high negatives. Her positives went up and down but the negatives remained firm. It confirmed what they teach in Poli Sci 101 at the begining of a campaign positives mean nothing look at the negative numbers.
|
jasmine621
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Feb-22-08 11:07 AM
Response to Original message |
4. It's what the media wanted everyone to believe. They framed her, they maimed her, |
|
and now they are going to bury her.
|
helderheid
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Feb-22-08 11:08 AM
Response to Original message |
5. I've wondered the same, especially given she came in 3rd in Iowa. |
DU
AdBot (1000+ posts) |
Fri Apr 26th 2024, 04:59 PM
Response to Original message |