Sobering recent data: Lots of Democrats now actively disliking the candidates

[Kurt_and_Hunter]

National polling of Dem voters is becoming more and more consistent, and that is bad news. When polls are jumping all over the place we can hope that they will eventually settle on one nominee or another. Unfortunately, the polls are no longer erratic. They're just split.

Newsweek, Gallup, Rasmussen... all have Obama and Clinton tied in the mid-40s, and not showing much movement.

Those are hard attitudes now. Most people have decided. The problem is that the will of the people is that the people have no discernible will. I take individual poll results with a large grain of salt, but when different polls start showing the same unanticipated effect it says something.

Not long ago, the great majority of Democrats said they were satisfied if the other choice won. (about 75%)

Today, only about 43% of Hillary people have a favorable view of Barack Obama and only about 50% of Obama supporters have a favorable opinion of Hillary Clinton. (latest Newsweek and Rasmussen)

Let that settle in and consider what it means... "favorable" is a minimal standard.

That's crazy! I'm not an Obama fan, but I have a favorable view of him. It seems that the average Clinton supporter likes Obama less than I do. And nobody on DU needs to be convinced of the enmity Obama supporters have for Hillary.


There has been a running propaganda battle here about which candidate can rely on the other candidates supporters. "All Hillary's votes will go to Obama, but not visa versa" and, " all Obama votes will go to Hillary, but not visa versa."

Well guess what? The verdict is in. A big chunk of the party actually dislikes Obama, and a big chunk of the party actually dislikes Clinton.

To the best of our knowledge today, Hillary will not get the Obama vote, and Obama will not get the Hillary vote.

Either candidate will lose 15-20% of potential Democratic voters off the top. That's reality. That is where we are.

(I say "potential Democratic votes" to include Dem-leaning independents. Obama is losing a lot of Dems and Clinton is losing a lot of dem-leaning indys. The two effects are pretty close in terms of number of votes. That's why Obama and Clinton poll so close to each other vs. McCain, despite having different bases. And that is why Clinton and Obama edge McCain by roughly the name number of electoral votes in the SUSA 50-state survey, even though they win very different mixes of states.)

[mmonk]

1. Yes.

Negative campaigning has it's drawbacks more in primaries than general elections.

[writes3000]

4. Yep, and who started the negative campaigning trend?

Hillary is on her way to bringing this party down and she doesn't have the numbers to justify her destructive tactics.

[papau]

22. Obama started the negatives via his playing race card to stop Hillary NH momentum

and it worked to move 70/30 stable AA split to todays 90/10 and a string of red state victories and delegates.

Obama was and is willing to tear the party apart for his ambition.

[BumRushDaShow]

36. Sorry wrong answer.

Bill played the race card in South Carolina and finished his wife off.

[papau]

41. On DU and among Obama supporters and the media truth is indeed the "wrong answer"

[DURHAM D]

44. It actually started much earlier with his generational war.

He pushed out pre and early boomers well over a year ago in order to bring his young supporters into the "Oh hell yes" choir. Those stupid old liberals had to go to make room for the "progressives". Liberals are Democrats and progressives are something else - not sure what. But whatever they are they don't hold the core values of the Democratic party.

[JDPriestly]

107. You are right -- there is so much agism among Obama supporters

In addition, Obama is lukewarm on Social Security -- a life and death issue for most seniors.

As for Hillary, the scorpio, she is angry and has her stingers out. This is a lose, lose situation.

I say go to a second vote and choose Edwards. He attacks the Republicans and its power base. He attacks Hillary and Obama only to the extent they are soft on Republicans and the Republican power base. Americans will love Edwards. He is the candidate that can bring us together.

And if you don't like him because he is a trial lawyer, please remember that John Adams, Thomas Jefferson and Abraham Lincoln were all trial lawyers.

Otherwise, Clark is a good choice for vice president.

[Hawaii Hiker]

114. People on social security now are fine, it's 35-40 years done the road,

when a real problem could occur.....

[writes3000]

51. Here's what you refuse to consider about the "black" vote.

They simply rallied around a candidate they felt represented them. Up until Iowa and NH, the majority of blacks rooted for Obama but they were unsure whether the country was ready for it.

As SOON as Bill Clinton went on the attack, on any kind of attack, it was a rallying cry for blacks. Yep, one wrong headed Barack supporter claimed Bill was being racist, but the majority of blacks didn't buy that bullshit. But black voters did rally around the black guy because they didn't appreciate the powerful, advantages white guy insulting him unprovoked.

It is the EXACT same thing we saw in NH, when female voters rallied around Clinton when they felt she was being unfairly trashed.

Now, when Bill said that Barack = Jesse Jackson, that was race bait. And that set the majority of black voters in stone.

That's what happened. And it's the way it happened.

[papau]

74. I agree that Hill's AA lead of 70/30 could not be sustained - but the switch was initially

a simple reverse to 70/30 Obama as black women stayed with her.

It took the race card to move it to 80/20 (in SC) and then 90/10 (in Del).


Barack = Jesse Jackson? - I worked to nominate Jesse and do not see that as evil. But telling blacks they should see it as evil was just more of the race card, in my opinion.

[TheDebbieDee]

68. Ding! Ding! Ding! We have a winner here!

Keep telling it like it T-I-is!

[stop the bleeding]

2. DING DING DING - we have a winner!

Which is "My Friends" will win the GE if can not find a way to unite.

edit:

I can not imagine another 4 years of this, yesterday a Dem won Denny Hastert's seat in IL, the NYT has printed an article that we could hold 60 seats in the Senate, we already have a majority in the House. The GOP is fractured this year, the economy is in the tank, people are unhappy with the war.

McLame holds his own in the polls against either DEM and he does this all despite what is listed above.

This year it should have been a lock on the GE, but no we shoot ourselves in the foot.

[maddiejoan]

3. Which is why the "Dream Ticket"

will need to happen.

It's inevitable now.

The rest of the primary is simply to decide in which order it will appear.

Clinton/Obama?

or

Obama/Clinton?

I know which I prefer --but I'd be able to vote AND support either.

[mmonk]

You may be right.

[against all enemies]

6. Why would Obama want Bill/Hillary as VP? She has undercut him

every chance she has.

[maddiejoan]

14. and visa versa

but it WILL be necessary for either if Party Unity is a desired goal.

[PetraPooh]

42. No, not visa versa, Obama has only responded, not once have I

heard him initiate a negative response. Even in his responses to her negativity, he has simply asked questions to get people think about her qualifications to bash him, not her qualifications to be president.

If Hillary is on the ticket at all we will lose.

[maddiejoan]

50. oh please

put down the Kool-Aid.

you've had quite enough

[PetraPooh]

56. I would have to be pro-Obama to have koolaid issues, I haven't made that leap

So actually I feel quite competent to look at the full reality of the situation.

[maddiejoan]

61. I'll let ya know

[PetraPooh]

63. You think you will let me know what?

[maddiejoan]

67. I'll let ya know

when you have demonstrated an ability to see reality.

[Rageneau]

62. All Hillary does is ask questions, too.

You seem to think Obama gets points because he doesn't do the attacking directly, but instead only "asks questions" to get people to think about her qualifications.

Yet when Hillary does exactly that same thing, all of a sudden Obama supporters claim she is stepping over the line.

A good example is the recent 'Qualified to be Commander in Chief" flap. All Hillary did is the same thing you say Obama does -- she asked a question about BO's qualifications. Specifically, she said, "McCain is qualified and I am qualified. As for whether Obama is qualified, you'll have to ASK HIM."

Just like Obama.

[PetraPooh]

65. No she stated that she and McCain have experience and Obama has a speech.

Not a question a statement.

[maddiejoan]

70. No.

She said that is what McCain can be expected to bring up.

[PetraPooh]

72. Yes she did, and numerous times. Pull your head out of ....

[maddiejoan]

80. my head is placed firmly atop my shoulders.

but thank you for your concern

[PetraPooh]

95. Then you must be VERY flexible.

[Pirate Smile]

18. For the reasons stated in the OP.

[IndianaGreen]

7. The "Dream" ticket is a cynical Clintonian fantasy

It won't happen!

[maddiejoan]

19. If Obama is the nominee without Clinton as VP

he will lose the GE.

the same applies for Clinton.

[Pisces]

8. No way on the dream ticket.

Hillary doesn't care if they lose. She is fine with McCains life experience and commander in chief threshold.

[maddiejoan]

20. poppycock

[Kurt_and_Hunter]

109. Welcome to DU. We can always use some more divisive liars around here.

[Ravy]

9. Totally agree, maddiejoan!

And well said.

[hueyshort]

15. in other words Clinton is being blackmailed

by Mr. Unity and the latte fanatics.

[maddiejoan]

53. I wouldn't go that far

What we have are two very gifted candidates vying for the same office.

[stop the bleeding]

73. I understand what you're saying maddiejoan a C/O or O/C ticket would be ideal

for uniting the party for the GE.

Two things though

1) I doubt either C or O would accept the role as VP in fact O said so in the last day or so

2) They both are not as strong as My Friends McLame on National Security, I don't care what either side says about this, we all know they both need a VP that helps compliment them on this issue along with a few others.

So I know what you're saying but I see these two reasons as large hurdles to overcome, and this makes me really worried about losing the GE in a year where should have had a lock on it. I just don't see an easy fix to this mess.

Peace and keep fighting for you candidate.

[maddiejoan]

79. You raise a valid point

you really do --and from my own standpoint --I see Wesley Clark as a good choice for either Clinton or Obama as well.

For Obama --Wes Clark has the added bonus of being able to possibly bring Clinton supporters back into the fold, bring in the South and also has the National Security creds.

I also think Clark would work well for Clinton, and his energy and charisma and stance on Iraq might appeal to Obama supporters.

Clark as VP would be a good 'unity' choice

[stop the bleeding]

84. God maddiejoan that is a good idea!

probably one of the best I have heard yet. I need to think on this one and explore it a bit more, I know people have issues with Clark as well, but people have issues with just about everything.

You have put a smile on my face.

Thank you!

:kick:

[maddiejoan]

91. Thanks

I've been ruminating on this one for months.

I could actually support Obama/Clark enthusiastically. (actually one of the few things that would be make me enthused over Obama)

Having a high profile Clinton supporter who just happens to be a General would solidify the base and render McCain obsolete.

[stop the bleeding]

96. No Doubt

I might try to inject this idea in an OP when I think I have a window to make some headway on GDP - I know you're laughing about that, anyone who has spent more than 5 minutes on GDP knows that real rational thought is something of a pipedream.

:toast:

[maddiejoan]

97. Good luck

I've suggested it before, but very few on DU take me seriously these days --cos, ya know --I'm a "Hillbot"

Be interested in seeing how it goes over from an Obama supporter.

[KoKo]

98. That damned "Dream Ticket" better happen or lots of us Dems

will do write in's or just vote down ticket for our Dems rather than vote for McCain.

[maddiejoan]

101. And I'll do just that

unless Clinton or Clark is the VP that is chosen should Obama be the nominee.

[IndianaGreen]

5. McCain's poll numbers are now within the margin of error

Has anyone noticed how McCain's poll numbers got him within the margin of error with the Democrats since Hillary threw the kitchen sink?

This is cause for concern!

[Pisces]

12. Dems always find a way to screw it up, even in a gimme election.

If the party leaders don't step in it will be their burden to bear. Edwards should step in and endorse Obama.

[saracat]

35. Never. After what Obama did to him? And John should endorse "against "his own health care plan?

Health care was central to John's campaign.And you would suggest he make himself a hypocrite for the sake of
party unity for the sake of a party that threw him under the bus and forced him to step aside so that they could "make history" ? For the sake of a candidate that mocked his race and gender?

[pleah]

104. Bravo!

:applause:

[CyberPieHole]

10. Correct~a~mont...

Neither candidate can win without the support of the voters from the other candidate. Say hello to President McCain.

[stop the bleeding]

16. yep - what I said up thread

this GE should have been a lock.

[Pirate Smile]

11. They need to just make it Obama/Clinton and be done with it.

If it gets switched to Clinton/Obama against the pledged delegates then you have a huge problem.

The only acceptable resolution is to do the Obama/Clinton ticket and move into General Election mode.

[JVS]

13. You can thank Clinton supporters for hatemongering against Obama.

[Ravy]

17. And Obama supporters for labeling the Clintons as racists. Thank them, too. nt

[JVS]

No. You have Bill and Hillary and their big fucking mouths to thank for that.

[Ravy]

34. That is bullshit. Both Clintons were making a valid point about

something that had nothing to do about race, and the Obama camp swithed a few words, here and there, and made the race allegations.

It was bullshit, but it worked. But, it turned many off of Obama, forever. No one wants a president who labels all who disagree with him as "racist", particularly following one that called the same people "unpatriotic" for disagreeing with him.

[JVS]

45. Clinton claiming that LBJ was the real force behind JFK's accomplishments is valid and has...

nothing to do with race?

Bill dismissing Obama's victory in SC as being like the last time a black guy won a primary has no racial overtones?

[Ravy]

57. That is a perfect example of switching the statement around and then bashing it.

It is intellectually dishonest.

Hillary's point was that when the movements come along, you have to have a president in office who will sign the legislation. She was not dissing MLK or JFK. She was saying that political muscle is needed to make movements into law.

[JVS]

69. She was diminishing his accomplishments, and using MLK as a figure to keep down a black person.

:puke:

And she's supposedly smart enough to know to be careful

[Ravy]

75. She was not. She was saying that movements need political will and power.

The Obama camp is supposedly smart enough to be honest.

[JVS]

77. bullshit

[MonkeyFunk]

83. JFK? Or MLK?

She didn't say Johnson was the driving force - she said he was a necessary part of the equation.

[papau]

39. no - you forget the history - should be able to control supporters - until O had

supporter big mouth problems, and intentional mis-understanding of criticism of O's "always against war" mantra based on O's 2004 to 2007 voting record and speeches - a mantra Bill called a "fairy tale" - but Obama's campaign jumped on as if Bill said a black man can not win white votes - a stretch that other black politicians winked at as they supported O - was the start of the negative campaign-

and so far it has worked well for O giving him red state victories and extra delegates - in part because of the extra allocation of delegates to AA areas made as a result of their loyal Dem voting in the past.

[IndianaGreen]

26. It was Bill who first used racially coded language on the Charlie Rose show

and just yesterday, he was giving his rationale for why the black man should sit in the back of Hillary's bus.

[Ravy]

40. Link please.

After the Obama camp called Clinton's remark about the popular view of Obama's Iraq record being a fantasy being morphed into the idea of electing a black man for president is fantasy, I prefer to look at the actual quotes, in context.

[IndianaGreen]

81. You can either google it yourself, or search the DU archives--it was discussed extensively here

If you are too lazy to keep yourself informed, I ain't doing it for you.

[papau]

46. racially coded language"? - I claim the use of the word "Bill" is racially coded message of hate to

black ducks - makes as much sense.

[LWolf]

21. And then there are those of us

who dislike both of them.

But it's too late to nominate a candidate that can actually unify the party.

Too late, unless a brokered convention offers up a better choice.

[PurityOfEssence]

85. Yes, the big, dark secret: they're both deeply flawed people with mealy-mouthed policies

I'm harder on Obama because he's universally hailed as so damned wonderful, when he's got a cynical and opportunistic streak to the core. At least most people would concede that Clinton is a bit of a hard case, whereas it's widely assumed that Obama is the true second coming.

Both are obviously better than McCain, or any other Republican for that matter, and slipping in another "compromise" candidate would be ruinous, so we're stuck with one of them. It doesn't make many of us happy, though.

[LWolf]

100. You said it. n/t

[Kurt_and_Hunter]

108. Indeed!

[Kittycat]

23. Thank you for the Kitchen Sink to the Dem Party - Hillary W. McLieberman

[maddiejoan]

37. Barack W. Pelosi

see --I can do it as well.

He'll be the bend over and take it up the ass from the GOP candidate.

He's already doing it on SS and Healthcare.

[MonkeyFunk]

58. And don't forget school vouchers.

[Benhurst]

24. Given the hostility of both Clinton's and Obama's supporters to

the other candidate, I think it is time for the super delegates to begin thinking about a compromise candidate. Both Clinton and Obama have failed to achieve a majority and reach the required 2025. And given the hostility both will face from the other's followers, they are losers beyond the scope of just being so under the rules of the 2008 Democratic primary.

Unless the super delegates do their job and point the party in a different direction, we had better get prepared for President McCain.

[IndianaGreen]

31. If Gore turns the convention down, we should ask John Edwards

to save the party from going the way of the Whigs.

[JVS]

32. Howard Dean

[Lucinda]

25. I dont think that will hold. It's media driven. And it changes on a dime.

[LisaL]

27. Let's just select Gore and be done with it.

[marmar]

47. I'm all for that......

.... then put Hillary and Barack (and their supporters) in a playpen and let them whack each other over the head with rubber toys.

[MonkeyFunk]

60. That would be the stupidest thing Dems could do

Nominate someone with no money, no political organization in place, and no expressed desire for the job? Just because we have TWO great candidates and people are split?

[LisaL]

66. Each one of the two candidates is gonna lose

at least part of the votes from the other candidate's camp.
Which will allow McCain to win no matter who is nominated.
Frankly I don't see the solution.

[MonkeyFunk]

88. except the big glaring obvious solution....

run them together.

[LisaL]

89. They could never agree which one should be President, and

which one should be a VP.

[MonkeyFunk]

93. Sure they could

they're much more adult about stuff like this than DUers are.

[Kurt_and_Hunter]

110. At this point the top vote-getting ticket would be C/O, but it wouldn't be equitable

Tough to see how to even get there.

[RestoreGore]

86. How flippant.

[C_U_L8R]

28. That's the Clinton strategy - has been for years

Doesn't everyone remember we had 8 years of "triangulate, divide, then conquer" ???
The Clintons perfected it to an art and it works. It works really well. Just look around.
Do we really want 8 more years of THIS?

[seabeyond]

29. there were a lot during 04. and they continued with battle and do damage and certainly

didnt help kerry and a win.

it isnt good

[goldcanyonaz]

30. This is why the "Dream ticket" is the only way out. Neither side is more popular than the other.

Wouldn't know that be reading this forum, but this forum doesn't represent reality.

[NastyRiffraff]

33. I think everybody has to take a step back and overcome their dislike

and vote for the Dem nominee. You don't have to like him or her, but you must recognize that either Dem candidate will be better than McCain. I support Hillary, and dislike and distrust (not hate) Obama, but I WILL vote for him if he's the nominee. Period. I wish there were a viable choice, but there isn't.

[Upton]

38. Yep, and Hillary and her supporters could care less

after all, if she can't win no one will.

[OzarkDem]

43. Then Obama should accept Clinton's offer

and run as VP.

Winning in places like Wyoming and Utah is pretty meaningless in the GE. He's far behind Clinton in the count for electoral votes. Time for him to pull the plug.

Will it hurt his male ego? If he's a bright guy it won't, but something tells me he has a strong macho streak that's making this hard for him to take.

[Pirate Smile]

49. Ridiculous. He is winning. She isn't. She would have to be VP or else

nothing is resolved.

[DURHAM D]

54. I don't think Obama wants Hillary because she might make him actually be a Democrat.

As best I can tell he has no passion for any Democratic core issues. If he picks her he then has a problem with health care - she will force it on him and he doesn't want to deal with it.

[Name removed]

82. Deleted message

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

[LisaL]

87. Black men got the right to vote 50 years before women did.

Isn't that precious?

[Pirate Smile]

102. Could they use it? What do you think they were still fighting for during the Civil

Rights movement in the 1960's.

This woman v. black crap is really, really pathetic and divisive.

She is behind him so she should be the VP candidate. It doesn't have anything to do with her gender or his race.

[goldcanyonaz]

94. Quit with the fucking race baiting. It's disgusting.

[Kurt_and_Hunter]

106. sickening comment

[JackHughes]

48. Unity Ticket Compromise - The Only Solution

Since neither Obama nor Clinton can achieve the number of delegates required to win the nomination outright; and the Michigan and Florida debacle looms as an unresolvable nightmare; and the longer this conflict continues the more divided the Democrats will be and the better McCain's chances become. Therefore:

Hillary agrees to a single term and Obama runs as Vice President. The party is united and the Florida/Michigan issue becomes moot. If elected, she makes history and can institute her policies, yet shows her willingness to sacrifice her ambition (for two terms) for the good of her party and her country -- enhancing her popularity (and possibly even assuaging the anxiety of the Hillary-haters).

For Obama it's a good move for similar reputation-enhancing reasons -- he sacrifices his immediate presidential ambition for the good of party and country. In four years, he (presumably) becomes president while still relatively young (their relative ages make this the only workable sequence).

Any compromise requires sacrifice from both parties and this is the only deal that I can see working. Any other scenario will result in prolonged and increasingly bitter intra-party slashings, and will either require a dark-horse candidate like Gore or will split the party with disastrous electoral results.

[Pirate Smile]

52. No. The second place person gets VP and it is insane to argue otherwise.

[maddiejoan]

55. So you want us to have 12 years instead of 16?

[fadedrose]

59. The "other" solution

is to have people nominate others for president at the convention, throw it wide open with terrific speeches praising Biden, Gore, Clark, Kerry and a bunch of other people - would be so exciting to watch - and then let'em vote. Sounds like an American idea, doesn't it?

A national primary day is an idea they should start to consider. These primaries and caucuses are nothing but trouble because they breed jealousy and force the states to compete against each other for power.

[KoKo]

99. Never Happen... Both candidates voters would be up in arms...

It would have to be a unity ticket. I don't see Hillary as Obama's VP, though...

[Pirate Smile]

103. Then there wont be a unity ticket.

[JackHughes]

76. The real goal..

..Isn't winning the nomination -- it's winning the presidency and literally saving our country from the Republicans. The policy differences between Clinton and Obama are minute, compared to the differences between the Dems and the GOP.

I'm old enough to vividly recall the party schisms of 1968 and 1980 -- both of which put Republicans into the White House.

Please remember that politics IS compromise.

[MonkeyFunk]

90. No

NONE of our candidates should agree to a single term.

Christ, we've had ONE two-term democrat since FDR. I think we deserve better than that.

[pleah]

105. That's pretty much what Mario Cuomo said the other day on TV.

I completely agree. It will be the only way we can salvage the party.

[mudesi]

64. Thanks Hillary Clinton!

:puke:

[backscatter712]

71. Who's the candidate that's going scorched earth?

Oh yeah, Hillary.

She's decided "If I can't be President, no Democrat will." All the better to set her up for 2012.

When one candidate throws mud, it looks like both have been throwing mud.

And Hillary's the one that threw the kitchen sink.

She's sinking the entire party, and the party needs to stand up and tell her to get out now.

[BootinUp]

78. Depends on your point of view, some would say both have hurled

some good ones.

Hillary will say anything, don't you know, whether its true or not.

[Frank Booth]

92. Looks like Hillary's plan has succeeded

Trash Barack Obama before the general election. Imply that John McCain would be a better President by praising his foreign policy experience.

Since she can't win this time around, she's setting her sights on 2012. Doesn't it just make you proud of our great democracy?

[Kurt_and_Hunter]

113. Moronic and baseless

[Hart2008]

111. I am still waiting to see the effect of Nader in the polls. n/t

[Carrieyazel]

112. The longer this goes on, the better for McCain. We've screwed up the top of the ticket.

But look at the bright side. Congress, state houses, governors, local offices. We can make the Repukes the permanent minority below the presidential level.

We need to run a consensus candidate who can win nationally for President. McCain was the only one on their side who could win a general, and they've nominated him. We're still slugging it out.