ABC/Washington Post Poll: Campaign Against Obama Gives Clinton Her Highest Negatives Since 1992

A new ABC News/Washington Post poll finds that her no-holds-barred campaign for the Democratic Presidential nomination against Senator Barack Obama has given Senator Clinton an unfavorable rating higher “than at any time since The Post and ABC began asking the question, in 1992.”

This confirms what many had suspected was an emerging trend: the more Clinton went negative to drive up Obama’s negatives and in effect make him unelectable so Superdelegates would consider opting to her, the more her own negatives went up. The danger for Clinton: she began the campaign overcoming a history of negatives, which Obama didn’t have.

More bad news: 6 out of 10 independent voters now view her negatively.

Still another bit of bad news: the poll indicates that despite her arguments to the contrary, Democrats now consider her more unelectable than Obama.

But there is a silver lining for her: Democrats want the contest to be allowed to run its course, rejecting the arguments of those calling for Clinton to pull out so that front-runner Obama can start to battle presumptive Republican nominee Senator John McCain.

However, the news of Clinton’s negatives represents a major problem for her and the Democrats: it means Republicans will have an easier time uniting against her, and if she gets the nomination via a controversial procedure, these numbers indicate she will face a massive internal fence-mending effort to woo some angry segments of her party back ….efforts she’ll have to do against a backgroup of negative perceptions:

The fierce battle…appears to have taken a toll on the image of Clinton, who was once seen as the favorite. And Obama has widened his lead since early February on several key qualities that voters are looking for in a candidate and has narrowed sizable advantages for Clinton on others.

He now has a 2-to-1 edge on who is considered more electable in a general contest — a major reversal from the last poll — and has dramatically reduced a large Clinton lead on which of the two is the “stronger leader.”

Keep in mind that Clinton’s campaign had been designed to creative exactly the opposite effect. AND:

While Clinton retains a big edge over Obama on experience, public impressions of her have taken a sharply negative turn. Today, more Americans have an unfavorable view of her than at any time since The Post and ABC began asking the question, in 1992. Impressions of her husband, former president Bill Clinton, also have grown negative by a small margin.

In the new poll, 54 percent said they have an unfavorable view of Sen. Clinton, up from 40 percent a few days after she won the New Hampshire primary in early January. Her favorability rating has dropped among both Democrats and independents over the past three months, although her overall such rating among Democrats remains high. Nearly six in 10 independents now view her unfavorably.

Obama’s favorability rating also has declined over the same period but remains, on balance, more positive than negative.

Meanwhile, the poll has about the same results when Democrats are asked who they want as their nominee as the recent Gallup Daily Tracking poll did:

Sen. Barack Obama holds a 10-point lead over Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton when Democrats are asked whom they would prefer to see emerge as the party’s presidential nominee, but there is little public pressure to bring the long and increasingly heated contest to an end, according to a new Washington Post-ABC News poll.

What does this mean?

1. Clinton and her party will have their work cut out for them if she becomes the nominee.

2. There are angry rumblings among liberal Democrats that if Obama gets the nomination after a bloody battle to the finish and then goes down to defeat due to Republicans using charges and themes raised by Clinton that she will be to blame. In reality, opposition political parties have long plucked things from primaries and used them against a party’s nominee. But due to the kind of battle that is being waged and her high numbers, this means if Clinton tried to get the nomination in 2012 she’d face fierce built in antipathy from a segment of her party.

3. The numbers could indicate there is either a generational shift or just a sense of “ENOUGH!” when it comes to negative campaigning on the part of some Americans. The likely impact: an increased use of surrogates by Clinton and others in the future to keep a candidate at least visibly removed from the political mayhem. Negative campaigning won’t due or vanish, but politicians may have to start to do a better job of cushioning themselves (they’ll probably just blame it on followers who went too far). Don’t expect patty-cake contests any time soon.

Cartoon by Adam Zyglis, The Buffalo News

UPDATE: Apparently Clinton’s efforts to use the “bitter” controversy to woo Superdelegates are not yet having the desiged impact. The Hill:

Superdelegates from states voting next in the Democratic primary say that Sen. Barack Obama’s (D-Ill.) controversial comments on guns and religion will not cause much damage to his political standing despite an intensifying assault from Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton (D-N.Y.) and Republicans.

“I don’t sense a lot of frustration,” said Rep. Baron Hill, an uncommitted Democrat who represents a rural district in Indiana, which will hold its primary on May 6.

which will hold its primary on May 6.

“People say, ‘What’s the big deal? Where’s the beef?’ ” said Hill, who added that the strongest reaction has come from members of the press. “Rank-and-file people aren’t that hyped up about it.”

Other uncommitted delegates held back from criticizing Obama’s comments, which have spurred attacks from Clinton and Republican political operatives. The muted responses raise questions over whether Clinton’s attacks will prove effective.

….Rep. Tim Holden, an uncommitted Democrat representing a rural district in eastern Pennsylvania, said Obama’s comments were unfortunate but somewhat understandable given the long and intense scrutiny of presidential candidates.

Holden said he disagreed with Obama’s assertion that people living in rural areas turn to guns and religion because of bitterness. At the same time, however, he said that there has been little reaction in his district.

He said he checked with his district offices and heard about no complaints from constituents.

“I could be dead wrong, but I’m not hearing very much about it,” he said.