« New NPS Plan Emphasizes Preservation
The morality of religious dating websites run by secular companies »
Hillary Clinton And Dynasties Get High “No” Vote In Poll (UPDATED)
Bad polling news for Hillary Clinton and the concept in general of political dynasties — or national presidential candidate political retreads:
With the presidential election more than two years away, a CNN poll released Monday suggests that nearly half of Americans would “definitely vote against” Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton.Respondents were asked whether they would “definitely vote for,” “consider voting for,” or “definitely vote against” three Democrats and three Republicans who might run for president in 2008.
Regarding potential Democratic candidates, 47 percent of respondents said they would “definitely vote against” both Clinton, the junior senator from New York who is running for re-election this year, and Sen. John Kerry of Massachusetts, the party’s candidate in 2004.
Starting out with a candidate with high negatives means a party’s campaign has to be the “sell” and the “UNsell” and — no matter how you view X party canididate — it means the party has starting a race carrying some baggage.
But as this poll shows, it isn’t just Hillary Clinton who’s getting the negatives. If you look at it, it seems to be people related to past candidates or people who’ve run on a national ticket before:
Forty-eight percent said the same of former Vice President Al Gore, who has repeatedly denied he intends to run again for president.Among the Republicans, Sen. John McCain of Arizona and former New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani fared better than the Democrats, and Florida Gov. Jeb Bush fared worse.
Only 30 percent said they would “definitely vote against” Giuliani; 34 percent said that of McCain.As for Bush, brother of the current president, 63 percent said there was no way he would get their vote. The younger Bush has denied interest in running for president in 2008.
This suggests that Jeb Bush (who is said to have a good political ear) more than ever will stay out of 2008 until he has a chance to further solidify his own national persona and let some of the emotions lingering over his brother’s terms in office cool. MORE:
Among all choices, Clinton had the highest positive number; of those polled, 22 percent said they would “definitely vote for” her.Giuliani was next with 19 percent, followed by Gore with 17 percent, Kerry with 14 percent, McCain with 12 percent and Bush at 9 percent.
However, it’s generally more of a task to have people unlearn perceptions than learn them. All of this taken together suggests that the Democrats may have some additional work to do in 2008 if Clinton, Gore or Kerry are the nominees — more fence-mending than a likely GOP candidate will have.
UPDATE:
– The latest poll shows Hillary Clinton is headed to a landslide re-election victory.
–Outside The Beltway has some thoughts and a good round up on this poll.
5 Responses to “Hillary Clinton And Dynasties Get High “No” Vote In Poll (UPDATED)”
It seems like everyone understands the formula that works for Democrats except for the idiots running the Democratic Party. Southern Democrat governors can win national elections. The longer they toy with Hillary, Kerry and Gore, the less time they have to promote someone who can actually win an election against a strong GOP candidate. Why nobody is looking at Sebelius or Napolitano is beyond me. Both are Southern Democrat governors and they’re both women with no negative national track records or opinions. And Mark Warner gets very little attention compared to his New England counterparts. Clearly the strategy of the last 3 elections has not been working and if the DNC can’t get its act together in the next few weeks, they don’t stand a chance against the GOP.
in all fairness, Carter and Clinton had longer track records than Warner, whos only a one term gov thanks to term limits. Both had considerable exposure nationally – Carter had been on the trilateral commission, and had made the nominating speech for Scoop Jackson at the ’72 convention, and Clinton had been very active in the DLC, and had IIRC had been chair of the Dem Governors conference. I certainly think Warner should be considered, to hand it to him automatically cause hes a governor from below the mason dixon line seems a bit silly, and to put forward people with NO NATIONAL records whatsoever, well…..
Bill Clinton had no national record before running. He was never a Senator or Representative (as far as I know), but his experience as Governor of Arkansas is what made him a strong contender and a good Presidential Candidate. Senators in general have a poor track record when running for President and I think part of that is that people don’t want another Beltway political hack in the Oval Office when they already have 500+ on the Hill. Plus, being the Governor is comparable to being the President of your state – the experiences gained in governorship are much more similar to Presidency than Congressional duties are.
I think when you find a Democrat with a strong following and a good track record in a southern state, you ignore that person at your own risk. Napolitano, Sebelius and Warner are all popular and successful in states where most dems are more likely to win the lottery than an election. Why not focus more part attention on them and less on candidates that don’t even have popular support within the democratic party?
I agree with your perspective, Amanda, that the Dems need to look at red-state governors… eventually. Maybe it’s a good thing that they haven’t yet garnered attention/buzz more than two years before the election. Both Carter and Clinton flew under the radar until the primaries actually got underway. Start talking about Napolitano, Sibelius, or Warner now (I’d add Bill Richardson and Tom Vilsack to that list as well), and the public will be sick of them by 2008. (I’m not sure why this hasn’t held true for Republicans… Bush was practically annointed by the men in the smoke-filled rooms about a year and a half prior to November 2000.)
Nick – you’re absolutely right. I’m just being impatient. We still have something like 950 days left of the Bush Presidency which gives us about 550 before the real campaigns begin. Who knows what the landscape will look like in 2008?
PING:
TITLE: Hillary Clinton Gets 47 Percent “Definite No” in CNN Poll
BLOG NAME: Outside The Beltway | OTB
Nearly half of Americans would “definitely not vote for” Hillary Clinton , according to a new CNN poll.
With the presidential election more than two years away, a CNN poll released Monday suggests that nearly half of Americans would “…