Survivor

« Return to Article

Discuss

Member Comments

  • Posted By: Mr M @ 11/03/2007 6:26:46 PM

    the poll was taken somewhat soon after the debate,and didn't have enough time tomark the media's influence. uknow the line that all of u have been writing - hllary is reeling....hillary has beenbeaten up...obama makes is move..... edwards is relentless....hillary stumbles, etc, etc. all that to make it a race. anyway, back in reality land, we ALL know the debate was watched by about 875,000 political junkies whose minds were already made up, and the millions who read what the media disseminated and decided we can forgive our next commander in chief fudging a 30 second lightning round response to a quirky question on what a new york governor is trying to do about illegal immigration, knowing full well that her counterparts were not familiar with the nuances and details of the sometimes confusing plan. do mea favor. allow the candidates to blur our thinking. don't u do it...............................

  • Posted By: Mr M @ 11/03/2007 6:26:24 PM

    the poll was taken somewhat soon after the debate,and didn't have enough time tomark the media's influence. uknow the line that all of u have been writing - hllary is reeling....hillary has beenbeaten up...obama makes is move..... edwards is relentless....hillary stumbles, etc, etc. all that to make it a race. anyway, back in reality land, we ALL know the debate was watched by about 875,000 political junkies whose minds were already made up, and the millions who read what the media disseminated and decided we can forgive our next commander in chief fudging a 30 second lightning round response to a quirky question on what a new york governor is trying to do about illegal immigration, knowing full well that her counterparts were not familiar with the nuances and details of the sometimes confusing plan. do mea favor. allow the candidates to blur our thinking. don't u do it...............................

  • Posted By: Mr M @ 11/03/2007 6:26:20 PM

    the poll was taken somewhat soon after the debate,and didn't have enough time tomark the media's influence. uknow the line that all of u have been writing - hllary is reeling....hillary has beenbeaten up...obama makes is move..... edwards is relentless....hillary stumbles, etc, etc. all that to make it a race. anyway, back in reality land, we ALL know the debate was watched by about 875,000 political junkies whose minds were already made up, and the millions who read what the media disseminated and decided we can forgive our next commander in chief fudging a 30 second lightning round response to a quirky question on what a new york governor is trying to do about illegal immigration, knowing full well that her counterparts were not familiar with the nuances and details of the sometimes confusing plan. do mea favor. allow the candidates to blur our thinking. don't u do it...............................

  • Posted By: Mr M @ 11/03/2007 6:23:57 PM

    the poll was taken somewhat soon after the debate,and didn't have enough time tomark the media's influence. uknow the line that all of u have been writing - hllary is reeling....hillary has beenbeaten up...obama makes is move..... edwards is relentless....hillary stumbles, etc, etc. all that to make it a race. anyway, back in reality land, we ALL know the debate was watched by about 875,000 political junkies whose minds were already made up, and the millions who read what the media disseminated and decided we can forgive our next commander in chief fudging a 30 second lightning round response to a quirky question on what a new york governor is trying to do about illegal immigration, knowing full well that her counterparts were not familiar with the nuances and details of the sometimes confusing plan. do mea favor. allow the candidates to blur our thinking. don't u do it...............................

  • Posted By: clikdawg @ 11/03/2007 4:59:03 PM

    I'm no Statistical Wizard, so perhaps someone could explain to me -- simply, now, simply -- how Senator Clinton's huge lead in this poll against her Democratic rivals translates into a statistical dead-heat against Giulani (4 points, with a margin of error of +/- 4), while Edwards (at 16% vs. Hillary) absolutely crushes Rudy in the party-against-party match-up.

    Now, I'm an independent who doesn't give a tinker's damn about John, Hillary, or Rudy; but, on the face of it, either Americans are either schizier than I thought, or this poll is a fairy tale of the very highest magnitude.

    Thank whoever (in advance) for clearing this up for me ... if you can ...

    • Posted By: pasteeater @ 11/03/2007 6:03:48 PM

      Well i guess i can state the obvious... more independent voters like edwards.. which i am happy with because i think the country is ready for someone like edwards where we werent 4 years ago... i think clinton scares a lot of independents... for 20 years we will have either a Bush or Clinton in the white house..If hillary gets elected it could be as much as 28 years. bush senior an honorable man and clinton was an excellent president... bush jr knew what he had to do to be elected since he worked on his fathers campaign. hillary knew what to do because she also was in the ballpark. presidential leadership went downhill with the last bush as president... i think a lot of people are scared it will do the same with hillary... to me it is like the monarchys.. inbreeding causes stupidity (of course there is no inbreeding here but it was just an example)... I also think the republicans have to bow to the extreme right wing... and the democrats have to bow to the extreme left... which means america gets hurt when it comes to elected officials

  • Posted By: cerrulis @ 11/03/2007 5:49:58 PM

    48-19 percent, women more likely to vote for Clinton? Is this just a "girls gotta stick together" thing? I am a woman, and I will chew Hillary's toenails before I vote for her. Did you people pay ANY attention to the debate?

  • Posted By: inddenver @ 11/03/2007 3:25:29 PM

    I don't understand where this $100 haircut business (whether it's true or not) is so derogatory against Edwards. Does Hillary go to Super Cuts or Fantastic Sam's??? Give us a break. Yes, Edwards is a trial lawyer, yes he was successful and can afford a nice home. Most American feel that they deserve financial success if they worked to obtain it. What is so wrong with Edwards' success? Is Hillary in the poorhouse?
    Hillary is a double-talking politician who has lots of skeletons in her closet (Remember Clinton-Gate?). Republican will have a heyday with her if she wins the Dems ticket. I hope she does not because I would like to see a democrat in the White House again in the forseeable future. She's just not trustworthy enough for most Americans.
    Hillary: Please step down and give Dems a chance in 2008.

    • Posted By: lionred @ 11/03/2007 5:39:07 PM

      Edward's claims to be a man of the people. He's such a liar and hypocrite. His expensive haircuts and super nice home proves it!!! For him to attack Hillary as being an insider is just ridiculous. He too is an insider. As for double talk, I think this argument is bogus as well. The main problem we have with Bush is that he never changes his mind. Now we are criticizing Hillary Clinton, because she is flexible in her viewpoints and willing to take a honest look at the issues we face and then make the right decisions to address them. I want a thoughtful President. Madame President Hillary Clinton, will be a thoughtful presient.

  • Posted By: lionred @ 11/03/2007 1:58:02 PM

    Hillary Clinton is the best choice for the Democratic Party. John Edwards is just a lawyer, who trying to act like he cares for the poor. He claims Hillary is an insider and he is not. This argument is ridiculous. He has a 10, 000 sq ft home, likes $100 haircuts, has been a senator, and has twice run for president. Now does that sound like an outsider to you? As for Obama, this two year old senator is extremely unskilled. He hasn't performed well in any debate. Also his biography, is extremely shoddy at best. From his attacking of Hillary Clinton, he clearly has gotten rid of the politics of hope, and is gladly promoting the politics of desperation. Obama is good at hamming it up with Jay Leno and David Letterman, but he absolutely has nothing serious to offer America. Hillary Clinton is the democrats best shot at the White House. If Democrats are foolish to choose someone else, then we deserve to lose...because we will!

    • Posted By: Paul H @ 11/03/2007 3:17:46 PM

      IF you choose Hillary, the yes, you all deserve to lose, yet again. IF she is the best choice, as you say (one of the only Dems I've spoken with who actually believe that crap) then the Dems have already lost because Hillary is out on the trail making deals with whomever she can just so she can get into office. Guess who pays for all of these "great" ideas of hers? You and I. All of our taxes will go up to pay for her stupid ideas of universal health care and let's not forget she is for illegal immigrants.

      Shes backs the governor of New York, who wants to give licenses to illegal immigrants ... does anyone understand how assinine that truly is? This would allow people who aren't from this country to vote in our elections!

      You Democrats cannot be stupid enough to truly believe that Hillary is your best choice for President of the United States.

      • Posted By: lionred @ 11/03/2007 5:28:51 PM

        Paul even the Republicans are fed up with being Republicans. They can't even decide whether they should be more conservative or whether to be more liberal. The party is falling apart at the seams. Democrats are excited and motivated! We will win, especially with Hillary Clinton as our leader. Democrats will make history! We will elect to the White House the first U.S. women President...Madame President Hillary Clinton!

  • Posted By: Truedem @ 11/03/2007 5:13:32 PM

    Personally, I find these poll numbers hard to believe since all Democrats with whom I speak, (here in NYS) even those who support her, feel that she took quite a beating in the debate. The final blow was certainly the doublespeak answer concerning the issue of driver's licenses for illegals but she was no more sustantial in trying to define herself on her Iran policy. She was downright duplicitous when talking about the archived documents and was obviously pandering to the right with her hands off approach to Social Securinty ( we all know that a 'bipartisan committe' is code for doing nothing). All in all she was not only ineffective in presenting her positions but she confirmed many people's prior opinion that both she and her husband will always pick expediency over principle when expressing their intent. The Democrats would do well to think carefully before supporting Hillary as their nominee because even if she wins (which is questionable) she will not represent the change that many of them wish to bring about in Washington.

  • Posted By: Chuck in Denver @ 11/03/2007 3:48:32 PM

    How could any meaningful poll have been taken already to reflect the influence of last Tuesday's debate? Few people actually watched the debate and it will take some weeks until the impact of the post-debate discussions begin to have some effect. Like so many ask, I also wonder, who did they poll? Folks at the Newsweek headquarters? I think any polling is now underreporting the impressions of people in their 20s and 30s, many of whom no longer have landline telephones.

  • Posted By: USMC1980 @ 11/03/2007 3:15:46 PM

    Anyone who thinks that Hillary Clinton is more likey to start a war with Iran then Rudy Giuliani is ignorant of the facts. Giuliani has been spitting more venom at Iran then even Bush has, and he has surrounded his campaign with the same Neo-cons who pushed the war in Iraq, and are now pushing to bomb Iran. If you want another George Bush in the White House, by all means be foolish enough to vote for Giuliani. If you want an end to the pointless war in Iraq, a tuff diplomatic solution to Iran, better healthcare, and a better 90's era economy, you best vote for Clinton. Most Americans realize this, which is why she continues to spank poor Rudy in the polls. This poll shows that despite the best efforts of bias blowhard's like Tim Russert and Chris Matthews....Hillary in unstoppable.

    • Posted By: Paul H @ 11/03/2007 3:46:50 PM

      You need to seek help if you truly believe any of what you just posted.

  • Posted By: Fab40ies @ 11/03/2007 1:19:25 PM

    I cannot imagine who Newsweek, or any of the other survey 'companies,' are speaking to when they administer their surveys. I am a Vet and speak with people across the country, with ages ranging from 22 to 72...not one person I have spoken with, who plans to vote for the democrats, supports Clinton - including myself. Hillary is too polarizina and will not pull in the Independents = Hillary wins the nomination and we will have another Republican in the White House, we'll be mired in the Middle East for decades, and our economy will implode. This is exactly what happened to the U.S.S.R. It wasn't Reagan (as the republicans like to believe), U.S.S.R. invaded Afganistan, got stuck in a war they couldn't win and it destroyed their economy.

    Even now we're living in a lie. It is impossible for the CPI to only be 3.4% with the price of a gallon of gas having doubled in the past six years. Search the web - the statistics for the inflation rate are being altered via substition bias, geometric weighting, hedonic adjustment, and owner's equivalent rent of primary residence (this is what the news should be reporting). The actual inflation rate should have been between 7-11% each year since 2001. This will continue if there is not a significant change to how we're doing business. The probability will be that Clinton will simply maintain the status quo until the economy finally collapses.

    We need a complete change: any of the others, Edwards, Obama, Kucinich, etc. would be preferable to Clinton.

    • Posted By: Paul H @ 11/03/2007 3:04:18 PM

      You're right it was the war in Afghanistan that broke their back but you have the facts wrong. IT was Reagan's policy to help the Afghans that made it so they could fight against the Russians. You really don't believe a bunch of ragtags did it on their own, do you? It was our weaponry and training that helped them defeat the Russians. so yes, the downfall of the Russians was helped because of Reagan's stance against them.

      They could no longer keep up with our military and it broke their back, because we helped the Afghans defeat the mighty Red Machine.

  • Posted By: abadreview @ 11/03/2007 1:46:07 PM

    That's because you assholes in the media are providing misinformation to the public. No matter what this skank does, you call her the "obvious frontrunner." By telling the uninformed public this, they basically just jump o her imaginary bandwagon, without even giving the other, more respectable candidates an in-depth look. Whoever will keep pumping money into a failing capitalist system is who the major corporations want. Oh, wow, Newsweek is part of a huge media conglomerate..what a surprise. We are nearing a civil war of epic proportions because the voices of the lower classes are no longer relevant to the powers that be.

    • Posted By: jelawson @ 11/03/2007 3:03:26 PM

      Clinton is ahead by a substantial amount in EVERY primary state poll, she leads all Democratic challegers nationally by +20% margin. She IS the OBVIOUS front runner, regardless of your opinions about the media coverage - and INSPITE of the 24/7 attacks she takes from all other presidential candiates, Fox News, Rush, etc. Perhaps you're a little closer to the 'uniformed public' than you'd like to think.

  • Posted By: DADIO550 @ 11/03/2007 2:55:20 PM

    I just love when sites like MSNBC try to bolster their media darling Hillary when they know darn well that she took a beating in this last debate. Why else would their healdlines state that she emerged undamaged? The American people are not that stupid, they know she cannot lead this nation as it's Commander in Chief.

  • Posted By: visioman @ 11/03/2007 2:11:46 PM

    I am a Democrat who was a strong supporter of Bill Clinton. My feelings about Hillary are these; she is smart, articulate and she would probably do great things for our country domestically.
    The problem I see, is that she is in bed with AIPAC and would in all probability start a war with Iran, if Bush doesn't do it first.
    I do not want to see this country in another war for Israel. The war in Iraq is already one too many.

  • Posted By: peaveydude @ 11/03/2007 1:23:11 PM

    Let's see...Rose Law firm, Whitewater, White House Travel Agency, Vince Foster murder...yeah...I"M sure they're gonna "Swift boat" ole HIllary's crooked butt...Let the fun begin!. BIll got a BJ, but Hillary was the crook. Don't put any bets on seeing the first *** pres anytime soon...

  • Posted By: rkatz @ 11/03/2007 12:31:46 PM

    I am shocked by the statistic that more people think the situation in Iraq is improving. The Petraeus propaganda is working. That general is a Republican operative. Why did the Mainstream Media go along with the lie that he was some kind of objective observer, when lots of other generals and ex-generals are giving a more sober, objective view of the Iraq occupation. It's a mess and there is no end in sight. The surge is a failure. But we live in an Orwellian world where something gets repeated by the Administration enough times the MSM takes it as truth.

    I wish the MSM would get over its obsession with polling and start reporting the facts behind the spin so people know something about the real situation in the world theyare facing, and how these candidates will respond.

    It's all horse race all the time. This is not another major league sport with all those interesting statistics to play with! This is the future of our democracy, our world at stake.

    The fourth estate is failing us. Did you know that a third of Americans still believe that Saddam Hussein was behind the attacks of 9-11? Propaganda works when we have a lazy, compliant press.

  • Posted By: greenbug @ 11/03/2007 9:52:34 AM

    You won't find out the fallout from the debate and Hillary's actions afterwards, for a few weeks. You guys should know this. I know you will tout the immediate polls right now as polling is kind of an obsession of the media's but, the real numbers won't show until around thanksgiving.

Reply

Report Abuse

Enter comments if any for reporting abuse