More than half of Americans say they will never vote for evil witch Hillary Clinton!

  • Thread starter inkyblacks@yahoo.com
  • Start date
I

inkyblacks@yahoo.com

Guest
http://www.contracostatimes.com/por...rint_article.jsp?articleId=6260144&siteId=571

More than half of Americans won't vote for Clinton, poll shows
Survey provides a snapshot of the senator's challenges as she seeks
the Democratic nomination for president

By William Douglas
MCCLATCHY WASHINGTON BUREAU
Contra Costa Times

WASHINGTON -- More than half of Americans say they wouldn't consider
voting for Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton for president if she becomes
the Democratic nominee, according to a new national poll made
available to McClatchy Newspapers and NBC News.

The poll by Mason-Dixon Polling and Research found that 52 percent of
Americans wouldn't consider voting for Clinton, D-N.Y. Former
Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney, a Republican, was second in the can't-
stand-'em category, with 46 percent saying they wouldn't consider
voting for him.
Clinton has long been considered a politically polarizing figure who
would be a tough sell to some voters, especially many men, but also
Clinton-haters of both genders.

Thursday's survey provides a snapshot of the challenges she faces,
according to Larry Harris, a Mason-Dixon principal.

"Hillary's carrying a lot of baggage," he said. "She's the only one
that has a majority who say they can't vote for her."

Clinton rang up high negatives across the board, with 60 percent of
independents, 56 percent of men, 47 percent of women and 88 percent of
Republicans saying they wouldn't consider voting for her.
Romney struggled most with women: 50.9 percent said they wouldn't
consider voting for him.
"It's the flip-flop of Hillary," Harris said of Romney. "One could
suppose it's the Mormon issue -- we didn't ask follow-up questions --
but his religion is an issue."

On name recognition, Clinton also led the 2008 presidential pack in
voter disapproval, with 42 percent saying they recognized her name and
were unfavorable toward her, versus 39 percent favorable.
That gave her a double-digit lead in that bad-news category over
Republican Sen. John McCain of Arizona and former North Carolina Sen.
John Edwards, a Democrat. They each had 28 percent unfavorable
recognition.

Former New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani had the highest favorable
recognition at 43 percent, with Clinton close behind at 39 percent.
Sen. Barack Obama, D-Ill., was third at 36 percent, followed by McCain
at 33 percent and Edwards at 32 percent.

McCain rang up the highest favorable rating among independent voters
with 39.4 percent, followed by Giuliani with 37.3 percent. Edwards
scored well with independents, too, with 31.1 percent favorable; Obama
had 28 percent favorable.

The Mason-Dixon survey was conducted June 23-25 with 625 likely
general-election voters. It has an error margin of plus or minus 4
percentage points.
 
> More thanhalfofAmericanswon'tvotefor Clinton, poll shows
> Survey provides a snapshot of the senator's challenges as she seeks
> the Democratic nomination for president


This will not be an issue for Hillary. Recall that Bill got two terms
in the Whitehouse and never had even fifty percent of the popular
vote. IIRC, Bill received 43% / 47% in his two runs for the
Whitehouse. Thanks to Perot who took on the role of spoiler.

I believe that the Clintons are hoping for the same break in 2008; a
3rd party candidate who will pull in enough moderate and moderate-
right voters to allow Hillary a walk into the Whitehouse.

Hillary expects to be in the Whitehouse in January of 2009, and will
allow nothing to conflict with that objective.
 
"inkyblacks@yahoo.com" <inkyblacks@yahoo.com> allegedly said in
news:1183134352.220982.303860@a26g2000pre.googlegroups.com:

Hey, that's Madame President Clinton to the likes of a drooling little
****wit like you...

You should repeat it so you can get used to saying it for 8 years.

<snicker>


Gonzo Funeral Watch: 108 days 16 hours 45 minutes and counting

--
AW

<small but dangerous>
 
Hillary Clinton has a chance to win the Democratic Party nomination,
but zero chance to win the general election. The only possible 3rd
party candidate of importance would be current New York City mayor
Michael Bloomberg, who will take away Democratic votes, not Republican
votes. Bloomberg is a liberal. He was registered as a Republican for
a time only to get a chance to run for mayor. It was a technical
scam. He was and is effectively a Democrat.

If Democrats are stupid enough to nominate Hillary Clinton, they will
only assure that Fred Thomspon will be the next president. A vote for
Hillary is a vote to put a Republican in the White House in 08.

IB


On Jun 29, 11:11 am, Don't Wait Up <pinto...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> > More thanhalfofAmericanswon'tvotefor Clinton, poll shows
> > Survey provides a snapshot of the senator's challenges as she seeks
> > the Democratic nomination for president

>
> This will not be an issue for Hillary. Recall that Bill got two terms
> in the Whitehouse and never had even fifty percent of the popular
> vote. IIRC, Bill received 43% / 47% in his two runs for the
> Whitehouse. Thanks to Perot who took on the role of spoiler.
>
> I believe that the Clintons are hoping for the same break in 2008; a
> 3rd party candidate who will pull in enough moderate and moderate-
> right voters to allow Hillary a walk into the Whitehouse.
>
> Hillary expects to be in the Whitehouse in January of 2009, and will
> allow nothing to conflict with that objective.
 
On Jun 29, 3:51 pm, "inkybla...@yahoo.com" <inkybla...@yahoo.com>
wrote:
> Hillary Clinton has a chance to win the Democratic Party nomination,
> but zero chance to win the general election. The only possible 3rd
> party candidate of importance would be current New York City mayor
> Michael Bloomberg, who will take away Democratic votes, not Republican
> votes. Bloomberg is a liberal. He was registered as a Republican for
> a time only to get a chance to run for mayor. It was a technical
> scam. He was and is effectively a Democrat.
>
> If Democrats are stupid enough to nominate Hillary Clinton, they will
> only assure that Fred Thomspon will be the next president. A vote for
> Hillary is a vote to put a Republican in the White House in 08.
>
> IB
>
> On Jun 29, 11:11 am, Don't Wait Up <pinto...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > More thanhalfofAmericanswon'tvotefor Clinton, poll shows
> > > Survey provides a snapshot of the senator's challenges as she seeks
> > > the Democratic nomination for president

>
> > This will not be an issue for Hillary. Recall that Bill got two terms
> > in the Whitehouse and never had even fifty percent of the popular
> > vote. IIRC, Bill received 43% / 47% in his two runs for the
> > Whitehouse. Thanks to Perot who took on the role of spoiler.

>
> > I believe that the Clintons are hoping for the same break in 2008; a
> > 3rd party candidate who will pull in enough moderate and moderate-
> > right voters to allow Hillary a walk into the Whitehouse.

>
> > Hillary expects to be in the Whitehouse in January of 2009, and will
> > allow nothing to conflict with that objective.


LOL after the present administration, I'm sure at least some of the
Republicans will have the sense to vote intelligently (for a change).
 
On Jun 29, 12:54 pm, Wes Penn <wespen...@gmail.com> wrote:

"I'm sure at least some of the Republicans will have the sense to vote
intelligently (for a change"
--------------------------------------------------------------------
You are WAY out of touch with reality if you think any significant
percentage of Republicans will vote for Hillary Clinton. No polling
service shows any significant Republican votes for HC.

To win the general election, a Democratic candidate must win the
majority of registered Democrat votes, plus the majority of
Independent votes. Polls show that very few Independents will vote
for Hillary and only about half of Democrats will vote for her.
Millions and millions of Democrats will vote Republican if she gains
the nomination.

Fred Thompson is a formidable candidate. If Democrats want to win in
08, they had better nominate Obama, Edwards, or Gore.

Hillary Clinton = doom for Democrats. She knows that, but as always,
she puts her own ego ahead of the welfare of her own country. Hillary
is a sell-out politician, a whore who will do anything to gain power.
She has a long history of lying and she has many faces, not just one.
The majority of Americans see through her and don't like her and will
NEVER vote for her.

Hillary Clinton = suicide for Democrats!

IB
 
On Jun 29, 7:45 pm, "inkybla...@yahoo.com" <inkybla...@yahoo.com>
wrote:
> On Jun 29, 12:54 pm, Wes Penn <wespen...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> "I'm sure at least some of the Republicans will have the sense to vote
> intelligently (for a change"
> --------------------------------------------------------------------
> You are WAY out of touch with reality if you think any significant
> percentage of Republicans will vote for Hillary Clinton. No polling
> service shows any significant Republican votes for HC.
>
> To win the general election, a Democratic candidate must win the
> majority of registered Democrat votes, plus the majority of
> Independent votes. Polls show that very few Independents will vote
> for Hillary and only about half of Democrats will vote for her.
> Millions and millions of Democrats will vote Republican if she gains
> the nomination.
>
> Fred Thompson is a formidable candidate. If Democrats want to win in
> 08, they had better nominate Obama, Edwards, or Gore.
>
> Hillary Clinton = doom for Democrats. She knows that, but as always,
> she puts her own ego ahead of the welfare of her own country. Hillary
> is a sell-out politician, a whore who will do anything to gain power.
> She has a long history of lying and she has many faces, not just one.
> The majority of Americans see through her and don't like her and will
> NEVER vote for her.
>
> Hillary Clinton = suicide for Democrats!
>
> IB


Well, at least here's one who won't vote intelligently.
 
Wes Penn wrote:
> On Jun 29, 7:45 pm, "inkybla...@yahoo.com" <inkybla...@yahoo.com>
> wrote:
>> On Jun 29, 12:54 pm, Wes Penn <wespen...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> "I'm sure at least some of the Republicans will have the sense to
>> vote intelligently (for a change"
>> --------------------------------------------------------------------
>> You are WAY out of touch with reality if you think any significant
>> percentage of Republicans will vote for Hillary Clinton. No polling
>> service shows any significant Republican votes for HC.
>>
>> To win the general election, a Democratic candidate must win the
>> majority of registered Democrat votes, plus the majority of
>> Independent votes. Polls show that very few Independents will vote
>> for Hillary and only about half of Democrats will vote for her.
>> Millions and millions of Democrats will vote Republican if she gains
>> the nomination.
>>
>> Fred Thompson is a formidable candidate. If Democrats want to win in
>> 08, they had better nominate Obama, Edwards, or Gore.
>>
>> Hillary Clinton = doom for Democrats. She knows that, but as always,
>> she puts her own ego ahead of the welfare of her own country.
>> Hillary is a sell-out politician, a whore who will do anything to
>> gain power. She has a long history of lying and she has many faces,
>> not just one. The majority of Americans see through her and don't
>> like her and will NEVER vote for her.
>>
>> Hillary Clinton = suicide for Democrats!
>>
>> IB

>
> Well, at least here's one who won't vote intelligently.


Typical neocon misogyny.
 
"Amanda Williams" <pms@fu.com> wrote in message
news:Xns995EAAEDB9422fubar@63.218.45.254...
> "inkyblacks@yahoo.com" <inkyblacks@yahoo.com> allegedly said in
> news:1183134352.220982.303860@a26g2000pre.googlegroups.com:
>
> Hey, that's Madame President Clinton to the likes of a drooling little
> ****wit like you...
>
> You should repeat it so you can get used to saying it for 8 years.



LOL, directly from a kooky leftist! If you believe that Hillary can win a
general presidential election, your are truly blind and/or ignorant to
reality!
But go ahead and help her get the Democratic nomination...it will only help
the Republican nominee!



>
> <snicker>
>
>
> Gonzo Funeral Watch: 108 days 16 hours 45 minutes and counting
>
> --
> AW
>
> <small but dangerous>
 
NBC wrote:
> "Amanda Williams" <pms@fu.com> wrote in message
> news:Xns995EAAEDB9422fubar@63.218.45.254...
>> "inkyblacks@yahoo.com" <inkyblacks@yahoo.com> allegedly said in
>> news:1183134352.220982.303860@a26g2000pre.googlegroups.com:
>>
>> Hey, that's Madame President Clinton to the likes of a drooling
>> little ****wit like you...
>>
>> You should repeat it so you can get used to saying it for 8 years.

>
>
> LOL, directly from a kooky leftist! If you believe that Hillary can
> win a general presidential election, your are truly blind and/or
> ignorant to reality!
> But go ahead and help her get the Democratic nomination...it will
> only help the Republican nominee!


The only reason anyone thinks Hillary can win is the weak Republican field.
Then again, everyone thought Bush II was a lightweight.

Hmmm...I guess that works to Clinton's favor too.
 
"Geoff" <gebobs@yahoo.nospam.com> wrote in message
news:kIWdnbjHgKhx3xXbnZ2dnUVZ_ternZ2d@giganews.com...
> NBC wrote:
>> "Amanda Williams" <pms@fu.com> wrote in message
>> news:Xns995EAAEDB9422fubar@63.218.45.254...
>>> "inkyblacks@yahoo.com" <inkyblacks@yahoo.com> allegedly said in
>>> news:1183134352.220982.303860@a26g2000pre.googlegroups.com:
>>>
>>> Hey, that's Madame President Clinton to the likes of a drooling
>>> little ****wit like you...
>>>
>>> You should repeat it so you can get used to saying it for 8 years.

>>
>>
>> LOL, directly from a kooky leftist! If you believe that Hillary can
>> win a general presidential election, your are truly blind and/or
>> ignorant to reality!
>> But go ahead and help her get the Democratic nomination...it will
>> only help the Republican nominee!

>
> The only reason anyone thinks Hillary can win is the weak Republican
> field. Then again, everyone thought Bush II was a lightweight.
>
> Hmmm...I guess that works to Clinton's favor too.
>




Fred Thompson could win over Hillary!
 
On Jul 1, 4:12 pm, "Geoff" <geb...@yahoo.nospam.com> wrote:

"The only reason anyone thinks Hillary can win is the weak Republican
field.
Then again, everyone thought Bush II was a lightweight."
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fred Thompson is no lightweight, and will be a serious challenge to
any Democratic candidate. I think Barack Obama has a good chance of
beating Fred Thompson in a general election. Thompson has allot of
appeal to voters, and it is amazing that he is now the leading
Republican candidate even though he has not officially declared yet.
If Democrats want to beat him, they had better not nominate a lying,
two faced witch that the majority of Americans do not like.

It looks like smarter Democrats are realizing that Hillary = doom for
Democrats. Obama is beating her in the polls and raising more cash.
Just being Bill Clinton's lying wife is not enough to become
president. In the last election, I voted all Democrat, but I will
never vote for the lying witch under any circumstances. I won't vote
for Thompson either, but will write in Obama's name if Hillary wins
the nomination. Let's hope it does not come to that.

IB
 
> The poll by Mason-Dixon Polling and Research found that 52 percent of
> Americans wouldn't consider voting for Clinton, D-N.Y. Former
> Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney, a Republican, was second in the can't-
> stand-'em category, with 46 percent saying they wouldn't consider
> voting for him.


Does this mean Mitt has a 3 pt lead on Hillary?

Or that Rudy will do really great in SC and get the nomination and win
by double digits?

It's sooo _hard_ to figger out why Repugs are so afraid of the
Clintons.

I'm scratchin' my weedle noggin but I can't figger it out.


Bret Cahill
 
> > The majority of Americans see through her and don't like her and will
> > NEVER vote for her.


> > Hillary Clinton = suicide for Democrats!


> Well, at least here's one who won't vote intelligently.


Hard to say. Deep down he probably wants another high tax Clinton
economic boom.

But you know rightards . . . they like to impress everyone with how
rightarded they are.


Bret Cahill
 
> The only reason anyone thinks Hillary can win is the weak Republican field.

Actually Mitt will be as effective against the Clintons as Dole or GHW
Bush.

> Then again, everyone thought Bush II was a lightweight.


Democrats didn't run anyone against Dumbya in 2000 or 2004.

> Hmmm...I guess that works to Clinton's favor too


Let's just say Hillary will be unopposed in 2008.


Bret Cahill
 
Bret Cahill wrote:
>> The poll by Mason-Dixon Polling and Research found that 52 percent of
>> Americans wouldn't consider voting for Clinton, D-N.Y. Former
>> Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney, a Republican, was second in the can't-
>> stand-'em category, with 46 percent saying they wouldn't consider
>> voting for him.

>
> Does this mean Mitt has a 3 pt lead on Hillary?
>
> Or that Rudy will do really great in SC and get the nomination and win
> by double digits?
>
> It's sooo _hard_ to figger out why Repugs are so afraid of the
> Clintons.
>
> I'm scratchin' my weedle noggin but I can't figger it out.
>
>
> Bret Cahill
>
>

It may be because every time they have a problem the knee jerk
reaction is to blame Clinton and having done that over and over they now
believe themselves.
 
Geoff wrote:
> NBC wrote:
>
>> "Amanda Williams" <pms@fu.com> wrote in message
>> news:Xns995EAAEDB9422fubar@63.218.45.254...
>>
>>> "inkyblacks@yahoo.com" <inkyblacks@yahoo.com> allegedly said in
>>> news:1183134352.220982.303860@a26g2000pre.googlegroups.com:
>>>
>>> Hey, that's Madame President Clinton to the likes of a drooling
>>> little ****wit like you...
>>>
>>> You should repeat it so you can get used to saying it for 8 years.
>>>

>> LOL, directly from a kooky leftist! If you believe that Hillary can
>> win a general presidential election, your are truly blind and/or
>> ignorant to reality!
>> But go ahead and help her get the Democratic nomination...it will
>> only help the Republican nominee!
>>

>
> The only reason anyone thinks Hillary can win is the weak Republican field.
> Then again, everyone thought Bush II was a lightweight.
>
> Hmmm...I guess that works to Clinton's favor too.
>
>
>

bush jr is a lightweight. but cheney is one heavy mutha.

--
On the right,The John Birch Society's website editor recently opined of the Bush Administration's warrantless wiretap program: "This is to say that from the administration's perspective, the president is, in effect, our living constitution. This is, in a specific and unmistakable sense, fascist."
 
On Jun 29, 4:44 pm, Amanda Williams <p...@fu.com> wrote:
> "inkybla...@yahoo.com" <inkybla...@yahoo.com> allegedly said innews:1183134352.220982.303860@a26g2000pre.googlegroups.com:
>
> Hey, that's Madame President Clinton to the likes of a drooling little
> ****wit like you...
>
> You should repeat it so you can get used to saying it for 8 years.
>


So, tell me; what is so wonderful about Hillary? Why, specifically,
would you vote for her?


> <snicker>
>
> Gonzo Funeral Watch: 108 days 16 hours 45 minutes and counting
>
> --
> AW
>
> <small but dangerous>
 
mpautz@gmail.com wrote:
> On Jun 29, 4:44 pm, Amanda Williams <p...@fu.com> wrote:
>> "inkybla...@yahoo.com" <inkybla...@yahoo.com> allegedly said
>> innews:1183134352.220982.303860@a26g2000pre.googlegroups.com:
>>
>> Hey, that's Madame President Clinton to the likes of a drooling
>> little
>> ****wit like you...
>>
>> You should repeat it so you can get used to saying it for 8 years.
>>

>
> So, tell me; what is so wonderful about Hillary? Why, specifically,
> would you vote for her?


For one thing, it's absolutely hilarious how you Republicans get your
panties in a bunch at the mere mention of her name.
 
Back
Top