Hillary Winning both Races: Most Popular & Most
Unpopular
Written by JB Williams
©2007 USA
According to the latest CBS News poll
(Oct. 12-16), Hillary Clinton is
receiving 46 percent of the love from her party faithful and leading the
Democrat primary race for the 2008 general election. But according to the
latest Zogby poll, she’s also leading the race for
the most despised candidate in the country…
Zogby asked the question, "Whom would you NEVER
vote for, for President of the U.S.?"
With the Presidents public approval rating around 30 percent
and congress all the way down at 11 percent, what a great question! Zogby asked
this question of 9718 "likely voters" (Democrats, Republicans and Independents)
and Hillary tops the list of candidates people would NEVER vote for.
50 percent of those polled said that they would NEVER vote for
Hillary Clinton under any circumstance. Leading the Party as the most unpopular
Republican candidate is Libertarian Ron Paul. 47 percent of Americans said they
would NEVER vote for him.
It probably won’t shock anyone to learn that a high-profile
polarizing candidate like Hillary Clinton has more enemies than friends. She is
highly popular among hardcore leftists now running her Democratic Socialist
Party and equally unpopular with everyone else, those still stuck on American
principles like Life, Liberty and Freedom to define and pursue Happiness.
But how did Libertarian Ron Paul get so unpopular so fast, for
an obscure house member who most Americans never heard of before the first
Republican debate? My guess is, his Democratic Socialist-like stance on the war,
drugs, and the individual right to be wrong.
Others didn’t fair much better
On the Democrat side, between 42 and 49 percent said that they
would NEVER vote for Kucinich, Gravel or Edwards. On the Republican side,
between 42 and 49 percent said that they would NEVER vote for Brownback,
Tancredo, McCain, Hunter, Giuliani or Romney, in that order.
So who are the least offensive candidates?
Former Clinton advisor and New Mexico Governor Bill Richardson
ranks the least offensive in the race with a 34 percent NEVER rating. Republican
Mike Huckabee is second with only a 35 percent NEVER rating. But neither of
these candidates is going to win anything. Richardson has 3 percent primary
support from Democrats and Huckabee has 4 percent from Republicans.
Apparently, we’re not looking for the least offensive
candidates.
Best positioned overall are Democrat Barack Obama, running
second in the DNC primary race at 17 percent with a 37 percent NEVER rating and
Republican Fred Thompson, also running second for his party nod at 21 percent,
with a 41 percent NEVER rating. These two are the least offensive candidates
with a chance of winning.
Offensive to whom?
According to these numbers, Hillary Clinton is the most
polarizing individual in American politics today, with Kucinich, Gravel, Paul
and Brownback running close behind in the unpopularity contest. I get all of
them except Brownback. Clinton, Kucinich, Gravel and Paul have all tried to make
a campaign out of anti-American ranting and raving and clearly, their rhetoric
is NOT resonating with the average American. But how did Brownback get in this
group?
The fact that almost as many say NEVER to McCain, Giuliani and
Romney, the three RNC front-runners until Thompson entered the race, spells
trouble for the RNC in 2008.
The difference between Hillary and these three candidates is
this…
Hillary offends all Republican and Independent voters. Her
Democrat base is blindly intact and united in their effort to elect the first
female President, vote themselves free Hillary-Care or get Bill back into the
oral office.
McCain, Giuliani and Romney not only offend Democrats, but
Republicans too. Their efforts to appear "open minded" on social issues and the
related spending has made enemies in the Republican base that must be on-board
for any of them to win. The Clinton’s have always had enemies on the right, but
they remain loved by Democratic Socialists everywhere. These three Republicans
have made enemies on both sides of the aisle and that’s what makes a Hillary win
possible.
History may repeat in 2008
In 1992, Ross Perot drew 18.9% of the vote to a third
party ticket after George Bush Sr. angered the conservative base of the
Republican Party and Bill Clinton became president with 43% of the popular vote,
against the will of 57% of American voters.
In 1996, Perot pulled on 8.4% of the vote, but it was
still enough to allow the re-election of Clinton with less than 50% of the
popular vote.
In 2008, Hillary will not get 50% of the popular vote either.
But after George Bush Jr. has spent much of his second term pandering to the
left, Republicans are again divided between liberal party front-runners that
they prefer not to support and second or even third tier candidates who are more
conservative, but a complete long-shot to win anything in any party.
If Democrats offered a more formidable candidate than Hillary,
like say Al Gore, I’d give Republicans NO chance of winning in ’08 at all. As it
is, Hillary’s NEVER rating is so high that several Republican candidates have a
real shot at defeating her, no matter what the polls might say today. The more
public she becomes in the campaign process, the more people will be reminded of
all the things they hate about her.
In the end, it’s an entire conservative nation against six very
liberal cities
The vast majority of campaign funding across the nation comes
from only six major U.S. metro centers. So far for the 2008 election cycle still
a year away, in order, they are…
In Millions
(In Millions from
OpenSecrets.org)
|
NEW YORK |
$61.3 |
|
WASHINGTON, DC-MD-VA-WV |
$45.3 |
|
LOS ANGELES- LONG BEACH |
$28.5 |
|
CHICAGO |
$25.5 |
|
BOSTON, MA-NH |
$18.8 |
|
SAN FRANCISCO |
$15.7 |
In millions, Democrat funding is in blue, Republican in red. As
you can see, these six cities are major players in campaign funding and they
slant heavily Democrat. The voting trends of these six cities follow the funding
trend, no matter who the candidates are in any election. These cities are the
most partisan cities in America today.
By comparison, the rest of the nation is pretty conservative.
But the percentage of average American adults donating $200 or more to any
campaign is only .16%, a little more than 1/10 of 1%. 99.84% give nothing at all and still they wonder
why their voice is not heard. They leave the political funding to the BIG
players and the election to them as well.
Democrats are the BIG players today
The top 527 groups are Democrat. The top individual donors list
is Democrat. The top institutional donors list is Democrat. The top PAC
recipients list is Democrat. Democrats even receive the most illegal
international funding from foreign special interest groups and foreign
governments. As a result, Democrats are out-raising Republicans almost 2-1
across the board and we all know that in American politics, he with the gold
makes the rules…
With more money and a divided Republican electorate, six cities
have the ability to hoist Hillary Clinton into the White House in 2008, against
the will of more than 50% of the nation.
When you are watching Hillary’s inauguration in January of 2009
and wondering how the hell it all happened, come back and read this column one
more time. This is how it can happen and unless Republicans find a way to unite
behind a candidate that the conservative base of the party can support; this is
how the most disliked woman in American will become our next President