English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

And Yahoo Answers always has these very bad spellers stating how much they hate HIllary and she will not win the election--she is a socialist, etc.. and those people never post any links or proof. My conclusion is Yahoo Answers is a bunch of biased, unfactual, silly arguments that has no merit whatsoever. People should really do their own reseach...
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2008/president/national.html

2007-10-09 06:28:41 · 15 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government Elections

15 answers

Not considering that one poster thought your comparison insulting , I kind of agree with you. I have always tried to stick up for Hillary in replies I give and I try to do it in an intellectual way. Best thing for your do is come back to Yahoo Answers next year and tell all these Conservative Hillary Haters to eat crow. Tim Russert did when he was proven wrong. And in response to the polls about John Kerry, the other opponent was a sitting president which makes things hard to win against and in Hillary's case, there is no sitting president to run against.

2007-10-09 07:49:33 · answer #1 · answered by Michael M 6 · 2 0

Yes, and they've noticed it too. They respond with more of the old unproven garbage and old debunked stories like the Clinton Hit List. It's obvious desperation. Now they keep bringing up Kerry and how he was supposed to win and didn't, which is silly. He was running against an incumbant President, a hard way to go in any case.

And then there is the Howard Dean theory, which is really ludicrous. Dean was a relative unknown who got early recognition as being a "fresh" candidate, much like Obama, rather than Hillary. And he was naive in the ways of media and blew his own chances by getting rabidly overexcited with his 'war whoop," which though it seems silly, made people wonder if he was a bit loopy. He went rapidly downhill after that. Who in their right mind thinks Hillary will make that sort of mistake? She's done this campaign thing a time or two through the years. And she's not seen as the same type of candidate as Dean was at all. She's not a fresh face, she's well known.

They're grasping at straws. They'd do better to find out what her positions really are and attack her from that standpoint, but they don't want to work that hard. It's easier to just follow the flow of smear politics and character assassination. Trouble is, Americans had a belly full of that during the swift boating of Kerry, and they now recognize if for exactly what it is. Personally, I hope they keep it up, they don't do anything but add to her recognition and prompt more people to vote for her.

2007-10-09 15:08:03 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 3 1

In the latest ABC/Washington Post poll; She had an 8 point lead over Giuliani; Which is the largest lead in a presidential election poll since Bush led Kerrey by about the same number after his 2004 convention bounce (Oh, BTW - Even though the race tightened; Bush was re-elected).

But go ahead, Cons - Tell us again how the polls are never right...

2007-10-09 14:49:55 · answer #3 · answered by ? 4 · 3 0

1) Nothing is more biased than the media reporting these polls to sway peoples thinking into a canidate
2) Ever notice how any and all democrats are leading over republicans -- not just hillary -- at this point a 4 year-year-old could run against them and they'll win.
3) Fact - she will loose them election if nomintaed regardless of what anyone thinks she's doing in the polls..Why?? 1) She has too many negatives 2) She dopesnt have the experience everyone think she does 3) She's al;ready snapping on people asking too many questions and as a politician she must know how to answer without the laughing or the yelling. 4) She cant beat Guiliani -- he has the experience she braggs about.

2007-10-09 13:38:50 · answer #4 · answered by 2008 matters 3 · 0 4

Two days ago someone said I was 'ignorat' or a lyer.
My error was telling him he was citing something that disproved his point. Maybe he though no one would check?
Even when they do their own research, they choose the most right wing sources. Or their language is inflammatory.
Or their questions, like is Hillary going to wear a burkah, are asinine.
Or my favorite, I got nine thumbs down for telling the truth about the DUIs Bush and Cheney got.
I mean really, I didn't get them, they did. Whats to thumbs down?
They love to dish it out but I'd like to see more in the way of rational non-name calling discussion and less of the hysterical overreactions of the opposition.
And yes, of course Hillary is in the lead, can't you tell by the dredging up of every thing she has ever been investigated for, or smeared with, or accused of no matter how many times its be found to be without a shred of truth? They only slander the front runners.

2007-10-09 13:38:42 · answer #5 · answered by justa 7 · 4 1

I would have never thought it a while back, but I"m starting to seriously suspect Hillary may be our next president. Republicans better get ready for that balanced budget - that's going to hit the pockets of the ultra-rich really hard!

2007-10-09 14:17:36 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 2 0

You are correct about the poll numbers. But did you ever notice that you can't trust poll numbers or rely on them? They are Biased. It has been done for years by asking the right questions in the right way you can get the poll to say what you want it to! People are so naive about this and need a class in statistical analysis.
I'm not saying that she is not leading the polls! I do however question the amount!
Lets see how things are after the Republicans get done unloading their ammo, which they won't do until after the primaries!
The Republicans want her to win the primaries because she will be the easiest candidate for them to deal with.
I'll never understand why the Democrats are falling for this???
They should choose someone who the republicans have less ammo on!!!

2007-10-09 15:05:55 · answer #7 · answered by Working Man 6 · 0 3

No one I know of is saying she will not win or that her poll numbers hurt. What many of us are saying is she is an authoritarian socialist who could destroy the individualist nature of this nation.

If you want facts, just look at her quotes.

To the below post, the "ultra rich" have already earned their wealth, and most of the principle is beyond taxation. What Hillary's tax programs would hit is the high-wage earners, basically the hardest working and often most cash-strapped people in our society.

Hillary is not proposing any favors; she's just using promises of taking our dollars to buy votes. Nothing new here.

2007-10-09 14:13:47 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0 2

George...You've hit the nail right on the head & I agree with you 100%. How come more people don't seem to realize this? Are they really sheeple?

edit: to the poster who gave a link to all the Hillary "quotes":
All those things have been debunked by snopes. Check them out for yourself. http://www.snopes.com/politics/clintons/hildabeast.asp

andy f: John Kerry would have won if it wasn't for the lies & attacks on his character by the swift boaters. Where were the indignant, righteous cries in his defense then?
The fact is: your hero stole both elections with lots of help.
.

2007-10-09 14:27:49 · answer #9 · answered by mstrywmn 7 · 3 0

Why only Republicans ? She leads every body in the race from both the the parties.

2007-10-09 13:44:48 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 3 0

fedest.com, questions and answers