My personal feelings are that if Hillary is the Democratic nominee, that Republican voters will come out in such a large force to prevent her from becoming President, whereas if another Democrat is the nominee, that Republicans may not come out as much, expecting an easy win over a "second-tier" candidate.
Your thoughts?
2007-12-03 07:00:19 · 18 answers · asked by Professor Farnsworth 6 in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
Look at Venezuela. Wasn't that supposed to be a certain victory for Hugo???
Be patient, Hillary's ego and arrogance will destroy her.
Yes, i agree with you. I'd be a fool not to.
2007-12-03 07:08:21 · answer #1 · answered by TedEx 7 · 3⤊ 0⤋
That's a good question. I think we won't get any of the democrats that lost in the past. They are losers. Running again makes them look even more like losers. So it will be between those who haven't run before, which is why Obama and Hillary are the front runners. Neither are good candidates. If we had a Democratic Dark Horse...a better version of Gore, for example, I think a Democrat could win if it were a rich white male that was in with the electoral college. He won the popular vote before, so we know it's possible. But as it stands it looks like we'll get another Republican president and the country will go bankrupt or nuclear or something else toxic and ruinous to the poor.
2007-12-03 07:05:19 · answer #2 · answered by ? 3 · 3⤊ 1⤋
the two have their very own vulerabilities. Hillary is extremely unlikeable. She has the utmost unfavorable rankings of any of the applicants. If she have been to lose her temper and start up up cursing like a sailor, that would added alienate her. Couple that along with her professional-Iraq conflict vote that has soured some contributors of her base, and he or she could have extreme problems. Obama's important shortcoming is that, from a countrywide perspective, he's a political gentle-weight. He has not even had one comprehensive term as senator. There are individuals who won't vote for him because of the fact he's black, yet they're merely as probable to be democrat as republican, so i don't carry plenty inventory in that. If I had to chosen one over the different, i think of Hillary could be greater handy, customarily because of the fact there's a plenty longer public provider checklist that could desire to be mined for unfavorable information; votes that are contradictory, positions that are antagonistic by this team or that team, etc.
2016-10-10 04:04:26 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
That does seem to be the case--a recent Zogby poll shows Hillary losing head-to-head against any GOP candidate. Bear in mind that it's the middle-of-the-road voters who really decide the election, because the faithful on both sides will always turn out to vote. Hillary is seen as a controversial and divisive candidate, which makes her less attractive to moderates. She also has a long history of unpopular or questionable statements, stands, and actions that will all be brought out and used against her if she gets the nomination.
2007-12-03 07:06:39 · answer #4 · answered by Your Friendly Neighborhood Skip 3 · 2⤊ 0⤋
The problem is...
Hillary Clinton has to pick a Vice President, and it is going to have to be Obama.
Obama is black and I don't think White people are ready
for that.
So I think Republicans voted Hillary and Obama in polls, because they know any of the Republican candidate will beat them.
If Rudy Giuliani won nomination, his running mate would probaby be Huckabee, Romney, or McCain. Or
maybe Huckabee won nomination and his running mate would be Romney. Then you know they will beat Clinton/Obama , 99% chance.
But if Clinton chose Edwards, then Blacks will feel she is a racist for picking Edwards and not Obama.
2007-12-03 07:08:39 · answer #5 · answered by Jagger Otto 7 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Many Republicans are sick of the George Bush error they made, some may not vote at all. But if Hillary runs, I will cross party lines to vote for anyone but her. The last thing this country needs is Hillary in charge.
2007-12-03 07:06:32 · answer #6 · answered by zipper 7 · 3⤊ 1⤋
Hillary!
2007-12-03 07:12:15 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
As a registered Republican, I agree with you 100%. Barack Obama on the other hand would give Republicans a run for their money.
Mike Huckabee 2008
2007-12-03 07:02:29 · answer #8 · answered by Stop Global Whining! 2 · 3⤊ 2⤋
I'm going to say the toughest democrat for the republicans to beat would be Obama. He has a record of working on a bi-partisan basis to get bills passed both in the US senate as well as the Illinois senate. He is well liked and admired by his republican colleagues who seem eager to join him on a Bill. Conversly Hillary has very little support among self described republicans.
2007-12-03 07:04:11 · answer #9 · answered by labken1817 6 · 3⤊ 4⤋
We will come out in full force no matter what. So the Liberal democrats better bring it
2007-12-03 07:10:58 · answer #10 · answered by NEO PIRATE 3 · 0⤊ 1⤋