Can Hillary Win?
That’s the question, of course, that is on the minds of those who are behind the recent surge in interest for Mark Warner. Clinton has many advantages (100% name recognition, many fervant backers, a grudging admiration even from opponents on the way she has conducted herself in office, fundraising ties that other candidates can only dream of) to draw on in running for the Democratic nomination, and three huge disadvantages: she’s a senator, she’s a Clinton, and she has to fight the perception that she is unelectable, nationally.
Chris Cillizza parses the polls at The Fix and concludes, tentatively, that she can win:
…Can Hillary win?
Looking at these latest numbers, the answer seems to be a guarded yes. There is no question Clinton is an extremely divisive figure who is beloved by roughly 45 percent of the population and detested by another 45 percent. But given the extreme polarization between the two national parties these days, that 45-45 split is likely to be the playing field on which the 2008 election is conducted regardless of the participants.
Several other interesting things jump out regarding Clinton’s unique appeal (and potential problems). Roughly one-fifth of Democrats view Clinton unfavorably, a sign that there remains a significant bloc within the party dissatisfied with her and not likely to come around any time soon. The same poll, though, showed that approximately one-fifth of Republicans view Clinton favorably — a group (perhaps moderate women that lean toward the GOP) that could push her over the top in a general election.
Of course, the obvious retort from Warner supporters would be that the question is wrong. It’s not whether Hillary can conceivably win, but whether she’s likely to; better still, is she more likely to than Warner? The jury is still out…
The following appears on Drudge as I type this:
“Most voters now say there’s no way they’d vote for Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton if she runs for president in 2008 – while just 16 percent are firmly in her camp, a stunning new poll shows.
CNNGALLUP found that 51 percent say they definitely won’t vote for Clinton (D-N.Y.) in 2008, another 32 percent might consider it, and only 16 percent vow to back her. That means committed anti-Hillary voters outnumber pro-Hillary voters by 3-1. The poll suggests she can forget about crossover votes – 90 percent of Republicans and 75 percent of conservatives say there’s no way they’d back her.
Meanwhile, 46% said they would oppose Secretary of State Rice if she ran for President – a step Rice has repeatedly said she won’t take.”
Rather a differing view, I think. Personally, I think it’s a closer view of how Republicans think about her. The Republicans would have to nominate Satan himself for me to give Hillary even a first thought, much less a second.
I don’t know. I don’t think she can win, but then I didn’t think she could win the Senate seat in NY either. Her being a sitting Senator might not be a big blow against her if the Republicans also nominate a Senator, but you also forgot to mention that she’s from the north. I still say that Republicans and Democrats alike should be looking at sitting Governors from south of the Mason-Dixon line.
A Clinton/Giuliani battle would be interesting, consdering it would be a replay of their aborted battle for the Senate.
Here’s the deal with Mark Warner. On paper, he looks like an extremely electable candidate, as he appears to be more capable of flipping currently red states like Virginia and West Virginia (add those 2 states to Kerry’s 04 total and you have 271 electoral votes — just enough to win, assuming no more than one brain-dead elector decides to vote for John Edwards).
But the true test of Mark Warner’s electability won’t be known if/until he actually secures the Democratic party nomination. If he is able to do so without pandering to the SE Kos/ MooreOn crowd, the Republican party will be in trouble. However, if he gets tainted by the fringe elements of the left on his way past Hillary, he’ll wind up being just as electable as Howard Dean.
This is Hillary’s big advantage as a candidate. While she doesn’t appear to be as electable as Warner does right now, she has a better chance of securing the nomination without pandering to the elements of the left that would poison a general election candidacy in November. While she doesn’t look it now, she probably is the party’s most electable candidate.
Interesting numbers on that poll, if the poll is truly representative of this country now. I would have thought the percentages of people vowing to back her would be higher, somewhere around 25% to 35%. The 51% did not surprise me. In my opinion, the Senator lacks the natural political charisma that Bill possessed to be elected nationwide. As I have said many times, Bill could charm the pants off a dead women.
If the numbers hold up for the next few years it will be interesting to watch if Senator Clinton removes herself from the race knowing that she could not win the Presidency thus letting a more electable candidate run such as Warner or Richardson. Will her ego get the better of her. Senator Clinton is not a stupid person and surely she is able to know when it would be more political advantageous to stay put and be the futuristic Senior Senator from New York. With some patience and if the Dems take back the Senate, she could be the majority leader. Do you think she knows when to hold them, when to fold them, and when to walk away?
What I find interesting is that I could find this at Drudge, the NY Post, the NY Daily News, and the WaPo politics blog, but — as I write this — not at CNN or USA Today web sites, even though they paid for the poll.
Good point, Karl. The same point is being made on NewsBusters.Org now.
I really enjoy watching armchair pundits use their crystal balls. But, I enjoy even more, the propensity to underestimate Hillary Clinton. I hope everyone continues to lower expectations for Hillary’s possibilities. Who’s working who in the lead up to 2008?
If Hill wins the nomination you can add her name to a list that has the names of Dukakis, Gore and Kerry. She’s a walking GOTV campaign, for the GOP! She wouldn’t win one southern state; the electoral map will look just like the last two generals.
Warner on the other hand has developed a governing style that is very much like the Clinton model, Bills that is.