NAVIGATION MAIN MENU

COMPENDIUM LIBRARY/TWITTER MONITOR
VIDEO GALLERY
Economic News
Newsbrief Archives
Democrat Leadership Twitter and Realtime Feeds
Cabinet twitter and realtime feeds
North America weblog
International weblog
Democrats twitter directory
Latest Government Jobs and Public Tenders
Jobs Matrix
Global Travel Information
Pop Entertainment Forum
Start Portal


Please make a donation to support upkeep of the daily news journal, back archives, twitter feeds and the compendium library.










Hillary Clinton's Unlikely Support Among Anti-War Democrats

Daily newsbrief journal for September 2007, also see http://www.usdemocrats.com/brief for a global 100-page perpetual brief and follow twitter @usdemocrats


Hillary Clinton's Unlikely Support Among Anti-War Democrats

Postby admin » Sat Jan 28, 2012 4:09 pm

Hillary Clinton's Unlikely Support Among Anti-War Democrats « Thread Started on Sept 14, 2007, 8:47pm » --------------------------------------------------------------------------------Hillary Clinton's Unlikely Support Among Anti-War Democrats by Todd Beeton, Fri Sep 14, 2007 at 04:10:35 PM ESTread at source> http://www.mydd.com/story/2007/9/13/195528/929In The LA Times' analysis of their early state poll from earlier this week, they explored their findings that not only do Democrats at large in Iowa, New Hampshire and South Carolina feel Hillary Clinton is the candidate most likely to end the war in Iraq, but those that "chose the Iraq war as the most important issue" do as well. Comparing just the top 3 candidates, when asked "Regardless of your choice for president, who do you think would be best at ending the war in Iraq," results are as follows:All Democrats: Candidate IA NH SC Clinton 33 32 36 Obama 15 15 20 Edwards 8 9 12 Those that "chose the Iraq war as the most important issue":Candidate IA NH SC Clinton 30 32 63 Obama 17 17 13 Edwards 26 14 9 Edwards's strong stance against the war is clearly paying dividends for him in Iowa among anti-war Democrats, but the fact that support for Clinton does not appreciably decline among those for whom Iraq is the most important issue (and in fact rises demonstrably in South Carolina) illustrates just how successful Clinton has been in portraying herself as an anti-war candidate despite having voted for the war AND refusing to apologize for it AND repeatedly saying she'll leave tens of thousands of troops in Iraq. These results should perhaps come as no surprise, as they echo the findings of a national Pew poll from August that showed that the support each candidate receives was virtually identical among those that say the congressional leadership is doing "the right amount" to push back against Bush to end the war and those who say the leadership is "not doing enough." In other words, voters see very little distinction between the candidates on Iraq, despite the best efforts of Clinton's rivals to make those distinctions clear. Edwards: "no timeline, no funding!"; Richardson: "no residual troops!"; Obama: "I opposed this war from the beginning!" Yet those that count the war as their top concern pick the hawk of the bunch as their preferred candidate. It's enough to make Chris Bowers want to bang his head against flat surfaces.
admin
Site Admin
 
Posts: 82092
Joined: Fri Nov 27, 2009 7:00 am

Return to September 2007

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests

cron