If we did it again?

[South Florida]

Posted: 7/18/17 at 3:16pm

Would Trump still win?

http://thehill.com/homenews/administration/342462-poll-clinton-more-unpopular-than-trump

Can we finally admit that our candidate was and is hated by a majority of this country.

[LYLS3637]

Posted: 7/18/17 at 3:26pm

All is took was a 30 year smear campaign, Russian interference, and sexism. 

South Florida, you're focusing on the wrong numbers.

When Hillary left the White House as First Lady, her approval number was 60%. When she announced she was running for Senate, it dropped to 50%. Over her tenure as Senator, that number went up to 57%. When she announced she was running for President in 2007, it dropped to 48%. Her approval skyrocketed when she was Secretary of State (66%) and hovered between 57% and 66% until she announced for President a second when it dropped to 49%.

It's not the candidate's fault  America is stupid. 

[javero]

Posted: 7/18/17 at 4:14pm

"Can we finally admit that our candidate was and is hated by a majority of this country."

Sure, if we accept as fact that a tyrannical majority always acts in good faith.

Updated On: 7/18/17 at 04:14 PM

[Mister Matt]

Posted: 7/18/17 at 4:45pm

We're still following polls?  After that Presidential election?  HAHAHAHAHA!!!

Whatever.  They didn't ask me.

Can we finally admit that our candidate was and is hated by a majority of this country.

I don't know about "is", but as for "was", she won the popular vote, so no.  

[South Florida]

Posted: 7/18/17 at 6:22pm

Do any of you who have commented on this want to see her as the candidate in 2020?

[South Florida]

Posted: 7/18/17 at 6:27pm

Lyle, MM, these are folks I respect, and I've been wrong before but we need someone other than the Clinton's, they need to go away.  Bernie too Socialist for you?  Give me some Biden.

 

[javero]

Posted: 7/18/17 at 6:55pm

"Do any of you who have commented on this want to see her as the candidate in 2020?"

Nope

[GeorgeandDot]

Posted: 7/18/17 at 7:37pm

Fingers crossed that we'll get Biden as our candidate in 2020.

[Mister Matt]

Posted: 7/18/17 at 10:05pm

I'll have to see where we are in 2020.

[LYLS3637]

Posted: 7/19/17 at 9:01am

South Florida said: "Do any of you who have commented on this want to see her as the candidate in 2020?"

 

The Democratic Party could literally nominate a piece of dog $hit for 2020 and I'd vote for it.

[kdogg36]

Posted: 7/19/17 at 9:17am

LYLS3637 said: "The Democratic Party could literally nominate a piece of dog $hit for 2020 and I'd vote for it."

That's exactly how I felt about 2016. Because of Trump, I turned my back on my values and voted for garbage. In 2020, they're going to have to provide a real alternative to Trump's authoritarianism with regard to things like drone killings, the drug war, asset forfeiture, and immigration to get my vote.

Updated On: 7/19/17 at 09:17 AM

[Liza's Headband]

Posted: 7/19/17 at 11:24am

^^^^^^^ THIS

[LYLS3637]

Posted: 7/19/17 at 11:30am

kdogg36 said: "LYLS3637 said: "The Democratic Party could literally nominate a piece of dog $hit for 2020 and I'd vote for it."

That's exactly how I felt about 2016. Because of Trump, I turned my back on my values and voted for garbage. In 2020, they're going to have to provide a real alternative to Trump's authoritarianism with regard to things like drone killings, the drug war, asset forfeiture, and immigration to get my vote."

 

Why? One side of the ballot will not have changed, and any Democrat is infinitely better on foreign policy, mandatory minimums, and immigration policy than the douchebag we're stuck with. 

Updated On: 7/19/17 at 11:30 AM

[brdlwyr]

Posted: 7/19/17 at 1:09pm

I am not interested in any old white man for President for the rest of my life! 

I am intrigued with Kamala Harris.  Tough and smart. 

No clue where this country is going so no predictions.

[henrikegerman]

Posted: 7/19/17 at 1:38pm

Something seems quite odd about these numbers.

While Clinton's favorability ratings during the election were quite low (the second lowest of any major party candidate ever running for president), they were consistently HIGHER than Trump's (the lowest of any major party candidate ever running for president).   

What can possibly explain her favorables now suddenly being, of all things, LOWER than Trump's?  It makes little sense.  Especially since, if I understand what's being reported correctly, Trump's numbers are so critically lower than ever for him.

Updated On: 7/19/17 at 01:38 PM

[madbrian]

Posted: 7/19/17 at 2:03pm

henrikegerman said: "What can possibly explain her favorables now suddenly being, of all things, LOWER than Trump's?  It makes little sense.  Especially since, if I understand what's being reported correctly, Trump's numbers are so critically lower than ever for him."

While I share your skepticism, I also find America's collective misogyny unfathomable.

[LYLS3637]

Posted: 7/19/17 at 2:18pm

Trump did get a post-inauguration bump as is typical of every newly sworn in President. His was much much smaller than his recent predecessors, but alas, it has not fully worn off yet. That's why you see these numbers. Hillary's numbers remain unchanged, within the margin of error, while Trump's are a few points higher than they were when Bloomberg ran the same poll late last year.

It's also worth nothing that the disapproval numbers are only separated by 2 points, within the poll's margin of error.

Updated On: 7/19/17 at 02:18 PM

[henrikegerman]

Posted: 7/19/17 at 2:53pm

^thanks, LYLS, that sheds some light on how Clinton's favorables could potentially be lower than Trump's now.

[javero]

Posted: 7/19/17 at 4:46pm

madbrian said: "While I share your skepticism, I also find America's collective misogyny unfathomable."

That's what I found most appalling in the run up to the election.  Several otherwise reasonable white men our age privately admitted to me that they would simply not vote for a woman as potus.  According to them, they held their noses and voted for Obama.  They thought he was too green or unaccomplished but got his appeal.

Returning to Hillary, I know this is anecdotal but one went so far as to say in our car pool one day, "hell, if the women all go to work and take the reins in every damned thing, we men folk should just sit down and let them take care of us".  I still have't gotten over the remark.  For whatever reason his wife has never had to work outside the house.

I hope to see a sharp, youthful, and attractive woman who's above reproach elected potus in my lifetime.  It's tough to deny that optics will play a larger role in her ascent than is typically the case for her male counterparts.  This is a very shallow suggestion on my part, but perhaps at the gubernatorial level the Dems could start grooming a US version of Argentina's Cristina Fernández de Kirchner without all the charges of corruption and nepotism.

Updated On: 7/19/17 at 04:46 PM

[GeorgeandDot]

Posted: 7/20/17 at 12:36am

brdlwyr said: "I am not interested in any old white man for President for the rest of my life!"

Well, I'm interested in seeing someone qualified for President.  I don't care about their age, gender, or race.  I want someone competent.