I know, I know, polls mean nothing this far out, but...

[oldandslow]

Hillary is gonna win this thing...

I would never have believed it.

Per Rasmussen:

Pennsylvania:
Clinton 45%, Giuliani 44%
Clinton 47%, Thompson 40%
Clinton 44%, McCain 40%
Clinton 49%, Romney 36%

Illinois:
Clinton 49%, Giuliani 39%
Clinton 49%, Thompson 40%
Obama 56%, Giuliani 33%
Obama 55%, Thompson 34%

Missouri:
Clinton 46%, Giuliani 43%
Clinton 48%, Thompson 42%
Clinton 46%, McCain 40%
Clinton 48%, Romney 39%


New York:
Clinton 58%, Giuliani 33%

Per Survey USA:

Alabama:
Clinton 44%, Giuliani 50%
Clinton 47%, Thompson 49%
Clinton 48%, Romney 46%

California:
Clinton 56%, Giuliani 39%
Clinton 59%, Thompson 34%
Clinton 60%, Romney 32%

Iowa:
Clinton 52%, Giuliani 40%
Clinton 53%, Thompson 40%
Clinton 51%, Romney 42%

Kentucky:
Clinton 49%, Giuliani 44%
Clingon 51%, Thompson 44%
Clinton 53%, Romney 41%

Minnesota:
Clinton 47%, Giuliani 44%
Clinton 50%, Thompson 41%
Clinton 52%, Romney 36%

Missouri:
Clinton 46%, Giuliani 47%
Clinton 48%, Thompson 46%
Clinton 49%, Romney 43%

New Mexico:
Clinton 49%, Giuliani 43%
Clinton 52%, Thompson 40%
Clinton 53%, Romney 38%

Ohio:
Clinton 48%, Giuliani 45%
Clinton 50%, Thompson 43%
Clinton 51%, Romney 40%

Oregon:
Clinton 52%, Giuliani 42%
Clinton 53%, Thompson 41%
Clinton 57%, Romney 37%

Virginia:
Clinton 49%, Giuliani 46%
Clinton 51%, Thompson 42%
Clinton 53%, Romney 39%

Washington:
Clinton 55%, Giuliani 40%
Clinton 57%, Thompson 38%
Clinton 57%, Romney 36%

Wisconsin:
Clinton 46%, Giuliani 46%
Clinton 48%, Thompson 45%
Clinton 49%, Romney 42%

[BucEyedPea]

Doesn't surprise me...but I think it's more blowback in retaliation to NeoCON Republican rule even though the people are stupid and think she'll be a major difference on ME war. It's one big Demopublican Party on foreign policy while Jay Leno interviews the average person on the street and they can't place Iraq on the map. LOL! This country's in trouble.

[banyon]

Those leads look too narrow to me. This is before the "Republican Dirty Tricks Campaign" has even really started to work on her.

[oldandslow]

Those leads look too narrow to me. This is before the "Republican Dirty Tricks Campaign" has even really started to work on her.

Not really...that she has a lead (over Rudy G) of 12 points in places like Iowa and 5 points in KY tells you all you need to know. She is killing Romney, who is the likely nominee, imo.

And, she will do fine in the dirty tricks regard. If one has learned anything from the Clinton campaign file, it is that.

Honestly, these polls just blow me away. I am truly saddened by the path we, as a nation, are choosing.

[MGRS13]

Yea I hope its Clinton vs. Giuliani.....does any one remeber "Giant douche vs. a Turd sandwich."

[Taco John]

Ron Paul will run as a third party candidate and win Texas (which is not at all far fetched) and New Hampshire, stealing 38 electoral college votes. No candidate will get 270. Democrats will have 248, taking California, but losing Florida and Ohio. Republicans will have 252.

Then congress will vote, and Hillary will win.


Wouldn't that be wild?

[banyon]

Ron Paul will run as a third party candidate and win Texas and New Hampshire, stealing 38 electoral college votes. No candidate will get 270. Democrats will have 248, taking California, but losing Florida and Ohio. Republicans will have 252.

Then congress will vote, and Hillary will win.


Wouldn't that be wild?

Hillary would lose in the Congressional Vote, because each state only gets 1 vote, no matter their electoral votes.

[patteeu]

Ron Paul will run as a third party candidate and win Texas (which is not at all far fetched) and New Hampshire, stealing 38 electoral college votes. No candidate will get 270. Democrats will have 248, taking California, but losing Florida and Ohio. Republicans will have 252.

Then congress will vote, and Hillary will win.


Wouldn't that be wild?

It would be, but it's my understanding is that Ron Paul has said he won't run as a 3rd party candidate. Have you heard otherwise?

OTOH, Ralph Nader has said he definitely will run if Hillary gets the dem nomination. How much will a clearly anti-war Nader cut into an ambiguously anti-war Hillary's vote? Judging from the response Ron Paul's been able to generate, I'd bet it will be a significant impact.

[Taco John]

Hillary would lose in the Congressional Vote, because each state only gets 1 vote, no matter their electoral votes.



There would be some political feet put to the fire under that scenario!

[Taco John]

It would be, but it's my understanding is that Ron Paul has said he won't run as a 3rd party candidate. Have you heard otherwise?


He has to say that now. But when September rolls around and he doesn't get the nomination, his constituency will demand that he represent their vote by fighting on toward the ballot. Ron Paul will do the right thing. He's not going to let down the people who have supported him the distance. Ron Paul is going to fight the distance. He will talk tough about the Republican nomination, because that's the most realistic way to get elected president. But when push comes to shove in September, Ron Paul will fight on.

[MGRS13]

Ron Paul will run as a third party candidate and win Texas (which is not at all far fetched) and New Hampshire, stealing 38 electoral college votes. No candidate will get 270. Democrats will have 248, taking California, but losing Florida and Ohio. Republicans will have 252.

Then congress will vote, and Hillary will win.


Wouldn't that be wild?
That would be just enough to kick start the old revolution......imagine the radical right if Hillary was "appointed and not elected." Whoa nelly!

[patteeu]

He has to say that now. But when September rolls around and he doesn't get the nomination, his constituency will demand that he represent their vote by fighting on toward the ballot. Ron Paul will do the right thing. He's not going to let down the people who have supported him the distance. Ron Paul is going to fight the distance. He will talk tough about the Republican nomination, because that's the most realistic way to get elected president. But when push comes to shove in September, Ron Paul will fight on.

So you're telling me that we can't take Ron Paul at his word? I don't believe that.

[Taco John]

Ron Paul is still a politician. He has to be very careful about his words. He can't give the impression that he'd be willing to run as a third party candidate -- and frankly neither he, nor his supporters want him to run as a third party candidate. Folks like me, who grew up as Republicans, would rather see him restore the Republican party to represent actual "conservativism."

But yes, I absolutely believe that when Paul loses the Republican nomination, he will be pushed by his constituency to fight on, and he'll continue the final two months.

[Laz]

Yea I hope its Clinton vs. Giuliani.....does any one remeber "Giant douche vs. a Turd sandwich."
:deevee: :deevee:

[banyon]

There would be some political feet put to the fire under that scenario!

Some back door dealin' too, even moreso than usual.

[Taco John]

I have to believe that scenario would effectively wreck the electoral college system.

[HonestChieffan]

Polls at this point mean everything....the voter is in many cases a bandwaggoner and that group will go with whomever seems strongest...Hillary understands this well.

Polls indicate strength and weakness...You have to know where to focus.

Polls give depth of clarity on the issues in a state or a group of people...telling the candidate where to shore up and where to move on strength as well as weakness of the opponant.