Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : View from the Center and Left -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Dale Baker who wrote (52122)	3/6/2008 5:09:33 PM
From: Dale Baker	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 541761

From CNN on February 8: "Clinton does have higher negatives than Obama -- and McCain. Forty-four percent of the public say they don't like Clinton, compared with 36 percent who don't like McCain and 31 percent who don't like Obama, according to the CNN poll conducted February 1-3. Why does Obama do better against McCain than Clinton? Obama does do a little better than Clinton with independents and Republicans. But the big difference is men: Men give McCain an 18-point lead over Clinton, 57 percent to 39 percent, according to the CNN poll. The margin of error for that question was plus or minus 5 percentage points. But if McCain and Obama went head to head, McCain's lead among men shrinks to three, 49 percent to 46 percent -- statistically a tie. Women, on the other hand, vote for either Clinton or Obama by similar margins."

To: Dale Baker who wrote (52122)	3/6/2008 5:29:45 PM
From: Katelew	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 541761

I assume Hillary's negatives are high with you because you believe all the negative commentary the press and blogosphere seem intent on recycling. But keep in mind that Dems are getting huge turnouts and close to half of voters seem to trust her to lead the country. I think it's fair to assume that these folks are watching the same television and reading the same print commentary that you are but just don't buy it. Or do you think my half of the democratic party is stupid, misinformed, or ethically challenged? Or all three? I have no idea if she's squeaky clean, but lord knows she's been 'vetted' to hell and back and, for me at least, nothing of consequence has stuck. All the commentary is still stuck back there in the 'guilt by assumption' category. Use of phrases like Attilla the Hun and scorched earth campaigning seem like real overstatements to me. But my sensibilities aren't offended by bare knuckle politics as long as the 527 type lies aren't injected. More importantly, I think you're wrong. Obama hurt himself with the Canadian thing and his denial. Plus he didn't take time out to hold oversight hearings on Afghanistan even as the situation there is deteriorating. Hillary didn't make him make the denial or not hold the hearings, did she?