CNN Poll: Clinton leads all Republicans by Double Digits

CNN Poll:

Marco Rubio fares best against the former first lady, trailing Clinton by 14 points, 55% to 41%. Bush trails Clinton by 17 points, 56% to 39%. Christie and Paul fall 19 points behind Clinton, each putting up 39% to Clinton's 58%. Huckabee, Walker, Carson and Cruz each trail Clinton by more than 20 points.


< ISIS Kills More Coptic Christians in Libya | NYTimes takes stenography from GOP hit book >
  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft

  • Display: Sort:
    Same (5.00 / 1) (#1)
    by Ga6thDem on Mon Apr 20, 2015 at 07:44:26 AM EST
    story different day. The GOP can't break out of the low 40's no matter who the candidate is.

    Not suprised Jeb Bush is doing worse after seeing him in action.

    Yes, and polling (none / 0) (#10)
    by KeysDan on Mon Apr 20, 2015 at 02:37:15 PM EST
    is premature at this early point.  We do not know what the Republican field will be.  Lindsey is still kicking the tires of the clown car, although he is 91 percent sure he will be a candidate.   All results must be considered preliminary until Lindsey is up and running, or not.

    Lindsey (none / 0) (#12)
    by CaptHowdy on Mon Apr 20, 2015 at 02:42:22 PM EST
    Carly, Huck.   Going to need a clown minivan.

    Hey, you forgot (none / 0) (#14)
    by KeysDan on Mon Apr 20, 2015 at 02:49:09 PM EST
    me, Governor Bobby Jindahl (signed in his absence).  Yeah, and what about me?   Rick S.  

    Good lord, it is worse than I thought (none / 0) (#33)
    by MKS on Mon Apr 20, 2015 at 10:25:58 PM EST
    Lindsey (none / 0) (#13)
    by Ga6thDem on Mon Apr 20, 2015 at 02:42:57 PM EST
    I think is running strictly for one reason and that is to point out how much he hates Rand Paul. He's another one with no constituency within the GOP.

    A potential challenge for newspapers (5.00 / 2) (#2)
    by christinep on Mon Apr 20, 2015 at 11:33:38 AM EST
    See above thread on the "biggies."  My goodness ... to keep up tension, build interest in the contest, cast the election as some-kind-of-squeaker, etc., the advertisement seekers (aka news media) will have to hype and devise all the more.

    Wouldn't it be something if they had to resort to writing about some of the issues in a presidential campaign!?!  But, I jest. After reading and laughing about the Denver Post's main editorial this a.m.--wherein the eds appear to take on Gov. Christie for his negative comments about Colorado and retail marijuana here and also seem to disagree with Christie's extensive proposal to redo Social Security--the conclusion is almost inescapable from its own commentary that the Denver Post doesn't want a Repub candidate being mucking things up for that Party by OPENLY either being in the face of this State's voters and/or too strikingly trying to dismantle key aspects of Social Security.  Funny--or rather, sad-funny--that our paper is getting frustrated with the potential lack of contest and resultant lack of interest so early.

    Well HRC has quite a large (5.00 / 4) (#3)
    by MO Blue on Mon Apr 20, 2015 at 11:54:32 AM EST
    field opposing her candidacy. She has all the Dems who may or may not enter into the race, a couple of recycled Republicans who now claim to be Democrats and the entire Republican Party.

    Quite a task ahead of her. If she ever becomes president, whether or not you agree with her policies, she will have definitely earned that position.

    I'm all for Clinton at this point (5.00 / 1) (#4)
    by Militarytracy on Mon Apr 20, 2015 at 12:15:51 PM EST
    But..sigh...the GOP is so vile and corrupt that a Democrat was blessed with the Nobel Peace Prize simply by not being George W Bush, and now a Democrat will be blessed with the Presidency for simply not being a Republican.

    Probably oversimplified, she has her record, and it is head and shoulders above anything Republicans can offer anyone.  There is no race though.  Is it possible that that fact could cure Republican heads stuffed with Cotton?  That cure is probably too simple too.

    I have to think (none / 0) (#5)
    by Ga6thDem on Mon Apr 20, 2015 at 12:41:35 PM EST
    that the GOP has learned nothing judging by their behavior in Washington. After November they were all promising to pass "popular bipartisan" legislation. Only took a few short weeks before insanity took over once again.

    With a three percent (5.00 / 2) (#6)
    by KeysDan on Mon Apr 20, 2015 at 01:14:31 PM EST
    sample error (give or take), and at this early point, Bush, Paul, Walker and Rubio seem clustered around the starting gate.  The rest are back minding the clown car.

    So far, their break-away strategy is to attack Mrs. Clinton.  But, that does not have a long half-life--they will soon have to differentiate themselves from other members of the pack:

    Who hates Obamacare more; who will repeal it fastest;  who will get rid of regulations on the first day and decrease taxes on the rich, who will bomb faster and more furiously; and, who will or will not attend a gay wedding--or bake for gays.  

    Rubio does  bring a more retro-distinction in his Batista nostalgic Cuban policy. Overall, he seems better suited as a TV pitch-man for reverse mortgages.  Walker can continue to tout ISIS-eradication capabilities based on dealing with Wisconsin citizens who did not want their pensions cut; Paul can use his physician-stereotypic arrogance to avoid questions he does not like and see how that works.  Bush has his money-machine--which may make-up for the rest of him.

    Walker & the Money Machine (or Brothers) (none / 0) (#15)
    by christinep on Mon Apr 20, 2015 at 04:45:26 PM EST
    Per rumor (HuffPo today) the Koch Bros may be preparing to toss $$$$$ Walker's way.  If so, that wouldn't be surprising ... given that he has been their Atta Boy since his first gubernatorial term.  If so, will it be Jeb's Money Machine vs Scott's Brothers Koch?

    I think it might (none / 0) (#16)
    by CaptHowdy on Mon Apr 20, 2015 at 04:55:31 PM EST
    he is definitely Kochs boy.  Plus, Cruz has his own billionaire.

    Pass the popcorn.


    Don't give up on Lindsey, (5.00 / 1) (#17)
    by KeysDan on Mon Apr 20, 2015 at 05:02:57 PM EST
    yet.  Seems he may be fundraising the old-fashioned way--if successful, it may be curtains for Jeb and Scott.

    A "short" list from WIKI (none / 0) (#18)
    by CaptHowdy on Mon Apr 20, 2015 at 05:08:16 PM EST
    John Bolton
    Bob Erlich
    Jim Gilmore
    Peter King
    Dennis Michael Lynch ??

    In keeping with (none / 0) (#19)
    by KeysDan on Mon Apr 20, 2015 at 05:18:32 PM EST
    Citizens United, we need to include the high rollers, such as Sheldon Adelson, Koch Brothers, and the Fanjul Brothers (Cuba-American sugar plantation barons, parodied in Carl Hiassen's "Strip Tease"}.

    Maybe we could get them to (5.00 / 3) (#20)
    by CaptHowdy on Mon Apr 20, 2015 at 05:28:11 PM EST
    wear their sponsors.  Like NASCAR.

    This is the potential GOP runners list? (none / 0) (#21)
    by nycstray on Mon Apr 20, 2015 at 05:44:07 PM EST
    Yep (none / 0) (#22)
    by CaptHowdy on Mon Apr 20, 2015 at 05:51:10 PM EST
    i just heard a taking head say there could be 20 people running.  I thought, 20?  And googled.  Yep 20 I've heard of and the guy at the bottom makes 21.

    According to wiki.



    We no (none / 0) (#23)
    by Ga6thDem on Mon Apr 20, 2015 at 05:56:23 PM EST
    long are going to have a clown car. We are going to have a greyhound bus full of crazy.

    More like the Crazy Train . . . (none / 0) (#25)
    by nycstray on Mon Apr 20, 2015 at 06:00:21 PM EST
    You know (none / 0) (#26)
    by CaptHowdy on Mon Apr 20, 2015 at 06:02:15 PM EST
    no shortage of crazy for sure but honestly it's a way better crop than last time.  On the whole.
    Well, better I think if not "way" better.  No "9-9-9".  No Bachman. That's something in spite of Carson and Trump.

    This time (none / 0) (#27)
    by Ga6thDem on Mon Apr 20, 2015 at 06:07:22 PM EST
    there's no one even pretending to be a moderate like Romney was in 2012 and Romney and McCain were in 2008. This time it's nothing but crazy. Even Jeb is playing crazy.

    Good point (4.00 / 1) (#28)
    by CaptHowdy on Mon Apr 20, 2015 at 06:12:33 PM EST
    i guess when the inmates are running the asylum management has to get on board.

    All the permutations & combinations (none / 0) (#29)
    by christinep on Mon Apr 20, 2015 at 07:31:37 PM EST
    Just for fun(?) I began thinking about how the big $$$$ guys could work out their own deal IF need be.  Here is what I'm thinking--as PBS, which is on in the background, notes that the Koch Bros may be supporting Walker: What if the bargain involves Jeb Bush for Prez with Scott Walker for Vice-Prez.  The reason for this thinking is my heeding the warnings you have given about so many conservatives having had it with the so-called Repub "moderates": The premature answer could be to put someone with the acceptable conservative credentials with Jebbie.

    Oh, the possibilities ... hoo, hah.


    Walker (none / 0) (#30)
    by Ga6thDem on Mon Apr 20, 2015 at 07:42:36 PM EST
    would help Jeb about as much as Ryan helped Romney would be nothing to a negative.

    Scary. (none / 0) (#24)
    by nycstray on Mon Apr 20, 2015 at 05:59:26 PM EST
    He wouldn't have been polled at all (5.00 / 1) (#32)
    by CoralGables on Mon Apr 20, 2015 at 09:44:05 PM EST
    but that would be because Bill Clinton didn't announce he was running for President until October 1991.

    What nonsense. (5.00 / 5) (#34)
    by Anne on Mon Apr 20, 2015 at 10:31:25 PM EST
    Among the embarrassingly large numbers of people who don't vote, it's possible there's less national name recognition, but among people who actually do vote, and especially among people who watch Fox, for example, I think it would be stretching the imagination to think no one in the current GOP field has any national name recognition.

    It would also probably be a huge stretch of imagination to think that, once the American people know these GOP nominee-wannabes better, their polling is going to improve.  I am not being flip when I say that the eventual GOP debates are going to wake a lot of people up to the depth and extent of just how bad the GOP's policies and ideas are for this country.

    That is the truth (none / 0) (#35)
    by ruffian on Tue Apr 21, 2015 at 05:29:48 AM EST
    None of them are going to look better with more exposure.

    Largely true (none / 0) (#36)
    by CaptHowdy on Tue Apr 21, 2015 at 08:14:16 AM EST
    however, I've been listening to Kasich.  He seems like he might be the one to speak truth to the crazies.  MIGHT be.  Probably depends on his valuing self respect over winning.   Which he definitely will not do if he sticks to the "I'm not into all the attack nonsense, I want to talk about issues"

    If I was a republican it's what I would do.  It's the easy and obvious way to stand out and possibly set yourself up for some respect next time.


    Not so much (5.00 / 1) (#37)
    by CoralGables on Tue Apr 21, 2015 at 08:40:37 AM EST
    Trying to decide whether he should run Kasich said... "the most important thing is, what does the Lord want me to do with my life?"

    With all of these guys that god eventually tells  to run for president, how is it god doesn't just choose the one that's best instead of telling them all to run. That god, such a jokester.


    Realistically if he (none / 0) (#38)
    by CaptHowdy on Tue Apr 21, 2015 at 08:45:06 AM EST
    really plans to not do attack dog what else is there for him but Jesus.

    I do not think he either will or should be president just to be clear.  I just made the point that he has said he wants to stay out if the gutter.  Will he?  We will see.   But in theory he could do that and hug Jesus.


    I thought Huck tried to corner the god market (none / 0) (#42)
    by CoralGables on Tue Apr 21, 2015 at 09:25:28 AM EST
    and the rest of the GOP market with his book "God, Guns, Grits, and Gravy"

    I'm sure Jindal (5.00 / 1) (#44)
    by CaptHowdy on Tue Apr 21, 2015 at 09:29:42 AM EST
     Cruz, Santorum and others would take issue with that.  The Jesus bus will be almost as crowed as the crazy tran.

    What makes you think there are (none / 0) (#45)
    by Anne on Tue Apr 21, 2015 at 09:39:30 AM EST
    two different vehicles?  Or three, if you include the clown car.

    Well (none / 0) (#46)
    by CaptHowdy on Tue Apr 21, 2015 at 09:41:22 AM EST
    we decided earlier a car would not hold them all and it would take a bus at least and probably a train.  

    Maybe different cars?


    Whatever Vehicle... (none / 0) (#48)
    by ScottW714 on Tue Apr 21, 2015 at 12:51:36 PM EST
    ...burns the most fossil fuels.

    So maybe a extended clown hummer with low pressure in every tire and a giant wrap of jesus over the entire thing with the ghost of Reagan at the wheel and Nixon's corpse riding shotgun.


    An extended Hummer (none / 0) (#51)
    by CaptHowdy on Tue Apr 21, 2015 at 04:51:29 PM EST
    Coal Roller.  Genius.

    It's not that I necessarily doubt that (none / 0) (#43)
    by Anne on Tue Apr 21, 2015 at 09:28:41 AM EST
    god actually speaks to these people, but never having had the experience, and not knowing anyone who has, I wonder if what we have here are people who mistake the voice of their own egos for that of god.

    Or maybe it's just a case of believing that invoking god's name is one way to win over the believers.

    Honestly, if god really is speaking to these president-wannabes, I may have to reconsider the whole God thing altogether, because I'm not sure I can believe in a god that would promote the kinds of decidedly un-religious, un-Christian principles these guys seem to want to push.

    I don't know - maybe God's the original 11-dimensional chess-player, and we're just not smart enough to divine the strategy behind all these messages God is allegedly sending.

    And this is why I'd just really, REALLY like for religion to stay out of the whole process.  I don't care if people are having conversations with God - I just don't want to have to keep hearing about it.


    The problem (none / 0) (#39)
    by Ga6thDem on Tue Apr 21, 2015 at 08:50:42 AM EST
    is the crazies are not going to listen. He took the Medicare expansion in Ohio and that is all they are going to care about.

    No. They won't. (none / 0) (#40)
    by CaptHowdy on Tue Apr 21, 2015 at 08:55:51 AM EST
    and yes it is.  But like I said, it might set him up as the sane person if and when the party ever decides they want one.
    And no, it probably won't be in '16.

    Actually (none / 0) (#41)
    by Ga6thDem on Tue Apr 21, 2015 at 09:03:32 AM EST
    there is a whole organization called Republican Mainstreet Parternship or somesuch who's sole goal is to take the party back from the crazies. It's not just Kasich but people like Susanna Martinez and others but it is going to take more electoral losses for them to gain any power at this point. And yes, it is not going to be in 2016 looking at the slate of candidates the GOP is running.

    Capt: Take a look at Kasich' background (none / 0) (#47)
    by christinep on Tue Apr 21, 2015 at 11:19:49 AM EST
    He is no sweetie ... and, he can be and has been divisive.  I'm trying to remember the tales from my Cousin M who lived in Ohio for over 25 years and taught in the high schools in northern Ohio: Her conclusion these days from another state (to where she retired) is, first, to laugh loudly and, then, to say that she "would not vote for him if he was the last person in the world." Note: M is only issue-attuned, typically votes for Democrats (but is not really "political"), and, she remembers when Kasich tried to pursue the anti-union approach that Scott Walker almost patented against public employees in Wisconsin. <Reports at the time indicated that Kasich only pulled back from the almost or just-passed legislation that he had pushed when the Walker imbroglio proved embarrassing for him in Ohio where Unions are stronger than Walker's situation.>

    In Kasich' earlier term, he suffered near-record lows as a result of a fiscal scandal involving coinage (?)  He is be no means a Huntsman or similar type ... in terms of approach, he may have grown more savvy or, at least, understated, but he would more likely fit in with the Romney and Repub business model.  Some months back, on the Friday PBS News Hour, NYT columnist David Brooks kept mentioning Kasich as a good possibility, etc. etc.


    Christi, Howdy is right (none / 0) (#50)
    by NYShooter on Tue Apr 21, 2015 at 01:31:30 PM EST
    Remember, everything is relative. He didn't claim Kasich is a flaming Bernie Sanders type Liberal. But, from within this crowded field of ultra Right-Wing ("Deranged" in this case is not a gross exaggeration) Republican candidates, any display approaching rationality, or humanity, sticks out like a sore thumb.....in a positive way.

    I've noticed it myself. I remember Kasich from the past as a fire breathing, out of control, headline grabbing, ShowTime wannabee. So, when I see him these days, and his maturity growth quite discernible, the contrast makes for a relatively attractive candidate.....especially compared to that other bunch of, of, of, well, you know!


    I think he took lessons (none / 0) (#52)
    by CaptHowdy on Tue Apr 21, 2015 at 04:53:51 PM EST
    from his unsuccessful Walker wannabe experience.

    More from the CNN poll (5.00 / 2) (#49)
    by christinep on Tue Apr 21, 2015 at 01:07:27 PM EST
    'Read today that a majority of Americans view the economy as good and, further, a full 60^ expect that the economy will continue to improve.  Connected with that, President Obama has--for the first time in a few years--more approving than disapproving of his actions by a small (48 to 47 per cent) but politically significant difference. And...

    Connected with that, political scientists typically regard positive approval ratings for a President in the months before a general election as positively influencing the chances for that party's candidate.

    Another positive indicator may be on the horizon as well:  The major tracking of peoples' attitudes toward the ACA/Obamacare has been the Kaiser Foundation--since the inception of the law, it has periodically interviewed thousands at a time and reported such findings--and, today, the report is that more people (for the first time other than a short-lived blip a few years back) now have positive views/approve of the ACA than not.  The numbers for both are still in the low-mid 40s, but the movement is considered significant.  

    CNN blabber will say (none / 0) (#7)
    by CaptHowdy on Mon Apr 20, 2015 at 02:34:15 PM EST

    Ha (5.00 / 9) (#9)
    by CaptHowdy on Mon Apr 20, 2015 at 02:35:08 PM EST
    that was supposed to be CNN BANNER

    But that works too.


    The TV Pitch-Man for Reverse Mortgages... (none / 0) (#8)
    by ScottW714 on Mon Apr 20, 2015 at 02:34:38 PM EST
    ...is a former GOP Presidential candidate, Fred Thompson.

    I would disagree about attacking a Clinton in that the half life is very long, they been doing is some form since the early 90's and it seems to keep the GOP happy, regardless if they actually win.

    If I had to guess, 35% of any candidates strategy is attacking Clinton, and 20% attacking Obama/ACA.

    You also forgot the race to prove who loves Jesus the mostest.

    I wish (none / 0) (#11)
    by CaptHowdy on Mon Apr 20, 2015 at 02:39:56 PM EST
    flagellation was still big.  Self flagellation, I mean.

    I thought that (none / 0) (#53)
    by Jack203 on Tue Apr 21, 2015 at 09:05:43 PM EST
    the race was between Ted Cruz and Jeb Bush...

    But if those initial polls are that low on Cruz...I'm close to start predicting Jeb as the clear frontrunner.  Marco Rubio is an absolute joke.  He will fold like a cheap suit when the pressure starts.  

    Hooray another Bush.

    Hillary will still win.  We get another sane President and the first woman president.  Excellent.

    If only the house wasn't Republican, the country would actually be in good shape politically.  Redistricting can't come soon enough....

    The dems (none / 0) (#54)
    by CaptHowdy on Tue Apr 21, 2015 at 09:09:12 PM EST
    Are in a much better place as far as senate races go this time.

    Nice to hear good news once in awhile (none / 0) (#55)
    by Jack203 on Tue Apr 21, 2015 at 09:59:55 PM EST
    Thanks, I didn't know....

    RollCall (none / 0) (#56)
    by CaptHowdy on Wed Apr 22, 2015 at 07:55:41 AM EST
    After securing control of the Senate Tuesday, Republicans are already staring down a daunting map for 2016.

    The majority of the Senate battleground in the next election cycle will be fought on Republican turf, with the GOP defending 24 seats to the Democrats' 10. There is more trouble for the party beneath those raw numbers; only two Democratic seats are in competitive states, while more than half a dozen Republican incumbents face re-election in states President Barack Obama carried at least once.

    Republicans appear to have put themselves in as strong a position as possible, coming out of the midterms with potentially a 54-seat majority. But the next electoral fight for the Senate fundamentally looks nothing like 2014: Democrats are on offense, the playing field is packed with pricey media markets and every race is positioned down-ballot from a presidential contest.

    Beyond (none / 0) (#57)
    by Ga6thDem on Wed Apr 22, 2015 at 08:00:49 AM EST
    that the GOP has done nothing but shoot themselves in the foot since taking over the senate. Doing the bidding of the far right seems to be the only thing they are capable of doing these days.

    I expect gains (none / 0) (#58)
    by CaptHowdy on Wed Apr 22, 2015 at 08:04:08 AM EST
    in the House too.

    Me too (none / 0) (#59)
    by Ga6thDem on Wed Apr 22, 2015 at 08:34:49 AM EST
    but I expect it to stay Republican.