Rasmussen Reports posted an article this morning showing that Hillary could win in a closely divided country. Imagine how remarkable that is. A President who can’t reach 40% job approval, let alone 50% and a country that is in a hysterical national funk, and the best thing that can be said about the opposition’s heir apparent is that victory is possible.
In their article titled Electability and Hillary Clinton, Rasmussen says the following;
Probably the most frequently asked question about Hillary
Clinton’s candidacy for President is can she win the general election with an
unfavorable rating above 45%? The conventional wisdom has been that it will be
very difficult, but newly released data from Rasmussen Reports suggests that she
may well be a more formidable candidate than many commentators and pundits believe.
First, it is important to note that all the Democrats have negative
ratings in excess of 40%. To be sure, Senator Clinton’s at 49% is slightly
higher than Senator Obama (45%) and Senator Edwards (41%). But in a polarized
country with a polarized electorate, high negative ratings for leading
Democratic and Republican candidates should not be surprising.
Well, except that is for the fact that one of the leading Republicans does not have unfavorable ratings comparable to the Democrats. According to their own data, Rasmussen shows that Mitt Romney and John McCain, and, to a lessor extent, Rudy Guiliani, have unfavorable numbers close to her evilness and the other demonrats.
Yet, Fred Thompson’s unfavorables are in the mid 30’s, significantly lower than any Democrat.
More important than his unfavorable number being 13 points below her evilness, is that fact that his net favorable/unfavorable number (+4) is not only higher than hers (0) but higher than hers can hope to get.
Let me break it down.
24% of the nation is undecided about Fred Thompson, while 40% likes him and 36% doesn’t.
Only 2% of the Country is undecided about Hillary while 49% likes her and 49% dislikes her.
That means that Fred’s ceiling of possible support (64%) is considerably higher than Hillary’s (51%). Much of the 49% who dislike her (surveys have shown as many as 43%-44%) are already predisposed to vote against her evilness.
A sober look at these numbers has to give pause to supporters of her heinous highness.
9 in 20 voters are off the table for Hitlery and 10 in 20 dislike her. It’s almost impossible to see how she could reach 50% in a general election.
One thing is very simple- Thompson is likeabe, Hillary the bitch is not. Thompson is an unknown quality among a quarter of the population, Hillary is not.
There is almost nothing Hillary can do to improve her stature in the public’s eye, not so with Fred.
In order to win, the evil bitch will have little choice but to attack, attack, attack.
Although it is clear that Hillary is evil enough to employ such as strategy, it is not at all clear it would work and not backfire.
It is possible that Hillary could turn the majority of undecideds against Fred by the 60/40 ratio she would need to bring the race into equillibrium. However, could she do so without turning still more against her and energizing Thompson’s base.
Let me explain.
In order to win the election, Hillary must increase Thompson’s negatives without increasing her own. Yet, to increase Thompson’s negatives she will have to run a negative, nasty campaign that runs the risk of turning off undecided voters. Thompson could capitalize on this by running a positive, optimistic campaign and contrasting the two.
Her negatives are already so high that she has no room for error. If she were to push even a small percentage of voters to Thompson’s side, or even to staying home, she dooms herself.
Here is why. Hillary’s support, like Kerry and Gore before her, is concentrated in a lower number of high electoral count states. The Democrats lost 30 and 31 States, respectively, in the last 2 elections. Though Hillary’s overall level of popular support is near 50%, there is very little evidence that her level of electoral support is there.
If she comes off as nasty, while Fred comes off as optimistic (a very real possibility), it is difficult to see how battleground states come to him.