Quantcast
Home manage Las Vegas Review-Journal
  Jobs Cars Homes Shopping Travel Weddings Golf Best of Las Vegas Photo   Search:

RECENT EDITIONS
Sat Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri

Opinion


EDITORIAL: No longer inevitable?

Hillary finds herself in a horse race

With the Iowa presidential caucus three days away and the New Hampshire primary a week out, Hillary the Inevitable has been reduced to Hillary the Insecure.

New York Sen. Hillary Clinton, whose relentless fundraising and organizing made her the presumptive Democratic nominee for all of 2007, might come out of the gate in 2008 with two second-place finishes. According to a Los Angeles Times/Bloomberg News poll, Illinois Sen. Barack Obama has caught the former first lady in both states. Former North Carolina Sen. John Edwards is statistically even with the two in Iowa.


Most Popular Stories
  • LETTERS: With economists like these, who needs enemies?
  • LETTERS: Brace yourself for coming tax hikes
  • LETTERS: Nuclear power could be the answer for Nevada
  • EDITORIAL: Firemen's pensions past due for reform
  • EDITORIAL: Education 'consultants'
  • EDITORIAL: Internet sales taxes
  • FROM OUR READERS: In the dark about the new light bulbs
  • LETTERS: So now you're in favor of regulation, eh?
  • VIN SUPRYNOWICZ: Letting the looters vote on who's for lunch
  • EDITORIAL: Water, water everywhere




  • To anyone with a sense of modern political history, this development isn't terribly surprising. No front-runner can march the campaign trail for a year against well-funded, mainstream opponents without losing some support. Sen. Obama trailed Sen. Clinton by 20 points in New Hampshire as recently as three months ago. In the Times/Bloomberg poll, he led by 2 points, comfortably inside the 4-point margin of error. In Iowa, the poll had him trailing Sen. Clinton by 3 points and leading Mr. Edwards by 1 point, also inside the 4-point margin of error.

    Sen. Obama's gains might indicate that Sen. Clinton's long-perceived liabilities -- too calculating, too unlikable to win a general election -- are finally catching up with her candidacy.

    Although Iowa poll participants believed Sen. Clinton was the best Democratic candidate for fighting terrorism, handling the economy and ushering health care reforms, they said Sen. Obama was more likely to produce new ideas and change the way things are done in Washington, and that he had more honesty and integrity and was better at saying what he believed.

    Those numbers track well with a poll conducted for the Review-Journal earlier this month by Mason-Dixon Polling & Research. That survey discovered that although Sen. Clinton enjoyed an 8-point lead over Sen. Obama among Nevada Democrats heading into the state's Jan. 19 caucus, Sen. Obama fared much better in hypothetical general election matchups against Republicans.

    For example, the poll had Sen. Clinton losing to Rudy Giuliani and Fred Thompson by 8 points each, to Mitt Romney and Mike Huckabee by 11 points each and to Sen. John McCain by 17 points. Meanwhile, Sen. Obama was in a statistical tie with every Republican but Sen. McCain, losing to the Arizona lawmaker by 7 points.

    Sen. Obama has much greater appeal among independents and disenchanted Republicans, plain and simple.

    Predictably, this narrowing in the polls has ramped up Sen. Clinton's attack machine. But it would be a far greater service to New Hampshire, Iowa and Nevada partisans -- and a greater service to her image and her campaign -- if Sen. Clinton instead used her significant campaign resources to further specify her ideas and positions on the foreign policy and pocketbook issues that voters care about.

    Newsvine Digg Fark Technorati reddit StumbleUpon del.icio.us Slashdot Propeller Mixx Furl Twitter MySpace Facebook Google Bookmarks Yahoo! Bookmarks Windows Live Favorites Ask MyStuff myAOL Favorites

    Leave Your Comment 18 Reader Comments
    Terms & Conditions
    The following comments are provided by readers and are the sole responsiblity of the authors. The reviewjournal.com does not review comments before publication nor guarantee their accuracy. By publishing a comment here you agree to abide by the comment policy. If you see a comment that violates the policy, please notify the web editor.

    Some comments may not display immediately due to an automatic filter. These comments will be reviewed within 48 hours. Please do not submit a comment more than once.
    Current Word Count:

    Note: Comments made by reporters and editors of the Las Vegas Review-Journal are presented with a yellow background.

    Steve wrote on December 31, 2007 05:28 PM: ZB's right. Billary does have a "plan". Her plan is to raise taxes, waste money, raise taxes, waste money, raise taxes, waste money. Did I mention raise taxes and waste money? She'll pay billions in bribes to every terrorist organization in the world and will give 100% control of the U.S. to the UN.


    Jon H. wrote on December 31, 2007 03:19 PM: I think that the CNN question:

    Diamonds or Pearls . . .

    should of been

    Boxers or breifs . . .

    I think I would of been interseted in that answer.


    tank wrote on December 31, 2007 02:26 PM: here,s wishing the new year does not end with hillary in the white house. she will sell out this country as fast as she sells out her friends.one vicious women when she wants to silence someone.that i learned from the first clinton in office.


    zb wrote on December 31, 2007 12:04 PM: Hi,

    I consider myself equal opportunity: I despise all political parties just about equally. Put aside the rhetoric that separates them to pander to their respective followers and we often get that regardless of party it has more to do with power and money than principals and people.

    With that said we still have to make decisions given the choices we have.

    As a liberal (a liberal amount of rights and a liberal amount of power when necessary to protect it) I don't want Republicans (or what they have become) deciding who the next supreme court justices are going to be. Presidents come and go but we are going to be stuck with Roberts, Alito, Scalia, and Thomas for too long and I don't want the next three to be anything like them.

    As for Hillary, I invite you to view the following:

    http://www.hillaryclinton.com/video/27.aspx

    Its not because of Bill that I think she is the best choice but in spite of him. I believe she will be a far better president than he ever was (which I rate as a "B" at best since he never had to face a truly major crisis except of his own doing).

    Having a woman - especially one at least as qualified as any of the men - at long last as president will also be a great moment for American democracy.

    zb


    Jon H. wrote on December 31, 2007 11:51 AM: Grumpy,

    The Libertarians have a test that adds a up and down component to the left and right. When I take that test I am in the top center right.

    Yes, that means I also drag my harry knuckles on the ground, grunt and make other noises.

    May I return your wishes for a Happy blessed New Year!


    SOS wrote on December 31, 2007 11:39 AM: ZB wrote on December 31, 2007 10:49 AM: And they hate Bill because he actually made life better for millions of Americans instead of just a few.:



    Really, what did he do?



    He got caught in a lie (remember him pointing his finger at the camera), then went in to an African-American church to confess his sins (one of them anyway). He signed NAFTA, after Bush the first negotiated it, he could have left it unsigned. And lets not forget the money from China to get him re-elected, for our nuclear secrets, I mean after all we would not want China to miss hitting us if they ever decided to shot as us, do we. (What is Billery going to sell for her contributions? IE: shoe or chew or what ever his name is.)



    Until the American people wake up and finally realize that there is no difference between the Republicrats and Demopublicans, we will keep getting the same as we got now.



    Everyone, cries the republicans done this or the democrats done that. Here is a question, where was the repubs or the dems when the other side was doing what it was doing? (hint: right along side the other party, check the voting records!)



    From a ex-dem ZB, so lets here some answers.


    John F wrote on December 31, 2007 11:22 AM: ZB,

    Most polls I've seen show Obama faring better in head-to-head matchups with Republican candidates than Hillary does. I think that's part of what is driving primary voters towards Obama.


    Mr. Coudapeipstrel,

    Go to Obama's web site:
    http://www.barackobama.com/index.php

    Click on the "issues" tab. There are plenty of specifics there. Most all of the candidates' web sites have specific policy proposals. They make for great reading.

    Happy new year everyone!


    Libertarian wrote on December 31, 2007 11:00 AM: Obama's platform includes going into
    Africa to try to straighten out their sorry asses. How is that a change? From Iraq to Africa?
    Ron Paul doesn't have any personal messes in his life. He is Truly the only agent of change. He's truly uniting Republicans, Democrats, and independents. His message is different
    than the nanny stating socialism coming
    from the rest of the candidates, Republicans and Democrats. It's time for a real change back to the constitution! Ron Paul Rocks!


    douglas wrote on December 31, 2007 10:53 AM: fences are for cattle.


    ZB wrote on December 31, 2007 10:49 AM: The more the RJ - a right-wing rag - pushes Obama and attacks Hillary the more I know that Hillary is the best candidate to kick the Republicans out of the White House.

    The Republicans know they can beat Obama and they know they can't beat Hillary. They are pushing Obama for the same reason I hope Huckabee is the Republican nominee - nobody will actually vote for him in a general election.

    As to why some Republicans mindlessly hate Hillary: because she actually stands up for democratic values instead of just talking about it: Healthcare, children, the elderly, equality to name a few. Republicans talk about values but nearly every Republican Candidate has a sordid personal life, while Hillary stood by her family during the most difficult times. And they hate Bill because he actually made life better for millions of Americans instead of just a few.

    Btw: I know lots of republicans who are supporting Hillary based on the facts instead of the personal attacks such as this from the RJ.

    zb


    Read All Comments