Chuck Schumer and Rahm Emmanuel are the Democratic Party leaders who still think it's 1992 and they still think that Bill Clinton's win was attributable to triangulation and caving into Republicans, rather than Clinton's being the most gifted politician of his generation, and one of the most gifted in history. Relying on a public perception of "Bill will be the real president anyway", similar to the delusion that many Bush voters had in 2000 that "the old man will be really running things anyway", the Democratic party hackocracy has been pushing to nominate Hillary Clinton.
Or maybe they just WANT to lose.
The latest Zogby poll indicates
that a Hillary Clinton nomination will do just that. In the latest (11/26 poll, Hillary Clinton loses to John McCain 38%-42%, to Rudy Giuliani or Mitt Romney 40%-43%, to Mike Huckabee 39%-44%, and to Fred Thompson 40%-44%.
Barack Obama defeats John McCain 45%-38%, Rudy Giuliani 46%-41%, Mitt Romney or Mike Huckabee 46%-40%, and Fred Thompson 47%-40%.
And John Edwards, the candidate the Democratic Hackocracy wants to stop at all costs, the candidate who is receiving zero news coverage and many voters don't even know who he is, also defeats all the Republicans, albeit by smaller margins. Imagine if he received some news coverage not involving his hair or his house.
Now in fairness, Gallup has Clinton polling more strongly
, but the Gallup poll is intersesting in that it has seemingly written John Edwards out of the race entirely.
It's disheartening that there is still a fairly consistent 40% of the population that still wants a Republican president at all, let alone one of this particular batch of nimrods and nutjobs. But I think we can chalk up at least ten percent of this to the fact that the Democratic Party as a whole has so far shown itself to be unable to stand up for anything, crumpling more quickly than a Yugo at the slightest threat of We Will Say Mean Things About You. Perhaps Hillary Clinton IS the fighter she claims to be, but it's hard to imagine her fighting for anything that doesn't benefit her corporate supporters once elected. Fighting back against the right wing smear machine may be enough to get her elected, but it doesn't make her the leader that will roll back decades of Republican plunder, aided and abetted by her own husband's DLC strategy of capitulation.
It's equally disheartening that the media have already decided who your "real" choices are by choosing to cover only the two candidates whom they believe make the best story. I wonder what these numbers would look like if John Edwards were given a fair shake in the media.
Regardless of who gets the nomination, the question still must be asked: Have the Democrats become so accustomed to being at the short end of the stick that they are more comfortable losing? And another question must be asked: Can this country be fixed?
UPDATE: Pollster.com has some questions about Zogby's methodology
Labels: 2008 election, Democrats