General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsHillary's the one, says Monmouth poll of Dems Read more at http://www.philly.com/philly/blogs/big_te
Thomas Fitzgerald, Inquirer Politics Writer
POSTED: MONDAY, DECEMBER 15, 2014, 2:36 PM
A national poll from Monmouth University released Monday finds that Hillary Clinton is the top choice of Democrats as the partys 2016 presidential nominee, though a substantial number also think she should be challenged in a primary.
When asked who theyd like to see as the partys candidate, 48 percent of respondents volunteered Clintons name, to 6 percent for Massachusetts Sen. Elizabeth Warren, and 2 percent each for Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders and Vice President Biden.
When nearly half of Democratic voters volunteer the name Hillary Clinton as their choice for 2016, its hard to deny that she is the clear front runner, said Patrick Murray, director of the Monmouth University Polling Institute in West Long Branch, N.J. At the same, time Democrats do not want to the nomination process to be a coronation.
The poll results are based on a sample of 386 registered voters who identify themselves as Democrats or as leaning toward the Democratic Party. The findings are subject to a margin of error of plus-or-minus 5 percentage points.
Read more at http://www.philly.com/philly/blogs/big_tent/Hillarys-the-one-says-national-Monmouth-poll-of-Dems.html#ZrJZmwW4RZR34LZv.99
RiverLover
(7,830 posts)BootinUp
(47,156 posts)BootinUp
(47,156 posts)hrmjustin
(71,265 posts)But yes it is just a moment in time and once the primary starts the numbers will move.
Gman
(24,780 posts)mastered mind control. There's no other explanation. I guess.
earthside
(6,960 posts)Well, Hill was "the one" about this time eight years ago, too.
And, she doesn't look like that anymore, either ... that photo portrait is at least eight years old.
BootinUp
(47,156 posts)6% is not bad for a rookie.
VanillaRhapsody
(21,115 posts)Hillary Clintons 2008 campaign for the White House first went off course in the cornfields of Iowa, and some liberal groups are hoping to use that staging ground to derail the Democrat in 2016. MoveOn.org, a left-leaning advocacy group and political action committee, is starting Run Warren Run, an effort to draft Sen. Elizabeth Warren into the presidential campaign. Run Warren Run will hold its first rally in Iowa on Wednesday.
A memo to MoveOn: 2016 is not 2008; Clinton is in far better shape now than she was then. Warren, a Massachusetts Democrat, would need Clinton to bleed support in Iowa to have a shot at winning, which is something that didnt happen in 2008.
Many have argued that the Clinton campaign blew its opportunity in 2008 by squandering a large lead. This may have been true nationally (though vastly overblown), but wasnt true in Iowa. Clinton either trailed or held a small lead during the lead up to the 2008 Iowa caucuses. We can see this in a local regression plotting Clintons, John Edwardss and Barack Obamas support in Iowa caucus polls.
liberal_at_heart
(12,081 posts)She was supposed to be inevitable last time too if you remember. Then a rather unfamiliar not well known Senator stole her primary from her. Didn't he know she was inevitable? Didn't he know it wasn't his Presidency to win? It was her Presidency to win, damn it. He stole her Presidency. Now, two rather unknown Senators who fight Wall Street and who fight income inequality think they can steal Hillary's next chance at a Presidency? Who do they think they are? How dare they? Don't they know Hillary is inevitable? Don't they know it is her time? And how dare they fight income inequality anyway? Don't they know they can't "purify" the Democratic Party? Don't they know wishing for income equality is like chasing a rainbow?