Hot Air » Blog Archive » Poll: Hillary’s “pile on” whine is nonsense

Poll: Hillary’s “pile on” whine is nonsense

posted at 8:30 am on November 13, 2007 by Bryan
Share on Facebook | printer-friendly

There is good news and bad news in this poll’s results. The good news is that Hillary Clinton is being treated like any other front-runner would be treated. That’s also the bad news.

Most Americans reject the charge that other presidential candidates are “piling on” Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton, according to a new Fox 5/The Washington Times/Rasmussen Reports poll.

Only 25 percent of voters said recent criticism of Mrs. Clinton constitutes piling on, the survey found, and of those, less than half said she was the target because she is a woman.

“The vast majority of Americans are treating Senator Clinton as a front-running presidential candidate, not as a women who happens to be running for president,” said pollster Scott Rasmussen, adding that the poll’s questions, taken together, show less than 15 percent of Democrats think she’s being picked on as a woman.

“She’s being accepted as a serious candidate, rather than anything else,” he said.

Her campaign is trying to play it both ways, so that she can be seen as any other candidate when it suits them and as a victim of the boys club when that suits them. Of the 25% that thinks she’s actually getting unfairly piled on, only half think it’s for the same reason that the Clinton campaign is trying to project.

Meanwhile, the Norman Hsunanigans still aren’t getting anywhere near enough major press coverage and Clinton’s rivals aren’t exploiting it effectively. That’s obviously not the result of any pile-on.

The entire pile-on meme is dumb and deserves to die. If she wants to be the leader of the free world at a time of peril and uncertainty, then she should act like a leader and accept that criticism is going to come her way. The pile-on carries with it a subtle and not at all useful subtext: I’m a whiner. Of all the things we do not need leading us right now, whiner might be on top of the list.

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages:

Hillary will not stand against the far left’s ideas because she doesn’t want to alienate the MoveOn crowd. But, she won’t go against the ideals of the moderates of both sides of the political aisle because she doesn’t want to piss them off, either.

She’s going to have to pick a side. She can’t have it both ways. Lord knows, she’ll probably die trying, though.

flyawaybird on November 13, 2007 at 8:42 AM

Hillary is trying to have it both ways,
this smells of Clinton triangulation.

canopfor on November 13, 2007 at 8:49 AM

I just hope Putin and the boys don’t pile on her if she’s elected. Hillary would be the biggest farce in the history of the world. Are we going to wake up and find out this is not really happening?

volsense on November 13, 2007 at 8:52 AM

If she can’t handle Silky Pony, how does she intend to handle Osama or Ahmadinejad?

amerpundit on November 13, 2007 at 8:56 AM

“If she can’t handle Silky Pony, how does she intend to handle Osama or Ahmadinejad?”

Diplomacy

GogglesPisano on November 13, 2007 at 8:58 AM

If she can’t handle Silky Pony, how does she intend to handle Osama or Ahmadinejad?

I hear she’s been practicing her middle eastern accent.

flipflopper on November 13, 2007 at 9:09 AM

When she interviewed on the networks, Katie Couric, Meredith Viera, Diane Sawyer and the ladies of the View think of Hillary of one of their own. They all attended the same private schools in the northeast, all came of age at about the same time and they all share the exact same world view that prevailed on the campuses when they all attended privileged private colleges. So they see their job as protecting Hillary. Don’t expect her to be asked questions such as: “You keep referring to your experience in the White House. Therefore, do you think the way you handled the White House Travel Office, with mass discharges from employment, was a good example of how you would conduct affairs as president”? Do you think that the appointment of Sandy Berger, who since pleaded guilty to removing classified documents, was a good appointment? Would you consider reappointing him?’. Do you think the pardons of Marc Rich, Mike Espy and countless other Democratic fundraisers was proper?” These questions can not be asked to Hillary. Other candidates have to answer tough questions. Hillary does not.

Larraby on November 13, 2007 at 9:18 AM

The woman is made of teflon.

csdeven on November 13, 2007 at 9:37 AM

Continue to attack what she lacks: Credibility and substance.

T J Green on November 13, 2007 at 9:41 AM

“She’s being accepted as a serious candidate, rather than anything else,”

Well, she look like a man

AlexB on November 13, 2007 at 9:45 AM

She seems annoyed at the process. Can’t she just be coronated, then everyone can stand out of the way and let her be the monolithic dictator the country so deserves? Hillary Musharraf.

pistolero on November 13, 2007 at 9:55 AM

If she wants to be the leader of the free world at a time of peril and uncertainty, then she should act like a leader and accept that criticism is going to come her way.

In that context, this should be a “test” of her fitness for office. We, as a nation, deserve what we get if we elect a whiner candidate of whatever party/race/gender/species/planetary affiliation.

This is merely the election! History has shown it only gets rougher from inaguration day forward. If Hillary can’t stand the heat of softball criticism, she isn’t the candidate that is best for America.

highhopes on November 13, 2007 at 9:55 AM

Even if she could handle everything thrown her way, like her husband can, she’d be dangerous for America. There is nothing she can do regarding changing her campaign style that would make this socialist/communist elitist leftist far-left liberal freak, and her adoring husband, acceptable.

JiangxiDad on November 13, 2007 at 10:05 AM

If Hillary turns out to be the Dem candidate, Republicans will not stay home on Election Day like they did in huge numbers back in 2006. Whether the Republican candidate is Rudy, Fred, Mitt or anyone else, the thought of having Hill and Bill back in the White House will result in big Republican turnout at the polls.

She’ll never get elected in the general. She can lie to the public now, triangulate every issue, have cover and protection from the MSM, feel confident and untouchable, but seeing her face day after day and listening to her co-liar Bill defend her every time she stumbles over her own cankles for the next 11 months will be her undoing.

I want the Do-Nothing Duo out there, front and center, as often as possible. Their image plastered all over the media is their own worst enemy. Seeing Bill out their finger-pointing again only reminds us of the total embarrassment he was as a president, a husband, a father, a leader and a protector of our national security.

Let our battle cry be …… Never Again!

fogw on November 13, 2007 at 10:11 AM

It is absolutely frightening how much this woman is just like Evita Peron. Christopher Andersen was right.

She seems annoyed at the process. Can’t she just be coronated, then everyone can stand out of the way and let her be the monolithic dictator the country so deserves?…

pistolero on November 13, 2007 at 9:55 AM

This is the real reason for EVERYTHING she does. That’s why lying, slandering, stealing, cronyism, ad nauseum is OK for her and Bill.

Or as Andrew Lloyd Weber and Tim Rice put it:
“How annoying that we have to fight elections for our cause
The inconvenience–having to get a majority
If normal methods of persuasion fail to win us applause
There are other ways of establishing authority”

inviolet on November 13, 2007 at 10:39 AM

Uh, boo freakin’ hoo?

RMCS_USN on November 13, 2007 at 11:42 AM

CNN and Wolfman Blitzer seems to think Hillary is a dog-pile-on.
Drudge has it on the headline with a Big ~~Warming~~ Warning not to Gang-Up on the Glacier.

Clinton Inc. is calling in favors?

Kini on November 13, 2007 at 11:43 AM

Talk about government intimidating the media…

AlexB on November 13, 2007 at 11:46 AM

Drudge has it on the headline with a Big Warming Warning not to Gang-Up on the Glacier.

Kini on November 13, 2007 at 11:43 AM

From Drudge:

CNN’s Wolf Blitzer has been warned not to focus Thursday’s Dem debate on Hillary. ‘This campaign is about issues, not on who we can bring down and destroy,’ top Clinton insider explains. ‘Blitzer should not go down to the levels of character attack and pull ‘a Russert.” Blitzer is set to moderate debate from Vegas, with questions also being posed by Suzanne Malveaux…

Wolf ought to let her have it with both barrels to show that he can’t be intimidated. Of course he’d probably never get an interview with Her Thighness or the Clenis again, which is why he will probably go easy.