Hot Air Mobile
Home The Vault Gear About
Hot Air -- get your fill


Hillary’s swing state blues

posted at 1:50 pm on November 14, 2007 by Bryan
Share on Facebook | regular view

In 2004, Ohio was the swing state that ended up deciding the election. Tim Russert drove the point home with his election night “Ohio, Ohio, Ohio!” chant. If the latest Quinnipac poll is right and holds true and if Ohio plays the same role in 2008, Hillary Clinton will not be the 44th president. A rundown of the results shows:

# Former New York City Mayor Rudolph Giuliani and New York Sen. Hillary Clinton remain virtually deadlocked with 44 percent for the Democrat and 43 percent for the Republican in the Ohio presidential race.
# Clinton loses to Arizona Sen. John McCain 46 – 42 percent
# Voters say 49 – 29 percent that Gov. Ted Strickland is not qualified to be vice president and his presence on the ticket would not help the Democratic nominee.
# 41 percent of voters say they would never vote for her and 46 percent of married women and 48 percent of married men say they would never vote for her.
# Voters disagree 61 – 33 percent with the assumption that no Republican can be elected President in 2008 because of Bush’s low approval and the war in Iraq. Democrats agree 50 – 41 percent, while Republicans disagree 84 – 11 percent and independent voters disagree with the statement 62 – 33 percent.

On illegal immigration, the Democrats and anyone else who favors open borders are in big trouble in Ohio.

Ohio voters oppose 84 – 11 percent issuing driver’s licenses to illegal immigrants, and by large margins favor building a fence along the Mexican-U.S. border and creating a national ID card for all legal residents and citizens. They also oppose, 61 – 35 percent, providing a free public education to children of those in the United States illegally, according to a Quinnipiac University poll released today.

Former NM Gov. Bil Richardson signed a law allowing illegal aliens to obtain drivers in that state. Of the Democrat candidates, only Sen. Chris Dodd is outright against drivers licenses for illegals. John Edwards is conveniently quasi-opposed and the rest are in favor. The issue is a huge loser for them, as well as for pro-amnesty Republicans.

“The message to presidential candidates from Ohio, perhaps the most important swing state in the Electoral College, is that voters – be they Democrats, Republicans or independents – are very frustrated with illegal immigration and come down on the side of toughness rather than accommodation,” [Peter Brown, assistant director of the Quinnipiac University Polling Institute] said.

Put her chronic ceiling together with her muddled stance on border security and you have the makings of defeat, unless Hillary blunts the issue and/or does some wholesale planting.

hillary-planting.gif
Photoshop by Cry Havoc


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:

If Rudy is the nominee, there won’t be any last minute pro-life vote to save the day.

Valiant on November 14, 2007 at 1:54 PM

Photoshop by Cry Havoc

Mad Hillary, Beyond Thunder Thighs.

fogw on November 14, 2007 at 1:56 PM

Ohpleaseohpleaseohpleaseohpleaseohpleeeeeeeeeease let Hillary be the Dem nominee!

Note that these poll numbers are before any kind of heavy-hitting anti-Hillary campaign by the Republicans. There are still closets full of ammo we haven’t used against her. These poll numbers are her high-water mark.

Splashman on November 14, 2007 at 1:58 PM

Photoshop by Cry Havoc

Ever heard of a razor? Geez.

KelliD on November 14, 2007 at 2:06 PM

Photoshop by Cry Havoc

As a young clam, I would like to know your plan for global warming will affect me.

silverfox on November 14, 2007 at 2:08 PM

The farmer in the dell

The farmer in the dell
The farmer in the dell
Hi-ho, the derry-o
Hillary’s going to Hell

Hillary is a cow
Hillary is a cow
Hi-ho, the derry-o
Hillary is a cow

Hillary is a rat
Hillary is a rat
Hi-ho, the derry-o
Hillary is a rat

Hillary’s legs are like cheese
Hillary’s legs are like cheese
Hi-ho, the derry-o
Hillary’s legs are like cheese

MB4 on November 14, 2007 at 2:10 PM

Let’s not get to comfortable. Anything can happen in politics including her winning the White House. Does anyone think she would not stoop to any level to get elected?

Leonidas Hoplite on November 14, 2007 at 2:14 PM

Photoshop by Cry Havoc
As a young clam, I would like to know your plan for global warming will affect me.

silverfox on November 14, 2007 at 2:08 PM

Planting clams is a new low. The audacity of it all. Is there nothing she won’t stoop to?

OhEssYouCowboys on November 14, 2007 at 2:15 PM

38% of voters in Ohio want ALL illegal aliens DEPORTED, and Hillary wants ‘em voting.

Nice disconnect.

T J Green on November 14, 2007 at 2:23 PM

If Rudy is the nominee, there won’t be any last minute pro-life vote to save the day.

Yeah because the Democrat party has been such a stalwart champion of protecting unborn life. While pragmatic, Rudy’s take on the legalities of this issue is correct. What should have happened and what should be the goal is sending the whole issue back to the states where it belongs. Socially conservative states can outlaw the vile practice while the blue states can kill off life to their heart’s content. Obviously, as an anti-murder supporter I find the whole concept MORALLY repugnant but from a practical legal standpoint it is the correct approach.

highhopes on November 14, 2007 at 2:31 PM

Let’s not get to comfortable. Anything can happen in politics including her winning the White House. Does anyone think she would not stoop to any level to get elected?

Leonidas Hoplite on November 14, 2007 at 2:14 PM

In other words, let’s not be Democrats. They are already running around acting as if they have the White House and the election is just shy of a year away.

I’ve said from the beginning that Hillary’s numbers are going to fall when the cold brutal reality of another four years of having to deal with the Clintons sinks in with the American public. I think some of that is starting.

highhopes on November 14, 2007 at 2:33 PM

Sorry I can’t remember the details, but I heard something a couple of days ago about Virginia possibly being 2008’s Ohio, and that it helps Hillary.

eeyore on November 14, 2007 at 2:34 PM

MB4…………..LOL!!!!!!

Winebabe on November 14, 2007 at 2:45 PM

“Senator, love your outfit” makes me think of fava-beans-and-Chianti.

Wade on November 14, 2007 at 2:51 PM

I was just reading an article by Camille Paglia about HilClinton which suggested that Clinton has “near-Nixonian paranoia”. Of course, Nixon was right-they were trying to ‘get him’ just as the hounds have been yapping at President Bush for 7 years.
I think Paglia called it right, to suggest that HClinton is paranoid. Along with all of her other faults, I doubt that she has the emotional equilibrium to lead our country.
I’m going to make a prediction:
After she loses, whether in the primaries or general election,she is going to leave Congress. After failing in 2004, John Kerry was quite content to return as a Senator, one voice in a hundred.
HClinton wouldn’t be interested in that. No ROI.

Doug on November 14, 2007 at 2:56 PM

I’m a little confused on how you call a state that won’t under any circumstances vote for one of the candidates a ’swing state.’

Just because a state was a swing state one election doesn’t mean it will be a swing state for another election.

James on November 14, 2007 at 2:58 PM

, but I heard something a couple of days ago about Virginia possibly being 2008’s Ohio, and that it helps Hillary.

eeyore on November 14, 2007 at 2:34 PM

Don’t know about being the “Ohio” of 08′, but the Old Dominion could possibly become a “blue” state due to the high population areas of Fairfax and northern Va. voting demoratic.

BacaDog on November 14, 2007 at 3:02 PM

Didn’t Virginia just make strong statement in the election last week that they were for strong law and border enforcement? If I recall correctly, even tho they tipped Democrat, the Dems they put in office were stronger than the Republicans running on border enforcement.

Anyone know for certain?

stenwin77 on November 14, 2007 at 3:19 PM

In other words, let’s not be Democrats. They are already running around acting as if they have the White House and the election is just shy of a year away.

I’ve said from the beginning that Hillary’s numbers are going to fall when the cold brutal reality of another four years of having to deal with the Clintons sinks in with the American public. I think some of that is starting.

highhopes on November 14, 2007 at 2:33 PM

So, assuming Hillary is the nominee for the dhimmidumbocrats, who do you think is the best nominee for the Republicans to capitalize on Hillary, um, what’s the word/phrase, “oh-my-God-she-might-actually-win” revelation? Just curious, personally I think it’s Rudy.

Leonidas Hoplite on November 14, 2007 at 3:20 PM

Let’s not get to comfortable. Anything can happen in politics including her winning the White House. Does anyone think she would not stoop to any level to get elected?

Leonidas Hoplite on November 14, 2007 at 2:14 PM

I’m assuming that was aimed at my “ohpleaseohplease” comment. I’m not comfortable; I believe that the Repub. nominee has the best chance against Hillary, because of her long and putrid history. That is not to say it will be easy — it won’t, but it will be harder with Obama, IMO.

As for how far she’ll stoop, of course she will. So will Obama, and he’s the nominee, Hillary’s dirty-tricks team will have a new employer. Get used to it.

Splashman on November 14, 2007 at 3:20 PM

Er, that last sentence should have read, “… and if he’s the nominee…”

Splashman on November 14, 2007 at 3:21 PM

Please. Pass. The. Eye. Bleach.

NightmareOnKStreet on November 14, 2007 at 3:33 PM

I’m assuming that was aimed at my “ohpleaseohplease” comment. I’m not comfortable; I believe that the Repub. nominee has the best chance against Hillary, because of her long and putrid history. That is not to say it will be easy — it won’t, but it will be harder with Obama, IMO.

As for how far she’ll stoop, of course she will. So will Obama, and he’s the nominee, Hillary’s dirty-tricks team will have a new employer. Get used to it.

Splashman on November 14, 2007 at 3:20 PM

My comment was actually aimed at the post, not at any one comment. I was trying to say, yes, this is great and is a hopeful/positive sign but let’s not sit back and relax. Let’s do everything we can to hasten a Hillary implosion and not let it happen by itself, and also be ready for all manner of dirty tricks from the Clinton Campaign, which are sure to come. I guess I should have just said it.

Leonidas Hoplite on November 14, 2007 at 3:40 PM

Unfortunately, the purists on the right are just as dumb as the purists on the left. The purists on the right would rather see our troops have to salute Hillary Clinton as commander in chief than have Rudy because Rudy disagrees with them on the abortion issue. The overriding issue in the campaign is who will lead the war on terrorism and against Islamic fanaticism. Would anyone in his or her right mind want to allow Hilary Clinton to be our commander in chief over Rudy Guiliani. And lets face it. Like it or not, that is the stark choice. The mere thought of American servicemen having to serve as props for the Clintons permanent campaign is bone chilling and spine tingling. Rudy is the only person who can deliver us from the Clintons.

Larraby on November 14, 2007 at 3:55 PM

Larraby on November 14, 2007 at 3:55 PM

I agree with all that, except the last sentence. Rudy will be a fine choice as Commander-in-Chief, but if you’re arguing he’s the only one who can beat Hillary, you’re all wet. The choice will be just as stark if it’s Romney vs. Hillary. I’m not saying Romney would be just as fine a C-in-C (though he could; no one really knows), but if it’s Romney vs. Hillary, the choice will be similarly obvious to the American people.

Splashman on November 14, 2007 at 4:04 PM

Oh man! that photo is! disturbing….Nightmares tonight!

conservnut on November 14, 2007 at 4:07 PM

Didn’t Virginia just make strong statement in the election

last week that they were for strong law and border enforcement? If I recall correctly, even tho they tipped Democrat, the Dems they put in office were stronger than the Republicans running on border enforcement.

Anyone know for certain?

stenwin77 on November 14, 2007 at 3:19 PM

It really wasn’t a Dem / GOP thing. The dems took over the senate and gained seats in the HOD, although the GOP still kept the majority. The real deal on immigration was who was elected in Prince William county, who are leading the way in the state (and possibly the country) as anti amnesty, with neighboring Loudoun county in a close second.

Alas, poor Fairfax county went “the way of the weasel”.
I see myself moving to the outskirts of Manassas in the future….

bernzright777 on November 14, 2007 at 4:09 PM

Larraby, also see the latest on Rudy’s foreign policy here. It’s tough to know exactly how anyone (including Rudy) will do as C-in-C. He won’t be a one-man band; no President is. Notice how much trouble Bush is having with squishy appointees? coughcondoleezacough.

Splashman on November 14, 2007 at 4:10 PM

Democrats ARE illegal immigration and higher taxes. Do you think this country will turn this country’s national security over someone who whines when Edwards and Obama (not hardly what you would think of as “bullies”) asks her questions?

volsense on November 14, 2007 at 4:24 PM

Disgusting. You guys are better than this.

hillbillyjim on November 14, 2007 at 4:35 PM

Hillary’s swing state blues

Tell her to send in Bill. He’s the expert on swinging.

Dr. Charles G. Waugh on November 14, 2007 at 9:34 PM

Comment pages:


You must be logged in to post a comment.