Hillary Clinton polls ahead of GOP frontrunners

posted at 1:25 pm on October 27, 2011 by Tina Korbe

Barack Obama barely beats them in hypothetical head-to-head match-ups (and, occasionally, polls show they would beat him), but, apparently, if Hillary Clinton were to run for president on the Democratic ticket, she would make mincemeat of Mitt Romney, pommel Rick Perry and clean Herman Cain’s clock:

A national poll conducted for TIME on Oct. 9 and 10 found that if Clinton were the Democratic nominee for President in 2012, she would best Mitt Romney 55% to 38%, Rick Perry 58% to 32% and Herman Cain 56% to 34% among likely voters in a general election. The same poll found that President Obama would edge Romney by just 46% to 43%, Perry by 50% to 38% and Cain by 49% to 37% among likely voters.

Unable to analyze the methodology of the poll, I can’t vouch for its validity, but it doesn’t seem implausible. The grass is always greener …

Clinton continues to say she has no intention to run for president in 2012 or even in 2016. I wouldn’t be totally shocked if she reversed that in 2016, her age notwithstanding (she’d be 69 by the day of the vote). But, overall, I believe her — and think it’s wise of her to say no to the temptation. Think, for example, of how spectacularly Rick Perry polled before he actually entered the presidential race. As soon as Clinton appeared on the campaign trail, at least some of her would-be supporters would remember (and be turned off by) her strident tone, her unspoken pleas for power, her unoriginal and predictably liberal ideas. Unless her years under Obama really have humbled her? But, no — not when she’s managed, in those years, to become more popular than the president. Better, then, for Clinton to bask in this popularity, which could only accrue to someone decidedly outside electoral politics.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

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

Clinton continues to say she has no intention to run for president in 2012

Didn’t she say sometime in 2006 and 2007 that she had no intention of running for president in 2008?

DrAllecon on October 27, 2011 at 1:28 PM

Who really cares anymore . . . regardless of political party, one’s about as bad as the other. Stuff your mattresses with money, store canned goods and arm yourself for protection.

rplat on October 27, 2011 at 1:30 PM

but I thought ROMNEY was the nominee already?

SDarchitect on October 27, 2011 at 1:30 PM

After what we’ve seen from them I have a hard time believing a majority of Americans will back a dem for quite some time.

DanMan on October 27, 2011 at 1:32 PM

Tina Korbe pronounced:

Unable to analyze the methodology of the poll, I can’t vouch for its validity, but it doesn’t seem implausible. The grass is always greener …

Yes the grass is greener…over the septic tank. Then you open the lid and WHEW!! What a stench!

evilned on October 27, 2011 at 1:32 PM

Would she poll as good if she switched to (R), or is this hypothetical straw-man a way to show how truly weak the GOP candidates are?

If the GOP was thinking instead of trying to rearrange the deck chairs, they would draft Paul Ryan at the convention and let the others vie for VP.

belad on October 27, 2011 at 1:32 PM

Rally? Wait til she shows up on stage in her what-is-she-thinking hair, cankles and pantsuits and starts cackling. As far as Democrats go, she is so 2008. Obama set a new bar for leftism; there is no going back.

DaydreamBeliever on October 27, 2011 at 1:33 PM

Who really cares anymore . . . regardless of political party, one’s about as bad as the other. Stuff your mattresses with money gold and silver, store canned goods (and freeze dried) and arm yourself for protection.

rplat on October 27, 2011 at 1:30 PM

THIS X 1,000,000.

It’s going to take a complete collapse before people will get a clue (if then).

When you have a poll with results like this (even TIME lying like they do) proves you’re in deep doo.

PappyD61 on October 27, 2011 at 1:34 PM

proves you’re in deep doo

(as if we don’t need anymore proof than looking around at…….. THE TEATER NATION this once proud country used to be).

PappyD61 on October 27, 2011 at 1:35 PM

Ok, when I saw it was a poll conducted by TIME, I quit reading right there…jeez..TIME??? Really???

lovingmyUSA on October 27, 2011 at 1:36 PM

Unable to analyze the methodology of the poll, I can’t vouch for its validity, but it doesn’t seem implausible

Yeah, so that’s what makes it blog-worthy…

lovingmyUSA on October 27, 2011 at 1:37 PM

Of course.

She has been solely involved in the foreign policy angle and Obama is perceived as doing pretty well there. Plus, there are Independents who view the problem as not liberalism, per say, but Obama’s implementation of it.

amerpundit on October 27, 2011 at 1:37 PM

Just more proof no one wants Obama to be president in 2013, but leave it to the GOP to run a RINO against him to make Obama in 2013 possible. Sigh

karenhasfreedom on October 27, 2011 at 1:39 PM

And we laughed at Peggy Joseph in 2008……

Free diapers care of Rosa DeLauro, free prescription drugs per Bush 43, free mortgages for people that can’t pay, free healthcare for illegals when they show up in emergency rooms with no insurance, the list just goes on and on……

WE ARE THE TEATER NATION.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=19v5Kjmc8FI

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P36x8rTb3jI&feature=related

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vY84fF2hzhY

PappyD61 on October 27, 2011 at 1:41 PM

Think, for example, of how spectacularly Rick Perry polled before he actually entered the presidential race. As soon as Clinton appeared on the campaign trail, at least some of her would-be supporters would remember (and be turned off by) her strident tone, her unspoken pleas for power, her unoriginal and predictably liberal ideas.

That sums it up. Obviously Dems and left-leaning independents will prefer Hillary over Obama because they know Barry is a miserable failure and they believe the problem is with the messenger and not the message. For everyone else however, once they saw that Hillary shared 99% of Obama’s views, they’d never vote for her.

Doughboy on October 27, 2011 at 1:41 PM

Never, ever underestimate the ability of the GOP elite to engineer a foolproof means of turning a certain victory into crushing defeat.

Bruno Strozek on October 27, 2011 at 1:42 PM

Didn’t she say sometime in 2006 and 2007 that she had no intention of running for president in 2008?

DrAllecon on October 27, 2011 at 1:28 PM

The ONLY way Clinton would be able to run is if Obozo announced he wasn’t running or he died. If she challenged him outright, the black vote would be gone. So if she runs she can’t win if Obozo is alive and breathing.

belad on October 27, 2011 at 1:42 PM

This is nothing more than “Anyone except Obama vs any of the delcared GOPers”

This does not bode well. Neither side wants to proceed with anyone specific yet.

BobMbx on October 27, 2011 at 1:43 PM

Either this poll is highly skewed, or this country is so far down the hole of stupidity. I’m not sure which.

capejasmine on October 27, 2011 at 1:43 PM

Run, Hillary, run!

Suggested campaign slogan:

The fairy tale presideny is over.

profitsbeard on October 27, 2011 at 1:45 PM

I just love these wishcasting “if x was running against y” polls.

Heck, if you ask me whether I’d vote for Barry Goldwater, Al “Grandpa Munster” Lewis, Norman Thomas or Dave Thomas instead of the SCoaMF, I’d cheerfully say yes to any and all.

It’s meaningless.

But it gets the attention of the political junkies….

MrScribbler on October 27, 2011 at 1:46 PM

1.) The 90′s are the new 50′s, they are the new lost happy days and the Clinton name is synonymous with them. Furthermore, Obama’s hostility to business makes Bill & Hill look like free-market, small-government champions. Obama’s extremism is causing an inordinate number of Republicans and Republican-leaning independents to voice approval for Hillary.

2.) Clinton is currently Secretary of State, it is a position that many Americans view as non-partisan and thus opinions about Clinton are not divided along partisan lines.

3.) Clinton has not been attacked by anyone in years, nor has she required to attack the political opposition. Disengaging domestic politics while dancing on the graves of fallen tyrants is a sure path to a high approval rating.

That being said, I do believe that Clinton would beat anyone in the current field because of the 90′s thing, but it would be a close election. If Clinton took Biden’s place, her approval rating would plummet.

Lawdawg86 on October 27, 2011 at 1:47 PM

republicans just aren’t very popular, are they?

don’t worry, conservatives, it’ll get better.

or not.

sesquipedalian on October 27, 2011 at 1:47 PM

A national poll conducted for TIME on Oct. 9 and 10 found that if Clinton were the Democratic nominee for President in 2012, she would best Mitt Romney 55% to 38%, Rick Perry 58% to 32% and Herman Cain 56% to 34% among likely voters in a general election.

..sure would love to see the internals of this poll, Tina. I note that Time did not readily publish them. But the comment about the grass always being greener over the septic tank — a funny line purloined from the title of Erma Bombeck’s book — is dead on, however.

..and doncha just *love* the Whistler’s Mother image of The Hil in the Time Article?

The War Planner on October 27, 2011 at 1:48 PM

Most media polls are mathematical garbage but are nevertheless useful tools for changing attitudes and controlling behavior . . . it matters not if they are reliable and valid because the majority of people will believe anything the media says or writes, including pseudoscience. Expect to see many more biased polls from the left.

rplat on October 27, 2011 at 1:48 PM

After all the years with all the liabilities, anyone who said, “we came, we saw, he died” and cackled about it — as Hillary Clinton did — would not get so much as one moment of staring at her name on a printed piece of paper by me nor any of my relations.

That, for me, was her lowest, worst and most revealing moment. Too much Krypt-Keeper happiness at the gruesome death of a gruesome tyrant to even be rationalized by the fact that the target was that gruesome tyrant. Hillary Clinton’s weird and sick enthusiasm with comparable sick snark about it made her somewhat worse than that tyrant.

Lourdes on October 27, 2011 at 1:50 PM

sesquipedalian on October 27, 2011 at 1:47 PM

I didn’t know Debbie Wasserman Shultz posted here.

angryed on October 27, 2011 at 1:52 PM

Hillary: the anti-Obama… Who knew??

Democrats: you can thank the LameStreamMedia for this predicament… I hope you’re happy…

Khun Joe on October 27, 2011 at 1:53 PM

And the Leftmedia appears to be even more ingrained with the Clintons than they even are with the Obamas.

Anyone could run against Obama next year and be well received. ANYone. But I think it should be anticipated that the Left is forevermore dependent and reliant on celebrity-worship and the need for media ‘royalty’ in the U.S. If not Hillary, if not Obama, they can be expected to manufacture another character soon.

Lourdes on October 27, 2011 at 1:53 PM

You’re right Sesqepdialiamanian nobody like Republicans.

Well except when they do.

angryed on October 27, 2011 at 1:54 PM

After what we’ve seen from them I have a hard time believing a majority of Americans will back a dem for quite some time.

DanMan on October 27, 2011 at 1:32 PM

I occassionally think that, then I read the news and see how pathetically stupid so very many of my fellow citizens apparently really are.

Midas on October 27, 2011 at 1:54 PM

sesquipedalian on October 27, 2011 at 1:47 PM

Someone’s feeling feisty today. Did your mom make you a nice sandwich? Getting cold in the basement yet? Or are you at a OWS protesting for more freeloading off of tax payers, and blaming the Jews for all your ills in life, lack of ambition, and total lack of brains?

capejasmine on October 27, 2011 at 1:55 PM

Well except when they do.

angryed on October 27, 2011 at 1:54 PM

well, if the gop’s soothsayer says so it must be true.

sesquipedalian on October 27, 2011 at 1:55 PM

Obviously Dems and left-leaning independents will prefer Hillary over Obama because they know Barry is a miserable failure and they believe the problem is with the messenger and not the message. For everyone else however, once they saw that Hillary shared 99% of Obama’s views, they’d never vote for her.

Doughboy on October 27, 2011 at 1:41 PM

And let’s not forget that John McCain and Hillary Clinton matched-up nearly to a ‘t’ on “all the issues,” too. John McCain, in fact, boasted about that somewhere around 2007.

Lourdes on October 27, 2011 at 1:55 PM

This country is so screwed. I agree with PappyD61.

Mirimichi on October 27, 2011 at 1:56 PM

Sounds more like Time cheerleading just to avoid seeing the Democrat lose.

Liberal Democrat. Ivy-League educated. Alinsky devotee. From Illinois. Healthcare takeover.

Who am I talking about? Obama or Hillary. Hint: BOTH.

BTW, if 55% of this country wants to elect a Democrat after the last 3 years, we deserve to go the way of broken empires.

SAMinVA on October 27, 2011 at 1:58 PM

Run, Hillary, run!

Suggested campaign slogan:

The fairy tale presideny is over.

profitsbeard on October 27, 2011 at 1:45 PM

Suggested campaign slogan:

The fairy tale presideny is over.

And the witch is back!

Lourdes on October 27, 2011 at 1:58 PM

sesquipedalian on October 27, 2011 at 1:55 PM

Oh that’s right Rasmussen is the devil. Let’s rely on Time polls where twice as many Dems as Reps are asked questions.

Oh what’s this then? Rasmussen was the most accurate pollster in 2008. But don’t let facts get in the good way of a libtard fantasy.

http://www.fordham.edu/images/academics/graduate_schools/gsas/elections_and_campaign_/poll%20accuracy%20in%20the%202008%20presidential%20election.pdf

angryed on October 27, 2011 at 1:59 PM

then I read the news and see how pathetically stupid so very many of my fellow citizens apparently really are.

Midas on October 27, 2011 at 1:54 PM

That’s the real problem right there.

Mirimichi on October 27, 2011 at 2:00 PM

beat the rush…

…get some bumper stickers for your car in case you need them after the election to prove you were on board the Transformers train.

OBAMA 2012!!

PappyD61 on October 27, 2011 at 2:03 PM

Pure propaganda…

… not worth the thread.

Seven Percent Solution on October 27, 2011 at 2:03 PM

The fairy tale presideny is over.

profitsbeard on October 27, 2011 at 1:45 PM

I’ll take the evil queen over the naked emperor anyday.

God have mercy on my soul.

Laura in Maryland on October 27, 2011 at 2:07 PM

Obama 46
Romney 43

Obama 50
Perry 38

Obama 49
Cain 37

There’s the news in this poll

Falz on October 27, 2011 at 2:08 PM

That being said, I do believe that Clinton would beat anyone in the current field because of the 90′s thing, but it would be a close election.

Lawdawg86 on October 27, 2011 at 1:47 PM

I’m not so sure about that. Once her GOP opponents started drawing parallels between HillaryCare and 0bamacare, I think her support would plummet.

Then again, our trusty friends in the GOP would probably drop the ball on that, too. If they really knew how to campaign against the left, 0bama’s approval ratings would be in the 20% range instead of the mid-40s where it is now.

UltimateBob on October 27, 2011 at 2:14 PM

S.S.D.D. (Same sh!t, different dem)

Honestly, if we elect either hillary or obowmao in 2012, we deserve turmoil.

ErinF on October 27, 2011 at 2:15 PM

There’s the news in this poll

Falz on October 27, 2011 at 2:08 PM

Any poll conducted by Time is not news. I wouldn’t trust a poll by them to tell me 98% of people like sunny days and ice cream.

angryed on October 27, 2011 at 2:17 PM

Hillary, tell those people to go eff themselves.

Had Hillary won the nomination, I would have voted for her as a protest to McCain – as Coulter said and I agree – Hillary is more conservative than McCain.

But democrats totally screwed her. And now them calling her back to the field after cutting her for a whiffer should infuriate her. Because it infuriates me for her.

bloghooligan on October 27, 2011 at 2:19 PM

This is one I can’t figure out. This corrupt lying hag, this Lady MacBeth of the Left? If Sarah Palin had said or committed even a tiny fraction of the mendacities and malfeasances this woman has, her career would have been long over. Unbelievable.

rrpjr on October 27, 2011 at 2:20 PM

She should get in the GOP primary, then.

Hillary/Rubio 2012

Hiya Ciska on October 27, 2011 at 2:25 PM

Another dumb ass poll run by communist for communist & I’m supposed to believe that the “American people” prefer Hitlery Clinton over any Rep. Yah RIIIIIIIIGHT!

Confederate on October 27, 2011 at 2:28 PM

That too shall pass.

listens2glenn on October 27, 2011 at 2:28 PM

President Obama would edge Romney by just 46% to 43%, Perry by 50% to 38%

electibility: Romney 1 Perry 0

hanzblinx on October 27, 2011 at 2:29 PM

Americans for SMART POWER!

/gags

ornery_independent on October 27, 2011 at 2:35 PM

Why did Congressional Republicans give the incompetent Hillary a free pass? I can’t think of a single success she has had as Sec of State.

If the tables were turned, the Democrats would have destroyed her because she was a threat.

huckleberryfriend on October 27, 2011 at 2:42 PM

Summing America’s mentality up – It takes a Village.

This is why Republicans need to run off all centrists…let them go to the Democrats. We saw what happened to the Democrat Party when its loaded with centrists.

If the Republican Party can’t/won’t get rid of centrists, then it’s time for a Third Party…long pass time for a Third Party. Give the Republican Party to the centrists and move on.

We now have a former Massachusetts Governor who will probably win the primaries…basically another McCain. I will vote for Obama before I vote for Romney, and hope the centrists have to deal with him for another 4 years.

American needs to become a full-fledged Communist nation before Americans actually realize that Communism won’t work…

Karmi on October 27, 2011 at 2:43 PM

The grass is always greener …

Exactly. To me, this is just a further indication of how disenchanted people are with Obowma. Hillary, at this point, is blank slate upon which liberals and left leaning moderates can project their fantasies.

peski on October 27, 2011 at 3:07 PM

Hillary Huntsman…!

/

Seven Percent Solution on October 27, 2011 at 3:21 PM

In a recent poll when people were asked if they would vote for a Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton, me, or a chair 95% of respondents said PatriotPete while 5% were undecided with opinions evenly divided between the remaining candidates.

Poll methodology surveyed 95% of PatriotPete’s friends and family, 3% street vendors and some other guys we found wandering in the park to make it look like a real poll.

PatriotPete on October 27, 2011 at 3:27 PM

I suspect that Hillary will end her tour as SoS and announce that prior to the election and she and Bill will really enjoy watching Obama get beat and the DNC suffering the consequences of their betrayal of the Clintons in ’08.

And I wouldn’t blame her one bit.

Texas Gal on October 27, 2011 at 3:28 PM

Hillary Huntsman…!

/

Seven Percent Solution on October 27, 2011 at 3:21 PM

Packing for an extended stay on a desert island that shall remain unnamed for now…

Lourdes on October 27, 2011 at 3:32 PM

If the Republican Party can’t/won’t get rid of centrists, then it’s time for a Third Party…long pass time for a Third Party. Give the Republican Party to the centrists and move on.

Karmi on October 27, 2011 at 2:43 PM

It would probably be faster for the true conservatives to start their own party than to keep trying to control the voting membership of the GOP. I really don’t know how you would ‘get rid’ of anyone voting unless you issued some kind of membership based on criteria and excluded those who didn’t meet your criteria so if they didn’t have a membership they couldn’t vote in the true conservative party elections.

Texas Gal on October 27, 2011 at 3:35 PM

Obama and Hillary are both Alinsky-ites. Same marxism, different anatomy. Though I’m not sure which is which.

Bevan on October 27, 2011 at 3:49 PM

Why did Congressional Republicans give the incompetent Hillary a free pass? I can’t think of a single success she has had as Sec of State.

If the tables were turned, the Democrats would have destroyed her because she was a threat.

huckleberryfriend on October 27, 2011 at 2:42 PM

This. Her tenure has been a disaster. We are a laughing stock. I hope this poll is stacked with dems like usual, because if it isn’t we’ll see the US go full socialist in a decade or less.

Rational Thought on October 27, 2011 at 3:53 PM

Sarah Palin

Enough said. ;o)

DannoJyd on October 27, 2011 at 4:41 PM

the witch is back!

Lourdes on October 27, 2011 at 1:58 PM

Paging Elton John …

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8HxYuCsj26s

Laura in Maryland on October 27, 2011 at 5:00 PM

More proof of ANYBODY but Obama.

BKennedy on October 27, 2011 at 5:04 PM

said it before, say it again:

Romney ’12
Hillary ’16

ginaswo on October 27, 2011 at 5:38 PM

Well, yeah. Americans haven’t actually thought about Hillary as a political entity in four years.

Also, there were two elections in 2008, and a whole slew of people still wonder “what if” with regards to the first one, not just the second one.

HitNRun on October 27, 2011 at 6:32 PM

OPERATION CHAOS.

labrat on October 27, 2011 at 8:25 PM

Maybe she could switch parties. She is probably more conservative than Romney and Huntsman.

HellCat on October 27, 2011 at 8:55 PM