Fox News national poll: Clinton leads Bush, Christie, & Cruz by double digits

[Mr. Morden]

Fox News national poll:

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/interactive/2014/03/05/fox-news-poll-obama-popularity-dips-more-believe-christie-wouldnt-make-good/

Clinton 49%
Christie 38%

Clinton 51%
Bush 38%

Clinton 52%
Cruz 36%

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[pbrower2a]

Say what you want about FoX Propaganda Channel -- their polls are good.

[Bandit3 the Worker]

Say what you want about FoX Propaganda Channel -- their polls are good.

Their Obama approval numbers are 12 points off from ABC. This shows Clinton would actually be beating Christie, Bush, and Cruz by 23, 25, and 28, respectively.

[IceSpear]

But...but...Obama having a low approval rating means Hillary would be DOOOOOMMMMMEDDDDDDDDDD!!!!!!1111!1!!

[Mr. Morden]

Would [name] make a good president or not?
yes/no %
Clinton 50/47% for +3%
Rubio 24/33% for -9%
Paul 28/42% for -14%
Cruz 20/41% for -21%
Christie 24/52% for -28%
Bush 24/56% for -32%
Biden 28/63% for -35%

Interestingly, they asked the same question for Clinton in February 2006, and the results were exactly the same (50/47% for +3%).

Christie vs. Clinton by age:
18-35: Clinton +30
35-54: Clinton +7
55+: Clinton +5
65+: Clinton +7

Christie vs. Clinton by education:
college degree: Clinton +12
no college degree: Clinton +12

[HagridOfTheDeep]

The numbers you just posted, Mr. Morden, pretty much indicate that the GOP's problem isn't Hillary; it's themselves. As much as the Romney 2016 talk is ridiculed in this place, I don't know what else the Republican Party can do. They need a half-decent candidate, and right now they don't even have that.

[RogueBeaver]

Oh please Hagrid, like polls 3 years out mean anything.

[Kevin]

Oh please Hagrid, like polls 3 years out mean anything.

After all polls this far out in 2005 meant that we elected President Giuliani in 2008 right?

[King]

Oh please Hagrid, like polls 3 years out mean anything.

After all polls this far out in 2005 meant that we elected President Giuliani in 2008 right?

First of all, 2005 would be equivalent to 2013 not 2014. Learn subtraction.

Second, Giuliani was never a serious contender because he had no shot in any meaningful early primary state, kind of like Jeb Bush right now.

Third, Hillary fell apart in the primaries against Barack Obama--charismatic progressive black Jesus. The idea because she choked that lead away means that some schmuck like Scott Walker could pull off the upset is ridiculous.  Hillary was just as much of shoo-in over McCain in 2008 as Obama was, Democrats just decided to go with the shinier toy.

[hopper]

Fox News national poll:

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/interactive/2014/03/05/fox-news-poll-obama-popularity-dips-more-believe-christie-wouldnt-make-good/

Clinton 49%
Christie 38%

Clinton 51%
Bush 38%

Clinton 52%
Cruz 36%

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Where's Rand Paul at?

[hopper]

Oh please Hagrid, like polls 3 years out mean anything.

After all polls this far out in 2005 meant that we elected President Giuliani in 2008 right?

First of all, 2005 would be equivalent to 2013 not 2014. Learn subtraction.

Second, Giuliani was never a serious contender because he had no shot in any meaningful early primary state, kind of like Jeb Bush right now.

Third, Hillary fell apart in the primaries against Barack Obama--charismatic progressive black Jesus. The idea because she choked that lead away means that some schmuck like Scott Walker could pull off the upset is ridiculous.  Hillary was just as much of shoo-in over McCain in 2008 as Obama was, Democrats just decided to go with the shinier toy.

Well Walker would make the Presidential Race a little more interesting.

[morgieb]

Dominating.

[pbrower2a]

Oh please Hagrid, like polls 3 years out mean anything.

In 1969 one could have seen much the same about George McGovern.

[HagridOfTheDeep]

Oh please Hagrid, like polls 3 years out mean anything.

Are you really going to try and convince me that the Republican Party is not in bad shape?

My argument is this: Hillary isn't particularly strong; we're just particularly weak. Do you honestly believe Marco Rubio, Rand Paul, Ted Cruz, or Paul Ryan can even hold a candle to her? Not just politically, but in terms of gravitas and national stature. I'll allow myself to take Romney out of the equation, but just on the individuals alone, there's no way Rand Paul beats Hillary Clinton. Save these words and hold me to them if you really want to.