Poll finds Hillary Clinton slipping in Colorado and Iowa

[TyroneSlothrop]

A campaign Hillary has yet to launch is floundering ? hee hee I love it

Rand Paul: The Most Interesting Conspiracy Theorist in Washington
Bilderbergers, the Iraq invasion, Alex Jones—the GOP senator has routinely flirted with America's paranoid fringe.
—By David Corn
Rand Paul The Most Interesting Conspiracy Theorist in Washington Mother Jones
| Mon Oct. 20, 2014 6:05 AM EDT

The Scandal That Could Blow Up Rand Paul's Machine

 

[LoneLaugher]

The Dems should run Joe Biden, if nothing else just for the comedy value

Oh! Ha ha! You are one funny nutter! What a great comment! I can't stop laughing!

 

[Meathead]

The bag truly has too much baggage.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Statistikhengst will link to polling showing St Hillary the Inevitable is a prohibitive favorite

CrusaderFrank

I just recorded those numbers and studied the poll, including the breakdowns. They only make sense in context of all the other polls for the respective states. Now, hang on, I bet I am going to surprise you, alot.

In Colorado, there have now been twelve large polls, with a total of 48 matchups, where Hillary has "won" 29, the GOP has "won" 16 and there have been three absolute ties. I write "won" because most of those matchups have been statistical ties. In this poll, Paul is up +3 on Hillary, a statistical tie. In the last Qpiac, she was up by +2, also a statistical tie, and in the Qpiac before that, Paul was up by +3, also a statistical tie. So, although Qpiac made a big headline out of this, it's not new news. We've seen these numbers before. In fact, we have seen Paul up by +3 or more on Hillary in Colorado FIVE times now. So, that number from Qpiac is no surprise to me at all.

And to prove that, I have thus far done SIX big polling analyses, Hillary vs. GOP field, starting on March 17, 2013, around 2 years ago. Here are the six analyses. I know that you have seen at least two or three of them, which I have also published here in USMB. In the third I start to mention Colorado:

Statistikhengst's ELECTORAL POLITICS - 2015 and beyond: Clinton vs. GOP field, 2016 GE, Part I

Statistikhengst's ELECTORAL POLITICS - 2015 and beyond: 2016 GE: Hillary vs. the GOP field, Part II

Statistikhengst's ELECTORAL POLITICS - 2015 and beyond: 2016 GE: Hillary Clinton vs. GOP Field, Part III

Quote from analysis no. 3, November 16, 2013:

Here is a map of those states that have been polled, colored by the winner of the majority of the match-ups. In the case of Colorado, it is actually a tie, but the margins lean more to the GOP than toward Clinton, so I have colored that state light RED:

Statistikhengst's ELECTORAL POLITICS - 2015 and beyond: 2016 GE: Hillary Clinton vs. GOP Field, Part IV

From analysis IV, May 11, 2014:

In the West, also part of a very consistent pattern, Clinton is struggling mightily in Colorado, she has the entire time. If there is a state that the GOP has the best chances of regaining from 2008-2012, it is probably the Rocky Mountain State. Wait and see. It also appears to be close in Iowa, but Clinton is winning.

Statistikhengst's ELECTORAL POLITICS - 2015 and beyond: 2016 GE: Hillary Clinton vs. GOP Field, Part V

From analysis V, October 2, 2014:

Here is a map of those states that have been polled, colored by the winner of the majority of the match-ups. In the case of Colorado and Kentucky it's really quite close, so I am leaving both states green for now...

...in the West, also part of a very consistent pattern, Clinton is struggling mightily in Colorado, she has the entire time. If there is a state that the GOP has the best chances of regaining from 2008-2012, it is probably the Rocky Mountain State. Wait and see. There have now been 10 polls of Colorado and 36 matchups, of which Hillary has won 21, the GOP has won 13 and there were two mathematical ties. Then again, polling in Colorado was way off to the Right in 2008, 2010 and 2012. Why? The Latino vote was grossly underestimated and then also grossly miscalculated. Wait and see what happens in 2016 in the Rocky Mountain State.
It also appears to be close in Iowa, but Clinton is winning.

And analysis VI, from January 19, 2015, about 2.5 months ago:

Statistikhengst's ELECTORAL POLITICS - 2015 and beyond: 2016 GE: Hillary Clinton vs. GOP Field, Part VI

The same text as for analysis V, since nothing had changed.

So, you see, I have actually been one of the very first people out there to realize and very openly write that Hillary has a Colorado problem, ergo, the Qpiac numbers for Colorado don't surprise me at all. Had you taken the time to read those huge analyses back then, you would have already known this, Frank.

Also, the Iowa numbers have been exceedingly competitive the entire time. That doesn't surprise me, either. In Iowa, there have now been 21 polls since February, 2013, with 90 matchups: Hillary was "won" 78 matchups, the GOP has "won" 6 matchups and there have been 6 absolute ties. The same caveat that I used for "won" in Colorado applies here as well.


What DOES surprise me is that Clintons Qpiac numbers in Virginia have actually improved since the last Qpiac. In the Old Dominion, there have now been 18 polls, with 63 matchups, of which Hillary has decisively won 60, the GOP has won 1 and there have been 2 absolute ties. Here, the Hillary margins are totally different than for Colorado or for Iowa. I have mentioned this also many times in the above 6 analyses over the last two years.

I would like to point you to an analysis I did of Virginia in the first half of 2009, after Obama picked-up the state for the Democratic Party in 2008 - for the first time since 1964. I analysed all 9 pickups from 2008, starting with Indiana, then Ohio, and then Virginia.

This link will take you to an overview and to links to all three parts of the analysis. It is enormous:

Statistikhengst's ELECTORAL POLITICS - 2015 and beyond: Virginia - a county by county in-depth analysis


But the conclusion is pretty prophetic:

However, in VIRGINIA, there was real resistance to Obama, but this resistance occured in counties that are „emptying out“, so to speak. We see a large poli-demographic shift in VA, with the north and the southeast gaining greatly in political strength for the democratic party. Here there were obviously far fewer GOP defections, if at all (McCain scored more raw votes in VA than Bush from 2004), but far more newly registered and democratic dedicated voters. This poses a far larger problem for the GOP than either Indiana or Ohio, for Obama's +1.03% margin in Indiana can be overcome and Ohio is expected to be a battleground state in virtually every cycle, but the addition of more then 500,000 voters to the democratic rolls in just one cycle is much harder for the opposition to overcome. The best case scenario for the GOP is that VIRGINIA becomes a bitter battleground state. However, +6.30% is hardly a battleground margin. It is a better margin than Obama scored in OHIO, FLORIDA, INDIANA and NORTH CAROLINA. It is a lean winning margin, but a comfortable one and will require a minimum 12.60% shift back in order for the GOP to regain the state; I doubt that this shift will come from those 500,000 new voters. The worst case scenario for the GOP is that Obama cements VIRGINIA into the democratic column in his first term, adding the state to core democratic territory and thus making the electoral math for the GOP more difficult.

I published that on April 27th, 2009, almost 6 years ago. In 2012, Obama retained Virginia for the Democratic column. And currently, the Virginia numbers show that that state is, on the national level, more blue than purple these days. After Ted Cruz's announcement and now, Ron Paul's announcement, we are not really seeing the bounce that I expected for those two gentlemen, at least not yet, and definitely not in Virginia, a MUST win state for the GOP. And if Obama really did "cement" Virginia into the "blue wall", which is comprised of 243 EV from the states that are now 6 for 6 D states from 1992 onward, plus the likelihood of New Mexico also being in the wall, bringing it to 248, with Virginia's 13 EV, then the wall already stands at 261 EV. That is an absolute horror-scenario for the GOP.

So, I am going to say to you that, in light of the total polling for Colorado, Iowa and Virginia to-date, the Qpiac title may get some attention, but is not really accurate. Hillary is not wilting in Colorado because she never bloomed there to begin with.


One individual poll does not impress me, doesn't phase me, doesn't upset me, doesn't delight me, not even the WAPO poll that was one of my threads. It's the aggregate value that interests me much, much more. I sometimes publish numbers from an individual poll as I did for WAPO because the female vote breakdown was a data-point I wanted to share.

Now, what will be interesting to watch will be to see what those numbers do AFTER Hillary announces.

And finally, I find Qpiac to be a good, solid pollster:

Statistikhengst's ELECTORAL POLITICS - 2015 and beyond: The moment of truth: how did the pollsters do?

You will find an analysis of the Qpiac/NYT/CBS end-polls from 2012 in there. Qpiac did very, very well in 2012. So, I see it's current numbers from CO, IA and VA to be very feasable.

Bet you regret having tagged me now, eh???

Numbers trumps propaganda every time.

No regrets, my friend. I appreciate the effort and thought you put into your posts. We can argue over ideology, but no disputing the hard work that you do for you beliefs

 

[Statistikhengst]

Statistikhengst will link to polling showing St Hillary the Inevitable is a prohibitive favorite

CrusaderFrank

I just recorded those numbers and studied the poll, including the breakdowns. They only make sense in context of all the other polls for the respective states. Now, hang on, I bet I am going to surprise you, alot.

In Colorado, there have now been twelve large polls, with a total of 48 matchups, where Hillary has "won" 29, the GOP has "won" 16 and there have been three absolute ties. I write "won" because most of those matchups have been statistical ties. In this poll, Paul is up +3 on Hillary, a statistical tie. In the last Qpiac, she was up by +2, also a statistical tie, and in the Qpiac before that, Paul was up by +3, also a statistical tie. So, although Qpiac made a big headline out of this, it's not new news. We've seen these numbers before. In fact, we have seen Paul up by +3 or more on Hillary in Colorado FIVE times now. So, that number from Qpiac is no surprise to me at all.

And to prove that, I have thus far done SIX big polling analyses, Hillary vs. GOP field, starting on March 17, 2013, around 2 years ago. Here are the six analyses. I know that you have seen at least two or three of them, which I have also published here in USMB. In the third I start to mention Colorado:

Statistikhengst's ELECTORAL POLITICS - 2015 and beyond: Clinton vs. GOP field, 2016 GE, Part I

Statistikhengst's ELECTORAL POLITICS - 2015 and beyond: 2016 GE: Hillary vs. the GOP field, Part II

Statistikhengst's ELECTORAL POLITICS - 2015 and beyond: 2016 GE: Hillary Clinton vs. GOP Field, Part III

Quote from analysis no. 3, November 16, 2013:

Here is a map of those states that have been polled, colored by the winner of the majority of the match-ups. In the case of Colorado, it is actually a tie, but the margins lean more to the GOP than toward Clinton, so I have colored that state light RED:

Statistikhengst's ELECTORAL POLITICS - 2015 and beyond: 2016 GE: Hillary Clinton vs. GOP Field, Part IV

From analysis IV, May 11, 2014:

In the West, also part of a very consistent pattern, Clinton is struggling mightily in Colorado, she has the entire time. If there is a state that the GOP has the best chances of regaining from 2008-2012, it is probably the Rocky Mountain State. Wait and see. It also appears to be close in Iowa, but Clinton is winning.

Statistikhengst's ELECTORAL POLITICS - 2015 and beyond: 2016 GE: Hillary Clinton vs. GOP Field, Part V

From analysis V, October 2, 2014:

Here is a map of those states that have been polled, colored by the winner of the majority of the match-ups. In the case of Colorado and Kentucky it's really quite close, so I am leaving both states green for now...

...in the West, also part of a very consistent pattern, Clinton is struggling mightily in Colorado, she has the entire time. If there is a state that the GOP has the best chances of regaining from 2008-2012, it is probably the Rocky Mountain State. Wait and see. There have now been 10 polls of Colorado and 36 matchups, of which Hillary has won 21, the GOP has won 13 and there were two mathematical ties. Then again, polling in Colorado was way off to the Right in 2008, 2010 and 2012. Why? The Latino vote was grossly underestimated and then also grossly miscalculated. Wait and see what happens in 2016 in the Rocky Mountain State.
It also appears to be close in Iowa, but Clinton is winning.

And analysis VI, from January 19, 2015, about 2.5 months ago:

Statistikhengst's ELECTORAL POLITICS - 2015 and beyond: 2016 GE: Hillary Clinton vs. GOP Field, Part VI

The same text as for analysis V, since nothing had changed.

So, you see, I have actually been one of the very first people out there to realize and very openly write that Hillary has a Colorado problem, ergo, the Qpiac numbers for Colorado don't surprise me at all. Had you taken the time to read those huge analyses back then, you would have already known this, Frank.

Also, the Iowa numbers have been exceedingly competitive the entire time. That doesn't surprise me, either. In Iowa, there have now been 21 polls since February, 2013, with 90 matchups: Hillary was "won" 78 matchups, the GOP has "won" 6 matchups and there have been 6 absolute ties. The same caveat that I used for "won" in Colorado applies here as well.


What DOES surprise me is that Clintons Qpiac numbers in Virginia have actually improved since the last Qpiac. In the Old Dominion, there have now been 18 polls, with 63 matchups, of which Hillary has decisively won 60, the GOP has won 1 and there have been 2 absolute ties. Here, the Hillary margins are totally different than for Colorado or for Iowa. I have mentioned this also many times in the above 6 analyses over the last two years.

I would like to point you to an analysis I did of Virginia in the first half of 2009, after Obama picked-up the state for the Democratic Party in 2008 - for the first time since 1964. I analysed all 9 pickups from 2008, starting with Indiana, then Ohio, and then Virginia.

This link will take you to an overview and to links to all three parts of the analysis. It is enormous:

Statistikhengst's ELECTORAL POLITICS - 2015 and beyond: Virginia - a county by county in-depth analysis


But the conclusion is pretty prophetic:

However, in VIRGINIA, there was real resistance to Obama, but this resistance occured in counties that are „emptying out“, so to speak. We see a large poli-demographic shift in VA, with the north and the southeast gaining greatly in political strength for the democratic party. Here there were obviously far fewer GOP defections, if at all (McCain scored more raw votes in VA than Bush from 2004), but far more newly registered and democratic dedicated voters. This poses a far larger problem for the GOP than either Indiana or Ohio, for Obama's +1.03% margin in Indiana can be overcome and Ohio is expected to be a battleground state in virtually every cycle, but the addition of more then 500,000 voters to the democratic rolls in just one cycle is much harder for the opposition to overcome. The best case scenario for the GOP is that VIRGINIA becomes a bitter battleground state. However, +6.30% is hardly a battleground margin. It is a better margin than Obama scored in OHIO, FLORIDA, INDIANA and NORTH CAROLINA. It is a lean winning margin, but a comfortable one and will require a minimum 12.60% shift back in order for the GOP to regain the state; I doubt that this shift will come from those 500,000 new voters. The worst case scenario for the GOP is that Obama cements VIRGINIA into the democratic column in his first term, adding the state to core democratic territory and thus making the electoral math for the GOP more difficult.

I published that on April 27th, 2009, almost 6 years ago. In 2012, Obama retained Virginia for the Democratic column. And currently, the Virginia numbers show that that state is, on the national level, more blue than purple these days. After Ted Cruz's announcement and now, Ron Paul's announcement, we are not really seeing the bounce that I expected for those two gentlemen, at least not yet, and definitely not in Virginia, a MUST win state for the GOP. And if Obama really did "cement" Virginia into the "blue wall", which is comprised of 243 EV from the states that are now 6 for 6 D states from 1992 onward, plus the likelihood of New Mexico also being in the wall, bringing it to 248, with Virginia's 13 EV, then the wall already stands at 261 EV. That is an absolute horror-scenario for the GOP.

So, I am going to say to you that, in light of the total polling for Colorado, Iowa and Virginia to-date, the Qpiac title may get some attention, but is not really accurate. Hillary is not wilting in Colorado because she never bloomed there to begin with.


One individual poll does not impress me, doesn't phase me, doesn't upset me, doesn't delight me, not even the WAPO poll that was one of my threads. It's the aggregate value that interests me much, much more. I sometimes publish numbers from an individual poll as I did for WAPO because the female vote breakdown was a data-point I wanted to share.

Now, what will be interesting to watch will be to see what those numbers do AFTER Hillary announces.

And finally, I find Qpiac to be a good, solid pollster:

Statistikhengst's ELECTORAL POLITICS - 2015 and beyond: The moment of truth: how did the pollsters do?

You will find an analysis of the Qpiac/NYT/CBS end-polls from 2012 in there. Qpiac did very, very well in 2012. So, I see it's current numbers from CO, IA and VA to be very feasable.

Bet you regret having tagged me now, eh???

Numbers trumps propaganda every time.

No regrets, my friend. I appreciate the effort and thought you put into your posts. We can argue over ideology, but no disputing the hard work that you do for you beliefs

That is kind of you. But in this case, it has nothing to do with beliefs, but rather, hard data.

The premise of the OP is false to begin with. Hillary is not slipping in Colorado because she hasn't done well there to begin with. On the other hand, in the Quadrifecta states, where elections are won, she is easily ahead.

 

[Rambunctious]

I would consider voting for Manchin he's the best of the three listed.

No way, he lied and he lies to himself about his true beliefs. Never once did he step in and say to Obama, Pelosi, or the kid touching Reid to stop the nonsense. He is just as much to blame for the mess this nation is in as any of them. If not more so.

 

[Statistikhengst]

Poll finds Clinton slipping in Colorado and Iowa - POLITICO

Uh oh! Maybe time for democrats to think about Bernie Sanders,Elizabeth Warren or Joe Manchin!

Only, she's not slipping. She hasn't done well in any polling of Colorado over the last two years, and the polling in Iowa is just as tight as in the last two years. But in Virginia, she is actually doing better.

Adults know how to discern. Maybe one day you will be able to.

See how that works?

 

[Statistikhengst]

This thread reminds me a little of the crazy little orgasms the Righties got when one outlier Marist poll showed Obama only up by 4 on McCain in New York State, 49/45. They howled.

Election night, 2008? Obama +25 in New York State.



That was fun!

 

[Rambunctious]

• COLORADO: Paul 44 - Clinton 41
• IOWA: Paul 43 - Clinton 42
• VIRGINIA: Clinton 47 - Paul 43
• Run Hillary Run.........

 

[Mertex]

Poll finds Clinton slipping in Colorado and Iowa - POLITICO

Uh oh! Maybe time for democrats to think about Bernie Sanders,Elizabeth Warren or Joe Manchin!

Poll finds Clinton slipping in Colorado and Iowa - POLITICO

Uh oh! Maybe time for democrats to think about Bernie Sanders,Elizabeth Warren or Joe Manchin!

You better hope Jeb Bush and Rand Paul make it to the finals.........but they won't, so it doesn't matter that they have a lead now........

 

[Mertex]

This thread reminds me a little of the crazy little orgasms the Righties got when one outlier Marist poll showed Obama only up by 4 on McCain in New York State, 49/45. They howled.

Election night, 2008? Obama +25 in New York State.



That was fun!

Hey....I was able to thank you twice for the same post......you have two sets of "praise" buttons.....

 

[Statistikhengst]

This thread reminds me a little of the crazy little orgasms the Righties got when one outlier Marist poll showed Obama only up by 4 on McCain in New York State, 49/45. They howled.

Election night, 2008? Obama +25 in New York State.



That was fun!

Hey....I was able to thank you twice for the same post......you have two sets of "praise" buttons.....

Double your pleasure, double your fun with doublemint, doublemint, doublemint Statthanks!

 

[Siete]

Poll finds Clinton slipping in Colorado and Iowa - POLITICO

Uh oh! Maybe time for democrats to think about Bernie Sanders,Elizabeth Warren or Joe Manchin!

Poll finds Clinton slipping in Colorado and Iowa - POLITICO

Uh oh! Maybe time for democrats to think about Bernie Sanders,Elizabeth Warren or Joe Manchin!

You better hope Jeb Bush and Rand Paul make it to the finals.........but they won't, so it doesn't matter that they have a lead now........

Paul will get as much attention as his Dad did.

Jeb (IMO) will more than likely get the GOP nomination. The anti RINO crowd have already commented they wouldn't vote for Jeb, and that means he loses.

 

[Mertex]

Poll finds Clinton slipping in Colorado and Iowa - POLITICO

Uh oh! Maybe time for democrats to think about Bernie Sanders,Elizabeth Warren or Joe Manchin!

Poll finds Clinton slipping in Colorado and Iowa - POLITICO

Uh oh! Maybe time for democrats to think about Bernie Sanders,Elizabeth Warren or Joe Manchin!

You better hope Jeb Bush and Rand Paul make it to the finals.........but they won't, so it doesn't matter that they have a lead now........

Paul will get as much attention as his Dad did.

Jeb (IMO) will more than likely get the GOP nomination. The anti RINO crowd have already commented they wouldn't vote for Jeb, and that means he loses.

They're getting all excited, I bet they wet their pants. Even if Jeb Bush wins the Republican nomination, Hillary still beats him. Let them enjoy their moment......


In hypothetical matchups against Clinton, the three Republicans each fall short of the former senator and first lady by about the same percentage points. Clinton would outmatch Christie by eight percentage points, 50%-42%. A Clinton-Bush matchup would be 51%-42%, and a Clinton-Paul contest would also be 51%- 42%, according to the survey.
Poll Christie Paul Bush are top Republicans Clinton still leads CNN Political Ticker - CNN.com Blogs

 

[Preacher]

The Dems should run Joe Biden, if nothing else just for the comedy value

Is there any polling show how well he would do? I wouldn't mind him just seems like an empty suit to me....I prefer in order'

Sanders
Warren
Manchin

What about Che or Hugo Chavez or Mao?

3 communists.I know you want someone that the Koch brothers want more right wing than Cruz or Paul but that won't happen so.

I would consider voting for Manchin he's the best of the three listed.

Same here! Best listed no...but I would vote for him

Poll finds Clinton slipping in Colorado and Iowa - POLITICO

Uh oh! Maybe time for democrats to think about Bernie Sanders,Elizabeth Warren or Joe Manchin!

What difference would it make? Seriously. In other words, aren't all of them part of the political machine? Which one would go against the establishment, and actually conduct the office in a pro-America way, listen to the people, and act accordingly? Which one would actually lead protest marches to the steps of the Capitol, demand pro-America legislation and policies, and camp out there until their voices were heard? Which one would ask the American people to stand with them, locked arm in arm, a la MLK, and call Congress out into the street? Which one would vow to expose government corruption, the selling of votes on the floors of Congress, and try with conviction and determination to prosecute the offenders?

Which candidate running for office would vow before the American public to correct the terrible injustices in our judicial system, establish a fair and equal tax structure, re-write our unfair, unjust, and one-sided foreign trade agreements and policies, honor our soldiers by not sending them to their death in trumped-up political wars, restore the right to privacy, send Illegal Immigrants home, and repair and upgrade our rundown infrastructure? Which candidate would take the oath of office seriously enough, to actually represent the wishes, needs, and well-being of this once great nation and her citizens?

FYI - There are no candidates running at this time, nor mentioned as possible candidates, that is not part of the political machine. This means that regardless of campaign rhetoric, smooth talking silver tongued "Dr. Feelgood" speeches, once elected to office, it'll be politics as usual, and we'll be without representation yet again. Voters can not continue to do the same think at the polls and expect a different result. As long as voters elect and re-elect professional politicians to serve in government, how can anyone expect improvement, representation, or pro-America legislation and policies.

According to your logic, Obama is no different than McCain or Romney. Experience suggests otherwise.

There is very little difference between the 3.

Poll finds Clinton slipping in Colorado and Iowa - POLITICO

Uh oh! Maybe time for democrats to think about Bernie Sanders,Elizabeth Warren or Joe Manchin!

Poll finds Clinton slipping in Colorado and Iowa - POLITICO

Uh oh! Maybe time for democrats to think about Bernie Sanders,Elizabeth Warren or Joe Manchin!

You better hope Jeb Bush and Rand Paul make it to the finals.........but they won't, so it doesn't matter that they have a lead now........

Paul will get as much attention as his Dad did.

Jeb (IMO) will more than likely get the GOP nomination. The anti RINO crowd have already commented they wouldn't vote for Jeb, and that means he loses.

Are republicans THAT DUMB to nominate ANOTHER RINO and Neo Con? I can't believe that....I may be wrong but I can't believe it...

 

[Mertex]

The Dems should run Joe Biden, if nothing else just for the comedy value

Is there any polling show how well he would do? I wouldn't mind him just seems like an empty suit to me....I prefer in order'

Sanders
Warren
Manchin

What about Che or Hugo Chavez or Mao?

3 communists.I know you want someone that the Koch brothers want more right wing than Cruz or Paul but that won't happen so.

I would consider voting for Manchin he's the best of the three listed.

Same here! Best listed no...but I would vote for him

Poll finds Clinton slipping in Colorado and Iowa - POLITICO

Uh oh! Maybe time for democrats to think about Bernie Sanders,Elizabeth Warren or Joe Manchin!

What difference would it make? Seriously. In other words, aren't all of them part of the political machine? Which one would go against the establishment, and actually conduct the office in a pro-America way, listen to the people, and act accordingly? Which one would actually lead protest marches to the steps of the Capitol, demand pro-America legislation and policies, and camp out there until their voices were heard? Which one would ask the American people to stand with them, locked arm in arm, a la MLK, and call Congress out into the street? Which one would vow to expose government corruption, the selling of votes on the floors of Congress, and try with conviction and determination to prosecute the offenders?

Which candidate running for office would vow before the American public to correct the terrible injustices in our judicial system, establish a fair and equal tax structure, re-write our unfair, unjust, and one-sided foreign trade agreements and policies, honor our soldiers by not sending them to their death in trumped-up political wars, restore the right to privacy, send Illegal Immigrants home, and repair and upgrade our rundown infrastructure? Which candidate would take the oath of office seriously enough, to actually represent the wishes, needs, and well-being of this once great nation and her citizens?

FYI - There are no candidates running at this time, nor mentioned as possible candidates, that is not part of the political machine. This means that regardless of campaign rhetoric, smooth talking silver tongued "Dr. Feelgood" speeches, once elected to office, it'll be politics as usual, and we'll be without representation yet again. Voters can not continue to do the same think at the polls and expect a different result. As long as voters elect and re-elect professional politicians to serve in government, how can anyone expect improvement, representation, or pro-America legislation and policies.

According to your logic, Obama is no different than McCain or Romney. Experience suggests otherwise.

There is very little difference between the 3.

Poll finds Clinton slipping in Colorado and Iowa - POLITICO

Uh oh! Maybe time for democrats to think about Bernie Sanders,Elizabeth Warren or Joe Manchin!

Poll finds Clinton slipping in Colorado and Iowa - POLITICO

Uh oh! Maybe time for democrats to think about Bernie Sanders,Elizabeth Warren or Joe Manchin!

You better hope Jeb Bush and Rand Paul make it to the finals.........but they won't, so it doesn't matter that they have a lead now........

Paul will get as much attention as his Dad did.

Jeb (IMO) will more than likely get the GOP nomination. The anti RINO crowd have already commented they wouldn't vote for Jeb, and that means he loses.

Are republicans THAT DUMB to nominate ANOTHER RINO and Neo Con? I can't believe that....I may be wrong but I can't believe it...

Yes, because they don't consider anyone a "Librul" unless they fuck up, by then it will be too late and then they will call him an Hispanic "Librul".

 

[Siete]

Poll finds Clinton slipping in Colorado and Iowa - POLITICO

Uh oh! Maybe time for democrats to think about Bernie Sanders,Elizabeth Warren or Joe Manchin!

Poll finds Clinton slipping in Colorado and Iowa - POLITICO

Uh oh! Maybe time for democrats to think about Bernie Sanders,Elizabeth Warren or Joe Manchin!

You better hope Jeb Bush and Rand Paul make it to the finals.........but they won't, so it doesn't matter that they have a lead now........

Paul will get as much attention as his Dad did.

Jeb (IMO) will more than likely get the GOP nomination. The anti RINO crowd have already commented they wouldn't vote for Jeb, and that means he loses.

They're getting all excited, I bet they wet their pants. Even if Jeb Bush wins the Republican nomination, Hillary still beats him. Let them enjoy their moment......


In hypothetical matchups against Clinton, the three Republicans each fall short of the former senator and first lady by about the same percentage points. Clinton would outmatch Christie by eight percentage points, 50%-42%. A Clinton-Bush matchup would be 51%-42%, and a Clinton-Paul contest would also be 51%- 42%, according to the survey.
Poll Christie Paul Bush are top Republicans Clinton still leads CNN Political Ticker - CNN.com Blogs

Sir, Yes Sir !


D"OOOOOOOOH !

Mam, Yes Mam.

 

[Preacher]

Poll finds Clinton slipping in Colorado and Iowa - POLITICO

Uh oh! Maybe time for democrats to think about Bernie Sanders,Elizabeth Warren or Joe Manchin!

Poll finds Clinton slipping in Colorado and Iowa - POLITICO

Uh oh! Maybe time for democrats to think about Bernie Sanders,Elizabeth Warren or Joe Manchin!

You better hope Jeb Bush and Rand Paul make it to the finals.........but they won't, so it doesn't matter that they have a lead now........

Paul will get as much attention as his Dad did.

Jeb (IMO) will more than likely get the GOP nomination. The anti RINO crowd have already commented they wouldn't vote for Jeb, and that means he loses.

They're getting all excited, I bet they wet their pants. Even if Jeb Bush wins the Republican nomination, Hillary still beats him. Let them enjoy their moment......


In hypothetical matchups against Clinton, the three Republicans each fall short of the former senator and first lady by about the same percentage points. Clinton would outmatch Christie by eight percentage points, 50%-42%. A Clinton-Bush matchup would be 51%-42%, and a Clinton-Paul contest would also be 51%- 42%, according to the survey.
Poll Christie Paul Bush are top Republicans Clinton still leads CNN Political Ticker - CNN.com Blogs

Easily beats him because I guarantee a Cruz/Paul ticket will run against him as independents or American Taliban Party LOL

 

[Siete]

Poll finds Clinton slipping in Colorado and Iowa - POLITICO

Uh oh! Maybe time for democrats to think about Bernie Sanders,Elizabeth Warren or Joe Manchin!

Poll finds Clinton slipping in Colorado and Iowa - POLITICO

Uh oh! Maybe time for democrats to think about Bernie Sanders,Elizabeth Warren or Joe Manchin!

You better hope Jeb Bush and Rand Paul make it to the finals.........but they won't, so it doesn't matter that they have a lead now........

Paul will get as much attention as his Dad did.

Jeb (IMO) will more than likely get the GOP nomination. The anti RINO crowd have already commented they wouldn't vote for Jeb, and that means he loses.

They're getting all excited, I bet they wet their pants. Even if Jeb Bush wins the Republican nomination, Hillary still beats him. Let them enjoy their moment......


In hypothetical matchups against Clinton, the three Republicans each fall short of the former senator and first lady by about the same percentage points. Clinton would outmatch Christie by eight percentage points, 50%-42%. A Clinton-Bush matchup would be 51%-42%, and a Clinton-Paul contest would also be 51%- 42%, according to the survey.
Poll Christie Paul Bush are top Republicans Clinton still leads CNN Political Ticker - CNN.com Blogs

Easily beats him because I guarantee a Cruz/Paul ticket will run against him as independents or American Taliban Party LOL

Amerikazan.

 

[francoHFW]

OP- BFD. What do expect when the Pub Propaganda machine and loudmouth dupes go on forever about the huge scandals that turn out to be nothing, and our cowardly "librul" media report the bs with straight faces...our media is a controversy/gotcha/rating whore....only thing that even keeps the new bs/hate GOP even on the radar..