Saturday, May 28, 2005

Boosting Hillary 

A new USA TODAY/CNN/Gallup Poll is boosting the "Dem most likely" media bandwagon: "Poll majority say they'd be likely to vote for Clinton" announces the story, reporting that "29% were 'very likely' to vote for Clinton for president if she runs in 2008; 24% were 'somewhat likely'." But, "seven percent were 'not very likely' and 39% were 'not at all likely' to vote for her."

The media would like nothing better than to turn the American politics into an epic, Wilbur Smith or John Jakes-style breathless narrative of a clash of two mighty families; to magically transform the Republic into some sort of a cake with alternating Bush and Clinton layers (Bush Sr, followed by Bill, followed by W, to be followed by Hillary, Jeb, and Chelsea?). Not only would another Clinton in the White House appeal to our news-makers and opinion-shapers on ideological grounds, but the prospect is also quite entertaining to boot.

Powerline is not impressed with the poll ("The fact that 53% of poll respondents will, in the abstract, seriously consider voting for any given Democratic candidate for President is hardly surprising"), and oversampling of Democrats also seems to be a problem. My attention, however, was caught by this comment from Karen White, political director of Emily's List, a liberal lobby and fundraising group which supports (liberal) women in politics:
"People realize that women reach across party lines and are problem-solvers, and they want to see more of that in public life."
Ain't it funny that a man spouting generalizations like that he would be shouted down as sexist and simplistic, but from a liberal feminist it doesn't even elicit a shrug.


This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?