http://time-blog.com/real_clear_politics/2007/04/swing_states_poll.html

They should be very afraid.

After 9/11, no one wants a soft-on-terror president.

Our democrat congress approval of 11% shows they have very little cred with voters.

Tough on terror wins the whole enchilada.

Herb

Oh, a poll a year from the election. Yeah, those have been accurate predictors of the next election...what, 0% of the time? Yeah, Democrats should be terrified of a meaningless poll a year out long before any sort of national campaign has started.

Andrew

Well, when the demos think they can nominate anyone, egardless of their qualifications, because any demo can win. They better start thinking, wait a minute, democrat, think in the same sentence, that is asking too much I guess.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2008/president/us/general_election_giuli ani_vs_clinton-227.html

Afraid of what? That we can turn to page two and find more polls on the same website that show Clinton winning?

I'm sorry but we D's can spell and go beyond the "righties" shuck and jive.

I think anyone who today thinks any Democrat is a shoe-in to win the 2008 election no matter what Republican runs is woefully naive. A year is a long time - an eternity in presidential politics - and presidential elections are based very much on personalities and campaign strategies, not just "issues." At the same time, any poll taken today before either of the major party nominees has been decided is pretty much worthless. Ask presidents Howard Dean and Gary Hart and George H. W. Bush in 1993.

Andrew

What about the soft on terror guy who was president on 9/11/01?

And the 11% rating of Congress includes ALL Republicans, as well as Democrats. Anybody think that number would improve if more GOP members would vote to end the war in Iraq?

If you want to look at trends, look at the money advantage the Democrats have over the GOP. That's normally the other way around. And, just wait until the nominees are set and the advertisements begin with comparing the GOP nominee to George W Bush. This Democrat believes there is still some relevancy for the Bush Administration!

I'm going to go out on a limb and say that the major parties do put their best candidate forward. I'm sure a lot of it has to do with special interests and huge multi-million(billion?)-dollar donors, but we're probably seeing the best of the bunch from the two groups.
And this is coming from a non-partisan voter that won't be voting for either of them!

Vit said>>>
What about the soft on terror guy who was president on 9/11/01?

The ONE who said that terrorism wasn't an issue then and goes on TV and says that Osama isn't on his radar 1 year after 9/11. NOT AN ISSUE as DUHbya put it....