Running on Iraq: According to a new Zogby International telephone survey, if Sen. Hillary Clinton were to face a challenge from an anti-war candidate in the fall election, she could find herself in a real battle for re-election.
Right now she seems a lock to win the nomination for re-election to a second term in the Senate. The survey of 705 likely voters in New York, including 344 Democrats, showed she has the backing of 74 percent of Dems — not one of her three opponents garners over 3 percent support. But 21 percent said they are unsure, perhaps based on her support for the war in Iraq.
Asked if the race were between Hillary Clinton and a challenger who opposed the war in Iraq, 38 percent said they would support Clinton, while 32 percent said they would back the unnamed anti-war candidate. Another 31 percent said they would support someone else or were not sure. On that question, Clinton performed better among NYC voters (45 percent versus 28 percent for the anti-war opponent), and fared well among likely voters upstate (37 percent for Clinton, 29 percent for the anti-war candidate). However, she did worse in the voter-rich suburbs of NYC, trailing the unnamed anti-war candidate, 40 percent to 31 percent.
Among independent voters, 38 percent said they would favor the anti-war candidate and 28 percent would favor Clinton. Among women, Clinton would win, 42 percent to 32 percent. Men were split, with 33 percent supporting her, 33 percent supporting an anti-war candidate and 34 percent unsure or supporting someone else.
A likely anti-war opponent has emerged in New York politics, but he’s unlikely to beat Clinton. Jonathan Tasini, a labor activist and former head of the National Writers Guild, tried to place an anti-war resolution on the Democratic platform at the state convention over the weekend, but was rebuffed on a technicality.
Tasini did not receive sufficient votes at the convention to be placed on the ballot to challenge Clinton in a primary. He has pledged to mount a petition drive to collect 15,000 signatures to force a primary campaign between him and Clinton.
Good luck, Jonathan. Hillary Clinton has every appearance of being an unstoppable steamroller through the Senate campaign and onward two years down the road when it seems inevitable that the Democrats will forfeit another presidential campaign by placing her on the ballot.
Hey, Buck–
Let’s not play “Republican Lite” by falsely coronating Hillary and declaring her the ipso facto winner of the Democratic nomination for president. She would be an absolute disaster for the party and, arguably, the ONLY candidate we could run that would be even more divisive than King George.
My worst fear is that “Hillary is the one” will become the new “conventional wisdom” and perhaps prevent someone who could actually win from running – like Al Gore or Russ Feingold.
I strongly predict that if she is our candidate, we will lose in a landslide to the Republicans again.
Hey Bill, I agree completely with your comment re Hillary Clinton. Whether the nation is ready to crown its first female president is beside the point — Hill ain’t it. I’m worried, as you are, that she will be anointed and the Dems will lose again because they didn’t field a candidate worthy of the fight.
If I gave the impression in my post that I think Hillary Clinton is the right candidate for prez in 2008, I apologize. I find the notion frankly appalling.