I don't happen to believe the nonsense the right wing has been spouting about Clinton. The point I was making however is that the accusations against her are old news. If you believe them, you probably won't vote for her, and that is reflected in her negative ratings. If you don't believe them, you well might vote for her, which accounts for her positive ratings.Jeemie wrote:So Obama and Clinton have the same shortcomings, but the fact that Hillary's shortcomings are "old news" makes you more comfortable with her as a candidate?
Wow- compelling stuff, SSS! Way to go to bat for your candidate!
Obama is a new face who has very low negative ratings, so far because no one has taken a serious look at these charges against him. Like most charismatic leaders, however, the biggest element of his effectiveness is the degree to which people believe in him as a person, rather than his positions on the issues. Many of the young people who are supporting him now have very little real feel for the issues other than generalities like wanting peace and prosperity through change. They have no idea how to accomplish those things and no idea how Obama intends to accomplish those things. As long as they believe in him, that doesn't matter, but if they come to view him as just another Chicago style politician (which he is), that degree of blind faith in him will go away.