London Times: Hillary's Disapproval Rating 'Only' 44%
Among political consultants, the general rule of thumb is that a disapproval rating of 40% spells a candidate's near-certain defeat. After all, virtually no one who disapproves of a candidate will vote for him, while approving of someone is no guarantee of a vote.
Hillary Clinton's disapproval rating of 44% in a recent Time magazine poll thus bodes very ill for her presidential prospects. Yet the Sunday Times of London has managed to put a rosy gloss on what would have most politicians looking for another line of work. Pollyannas the Times of the poll results:
"Only 44% viewed her negatively, figures that President George W Bush can only dream of at the moment."
Maybe so. There's just one little problem. Hillary won't be running against W. Her opponent will be someone who, at least for now, surely has negatives much lower than Hilary's 44%.
The Times sunny-side up take came in the course of an article passing along alleged speculation from "some of her closest [but unnamed] advisers" that Hillary might not run for president in favor of taking over from Harry Reid as Senate minority/majority leader.
A "leading Democratic party insider" is quoted as claiming: "I would not be surprised if she were to decide that the best contribution she can make to her country is to forget about being president and become a consensus-maker in the Senate."
Hillary, the most divisive woman in America, a consensus builder? Please.
I'm with another "close friend," quoted as saying “there is no way she won’t run for president.” If advisers are floating the notion Hillary won't run, I'd say it's just a way of softening her image, making her look less the ambitious Lady Macbeth.
Toss in some fluff about Hillary wanting to be a "consensus builder" and the picture emerges of a centrist, altruistic figure. Say - isn't that just the kind of person many would like . . . to run for president?