I've talked about likability before, and there's an interesting recent post by Dan Balz at the Washington Post.
Balz points out that likability is not as important this year (and next) as it was in previous presidential elections. With the scandals and failures at the federal level, competence is more important than likability.
This crystallizes what I've been trying to express to people who ask me about Hillary's negatives. She can be elected president even with high negatives, I say, without any real historical proof.
A recent Post poll that Balz cites puts Giuliani and Romney in a dead heat for the "strong leader" category, but the other candidates destroy him on "honest and trustworthy." Giuliani is not going to win in Iowa. Thus, his front-runner status right now will only hurt him in the end, since it will make an Iowa loss more devastating.
House GOP loses key fundraising advantage
1 week ago
2 comments:
I think that even thought people talk about Hillary's negatives she is still getting talked about. Since she is always being talked about more and more people like to hear about what she is doing or saying.
-Kelly Beck
Pretty much most of the candidates are crooks but we have to pick the best "crook" to run our country. As long as Romney, Hillary, and Rudolf G. are being talked about their succeding in the way of getting the public to notice them. It may not be positive but with their tactics iam sure they can turn the negatives into some positivity in their race. Hillary is being talked about lately so it seems that shes doing the best so far if everyone wants to take a shot at her.
Post a Comment