Email List
Most Popular This Week
- Everything Is Rigged: The Biggest Price-Fixing Scandal Ever
- Study: Monsanto's Roundup Herbicide Linked to Cancer, Autism, Parkinson's
- Picture of the Week
- 'The Gilded Age' Statistics Corporations Don't Want Workers, or Anyone, to See
- Bradley Manning is Off Limits at SF Gay Pride Parade, but Corporate Sleaze is Embraced
- Study: Monsanto's Roundup Herbicide Linked to Cancer, Autism, Parkinson's
- Everything Is Rigged: The Biggest Price-Fixing Scandal Ever
- Report: Toxic Chemicals Found in Thousands of Children's Products
- The Life and Death of Words, People, and Even Nature
- You and Your Family Are Guinea Pigs for the Chemical Corporations
Popular content
Today's Top News
Poll Finds Bay Area Democrats Like Gore Best
SAN FRANCISCO - Al Gore, though not a candidate in the 2008 presidential race, enjoys the highest favorable ratings among those likely to vote in the Democratic primary in California and is the leading choice of voters in the Bay Area, a new Field Poll shows.The Field Poll released today shows that of announced Democratic presidential candidates, Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton of New York leads the pack with 41 percent support among those who identified themselves as likely to cast Democratic primary ballots in February. She is followed by Sen. Barack Obama of Illinois at 28 percent and former North Carolina Sen. John Edwards at 13 percent, New Mexico Gov. Bill Richardson at 4 percent and all other candidates coming in with less than 4 percent.
When Gore is added to the mix, however, Clinton's lead is cut to 31 percent, followed by Gore at 25 percent, followed by Obama at 21 and Edwards at 8 percent, the poll shows.
Gore has an 85 percent favorable rating with likely Democratic voters, compared with an unfavorable rating of 13 percent, the highest favorable rating among potential candidates. Edwards is next with an 83 percent favorable rating, with just 6 percent seeing him in an unfavorable light; Clinton is next with a 75 percent favorable rating, with nearly 1 in 5 having a negative view of her; and Obama has a 73 percent favorable rating, compared with 11 percent unfavorable, the poll shows.
On regional preferences, Clinton leads in Los Angeles County, other Southern California regions and other Northern California regions, but when Gore is included in the matchups, the former vice president is the preferred candidate in the Bay Area, where Edwards also has his strongest showing.
Gore also leads with white non-Hispanic voters, while Clinton leads with Latino and African American voters, the poll shows.
The poll of 417 likely Democratic primary voters was taken March 20-31 and has a margin of error of five percentage points.
© 2007 Hearst Communications Inc.
Comments
Note: Disqus 2012 is best viewed on an up to date browser. Click here for information. Instructions for how to sign up to comment can be viewed here. Our Comment Policy can be viewed here. Please follow the guidelines. Note to Readers: Spam Filter May Capture Legitimate Comments...
12 Comments so far
Show AllIf Al runs, I'll definitely have to vote for him. If he doesn't, I don't know. I really really do not want to vote for Hillary for president. Senator fine, president no. All based on her war stance. Obama's very slick and his voting record is very liberal, but I don't like the way he tried to duck the question of Gen Pace's stupid remark instead of just saying he thought it was ridiculous. Does he think it's ridiculous or not? Kucinich is the real deal, but he can't get a break from the media. Edwards is ok, but not compelling. Where is a statesman when we need one. Is it Al? Run, Al, run.
I wonder if the two above voted 3rd party in 2000. If you did, look at the outcome. George Bush.
I vote for Greens and Independents in state races, but National races are ae to important to take the chance.
I am so sick of the whiners who blame 2000 on Nader. If any one of the candidates, including Gore, had the guts to truly speak truth to power like Nader did every damn day, those numbers would not have been so close. Furthermore, I have personally talked with Nader and he has said on many occassions that he would have dropped out in a heartbeat if Gore would have grown a backbone! That said, I don't think for a minute that Gore would back down, knowing what he knows now. For that reason, I hope he does run, because he will hand the Republicans their asses!
Lastly, there are plenty of analysts out there who claim that the numbers don't in fact point to the conclusion that Nader lost it for Gore. Don't forget that he still won the popular vote.
Thanks for the moment of clarity leobixby. I find it hard to believe that some people are still parroting that old Democratic Party canard without bothering to sort through the MSM and partisan BS and find out the truth for themselves.
At the LA premier of An Unreasonable Man, Nader mentioned that he had talked with Al Gore and that Gore himself didn't believe that Nader had cost him the presidency. Why can't Gore-ista Democrats accept his evaluation of the situation? Anyway, that was then and THIS IS NOW.
Go to http://www.counterpunch.org/lindorff04032007.html and http://switch2green.org to find out how to get the Democratic majority to pay attention to the will of the voters.
Nader or Kucinich for President in 08. Gore for head of the EPA if he wants it. Otherwise let him go home to his washington mansion and clip carbon future coupons and count his multiple millions of dollars.
AL GORE HAS INTERNATIONAL STATESMAN WRITTEN ALL OVER HIM....
IF AL GORE HAD WON IN 2000....
WE ARE JUST LEFT TO WONDER....
Why do wish wish the worst job in the world on Al Gore? It would be a personal sacrifice for him to run for president. He has found a rewarding purpose in life, and a mission that he is eloquent and effective at promoting. It's too bad that the American public buckled in 2000 and accepted the Supreme Court's appointment of GWB as president. But it is done. Al's moved on. We have a whole set of problems resulting from the nincompoop who has been not elected twice to the presidency, and it's up to the citizenry to make sure we aren't taken again in 2008.
@maggie50: I voted for Al Gore in 2000. I like the Green position on many issues, and Ralph Nader is spot on correct in his policy criticisms, but I don't vote minor party for president, for exactly the reason you brought up, splitting the vote allows an undesirable like GWB to get in. What a fiasco!
I'll vote for whomever the Democrats nominate in 2008, even if it is Hillary. I really don't want her as president, though. I don't mind her as my senator -- she works hard for NY and brings in the bacon -- but her war stance is too creepy for me and she is so calculating as to be nauseating. I don't like listening to her, but not as much as I despise Bush and all he stands for.
Why do Republicans hate America? Clearly they do.
Just to be clear, even though I believe that vote splitting allows undesirable candidates like GWB to "win" still I do not blame Nader for Gore's loss in 2000. I blame a) Mr Gore himself who failed to take his own state (that alone would have given him the win), b) Mr Gore for not invoking the still very popular Bill Clinton during the campaign, c) disenfranchisement of Florida voters, d) the Supreme Court, which should have stood down and allowed Florida to count and recount ALL the votes, and e) Al Gore, who stood by and let that happen without raising a ruckus.
I agree that hoping Al Gore will run again is wishful (and selfish) thinking. The one I really like, as I said, is Dennis Kucinich, but the media won't give him the time of day. What can we do about that? Anyone got any suggestions for kicking some MSM butt?
Even if the Democratic party nominee is Hillary...What a racket the Bush-Clinton dynasty is. They're laughing at those of you who thinks their trading off back and forth is a partisan decision of some kind.
You don't need to kick MSM butt. What is needed is to kick some Democratic butt! I just saw Kucinich on Monday and I will not vote for anyone else in the primaries. The MSM are not going to pay him any attention unless he gets some traction in the primaries. I am registered Independent. If the Dems don't have open primaries, I will register as a Dem so I can vote for Kucinich. I suggest that everyone of every party do the same. This is the only way I can figure out how to get the message across to the Dems that we the people will no longer put up with "the lessor of two evil" candidates. VOTE KUCINICH!!!
Maggie:
You can do the reverse. Switch to Greens and vote for Progressive Dems. It's the best way to tell the corporate DLC to go jump in a lake. That progressives won't be taken for granted.