UES Eateries Accused Of Racism For Not Delivering To Harlem
Teen Pulls BB Gun On Cops, Gets Shot In The Face
Adding In "Discouraged Workers," Jobless Rate Is 17.5%
NY Post Finds One Man Who Sides With Fort Hood Shooter
Reports: Taconic Crash Driver Was Regular Drinker, Pot Smoker
A poll from the Siena College Research Institute says that it looks like Govenor Pataki won't be reelected. Given various matchups, Pataki would be defeated by either Attorney General Eliot Spitzer, who has announced he's running for Governor next year, and Senator Hillary Clinton who is actually being urged by many, including Congressman Charles Rangel, to run for President in 2008. Which means that Pataki seems like a terrible candidate to represent the Republican party. If Rudy Giuliani were to emerge as an alternative Republican candidate, he would be able to beat Spitzer, but not Clinton. Like Clinton, Giuliani is more interested in the Presidency, which makes the Clinton-Giuliani matchup numbers kind of fascinating. But they can hardly be called a national bellwhether, since outside of NY, Clinton is extremely polarizing and Giuliani may still be riding some of the September 11 sentiment in the heartland; oddly enough, Pataki's blandness is more suited for the national stage than either Clinton and Giuliani. Anyway, Gothamist is sort of relieved that the poll numbers bear out that Pataki won't be governor next year, because we've had more than enough.
Siena College Research Institute New York poll
add to stumble upon
add to reddit
tweet this
post to facebook
As the US found out 2 times, Elections are hard to call. i.e. Months before the Election, GW Bush was losing ground to Kerry.
Also, I'm not a pollster but randomly surveying only 621 people over 4 days in a state as large as NY seems low. I wonder why they choose such a Number instead of say 1,000?
I for one am totally looking forward to having Spitzer in the Governor's mansion and Hill in the White House! It's going to be a long four years in the meantime.
I'm a market researcher and judging from the poll methodology they probably started out with 1,000 names and end up with 621 respondents, i.e. people who picked up the phone and said 'yes, I'll answer your questions.' If that's the case, a 62% response is really good. But I'm just guessing.
Thanks, MT. Out of curiosity, has there been many studies to show how close statistical surveying matches the actual population? I remember from class that it tends to be pretty close, but I don't remember the specifics.
Back on topic:
I'd vote for or Elliot Spitzer or Hillary Clinton. I like that he makes the SEC look bad by doing the job they should be doing. Hillary Clinton has an uphill battle for the white house. I'd vote for her, but I think this country isn't yet ready or willing to have a woman as President.
As for Pataki, I suppose it will come down to how bad or good NY state is doing.
Definitely Eliot or Hillary. Sure would be nice to have a governor who doesn't have the attitude "Upstate good, NYC bad."
I'm not so sure the problem is that Hillary is a woman, I think the problem is she's a Clinton. Clinton is to red states what Bush is to blue ones.
"Clinton is to red states what Bush is to blue ones."
True enough. In her case, it's 2 strikes to fight against. I wonder when/if The US will elect a Woman president? Politics have certainly changed in the last 50 years, but, IMO, we have a while to go in that regard.
Rudy can go to hell, after his "performance" at the RNC. I liked the man right up until that day.
Yeah, but can you imagine the support NYC would get if Rudy were in higher office? I can't think of a single person in politics that's more of a cheerleader for NYC than Rudy.