Busted? Hardly

Houtopia (in a saner moment):
"If you must follow the horserace (and we plead guilty to doing so), at least get good information. Rely on Pollster.com."

Well, I must ... and I do. Here's what they have via a recent Gallup poll:

Combined results from the four most recent Gallup surveys finds 92% of Democrats with a post-graduate education rate Sen. Barack Obama favorably while 86% rate Sen. Hillary Clinton favorably. Among Democrats with a high school education or less, 66% rate Obama favorably while 86% rate Clinton favorably.

So, multi-degreed folk give a 6-point nod to the guy who uses superfluous speech ... those without a degree give a 20-point nod to the lady who's been around the political block before.

Looking at the Gallup data in more detail, it's notable that Hillary's favorable shows relatively little variability ... it hits a low of 80% among Dems and peaks at 86%. Barack runs from 66 to 92 as he moves up the ladder. The trial lawyer hoping for another run as Veep ranges from 75 to 88. Al Gore? 75 to 85.

So I suppose that shatters an attempted talking point that Democrats don't have adequate faith in Hillary Clinton as a candidate. Even more detail shows that among Independents, there is a drop-off after Obama. My hunch still stands that that's due to the minimal knowledge of Obama that's out on public record. Were he to run strong enough to win the nomination, check back next year and you'll see his faves/unfaves in the same ballpark as every other Dem. The fact that Hillary, Edwards, & Gore are all lumped in similar territory after being through a rodeo or two before ought to be a dead giveaway on that. Check the historical record and look back at any Dem who ran for President and you'll see the same phenomenon.

So where's Hillary's real problem? Among Republicans. Surprisingly, I find that to be no big deal.

Now, as for national writers passing off opinion for news coverage as it pertains to the Hillary Effect, I'll let Ron Fournier's story stand on its own. Seriously ... dude brags about doing forty interviews and then the leading Democrat he can find to complain about Hillary being a drag on the ticket is a State Rep. from Indiana? Not one corroborating comment? I suddenly find myself in the strange company of Marc Campos on this one:

The problem with the article is they don’t say who wouldn’t be a drag on down ballot candidates – Obama an African American, Edwards a trial lawyer, Richardson a Latino. Haven’t folks learned never to underestimate the Clintons?

Well, apparently some do just that. Here's a quick test ... name one Dem who attacked Bill Clinton in a similar manner that went on to bigger and better things? Sure, Jerry Brown's making another hint at running for Gov of California, but it sure did take him long enough to make that much of a comeback, didn't it?