.
April 4th, 2008
05:01 PM ET

Which candidate benefits when 81% think U.S. on wrong track?

ALT TEXT

(PHOTO CREDIT: AP)

FROM CNN's Jack Cafferty:

Americans are in a pretty foul mood these days. Between an economy in recession and an unpopular war entering its sixth year with no resolution in sight, we're not a happy bunch.

In fact, 81% of us say things in this country have "pretty seriously gotten off on the wrong track," according to a New York Times/CBS News poll. A year ago it was 69%, and five years ago it was just 35%. It's the highest level of dissatisfaction ever recorded since this poll was first taken in the early '90s. Only 14% of Americans think we're headed in the right direction.

And the pain is spread across almost every demographic and political group – Democrats, Republicans, men, women, people who live in cities and those in rural areas, college and high school graduates.

The poll also found that compared to 5 years ago, 78% of Americans think things in the U.S. are worse. 17% say it's the same. And only 4% say things have improved.

The public's unhappiness began to rise with the onset of the war in Iraq. Now the economy is playing a big part in the darkening mood. Only 21% say the overall economy is in good condition, and nearly 2 in 3 say they think the economy is in a recession.

It's clear Americans are looking to the elections in November to offer a drastic change of course. Either John McCain, Hillary Clinton or Barack Obama has to convince the public they can right this train. The one who does will be our next president.

Here’s my question to you: Which of the presidential candidates will most benefit from the fact that 81% of Americans think the country is on the wrong track?
Interested to know which ones made it on air?


Inri from Cambridge, Mass. writes:

Obama campaigns on change. Hillary campaigns on Obama's unelectability. Even if they're wrong, people associate them with their campaign platforms. If people don't like the way things are going, they're going to support "change," even if they only have an idea of the word and not the candidate.

Andy from Fairfax, Va. writes:
None of the candidates benefit. The truth of the matter is that no matter who is elected in November they will have to spend their entire first term undoing the damage that the current administration has done.

Dan from Massachusetts writes:
The Democratic candidate, whoever he or she may be. The Republicans are responsible for setting forth an agenda that has crippled our military, destroyed our economy and seized power where it had never existed before. McCain is Bush, he's a Republican. The Democratic Party will win the White House come November.

Pete from Florida writes:
When the first Hurricane Bush left the U.S in bad shape, it was Bill Clinton who turned us around and put us back on our own two feet. Now the second Hurricane Bush has turned everything back around and knocked us off our feet. So the candidate who'd benefit most would be the one who knows exactly how to deal with a Bush storm, and that would be a Clinton.

Jim from Bossier City, La. writes:
I would put forth the idea that should the Democrats not win the White House in the Nov ‘08 election, it is time to do away with the two-party system. With the empire of George Bush and Darth Vader crashing on so many different fronts at this particular time, the Dems should be shoo-ins.

Harry from Kentucky writes:
The candidate with the least perceived connections to the Beltway. Currently, that would be Obama. Let's just pray that things don't get so bad, that Nader becomes viable.


Filed under: 2008 Election
soundoff (179 Responses)
  1. Terry From California

    Obama will, as he espouses change for America, thus changing the track to the right one.

    April 4, 2008 at 2:19 pm |
  2. Peggy, St. Louis

    Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama benefit because unlike what the Obama campaign says, both represent CHANGE!! Only McCain stands for more of the same.

    April 4, 2008 at 2:19 pm |
  3. Jim Galvin

    Obama.

    April 4, 2008 at 2:22 pm |
  4. Ron Kepics

    Hi Jack:

    I don't think any of them benefit. Right now I'm trying to figure out who is the lesser of the three evils. Mr. Obama comes to mind.

    Ron K. San Diego.

    April 4, 2008 at 2:23 pm |
  5. Keith from Irving

    Either democratic candidate benefits from that number, Jack.

    Barack probably gets the edge because 70% of those polled recently also said that Barack best shared their moral values, better than both Hillary & McBush.

    April 4, 2008 at 2:24 pm |
  6. Ralph

    Barack Obama. He's the new kid on the block and benefits from inexperience. Hope burns eternal. The other two are old shoes. Rick, Yakima, Wa.

    April 4, 2008 at 2:25 pm |
  7. Gigi in Alabama

    Either Democratic candidate should benefit, since most Americans fear another four years of Bush policies.

    April 4, 2008 at 2:25 pm |
  8. Sue Filutze

    Well it's sure not the Republicans, look at the mess this country is in.
    Highest deficit in history, two WARS, one that has no end in sight and the other they keep throwing a few soldiers on to see if it makes a difference, job losses, infrastructure collapse, housing crisis, highest gas prices in history, groceries out of sight, healthcare crisis, anyone that votes Republican in this years election is either into pain or just plain stupid.

    April 4, 2008 at 2:25 pm |
  9. Russ in PA

    I would hope that Dr. Ron Paul would benefit the most, as he is the only one that speaks of significant change: less government, less bureaucracy, and return of our freedoms. And he has the record to back it up. What are the other's offering besides more pandering? Zilch...

    April 4, 2008 at 2:26 pm |
  10. Jan Davis, Knoxville, TN

    Barack Obama because he is a fresh face without the baggage of the other two who voted for the war in Iraq. He will be able to unify our country and start on getting us out of the big mess we are in.

    April 4, 2008 at 2:28 pm |
  11. jim in pennsylvania

    Jack
    Easy question - which candidate has a consistant message to the American voters–
    Which candidate wants to unite the country and start doing business in Washington that benefit the American people??
    Obama in 09

    April 4, 2008 at 2:30 pm |
  12. Allen L Wenger

    Everyone, except John McCain.

    April 4, 2008 at 2:32 pm |
  13. Tom, Avon, Maine, The Heart of Democracy

    The candidate of Change, Jack. Not simply because he made the word synonymous with his promise to America, but because he embodies change.

    Maybe someday, a long time from now, the memory of George Bush will fade from public consciousness and it will be possible once again for a middle aged white man to win the White House, but it won't be someone who promises to stay the course.

    April 4, 2008 at 2:33 pm |
  14. April in texas

    Well I will say Obama. If we are going in the wrong direction that takes McCain out of the picture and since we had a Clinton before that cancels out Hilary as well as the madantory healthcare plan. I cant afford to have it now so I will be fined for not having it. I will be even poorer than I am now..

    Obama 08
    April in Austin Texas

    April 4, 2008 at 2:35 pm |
  15. Chris Swansea, MA

    The candidate who is on the right track, BARAK OBAMA

    April 4, 2008 at 2:35 pm |
  16. David,San Bernardino,CA.

    None of them. They are all part of the establishment. Even the change candidate is as much a part of Washington as anyone else. No matter who is elected,appointed president nothing will change. Just look at all the money that Obama is getting. Where is it coming from? Obama will be a lapdog to the special interests just as much as bush is. Nothing will ever change as long as the elections are financed with private money.

    April 4, 2008 at 2:37 pm |
  17. Josh

    Hillary Clinton would benefit the most since she has good ideas to fix the economy and try to stop outsourcing. It's because greedy weasels executives are always looking for cheap labor to do jobs for less money. Unless we start discouraging this practice, this will keep happening and more people in this country will be out of work.

    April 4, 2008 at 2:37 pm |
  18. J W - Atlanta

    It doesn't seem to make any difference WHAT the people think. These people do what they want regardless. The last election proved that. It doesn't seem to matter who wins. There's always some reason why a definitive political direction demanded by the majority of voters can't be embarked. The system has become as contorted as the tax code, and probably for this very reason.

    April 4, 2008 at 2:39 pm |
  19. cj-delhi,ny

    Of course the democrats will benefit because Bush is a Republican. Americans are tired of the "same old" administration and tired of Bush. I would have to say that Hillary is part of the "same old" so therefore my answer is Obama.

    April 4, 2008 at 2:39 pm |
  20. Claire in Erin Ontario

    All aboard the Obama Express!!

    John McCain is standing besides Conductor Bush in the engine car fuelling the current train to go faster on the same track.

    Hillary Clinton is standing in the caboose of the train, telling everyone we're on the right track, and that it can run better from where she is standing.

    Barack Obama is already on a different train, and everyday he is already moving America, with many Americans getting on board at every stop.

    The real question is, will the voters have the courage to get off the current track, and onto a new one, with Obama in the drivers seat?

    April 4, 2008 at 2:39 pm |
  21. IFEANYI AZUBIKE Houston, Texas

    Obama by far will benefit most from the poll. He seems to be the one that most recognizes that we are positioned flip side and has insisted on change. The change philosophy seems to resonate well with Obama and people have come to view him as synonymous with change. Clinton will have the most problem with voters who think that we are headed the wrong way because she is always for and against positions depending on the audience. McCain on the other hand is certain to get the remaining 20% because they represent his viewpoint on maitaining the status quo. And sorry Jack, You get nothing.

    April 4, 2008 at 2:40 pm |
  22. Jed from Chico, CA

    Obama Obama Obama

    The Americans who are for and against John McCain know that he will be more of mostly the same, but hopefully without all the secrets and lies. The last thing those 81% want is more of the same.

    Hillary Clinton could perhaps benefit some from the misguided Americans who mistakenly believe the good economic times during her husband's administration actual had anything to do with him (or, more relevantly, her). Those who payed attention in the 90's know the economic prosperity was a direct result of the Internet and technology boom and not due to anything her cheating, lying, perjured, disbarred and impeached husband did.

    Obama, the fresh-faced nobody from nowhere will benefit most from the current situation. If anyone represents a change for the better, it's Obama. He is unlike anyone who has run for president in the last 40-50 years. Certainly, he's unlike any politician in MY lifetime.

    April 4, 2008 at 2:40 pm |
  23. Adam

    Isn't it obvious? The only candidate that truly serves as an antagonist to the status quo of typical Washington politics is Senator Obama. McCain has already tied his fate to the failed policies of the current administration, and Clinton's malleable truths have reminded Americans of everything that we dislike about the government. If Americans are truly weary of the same rules of political engagement, it seems Obama is the de facto beneficiary.

    -Adam
    Miami, Florida

    April 4, 2008 at 2:41 pm |
  24. Mark - Asheville, NC

    Ordinarily it is the candidate of the party not in the White House, but this time neither of the Dem candidates would be able to benefit enough from this national sentiment, to beat McCain. I know that conventional wisdom holds that after eight horrible years of GWB, ANY Dem can win, but to that I would remind evereyone that the same thing was thought in 1988 about eight years of Reagan. Then we nominated Dukakis, who blew a twenty point lead to GHWB and went on to lose 41 states.

    Yes, the "out" party should benefit, but we STILL have to nominate someone who can win. This concept seems to be lost on the majority of Dems, and it amazes me to no end.

    April 4, 2008 at 2:41 pm |
  25. Christine, Lee's Summit, MO

    Obama will benefit in this election since he seems to have the least ties to the current administration or any previous administrations. McCain is just seen as someone who will carry on the policies of the current regime – I mean party.

    April 4, 2008 at 2:42 pm |
  26. Larry from Georgetown, Tx

    Obama will benefit if the people that are supporting Hillary think and vote their hearts instead of their emotions; and those that are behind McCain get a minute to think about the adverse affects of Iraq and his lack of economics. People Think, Think, Think!

    April 4, 2008 at 2:42 pm |
  27. Bob from Traverse city Michigan

    Certainly not the candidate that has married himself to the policy's of dickbush and georgecheney. Whichever democrat wins the nomination will benefit by exploiting the record of the worst presidential administration in the history of this country. If this comment offends any right wing republicans..... So!

    April 4, 2008 at 2:42 pm |
  28. Brian

    Jack,

    You and I know the answer to this is Obama. In this regard, it doesn't have anything to do with his policies, his leadership or his speeches. The fact is that he's the youngest candidate and he's the most unique in comparison to "traditional" candidates.

    The results of this poll are simply reflecting the same movement that has already pushed Obama to the level of success he's currently seeing.

    Brian,
    Idaho

    April 4, 2008 at 2:42 pm |
  29. Adam, LV, NV

    Depends on that 81%. If it's almost all about the economy, it probably benifits Clinton. If it's mostly about the war, it benifits Obama. Since it appears to be economic given the new polls showing Clintion and Obama back in a virtual tie overall, I'd say it more benifits Clinton. People have a hard time forgetting how good it was under (Bill) Clinton, and they want those times back.

    The county seems to be looking for it's blankie now. A lot of people feel that Clinton is the safe choice because, for good or bad, we know exactly what we are getting.

    April 4, 2008 at 2:43 pm |
  30. Joe in DE

    McCain – he has a chance to change the Bush rerun.

    April 4, 2008 at 2:44 pm |
  31. Rex in Portland, Ore.

    Obviously the right man for the job is McSame. He knows how to run a war, and if we are on the wrong track he certainly is the man to get us off it and on the right track. A veritable railroad engineer, that McSame-o. He gots that experience and wisdom that comes from being a war hero, so he will benefit from anything warlike. Including wrong tracks.

    April 4, 2008 at 2:44 pm |
  32. J. D., New Hampshire

    One would assume any Democratic candidate would benefit from such a number, but it's inevitable that many uninformed people in this country will vote against their own self interests because they're afraid a couple of guys might be able to marry and that will then, somehow, affect their own marriage. I know a very poor man who always votes Republican because of the "death tax," although he wouldn't qualify to have to pay such a thing in a million years. Never understimate stupid voters.

    April 4, 2008 at 2:44 pm |
  33. Laura from Muncie, Indiana

    Both Obama and Clinton represent change so they both benefit.

    April 4, 2008 at 2:45 pm |
  34. John in San Diego

    Jack, when 81-percent of Americans think America is on the wrong course they certainly don't want to elect stay-the-course McCain or re-elect the Clintons. Obama is th only one steering the train toward the new tracks.

    April 4, 2008 at 2:45 pm |
  35. dave, michigan

    The dems should as a whole, just waiting for them to screw-up, and then the 527's will have there fun.

    April 4, 2008 at 2:45 pm |
  36. Alan P. Naperviile, IL

    Absolutely not Mr. McCain. President Bush endorsed him to be the next president. That's just simply a big 'No' for those people like me who do not support keep sending innocent lives to Iraq. Mr McCain supports the War in Iraq as he mentioned. Gas price is record high and all the recession predictions going on. Clearly, nobody wants our next president to be walking the same path as Mr. Bush.

    If I do the math here:
    President Bush = US on wrong track
    To-Be President McCain = US still on wrong track

    All in all, it benefits/favors the Democrats.

    April 4, 2008 at 2:45 pm |
  37. J.C. from Raleigh, NC

    Jack,
    Obama benefits the most from such widespread disapproval of the direction the U.S. has taken since he is the only candidate who was against our invasion of Iraq. Both Clinton and McCain are associated with faulty judgment in voting to go to war. In addition to their misjudgment about the invasion, McCain is weighted down with his refusal to withdraw, and Clinton, if she insists on saying she was Bill's chief advisor, is burdened with her husband's weakening of the military and missing the opportunity to take out Bin Laden before 9/11. On the issue of "It's the economy,stupid!", McCain appears stupid, and Clinton has pie-in-the sky solutions that will fail as miserably as her health-care solutions.

    April 4, 2008 at 2:46 pm |
  38. Patricia

    Jack,

    They all benefit because they are not Bush. Beyond that, it's all about what you believe from what the campaigns are telling us. McCain has his maverick-thing going. Clinton is a woman–that has to be different, though we're not sure what that means at 3 AM or any other time of the day or night. Obama is the candidate of change, but many are confused about what direction he will take the country.

    My vote goes for Obama because the issue that defines us is the Iraq vote. The new directions I see us going with a President Obama are sound judgment, the ability to communicate in English, fiscal responsibility and, OK, hotness. He's just really nice to look at.

    Idaho

    April 4, 2008 at 2:46 pm |
  39. Mary Whartnaby -California

    Jack – hopefully Clinton or Obama, since McCain would tend to follow the Bush policies of "not much being accomplished".

    April 4, 2008 at 2:47 pm |
  40. Allan,Cameron Park, Ca.

    I thnk Hillary is the only candidate that can return the USA to where it was before this disaster took over. I don't know why so many people are against the prosperity we had under Bill Clinton, he cleaned up the mess left by Bush I. they can do better than anybody even though is will be a hugh task, considering how bad Bush II put us in.

    April 4, 2008 at 2:48 pm |
  41. Sunae Jacksonville, Fl

    Obama will be the one who benefits more, the real change is with him. Hillary can't bring anything new or fesh to this Country. McCain truly can't bring anything new or refreshing.

    April 4, 2008 at 2:48 pm |
  42. Lori

    Definitely Obama. Hillary Clinton & John McCain are the same old same old. Obama can unite us and give us hope that things can change.

    Lori
    Battle Creek, MI

    April 4, 2008 at 2:48 pm |
  43. Erin in Battle Creek

    Well not McCain!

    This one is too easy, Jack. It's the candidate for change (and my personal favorite) Obama.

    April 4, 2008 at 2:49 pm |
  44. Patricia

    It should benefit us Dems. We've gone through too much with the Republicans & NEO-CONS we need a break from the hysterics like James Dobson, Tony Perkins & the rest of the nut cases.
    Patricia
    Palmdale, Ca.

    April 4, 2008 at 2:49 pm |
  45. dennis north carolina

    obama. we the people want a change. we want a fresh way of our goverment to due their business. we do not want politics of the old way hidden in the board rooms. we do not want to be treated like children, we want to have a say in the future of our country and not be sittting on our couchs watching our elected officals wasted our assets both livingassets( our children ) or Material assets.

    April 4, 2008 at 2:49 pm |
  46. Peter Pan Fairview, Texas

    They all lose equally. Remember, All of these politicians running for president are and were powerful politicians and members of congress for years. They are part of why we are in the mess that we are in now. If 81 percent of the people are saying we are headed down the wrong path and they are correct, perhaps we don't need to be electing any of the morons that got us into this situation in the first place. They all want change but they are part of why we are needing the damn change in the first place. Lets add some insult to injury by promoting one of the them to the Very Tip Top position is this country. I am not voting for any of the losers. They all suck!!

    April 4, 2008 at 2:51 pm |
  47. Terry from North Carolina

    Jack
    Barack Obama is the engineer driving this train, Hillary has fallen off awhile back, and John McCain was left behind at the station. It is very clear that Barack Obama will be the democratic canidate for president and hopefully the train will be on time and stop at the right stations.

    April 4, 2008 at 2:52 pm |
  48. Pat in MIchigan

    Why didn't they have questions like these on the tests I had in high school? I'd venture a wild guess that the party whose candidate starts with any other letter except "R" will benefit most. Obama should benefit the most because he represents a CHANGE and HOPE.........two things most Americans are asking for.

    April 4, 2008 at 2:53 pm |
  49. tim from Ravenna, OH

    I am quite sure that the Obama campaign appreciates the fact that you not only bash Clinton, but put out questions so obviously slanted to him.

    April 4, 2008 at 2:53 pm |
  50. Charles in Florida

    Jack, Obama benefits most since he has an outside the beltway mindset. Hillary would be second, since she wouldn't follow "W's" path and McCain's last because his brain got us off track to begin with.

    April 4, 2008 at 2:54 pm |
  51. John in La.

    The real questions is, who loses? We do
    Until we sweep clean both sides of the isle in congress it does'nt matter who we put in the White House.

    April 4, 2008 at 2:55 pm |
  52. Pat in MIchigan

    the 14% that think we are headed in the right direction doesn't happen to be in the oil industry does it?

    April 4, 2008 at 2:56 pm |
  53. J. Onofre - CA

    The situation benefits the candidate that will actually bring about change.

    April 4, 2008 at 2:57 pm |
  54. Tom

    Jack, it's obvious, Barack Obama will clean house in November . If we don't get back on course soon we're headed for a train wreck. The entire world will be watching this historic election to see if Americans can come together and make it happen. They'll want to see if our democracy is all that's it's cracked up to be and we will show them. I think it's safe to say the world will be hoping it's Obama.

    April 4, 2008 at 2:57 pm |
  55. Terry in Hanover, VA

    McCain, Obama, and Clinton are all U.S. Senators and all part of the problem regardless of how long they've served in the Senate. Look at their records. The one who benefits the least is McCain since he seems proud of his ignorance of economics and thinks W has done a good job with the economy. Obama and Clinton benefit because America is sick of the GOP and its ham-handed policy of telling the middle-class and poor to suck it up because the rich need new toys. I think this election will do to the GOP what the French did to Marie Antoinette (figuratively).

    April 4, 2008 at 2:57 pm |
  56. Pete from Boston

    Jack,

    Whichever is closest to what people think is the right track. The only thing for certain is that whoever is for the status quo will be the loser. I would, however, assume that the candidate for change (espeically a vaguely specified change) would gain the advantage. I think it would be Obama.

    April 4, 2008 at 2:58 pm |
  57. John from Carlsbad

    Anyone who distances themselves from this joke of an administration. Anyone who can provide policies that are not the joke that this administration has been playing on all of us American citizens for the last 7+ years. That means anyone with a brain, some heart and pride in America unlike our current President and his administration.

    April 4, 2008 at 3:00 pm |
  58. Steve

    I wonder if the other 19% of Americans that think we are on the RIGHT track are also the people that think Obama is Muslim (which he’s not), and that the Surge is Working (which it is not).

    It really makes me sad when I stop to think of the ignorance of the American Voter.

    God help us (and I'm agnostic),

    -S

    April 4, 2008 at 3:01 pm |
  59. john

    Obama will benefit the most since we can realistically attribute 24 years of the Clinton/Bush establishment toward the current failures of U.S. foreign and domestic policy. Oh, and don't forget the current Republicans in congress who are dripping with interposition and nullification when it comes to legislating meaningful assistance for the estimated 2 million homeowners expected to face foreclosure by 2009.

    John in Northern California

    April 4, 2008 at 3:02 pm |
  60. Rob

    Jack,

    this is your softball of the day – of course Senator Obama – this is a very unique opportunity to actaully shake up the way things are done in Washington. Anyone that takes the time to know this man overwhelmingly supports him. It may be a very long time before a candidate of this quality appears on the scene with the integrity he represents.

    Rob – Winnipeg – Canada

    April 4, 2008 at 3:03 pm |
  61. Dave from Veazie, ME

    That's an easy one Jack. The only candidate that has consistently campaigned for change: Barack Obama.

    April 4, 2008 at 3:05 pm |
  62. Yankee

    Despite UN inspectors on the ground found no WMD the media led us into Iraq! Now the media has given Obama a free pass to the White House without checking if he really has done anything that hints he can pull a rabbit out of a hat. I think there really are lots of skunks in there. It is either naivety or great courage being shown by all candidates!

    April 4, 2008 at 3:06 pm |
  63. Bruce St Paul MN

    Obama was the first to raise the "change" banner, and the only one of the three that can make people believe it. Being younger and less experienced in Washington is actually a good thing if change is the agenda. McCain is using his Vietnam experience of being shot down and captured as his greatest strength. It might not resonate with voters born after 1960. Clinton is touting herself as a real insider who knows how everything works. Since nobody thinks government works, its like saying that she was the best lookout on the Titanic.

    April 4, 2008 at 3:07 pm |
  64. Paulette Dallas,PA

    Both Democratic candidates will benefit. The havenots in this faltering American economy need relief. The greedy Republicans have taken everything away from these people,except their breath – and with unrestricted or uninforced environmental regulations abounding,they are even working on taking that away! The last thing the U.S.A. needs now is Grandpa McSame who admits he knows nothing about economics.

    April 4, 2008 at 3:08 pm |
  65. Bert, Iowa City, IA

    I don't think the 81% factor will help Billary, McSame, or Hopebamma as much as it will help a third or fourth party candidate yet to be determined in the aftermath of the August Convention bloodbath.

    Bert in Iowa

    April 4, 2008 at 3:08 pm |
  66. tonyh

    I believe this poll is the first nail in McSame coffin. And by the way, the 14% who think we are headed in the right direction, are millionaires and CEO's and CFO'S and people making more than 100 Gs with a very steady job. WE THE PEOPLE ARE THE 81%!

    April 4, 2008 at 3:08 pm |
  67. Karen, Idaho Falls Idaho

    Hi Jack,

    Obama benefits more because the only words out of his mouth are "Change, Change, Change" The trouble is that he doesn't say how he is going to change things. But the constant chanting of the word "change" will get him votes.

    April 4, 2008 at 3:09 pm |
  68. Sharon, Minnesota

    Hillary, of course.

    If there are any thinking people out there, they will realize she has the best plan for ending the war and the building our economy. These are the two major issues that the Bush administrationn has miserably failed at causing a headlong tumble down into an economical abyss. we now find ourselves in.

    Here is a reminder that Bill Clinton brought us back from the brink from the first Bush's disastrous administration. Hillary was there then and don't kid yourself, she had a huge influence on her husbands administration. It takes a good woman to support and influence a great president. So don't minimize her worth then or now.

    April 4, 2008 at 3:09 pm |
  69. Mike Spring, TX

    With an 81% "in the toilet" rating, you'd think that there would be a clean sweep of Congress. However I'll bet that the usual 90% rule prevails for incumbents. WHY ? That's the real question.

    April 4, 2008 at 3:09 pm |
  70. Len of Colfax, Wisconsin

    I believe it would be Sen. Obama.

    Sen. McCain is always linked to a 3rd Bush administration which would have to put him at the bottom for getting on the right track

    Sen. Clinton has been part of the establishment as an “active” part of the first Clinton administration so probably would not offer any new ways to get on the right track She would still rely on closed doors special interests and lobbyists to get things accomplished.

    Sen. Obama offers the only positive alternative. While he might not be successful in fighting the lobbyists and special interests, I think he has the best chance of succeeding since he is the one that speaks most forcefully about fighting them.

    April 4, 2008 at 3:10 pm |
  71. Harry

    The candidate with the least perceived connections to the Beltway.

    Currently, that would be Obama. Let's just pray that things don't get so bad, that Nader becomes viable.

    Harry
    Ky.

    April 4, 2008 at 3:11 pm |
  72. Jim Draper, Bossier City, La. 71112

    I would put forth the idea that should the Democrats NOT WIN the Whitehouse in the Nov 08 election, it is time in our Nation to do away with the TWO party system. With the Empire of George W. & Darth Vadar crashing on so many different FRONTS at this particular time, the Dems should be shoo-ins. To list a few; The War in Iraq, the housing crisis, the financial markets, the Jobs market, spirialing energy costs going ever higher, bailing out of Wall St. while letting the individual pay the price for their errors. All of the Revelations coming out concerning How The Whitehouse deceiving and lying concerning torture, who made the decisions to permit it, then end up punishing a few National Guard members for what THEY signed on to. There are many more, however; you get the idea.

    April 4, 2008 at 3:11 pm |
  73. Carol, Springfield, MA

    Well, right now it would be Obama, but depending on how gullible the American public is it might not last until November.

    If the 527 manage to swiftboat Obama then I believe that America will be screwed for another 4 years. Most Americans are not very smart and they are basically sheeps that are easily lead to be slaughtered.

    Before they know it the special interest and the rich are laughing to the Cayman Island bank and the poor will go to Iraq to get blown up. Good job McRepublican.

    April 4, 2008 at 3:12 pm |
  74. Teddie

    Democrats, hands down. Republicans do not care about the poor folk only lining the pockets of their croonies which has allow to take place the last 8 years.

    April 4, 2008 at 3:12 pm |
  75. Mike from Syracuse NY

    Jack,
    Usually it's the person the public least associates with the 'system'; in this case Obama. Of course a little over a year ago, the public wanted change and voted the Democrats into control of Congress. Since then the economy went into recession, gas prices soared, and the mortgage crisis hit. I guess if you want change bad enough, you get bad change!

    April 4, 2008 at 3:13 pm |
  76. Inri from Cambridge, MA

    Obama campaigns on change. Hillary campaigns on Obama's unelectability. Even if they're wrong, people associate them with their campaign platforms. If people don't like the way things are going, they're going to support "change," even if they only have an idea of the word and not the candidate.

    When things get bad, the best possible thing you can do is make the buzz word of your campaign "change." This will doubtless help Obama the most, and hurt McCain the most.

    April 4, 2008 at 3:13 pm |
  77. Dave from Georgetown, Ontario

    Given Obama is the only candidate whose Express train is already on an entirely different track, it seems reasonable to believe that Obama is the benefactor.

    However, when 100% of Americans are already on the train, engineering by Bush, conducted by McCain with Hillary in the caboose keeping an eye on Obama... the real question is...

    In the end, are the voters prepared to jump off the current train and board the Obama Express, or is everyone so comfy in the dining and cabin cars that they don't notice the bridge is out just around the corner.

    Whoo Whooooo.. wake up!

    April 4, 2008 at 3:14 pm |
  78. Ralph at NYC

    Jack, today our country blames Bush and his GOP administration for the quagmire in Iraq and for overlooking the economic, environmental, and security needs in our own country. The Democrats should benefit in the coming election.

    April 4, 2008 at 3:15 pm |
  79. dan in mass

    The democratic candidate whoever he/she may be. The republicans are responsible for setting forth an agenda that has crippled our military, destroyed our economy and seized power where it had never existed before. McCain is Bush, he's a republican. The Democratic party will win the white house come November.

    April 4, 2008 at 3:17 pm |
  80. C. Farrell, Houston, Tx

    Any candidate who doesn't represent Bush's failed policies can benefit. We know Obama and Clinton recognize and speak about the country being on the wrong track due to Bush's failed policies. John McCain is trying to distance himself from a Bush look alike that could succeed but he still supports the Iraq war that created this mess.

    April 4, 2008 at 3:17 pm |
  81. AndyZ; Fairfax, VA

    None of the candidate benefit. The truth of the matter is that no matter who is elected in November they will have to spend their entire first term undoing the damage that the current administration has done.

    April 4, 2008 at 3:18 pm |
  82. Stacey-St. Louis

    Hillary, because she valuable experience and during Bill Clinton's terms in the White House our economy was doing so well. Her experience is unmatched by Obama. It is so obvious. Brilliant woman.

    April 4, 2008 at 3:19 pm |
  83. Michael

    Jack,
    What this poll tells me is that 81% of America does want the same old politics. Its clear McCain has no interest in splitting of from the Bush policies, and the Clintons are showing that being a fighter means you have win at any cost even if it includes misspeaking and spinning the truth. Obama would clearly benefit from the true desire to change this country's current direction.

    Michael P
    El Segundo Ca,

    April 4, 2008 at 3:19 pm |
  84. Chuck in Eugene Oregon

    Jack,

    Without reading anyones comments, there is only one real choice and that would be a visionary that would help lead and guide America in a new direction. Someone that is not corrupt or so well engrained in the Status Quo politics of Washington DC that they can not look beyond their own personal political asperations. America needs leadership, a new path into the future and truly someone that can Unite all of America regardless of party, age, gender, nationality or race. There is only one candidate that can do this and has already proven them selves capable of such, So my choice would be Obama.

    April 4, 2008 at 3:20 pm |
  85. mary in Baltimore

    None of them. After they are in power they forget what they promised.
    I hope this one is printed.
    Maria

    April 4, 2008 at 3:25 pm |
  86. Velle In Halifax

    Obama of course Jack. He came out from day one on a CHANGE paltform. He didn't have to be specific because EVERYTHING needs to change. Economy, foreign policy, education, energy, ecology...every pie the government has its thumb in they have flumoxed! If they got into crime (street crime as opposed to their white-collar variety), crime would cease to enjoy huge profits.
    That's why its so laughable for Hillary to jump on the change bandwagon when she saw Obama taking the lead in votes. She shouts about her "experience" in one voice and touts change in the next. Her so called "experience" is what she has learned from years of watching Bill and playing the Capitol Hill Game of "business as usual".
    And John McCain...well he only knows one tune Jack. BOMB-BOMB-BOMB BOMB IRAN...BOMB-BOMB-BOMB BOMB IRAN.

    April 4, 2008 at 3:25 pm |
  87. Pete, Fla.

    When the first Hurricane Bush left the U.S in bad shape, it was Bill Clinton who turned us around and put us back on our own two feet. Now the second Hurricane Bush has turned everything back around and knocked us off our feet. So the candidate who'd benefit most would be the one who knows exactly how to deal with a Bush storm, and that would be a Clinton.

    April 4, 2008 at 3:27 pm |
  88. marie

    Only one candidate – Obama. He is the only one that represents true change. It frightens me to think of the toll that 'four more years' could take on this country.

    April 4, 2008 at 3:28 pm |
  89. Nora. South Texas

    Bush
    Clinton
    Bush
    Clinton, you see the path this is trying to go? I say lets take the Change and make the next name on this list OBAMA!!!!!!!!He will change this course we are on.

    April 4, 2008 at 3:29 pm |
  90. Fish god Las Vegas,Nv.

    If we are on the wrong track it is because ,of Bush.Track implys a railroad, We need a new conductor.This implys change,thus Obama is the choice.Hilary hasn`t a clue about how to run a railroad. McCain can`t find the switch to change course.

    An independant voting for OBAMA

    April 4, 2008 at 3:29 pm |
  91. James D (Cary, NC)

    The candidate that did NOT put us here.

    April 4, 2008 at 3:29 pm |
  92. JeninTexas

    Clinton she is strong, passionate and brave. She can get us where she needs to be. Clinton 09

    But she will need Obama and he will need her so now is time to heal and lets get on this train together.

    April 4, 2008 at 3:30 pm |
  93. Brian G, Sugar Land, TX

    Jack,

    How silly a question. Voters are fed up with the same ol', same ol'.

    Now let's see...which of the candidates has steadfastly declared this is the time for change?

    April 4, 2008 at 3:31 pm |
  94. Wally Hayman

    Barack Obama is the sole beneficiary. He appeals directly to Grass Roots consensus. It will take a Coalition of the Voting to get rid of the Coalition of the Willing. Senator McCain is on one track, – keeping us at war and bankrupting our economy. He's now claiming that his 100 years in Iraq comment referred to keeping a military presence over there like we did in Korea and not putting them in harm's way. We have nearly 40,000 troops in South Korea and that costs money. My first question to Senator McCain is how many American soldiers would he leave in Iraq for 100 years? My second question is, where exactly is South Iraq – you know – the place that will keep our troops out of harm's way? Senator McCain is admittedly not well versed in economic issues so the cost of maintaining a sizable army in Iraq may not have crossed his mind. I'm beginning to think that his military genius never extended past the cockpit.

    April 4, 2008 at 3:32 pm |
  95. earl illingsworth

    To be perfectly honest with you Jack, I'd have to draw from three straws, and take my chances with any one of the candidates(Who Cares) getting picked! Pathetic bunch, if you ask me, but that's my personal opinion. Ever since FDR and Truman layed down the Progressive Rules in this country for the average working family, the Republican's have been stealthly destroying it's foundation as recently as a few years ago,with the gutting of Glass/Segal Law. Great move for "Wall Street", terrible for "Joe Six-Pack"! If we do the arithmetic from 1953 when Eisenhower became the Republican President, the Republican Party has held the highest office "Thirty-Six Years(36) ,and the Democrates "Twenty Years"(20),ahumm! That's right folks almost a 2-1 ratio Republican Administrations over the Democratic Administrations, and you wonder why were headed in the wrong direction? Enough said, read between the lines!!!

    April 4, 2008 at 3:33 pm |
  96. Chryssa

    Clearly Obama benefits. He's the only one who not only knows we need change, but has a plan to make it happen.

    Boise, Idaho

    April 4, 2008 at 3:33 pm |
  97. William Courtland, Waterford, Ontario

    Arn't the three 'counted' candidates all currently senators of the federation?

    The losers benefit most by dodging the associated pressures of blaim. The losers will not be faced with the publics false expectations of the Presidency which has risen from the parties contrived representation of Presidential responsibility as the president is the focus for all the problems of the federation; problems squared and concentrated on a seat of judgment which is designed in Constitution to abstain from such power and so to avoid that powers associated corruptions.

    The people are meant to deal with their own problems through their congressional representative, their state legislature, or in grouped masses through the senates, and if anything these few party candidates of hegemony should all lose by the will and intelligence of the electoral college members.

    April 4, 2008 at 3:34 pm |
  98. Ursula

    Obama benefits from this news. He has been steady and strong in his message and I think people view him as a lifeline to help us out of the mess we're in. I hope the Barack Express can continue to fire up the spirit of hope and stoke a renewable energy source in each of us.

    April 4, 2008 at 3:35 pm |
  99. Nancy, Cunningham, TN

    Well that's a 100% no benefit to McCain, he stands for a miserable 4 more years of the same. Obama is benefiting because he keeps saying change (people are listening to empty speeches). Hillary is benefiting because she is telling people exactly what she will change. Maybe she could win more votes if she just got on a platform and yelled "Change". Voters need to listen to how change can happen not just an "Audacious Hope" that things will change if Obama is elected.

    April 4, 2008 at 3:37 pm |
  100. Mike from Illinois

    The sad fact is is that a politician WILL benefit
    What a way to get in the office,
    Create the mess, do nothing every session, and make promises you have no intention of keeping.

    April 4, 2008 at 3:39 pm |
  101. kb from Iowa

    ha ha...thats an easy one. Any democratic candidate.

    April 4, 2008 at 3:40 pm |
  102. S, Dearborn, Michigan

    Jack, who cares which pres. candidate it benefits if 81% of us think we're in the ditch! Not one of the pres. candidates can reverse that themselves- the only way to really bring us back on track is to completely clean out congress (100%)- every single one of the incumbent nincompoops, and replace with people who want to do more than build bridges to nowhere! That's a civilized revolution!

    April 4, 2008 at 3:40 pm |
  103. Cynthia

    It would be the democratic candidates. The republicans are the reason we are in the shape we are in today.

    April 4, 2008 at 3:40 pm |
  104. David Alexandria, VA

    Any of them can benefit if they clearly define what change they represent. Talk of change is cheap. Real change is painful. Hopefully, sometime between now and the election, the American people will start getting some real substance from the candidates both about what they will do and what the consequences of those acitons will be (cost, benefit, and the like). At the same time, the American voters will be aided in making an informed decision if the media would do a better job of analysing the prospective change for its implications - and stop hyping Obama because he says "change" and berating McClain at evrry turn by saying "Aha! That is just pepetuating the Bush policy." (which, in many cases, it does not. )

    April 4, 2008 at 3:42 pm |
  105. Kimberly, Dallas, Texas

    Obviously the democratic candidate would benefit. McCain would be the exact same thing. Now, I personally believe Obama would benefit most because it seems like Hillary may not win the nomination.

    April 4, 2008 at 3:43 pm |
  106. Ralph, Long Island, NY

    Based on speaches minus any effort to fact check, Clinton. Based on the positions he held in 2000 as opposed to 2008, McCain. Based on being remotely in touch with reality, Obama. But I'm prejudiced, I wish the grumpy old man at CNN was running.

    April 4, 2008 at 3:43 pm |
  107. Dick Niemann

    Another softball question. Why the momentary favorite of the media, Mr. Obama of course. If you think the first four years of Bush were good, wait until you live through the first four of Mr. Obama and his supporters. The country will get "change" but not the change they want nor expect. The first two will be filled confusion followed by two years of utter chaos.

    April 4, 2008 at 3:43 pm |
  108. Aaron B.; Champaign, IL

    Both Democrats have campaigned on the notion that life in the United States totally sucks... and in many ways, it does. These are not fun times my friend. Anyone who campaigns touting a script that highlights everything that's wrong with our nation, will catch a few more ears the closer we get to November.

    April 4, 2008 at 3:44 pm |
  109. Scott L. - Wichita, Kansas

    Jack, I'm gonna have to go against the flow here and pick the candidate that is the least like the senators...
    Ralph Nader.

    April 4, 2008 at 3:45 pm |
  110. Ann, Newton, New Jersey

    None of them! Have you read the names of the companies that are putting their money on them? How about running Mr. Ventura, the wrestler? I'll bet he could take on Congress one by one and make them listen.

    April 4, 2008 at 3:47 pm |
  111. Patricia -Lexington, Ky..

    A drastic change of course is precisely what Obama is talking about, although he knows, and has cautioned us (the American people) that this change will not happen overnight. I want so much to believe that he is not too good to be true, and his instruction to us that we must be responsible and participte in change is wonderful. I think it has been a long time since an American leader has indicated a trust in us and a recognition that he will need our help.

    April 4, 2008 at 3:47 pm |
  112. Dave from Georgetown, Ontario

    Ground control to President Bush,

    “The bridge is out on the track you are on. If you can’t stop the train, at least slow it down to a crawl.”

    John McCain replies from the Engine car… “My President has already slowed the US train down to a crawl, and we’re building a new bridge as we speak”

    Hillary Clinton chimes in from the Caboose: “But you Republicans are building the new bridge in Iraq. Remember? I voted for it!”

    Barack Obama’s voice is heard from the Obama Express: “We’re already on a different track, heading in the opposite direction. We can stop and pick up your passengers, to save them from destruction.”

    John and Hillary reply in unison:

    “Hell no! Pour more coal on the fire, hurry!! We can jump this broken bridge and keep going!”

    April 4, 2008 at 3:48 pm |
  113. Russ from New Wilmington, PA

    Who benefits? Any candidate with a "D" for Democrat next to his name on the ballot. Voters may debate how much change they want as they decide between Obama and Clinton, but change is definitely in the air.

    Obama, however, represents more than just a change in party. He prepresents a real potential transformation of the political culture. Year after year, we SAY we want to believe in a president again, to shake off our cynicism that's characterized our politics since Watergate, to feel inspired about our leaders the way our parents said they felt about JFK. Now we've got that in Obama. He's gonna make us proud–ALL of us.

    April 4, 2008 at 3:48 pm |
  114. Nuwan Sam

    Realistically speaking, Obama will benifit since he is running on the platform of change and more people are buying into his argument. But I do not think he will put this country in the right track. He is too inexperience and will make a mess. None of the candidates will be able to do that completely. They will only put bandage solution to this whole mess we are in right now.

    Nuwan from Houston, TX

    April 4, 2008 at 3:49 pm |
  115. Robert W. Brooks

    Jack, It's going to come down to which candidate can convince the American voter that they can provide the kind of leadership needed to address the problems brought on by the war, deficit spending, the economic downturn, trade deficits and a declining influence on world affairs. We need a "leader" who like Theodore Roosevelt, put the needs of the American public first. Disapproval polls reflect the public's unhappiness with the decisions being made. To ignore them sends a strong message that the current office holders could care less about what the American public thinks or wants. The candidate that truely puts the best interest of every American ahead of their personal agenda will be our next President.
    Robert
    Forest, VA

    April 4, 2008 at 3:50 pm |
  116. Leevaughn Brown

    Jack,

    The answer to this one should be Obama.

    I am a black guy who supports Obama, not because he is black, but like everyone else that supports him, we have no "None of the Above" slot on the ballet.

    I have been for throwing those bums out for years!

    Hilliary is seen by all for who she really is, more of the same!

    McCain needs someone to tell him who the enemy is and econ 101.

    Obama is about change, no slight to him, but if the monkey wasn't busy we would stuff him in a dark suit, and give him the job!

    Everyone in this country no matter what background can see we need change!

    I wanted to pin my hopes on a five dollar lottery today, I have decided that I will send it to Obama instead.

    Out with the old and in with the new.

    April 4, 2008 at 3:51 pm |
  117. Taj

    Certainly Obama. He voted against the War & he has said that the US is on the wrong track. He has integrity, great demeanor & smarts. Common sense grows up with humble beginings & hardship in life. That's why he is so smart. Barrack Obama 2008.
    California

    April 4, 2008 at 3:51 pm |
  118. Bob, VA

    " – Only 21% say the overall economy is in good condition – " ??!!
    I guess the 21% must be living in China – –

    April 4, 2008 at 3:52 pm |
  119. tammie Alphonse

    That should be a nobrainer-HILLARY CLINTON!!
    She has the best track record for the Economy.
    Obama has no clear record for anything to do with the economy, maybe in 8 years he will have more experience.
    McCain has no clue either.
    Hillary is the best bet to lead us through the recession created by W.

    April 4, 2008 at 3:54 pm |
  120. sandy in Ohio

    Jack, I believe it benfits Obama the most. Short of overthrowing our whole govenmental system. He seems to be the one who most wants to change things. The voters however are the ones who make the ultimate decision and they gave us George W. Bush two times so anything can happen.

    April 4, 2008 at 3:54 pm |
  121. Luke Randles

    Jack
    I think Hillary has a better idea of what needs to be done detail by detail...when you listen to Obama he is relying on economist for his plans and sometimes he's not sure of what they have put forth in a detailed manner. And the last 7 years have shown us we need someone leading us who knows all the little details themselves not someone relying on others visions of how it needs to be done.
    Being an inspirational figure is nice but I personally want a policy wonk who knows all the minutia without having to wait for other experts before they act.

    April 4, 2008 at 3:56 pm |
  122. Judy

    Hillary is the best overall candidate given the current state of the economy, the war(s), and ongoing threat levels we face from abroad.

    NC

    April 4, 2008 at 3:56 pm |
  123. Bill in St. Cloud, FL

    The candidate with the least involvement in the situation in which we currently find ourselves would be the logical choice.
    But it really doesn't matter – the Republican candidate will continue to through money at the Iraq tragedy and the Democrat candidate will tax us till we bleed to pay for the governement's fiscal irresponsibility.
    When you talk about government, politicians and taking care of the American citizens, its almost always a lose-lose scenario. We either don't get what we pay for or we pay 20 times more than what we get is worth.

    April 4, 2008 at 3:57 pm |
  124. Colleen, Chicago, IL

    Obama at least remembers what it's like to be in the real world...so I'd say him! "35 ( or even more for McCain ) years of experience" means "I don't have a clue what's going on out there!"

    April 4, 2008 at 4:04 pm |
  125. Jeanette Lewis

    Hillary who else! Hillary in 08!

    April 4, 2008 at 4:06 pm |
  126. Don Blue Springs, Missouri

    None can fix the problem. We can't expect to have the president change the world. Most people are going to be suprised again when it still don't go their way no matter who they vote for.

    April 4, 2008 at 4:07 pm |
  127. Alan, Buxton, Maine

    Well let's examine the situation. McCain has been part of the problem for 40 years and is proposing to continue the same policies indefinitely. Hillary has been part of the problem for less time but is determined to make up for that deficiency as soon as possible. Obama seems to be best positioned to take advantage of the totally miserable situation this country is in. A new approach is necessary and he is the only one capable of that.

    April 4, 2008 at 4:07 pm |
  128. trevor UK

    OBAMA

    He's the only one who ISN"T a DC insider. The Clintons have been major players in dirty politics since the Little Rock days.

    April 4, 2008 at 4:08 pm |
  129. Annie, Atlanta

    Whichever democrat wins the nomination, since McCain is just promising more of the same. Does he really think that's a good strategy?

    April 4, 2008 at 4:09 pm |
  130. Ronnie in South Texas

    The candidate who stands to benefit most is Barack Obama. He offers a whole new fresh perspective to thinking "outside the box" to get America back on track. The other two candidates will just be putting old band-aids on old sores.

    April 4, 2008 at 4:09 pm |
  131. Emily

    Welll we already now that Obama benefits hands down he represents a new kind of politics, not business as usual, we need a president who will actually listens to the people of this country, we are ready to turn the page and write a new chapter in history, the republicans are going to be in for a rude awakening, because people are sick and tired of the Bush/Cheney adminstration, while they are getting richer and the working/middle class are struggling to make ends meet

    Barack Obama 08

    yes we can

    April 4, 2008 at 4:10 pm |
  132. Avvorio

    Not Hilly and Johnny. I think their tax returns will show how they really feel about the US tax structure and how to abuse it.

    April 4, 2008 at 4:12 pm |
  133. Tim Walters

    Clinton her biggest plus is the economy even if she didn't have anything to do with the economy durring her husbands presidency and I believe she did, she would still be the smartest choice because she would have the President that was the best sturard of our economy right at her side. And as for Obama if Jimmy Carter likes him that would be something if I was Obama I would want him to keep quiet the economy was almost as bad under Carter as it is under Bush.

    April 4, 2008 at 4:15 pm |
  134. Dennis G form FL

    The canidate least associated with the federal government obviously stands out. Unless of course your including candidates from around the world in which case any one that is not running for US president

    April 4, 2008 at 4:16 pm |
  135. Tom in Houston, TX

    Jack, Well here is the situation. John McCain is running for George Bush's 3rd term with respect to foreign policy and Herbert Hoover's 2nd term with respect to the economy. So, why is he running neck-and-neck with the two Democratic candidates, when he should have a snowball's chance in hell to get elected President. It doesn't make sense to me, but I felt the same way when George Bush got elected. Apparently, the worse things get the more John McCain will benefit.

    April 4, 2008 at 4:17 pm |
  136. Adrian Mora

    Hillary because Obama has no idea on the economic agenda specially when all of his finacial motions were voted 99-0 including his own vote

    April 4, 2008 at 4:17 pm |
  137. Dottor Giorgio da Caltanisetta

    The entire world knows that the United States is on the wrong track, but 19% of Americans think that the U.S. is on the right track. The latter must be eating too much dog food or at McDonald"s. McCain is suffering from chronic Post Traumatic Stress Disorder since being tortured by the Vietcong. He is not too old to run for the presidency, but one knows that he wants to have Henry Kissinger as his Vice Presidential running mate and have another round at the Paris Peace Treaties. Thus McCain is woefully mentally disturbed. Jack beware! The Capitalist Corporations of America have cloned a George Bush, and the clone has allready been chosen to be the next president. Furthermore the next move to save capitalism will be a preemptive nuclear strike against China! Remember what Truman did to Japan. In Exile, happy to have left!

    April 4, 2008 at 4:17 pm |
  138. Adrian Mora

    Hillary and here's why

    As Barack Obama continues to criticize John McCain for saying he’s willing to keep a 100-year troop presence in Iraq, another Obama adviser has suggested U.S. forces could stay in Iraq longer than the Democratic candidate initially thought.

    Adviser Colin Kahl wrote in a policy paper for the Center for a New American Security that the United States should transition to an “over-watch” force of between 60,000 and 80,000 troops by the end of 2010, according to an article Friday in the New York Sun.

    That appears to be at odds with Obama’s public position of removing all combat brigades from the country within 16 months of taking office.

    Because Obama is full of hot air.

    April 4, 2008 at 4:19 pm |
  139. Tim in ATlanta

    Obama!!

    April 4, 2008 at 4:19 pm |
  140. Karen Branson MO

    Gee whiz, Jack...Barack Obama is the only candidate who can take us to a new future.

    April 4, 2008 at 4:21 pm |
  141. Kathy

    Hi Jack!

    Obama for sure.

    I get so tired of Clinton saying she understand say she understands. That woman has no clue what it is like to not have a job, go beg for food stamps, or line up in an unemployment line.

    Our country needs change.

    April 4, 2008 at 4:22 pm |
  142. deb in az

    depends on which party has been spending the most money in congress.......probably the democratic party and whoever gets the nomination......people seem to always blame the economy of the president elect.......but what people should really pay attention to is the congress and who is voting for what and how it affects the country.....what we need is a congress that has the american peoples best interest.......when infact they go to washington and forget about the people that they represent.......

    April 4, 2008 at 4:22 pm |
  143. Brian - Minneapolis, MN

    Jack,

    Obama benefits the most. McCain offers a continuation of Bush policies and Clinton extends the 28-year Bush-Clinton domination of the executive branch. While the theme of "change" has been overused to the point of cliche, Obama is the only one who represents it.

    April 4, 2008 at 4:23 pm |
  144. brenda v. long beach calif

    Obama will benefit, if the clintons dont dig up more dirt on him. He should speak now or forever hold his peace. Hopefully he's on his way to being our next president but another scandal would be the end for him.

    April 4, 2008 at 4:23 pm |
  145. Kathy

    Hi Jack!

    Obama for sure.

    I get so tired of Clinton saying she understands. That woman has no clue what it is like to not have a job, go beg for food stamps, or line up in an unemployment line.

    Our country needs change.

    April 4, 2008 at 4:24 pm |
  146. shirl

    Obama!!

    McCain is a Bush clone and Hillary has just been 'hanging' around D.C. way to long to change her ways and her so-called 'experience'.

    We need a fresh face with fresh ideas. Perhaps that is seen in him and the reason for him drawing large crowds and supporters.

    April 4, 2008 at 4:26 pm |
  147. Michelle Michelsohn

    We need the Super Deligates to make thier stand as soon as possible. Lest Hilary get her way: let McCain win and and give her another chance at 2012.

    April 4, 2008 at 4:28 pm |
  148. Tony G of North Las Vegas, Nevada

    The Democratic candidate will benefit more.

    April 4, 2008 at 4:30 pm |
  149. Karl in CA

    The Democrats in general and Obama in particular. Clinton's record is part of why we are on the wrong track. Obama is less "experienced" in derailing the country and will be a better choice to get it back on the right track. McCain is so far off track he can't find the train station.

    April 4, 2008 at 4:31 pm |
  150. karen

    Please can someone explain why they like Hillary, she hasn't accomplished anything important. Can you Hillary supporters please read her Senate Record then come on this website and attack as usual. Base your opinion on facts.

    thanks

    April 4, 2008 at 4:33 pm |
  151. Jason

    Obama very simply because he is the only one who doesn't embody the past. McCain is 71 – I mean he could have VOTED for JFK. And Clinton has been a player in the politics that got us in this situation for years. Obama is the only one who offers a different "way" to do things.

    Durham, NC

    April 4, 2008 at 4:33 pm |
  152. Jessica

    Hillary's economic plans are solid and detailed. If economy is "Issue Number One" like CNN pundits keep saying, then she should be the one we are turning for a turn-around.

    Or we can keep falling victim to rhetoric – words that hold no weight. I guess you can lead a horse to water but you can't make it dissociate charisma from leadership.

    Jessica
    Lexington, KY

    April 4, 2008 at 4:33 pm |
  153. Katiec Pekin, IL

    Jack,
    I think Barack Obama will benefit most as he represents change,
    not politics as usual. And not being a career politican is a real
    plus, as we've all seen what has happened to our country these
    last 7 plus years with those "experienced" politicians.
    Voters are so dissatisfied with our government. They seem to have
    lost all sight of reality. And have put our country on a path of
    destruction. It is going to take many years to overcome the
    diasters of experience.

    April 4, 2008 at 4:33 pm |
  154. Carol c.

    Logic would tell you that Barack Obama would benefit from this poll as he has not been in Washington long enough to have been part of the political machine as Clinton and McCain have.

    But I listen to people in TN who are in dire straits and they still say they are voting republican. Wish I could explain it but there is no explanation for it. Sounds like a battered spouse making excuses for what they have experienced!!

    Hope I am wrong–would be happy to eat my words with a shovel!

    Carol
    TN

    April 4, 2008 at 4:34 pm |
  155. snoopy

    Hillary clinton because she is the one that can lead us out of this mess that the republicans have made. She has the experience and will be a President for ALL people, not a selected group as obama would be. She will have the right people in her cabinet to advise her and she will take their advice...obama is too arrogant to take someone elses advice.

    April 4, 2008 at 4:34 pm |
  156. steveO in Ca

    A error $109 million, hiding a high level campaign aid in Colombia to negoiate free trade agreements. Colombia exports cocaine and coffee, is Hillary screening the coffee drinkers from the cocaine snorters. Every thing she and her campaign has done in this presidential election appears to be thinking errors a good counseler would say appear to relate to some one high on an illegal substance.
    She has had a thrity percent lead in the next primary state now it is down to about eleven percent, Hillary isn't alert to the fact she is losing.

    April 4, 2008 at 4:34 pm |
  157. Henry Makovec Coeur d'Alene, ID

    Obama is the better candidate. I believe that he is the most likely to reach across the political aisle to come up with some comprehensive reform to get the economy going. Hillary is too polarizing to work with Republicans and McCain will only continue what "W" have already left us with.

    April 4, 2008 at 4:37 pm |
  158. mitchell martin ark.

    the new guy.the guy who talks about hope ,unity and the need for a new "kind of politics".only when we come together,can we expect to make the kind of changes,this nation is in need of making.i can't take anymore bush,cheney,mccain and clinton style of governing.it's nothing but fight,fight,fight...instead of unite,unite ,unite!

    April 4, 2008 at 4:38 pm |
  159. Larry - Fulton, Ill.

    Obama will benefit because of his committment to changing the way things get done in Washing D.C. The 4% of people who think the economy has improved must be Bush's very close friends and relatives. As far as the 21% who think the economy is good must work for Bear-Stearns or another one of those banks that don"t fall under Federal Regulation.

    April 4, 2008 at 4:38 pm |
  160. jean lindboe-Blooming Prairie, MN

    This answer is easy. Who got us out of the economic mess when Bush Sr. was in office. Bill Clinton. I believe that Hillary will take some pages from his book and help with the Bush Jr. mess. There is a fountain of experience that we need right now. We need more than "Hope and "Change.

    April 4, 2008 at 4:38 pm |
  161. Will, San Jose CA

    Any time approval is low the candidates that most represent political insiders are always at a disadvantage. Hillary has run a campaign focusing on how long she has been in politics. McCain, as much as I respect his service, was around to sign the original constitution. Obama wins by default.

    April 4, 2008 at 4:38 pm |
  162. MIKE A, CHARLOTTE,NC

    both obama and clinton benefit about equally. mccain doesn't benefit at all because he keeps wanting to stay on the same track as bush.. the problem is that the train ran out of track a few miles back and is mired down with the caboose trying to push it forward. obama and clinton are both big engines that are capable of pulling out.

    April 4, 2008 at 4:39 pm |
  163. Peter

    no wonder i feel so hungry in the mornings nowadays, no more breakfast due to economy. too hungry to answer your question Jack

    April 4, 2008 at 4:40 pm |
  164. Kim, Canada

    Obama

    April 4, 2008 at 4:42 pm |
  165. Dawn

    I think, in general, any democrat would benefit from the current issues that have seemingly been caused by Republican rule. But then to choose which one of the democrats will benefit the most, I would have to say Obama. This isn't because I'm a supporter. It's because of the same reason that the democrats benefit to begin with...he can say...."I had nothing to do with getting us into this mess."

    April 4, 2008 at 4:43 pm |
  166. Walter (Yonkers N.Y.)

    Obama will benefit most. Only because of the "GOOD OLD BOY" factor. It's just to bad with him at the helm it will get even worse.

    April 4, 2008 at 4:45 pm |
  167. jacob

    OBAMA!

    April 4, 2008 at 4:45 pm |
  168. Eric from Chicago

    It benefits the candidate who the 81% think can make the most & best changes. At this point, it would be Obama, possibly even Nader if he becomes a viable candidate.

    April 4, 2008 at 4:46 pm |
  169. Daniel in Chicago

    Ron Paul ultimately will benefit the most from this, because he is the only candidate who is proposing real change, the kind that would be a complete 180 degree turn. Of course, he won't win the republican nomination and he won't be president, but he has started a movement that will reshape politics in the coming years.

    April 4, 2008 at 4:48 pm |
  170. Joe St Louis, MO

    Obviously the Dems will benefit and between the two Obama benefits most. Clinton has been part of the establishment that has allowed all the money in our country go to CEOs, politicians, and foreigners.

    April 4, 2008 at 4:49 pm |
  171. peter canada

    Obama He well win Big,some Republicans well vote for him

    April 4, 2008 at 4:50 pm |
  172. Eric from San Francisco

    Senator Obama will benefit most because he is the most committed to ending the war, which is the largest contributing factor to the budget deficit. It is this deficit that has weakened the dollar and given all Americans a pay cut. Everything we import costs us more, including oil.

    April 4, 2008 at 4:51 pm |
  173. Rob in Charlotte,NC

    Jack, Obama has the most to benefit. Both Clinton and McCain represent families or political ideals that have controlled this country for the last 16 years. Obama is the only real change.

    April 4, 2008 at 4:52 pm |
  174. Bob S Philadelphia PA

    Jack,

    In my opinion the democrats will benefit the country is so screwed up under the current administration that people want change, I am a registered democrat but if Obama wins the nomination I will vote for McSame. I don’t think Obama is the answer, Even though McSame does admit he know nothing about the economy he will have people around him that will know plenty. I would rather have 4 more years of Bush then vote for Obama.

    April 4, 2008 at 4:52 pm |
  175. Oma Arizona

    Obama, the change candidate, I am sure, the other two-more of the same.

    April 4, 2008 at 4:53 pm |
  176. Trisha, from Monsey, NY

    Hi Jack, Thats easy Obama benefits, I believe he will be the next President of the United States. As far as Dems go, we know people are in love with one Candidate or the other, but I do not know any one who is in love with John McWar!!
    In the end we shall unite, kiss and make up and get Obama elected!

    Trisha, NY

    April 4, 2008 at 4:55 pm |
  177. Tony,.......Lou, Ky.

    Jack......I cant believe that your listeners think that Obama is our savour! Actually, I cant believe that anyone would think that ANY of the candidates will make a change! As far as Im concerned, he's nothing more than a racist, along with his wife. Read her college thesis and see for yourself! Clinton wont change a thing, except bring more illegals here to take our jobs and make more profits for big corps.
    McCain is on the same track as those other two idiots. Anyone thinking that ANY of these fools can actually make a difference is either niave, or plain stupid! In 2009, we will get what we deserve, and it wont be good........Live with it America!

    April 4, 2008 at 4:58 pm |
  178. Oraymw, Rexburg Idaho

    Ralph Nader gets the most from this. As 81% are about willing to make a crapshoot, Ralph Nader may actually stand a chance. He is most likely to lead us in a radically new direction. This is the first time in 20 years that he has actually had a chance at the presidency. Go Ralph!!

    April 4, 2008 at 4:58 pm |
  179. Ruth

    If the voters are smart Hillary Clinton will be the candidate to benefit from the bad economy. Obama has had little or no experience in this area and he's too high and mighty to be able to sympathize with the average person. Maybe if voters get hungry enough they'll realize Hillary has the qualifications to bring us out of this mess. The Democratic "big-dogs" like John Kerry, need to to let the people have a right to vote and quit trying to shove Hillary out of the race with their strong-arm tactics. The race card is being played by the Obama Campaign.

    April 4, 2008 at 5:23 pm |