Stronger Dem GE Candidate Clinton or Gillibrand?

[henster]

I think Gillibrand would end up being the more appealing candidate to the general public. She also seems far more better at the stump and politically skilled than Hillary.

[Mister Mets]

Gillibrand has not been tested the way Clinton has. She did very well in congressional races, before she was appointed to a safe Senate seat. She doesn't have the experience, or the ties to the very popular Bill Clinton.

There are a few demographics trends that favor Gillibrand, She's younger and has been in office for a shorter period of time (in the last six elections the person elected to major office last won the presidency). She also has less to defend in her record. It's a minor point, but she has more options for Veep, as she's better able to pick popular elderly officeholders (Steve Beshear, John Hickenlooper, etc.)

I think Gillibrand's success would largely depend on outside forces: who the Republicans nominate, and the popularity of President Obama. Hillary has a few more vulnerabilities, but she'd be slightly better at distancing herself from Obama (or attaching herself to him if his approval rating is suddenly in the mid-50s again.)

[bedstuy]

Kristin Gillibrand gets way too much credit.  She's just high profile because she's a young Senator from a big state.

Let's be real, Gillibrand is a Wall Street lawyer who used to be a member of the Blue Dog caucus.  That's not the type of person Democrats should nominate for President.

[henster]

Kristin Gillibrand gets way too much credit.  She's just high profile because she's a young Senator from a big state.

Let's be real, Gillibrand is a Wall Street lawyer who used to be a member of the Blue Dog caucus.  That's not the type of person Democrats should nominate for President.

And Hillary is? She is the Wall Street candidate at least Gillibrand is a true progressive.

[bedstuy]

Kristin Gillibrand gets way too much credit.  She's just high profile because she's a young Senator from a big state.

Let's be real, Gillibrand is a Wall Street lawyer who used to be a member of the Blue Dog caucus.  That's not the type of person Democrats should nominate for President.

And Hillary is? She is the Wall Street candidate at least Gillibrand is a true progressive.

Gillibrand was a member of the Blue Dog caucus just a few years ago.  How is she a true progressive?

Hillary was never a Wall Street lawyer.  Gillibrand worked at a huge white shoe law firm and represented Phillip Morris against the tobacco litigation of the 1990s.

[SWE]

Gillibrand is a joke

[MASHED POTATOES. VOTE!]

I like Gillibrand, but she's badly overhyped.

[dmmidmi]

Who actually voted for Gillibrand?

[Tender Branson]

Maybe Gillibrand actually.

Clinton could be one of those candidates that start out strong (now), but collapses during the campaign and loses in a landslide (through a mix of her own faults and the attacks of the Republicans).

Gillibrand on the other hand could turn out to start trailing in the polls, but could then build a strong campaign and appeal to moderates and a good share of Republicans.

[NHLiberal]

Kristin Gillibrand gets way too much credit.  She's just high profile because she's a young Senator from a big state.

Let's be real, Gillibrand is a Wall Street lawyer who used to be a member of the Blue Dog caucus.  That's not the type of person Democrats should nominate for President.

And Hillary is? She is the Wall Street candidate at least Gillibrand is a true progressive.

Gillibrand was a member of the Blue Dog caucus just a few years ago.  How is she a true progressive?

Hillary was never a Wall Street lawyer.  Gillibrand worked at a huge white shoe law firm and represented Phillip Morris against the tobacco litigation of the 1990s.

Uh because she was representing a very conservative district?

[Tender Branson]

Kristin Gillibrand gets way too much credit.  She's just high profile because she's a young Senator from a big state.

Let's be real, Gillibrand is a Wall Street lawyer who used to be a member of the Blue Dog caucus.  That's not the type of person Democrats should nominate for President.

And Hillary is? She is the Wall Street candidate at least Gillibrand is a true progressive.

Gillibrand was a member of the Blue Dog caucus just a few years ago.  How is she a true progressive?

Hillary was never a Wall Street lawyer.  Gillibrand worked at a huge white shoe law firm and represented Phillip Morris against the tobacco litigation of the 1990s.

It seems you are ignoring the fact that Hillary represented a child rapist once ...

[Never]

Kristin Gillibrand gets way too much credit.  She's just high profile because she's a young Senator from a big state.

Let's be real, Gillibrand is a Wall Street lawyer who used to be a member of the Blue Dog caucus.  That's not the type of person Democrats should nominate for President.

And Hillary is? She is the Wall Street candidate at least Gillibrand is a true progressive.

Gillibrand was a member of the Blue Dog caucus just a few years ago.  How is she a true progressive?

Hillary was never a Wall Street lawyer.  Gillibrand worked at a huge white shoe law firm and represented Phillip Morris against the tobacco litigation of the 1990s.

Hillary was a member of the Wal-Mart board of directors from 1986-1992. That's not exactly a progressive position. If we simply base our views of potential candidates by their occupations, we could raise doubts about the "progressive" credentials of both Clinton and Gillibrand.

Maybe Gillibrand actually.

Clinton could be one of those candidates that start out strong (now), but collapses during the campaign and loses in a landslide (through a mix of her own faults and the attacks of the Republicans).

Gillibrand on the other hand could turn out to start trailing in the polls, but could then build a strong campaign and appeal to moderates and a good share of Republicans.

^ QFT

[bedstuy]

Kristin Gillibrand gets way too much credit.  She's just high profile because she's a young Senator from a big state.

Let's be real, Gillibrand is a Wall Street lawyer who used to be a member of the Blue Dog caucus.  That's not the type of person Democrats should nominate for President.

And Hillary is? She is the Wall Street candidate at least Gillibrand is a true progressive.

Gillibrand was a member of the Blue Dog caucus just a few years ago.  How is she a true progressive?

Hillary was never a Wall Street lawyer.  Gillibrand worked at a huge white shoe law firm and represented Phillip Morris against the tobacco litigation of the 1990s.

Hillary was a member of the Wal-Mart board of directors from 1986-1992. That's not exactly a progressive position. If we simply base our views of potential candidates by their occupations, we could raise doubts about the "progressive" credentials of both Clinton and Gillibrand

I don't think being on a corporate board is the same thing as having a career in that area. 

Kristin Gillibrand gets way too much credit.  She's just high profile because she's a young Senator from a big state.

Let's be real, Gillibrand is a Wall Street lawyer who used to be a member of the Blue Dog caucus.  That's not the type of person Democrats should nominate for President.

And Hillary is? She is the Wall Street candidate at least Gillibrand is a true progressive.

Gillibrand was a member of the Blue Dog caucus just a few years ago.  How is she a true progressive?

Hillary was never a Wall Street lawyer.  Gillibrand worked at a huge white shoe law firm and represented Phillip Morris against the tobacco litigation of the 1990s.

It seems you are ignoring the fact that Hillary represented a child rapist once ...

Defending poor people accused of serious crimes is an honorable, progressive thing to do.  Getting paid six figures to represent Wall Street and America's biggest corporations is a fine job, but it's not a progressive, public-interested profession.

[TarHeelDem]

Can we please have both? I'd love to vote for a Clinton/Gillibrand ticket.

[Atlas Has Shrugged]

Can we please have both? I'd love to vote for a Clinton/Gillibrand ticket.

You'd have to give up New York's Electoral Votes (and the election) if you have them both, so by all means, please do .

[Bull Moose Base]

Can we please have both? I'd love to vote for a Clinton/Gillibrand ticket.

You'd have to give up New York's Electoral Votes (and the election) if you have them both, so by all means, please do .

I think the rule is the NY electors couldn't vote for both Clinton and Gillibrand, meaning Clinton would still win but conceivably without Gillibrand if the election were close enough that NY made the difference. (It didn't in 2008 or 2012). But it's academic. If this ticket were to happen, Clinton would run as a DC resident a la the Bush-Cheney 2000 move.

[IceSpear]

Can we please have both? I'd love to vote for a Clinton/Gillibrand ticket.

You'd have to give up New York's Electoral Votes (and the election) if you have them both, so by all means, please do .

Don't worry, the Hillary landslide won't need NY's electoral votes.

[henster]

Hillary is a very polarizing figure in America she has a lot of baggage she's old and seems out of touch with average Americans. Gillibrands seems middle class and is relatively young with kids I think she would relate better with women than Hillary. The fact that she held down a conservative district for a few years shows that can she could do well in conservative leaning states.

[Meursault]

There are no material differences between these people.

[Maxwell]

Not too many differences, voters are just more willing to believe in Gillibrand's amorphous blob set of beliefs.

[Bull Moose Base]

The country's fondness for the Clinton years, especially in the South and among seniors, gives Hillary an advantage no other Democrat has. She also has weaknesses most other Democrats don't: being ridiculously rich and corporate ties. Despite the stir over Hillary's clumsiness in answering questions about her money, it's a good bet she'll get the hang of it. (She already looks like she's learning from her mistakes.) The bigger weakness is her corporate coziness but Gillibrand isn't exactly the antidote on that. Taken all together, I think Hillary would be a lot stronger in the general. I'm assuming Gillibrand is going to be one of Hillary's most visible surrogates by the way.

[Frozen Sky Ever Why]

Seniors are her worst group in every poll.

[Bull Moose Base]

Seniors are her worst group in every poll.

I wasn't clear. Any Democratic nominee will poll weaker with seniors and Southerners than nons. I meant to say Hillary is far less weak in those groups than other Democrats are.

On second thought, I think she often or usually does worse with the middle aged than with seniors.

[SWE]

Can we please have both? I'd love to vote for a Clinton/Gillibrand ticket.

You'd have to give up New York's Electoral Votes (and the election) if you have them both, so by all means, please do .

Hillary can just claim residency somewhere else. She's never had a problem with carpet bagging before.

[Bull Moose Base]

Actually, if Ds hold the senate in 14 or the vote happens after the new senate is sworn in in 2017 (not sure which senate would vote), Hillary could safely pick Gillibrand (or Cuomo) as a running mate without changing her primary residence. Even if the election were close enough that Gillibrand or Cuomo fell short of a majority without NY, the senate would elect Gillibrand. But I tend to doubt she will do that.