Quinnipiac University Swing State Poll

 Former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton's lead is wilting against leading Republican presidential candidates in three critical swing states, Colorado, Iowa and Virginia, and she finds herself in a close race with U.S. Sen. Rand Paul of Kentucky in each state, according to a Quinnipiac University Swing State Poll released today. In head-to-head matchups, every Republican candidate effectively ties her in Colorado and almost all Republicans effectively tie her in Iowa. Secretary Clinton has lost ground in almost every matchup in Colorado and Iowa since a February 18 Swing State Poll by the independent Quinnipiac University. The Swing State Poll focuses on key states in the presidential election. One bright spot for Clinton is Virginia, the largest of the three states, where she leads all Republicans, including 47 - 40 percent over Bush, compared to a 42 - 42 percent tie in February. Voters in each state say Clinton is not honest and trustworthy. Her overall favorability has dropped significantly in Colorado and Iowa, while Virginia is unchanged. Favorability ratings for the Republicans are lackluster, at best. "These numbers are a boost for U.S. Sen. Rand Paul of Kentucky as he formally launches his campaign," said Peter A. Brown, assistant director of the Quinnipiac University Poll. "Ominous for Hillary Clinton is the broad scope of the movement today compared to her showing in Quinnipiac University's mid-February survey. It isn't just one or two Republicans who are stepping up; it's virtually the entire GOP field that is running better against her. "That's why it is difficult to see Secretary Clinton's slippage as anything other than a further toll on her image from the furor over her e-mail." "In all three of these states, more, and in Colorado many more, registered voters say she is not honest and trustworthy," Brown added. "Voters do think she is a strong leader - a key metric - but unless she can change the honesty perception, running as a competent but dishonest candidate has serious potential problems."

Hotwired wrote:Hmm I see you weren't one of them. For sure time will tell who is who. Personally I look at both sides and can't believe this is our best. Just a  loose affiliation of what's in it for me politicians who's personal gain is all that matters.  But, like I said the negativity of those who fear Paul and what he stands for flows like water. Truth is, if he did not pose a threat no one would say anything. He wouldn't matter. But the media needs to spread the thought to those sheeple who are still under the illusion that Obama and Hillary aren't silly Democrat leaders. Like good sheeple they believe what they are told and convince themselves it was their own personal thought. ODD!  The only time I see any attack from one left to another is when one does not agree with the agenda. Hence "Bob Menendez" I have not read any negative posts from the left condemning Hillary and her email's. Nor Obama's promise of being the most transparent president. The article is based more on Hillary's actions that caused her to loose ground then who is taking the lead in a useless poll. Yet you didn't comment on that factor. Why is that?

Just because a couple people on the Supreme Court declare something to be ‘constitutional’ does not make it so. The whole thing remains unconstitutional. While the court may have erroneously come to the conclusion that the law is allowable, it certainly does nothing to make this mandate or government takeover of our health care right.