This headline jumped out of today’s Wall Street Journal: “Clinton’s Explanations on Benghazi Attacks Winning Over Voters — WSJ/NBC Poll.”
Are they? Well, yes and no. Here’s the yes:
The number of people who are unsatisfied with her response to questions on the attacks on a U.S. diplomatic compound dropped to 38% in the poll, from 44% in a poll taken before she testified before the House Select Committee on Benghazi on Oct. 22.The new poll found Republicans’ opinion remained largely unchanged, but among Democrats and swing voters, there was a significant rise in satisfaction with Mrs. Clinton’s response.
A small change among Democrats and swing voters. That’s good for Hillary.
And here’s the no:
However, that shift did not have much impact on voters’ more general assessment of Mrs. Clinton’s honesty and character: A broader set of questions about her professional and personal attributes found that just 27% of voters rated her highly on being honest and straightforward — roughly the same as in the earlier poll.
So: People still think she’s shady.
I’m not sure where that leaves us. Certainly, the first shift might take some sting out of the Benghazi attacks in particular. And that might matter next year if Republicans intend to use them to hurt her. But if people still tend to think Clinton is a liar — if, in other words, they continue to think she is possessed of a poor character — is that really much of a victory overall?