« Obama Grilled By Iowa Voters Over Pakistan Comments | Home | In Michigan, Dem Gary Peters Will Run Against GOPer Knollenberg »
Poll: Hillary Ahead In Georgia And Missouri
The good polling news for Hillary keeps on coming this morning, with a new round of polling from American Research Group showing her ahead in Georgia and Missouri.
Hillary leads Obama in Georgia by 10 points, 35%-25%, with Edwards at 17%. And in Missouri she has 40%, with Edwards in second at 22% and Obama at 15%.
Meanwhile, among Republicans, Fred Thompson is beating Rudy in Georgia, 35%-25%, and statistically tying him in Missouri, where Rudy has 23% to Thompson's 22%.
Advertisement
It is interesting that Edwards is ahead of Obama in MO.
August 7, 2007 12:16 PM | Reply | Permalink
what is interesting is how the HillaryTeam has no numbers to push in NH, IA, and SC which are the exclusive primary numbers that count right now. From the same link above:
These national polls and state numbers where the candidates are not campaigning right now are meaninglessly. Unless you somehow want to foster the perception that Hillary is the inevitable candidate. Not only is the MSM engaging in that biased selection and framing of the Democratic primaries but the headlines at EC reflect that same prejudice perspective. Even though Obama leads Clinton 36% to 29% among independents.
At the same link we can see that between April07andJul07 Hillary declined from 37-31% in NH and JE declined from 26%-14% while Obama's numbers rose from 14-31% during the same time frame. Obama is the only candidate trending up in NH .When we look at IA between May07andJul07 we see Hillary holding steady going from a high of 31%to30% while JE went from 25-21% with Obama climbing from 11%to15%. The only one trending up in IA is Obama. If we look at SC we see the same pattern from May07-Jul07 with Hillary dropping from 34%to29%, along with JE dropping from 30%to18% and Obama once again climbing from 18%to33% over the same time frame. EC though along with the MSM does not want us to focus on how thenumbers are trending up for Obama in the key states of IA, NH and SC.
Obama is not running ads in Georgia or MO, he is spending time campaigning in IA, where it counts. More and more people are beginning to see just how dishonest Hillary is based on that lobbyist answer at the Kos convention.
TeamHillary is running scared because they simply do not have the money to outspend Obama in the primaries. Obama will prevail. This is a small blip but TeamHillary is attempting to make it into a major issue. The public, independents nor 48% of Democrats are buying this. Hillary's unfavorables are unchanged.
She will continue to decline in the polls whenever Obama launches an ad campaign in a state and ObamaCamp grassroots organizers come into the state. Obama knew he could not rely on the traditional means of campaigning where the local Dems provide access to their political network. The Clintons have sewed that up. Folks are too scared to risk gambling against them. Obama is able to overcome that with financing and his bringing new voters into the electorate as well as having the ObamaCamp volunteers.
Hillary Clinton is going to weep and moan with unconsolable regret for having called Obama naive and irresponsible. Bill knows this. A fundamental change is coming. No more BushCheneylite policies nor DLC democrates.
August 7, 2007 1:19 PM | Reply | Permalink
The sheer length of your post belies how much stock you yourself give to that statement. You sense that the more there are such state polls that show Clinton leading Obama and Edwards, the more it will create the 'aura of inevitability' before even the first vote is cast, which would sway voters in the early states of IA, NH, and SC. These early states are, of course, more seriously contested because they could make or break Obama's or Edwards' campain. Hillary could lose all three and still be viable; Obama and, definitely, Edwards must win at least one of these early three or they're done.
August 7, 2007 1:40 PM | Reply | Permalink
The contortions that all the campaigns (and their supporters) go through to minimize the value and meaning of negative polls but push the positive ones are pretty hilarious.
It should probably be said that the questionable value of polls this early out is equaled only by the questionable value of the analysis offered about them...
August 7, 2007 2:12 PM | Reply | Permalink
Brevity is the soul of lingerie not politics.
No what I sense is a select use of facts to foster an aura of inevitability that is belied by the primary polls in the states that are being contested. The voters in IA, NH and SC are not being swayed by national polls.
No, Hillary's unfavorables are too high for her to be viable when it is clearly demonstrated that her rivals beat her in a head to head contest. That bodes very poorly for HRClinton. She knows that and so does her political team. Thus, their desperate measures to re-direct focus from the primary states that matter. Hillary's numbers have only been high due to intital name recognition. What we are seeing is that when voters actually listen to her and the other candidates. A clear majority select the other nominees.
Hillary is going to be done far sooner than she ever dreamed.
August 7, 2007 2:23 PM | Reply | Permalink