« BET Founder And Hillary Supporter Bob Johnson: Obama Was "Doing Something In The Neighborhood" | Home | Obama: Clinton Backers Didn't File Any Lawsuits Before I Won Culinary Union's Endorsement »
CBS/NYT And ABC/WaPo Polls Give National Leads To Hillary And McCain
Two new major polls show national leads for Hillary Clinton and John McCain within their respective parties, though one is definitely more favorable to the frontrunners than the other.
From ABC/The Washington Post, compared to their last poll in early December:
Democrats:
Clinton 42% (-11)
Obama 37% (+14)
Edwards 11% (+1)Republicans:
McCain 28% (+16)
Huckabee 20% (+1)
Romney 19% (+2)
Giuliani 15% (-10)
Thompson 8% (-6)
The CBS/NYT poll is available after the jump.
From CBS/The New York Times, compared to their last poll early December:
Democrats:
Clinton 42% (-2)
Obama 27% (+0)
Edwards 11% (+0)Republicans:
McCain 33% (+26)
Huckabee 18% (-3)
Giuliani 10% (-12)
Romney 8% (-8)
Thompson 8% (+1)
Advertisement
So what we can conclude is: absolutely nothing.
January 13, 2008 11:56 PM | Reply | Permalink
Looking at McCain and Obama numbers, it is possible ABC/WaPo has oversampling of journalists and pundits and HuffPost contributors.
January 14, 2008 12:00 AM | Reply | Permalink
I think we can safely conclude that Obama is rising and Clinton is falling. At least according to these polls.
January 14, 2008 12:03 AM | Reply | Permalink
Hello President McCain. Only the Democrats could fuck up this election despite the toxicity of the GOP brand ... war ... recession ... corruption. Just pathetic. The only small, grayish silver lining: the Clinton era will be over and maybe the party can evolve. But watching Bush smirk as McCain wins him a third term might put me in my grave.
January 14, 2008 12:10 AM | Reply | Permalink
HRC lost 25 net points to Obama in a month?
cool.
January 14, 2008 12:28 AM | Reply | Permalink
The WaPo poll has Hillary up by 5, and the NYTimes poll has her up by 15?
Gee, that makes me very confident of one thing: polls are not exactly reliable.
So maybe Hillary is still up over Obama. Big time? Small time? Who the hell knows?
January 14, 2008 12:38 AM | Reply | Permalink
Prepare yourselves for McCain-Lieberman, the all media whore/war ticket...
...god help us.
January 14, 2008 12:44 AM | Reply | Permalink
Here we go again. There is so much difference between this polls for Hillary and Obama. CBS doesn't think Obama gained much and ABC thinks Obama gained 14 points...Do the polls really matter? I could pull numbers from the hat.
January 14, 2008 12:47 AM | Reply | Permalink
Isn't the Obama + the story here? Btw, love the way you have manipulated the Johnson storyline too. Is TPM now on the Clinton payroll in addition to Greg Sargent?
January 14, 2008 1:05 AM | Reply | Permalink
Yup...The truth is probably somewhere between the extrema, with Obama rising overall, which is to be expected, considering the boost he got after winning Iowa convincingly.
January 14, 2008 1:10 AM | Reply | Permalink
Note how both polls got exactly the same numbers for Hillary (42%) and Edwards (11%) but differ by 10 (37% & 27%) for Obama...
Interesting difference that could be due to assumptions about the black vote. NYT/CBS oversampled blacks and then went back and adjusted for their proportion in the sample. The WaPo/ABC poll might have used a different model...
January 14, 2008 1:25 AM | Reply | Permalink
I conducted my own personal poll and came up with the following results:
Obama: 100%
Clinton: forced to listen to Bill talk about himself for eternity
January 14, 2008 1:25 AM | Reply | Permalink
Were these taken before the Clinton race-baiting and complete misrepresentation of Obama's stand on Iraq or after? Before "the cry" or after? Before the slander or after?
January 14, 2008 1:57 AM | Reply | Permalink
I think the more recent trend is down for Obama. He was close to tied for national leads or even winning after Iowa, but now is slightly behind again, or way behind if you look at the other poll. So over the last month he gained but he has gone down lately. Which all amounts to not very much. This is a competitive race that is far from over.
And since a previous commenter said you were on the Clinton payroll, I will refrain from accusing you of being on Obama's payroll. LOL I bet you are all eager for the primaries to be over. It's really nasty sometimes.
January 14, 2008 2:02 AM | Reply | Permalink
PPP Poll: Obama, McCain Leading in South Carolina
A new Public Policy Polling survey in South Carolina finds Sen. Barack Obama leading the Democratic presidential race with 44%, followed by Sen. Hillary Clinton at 31% and John Edwards at 16%.
Key finding: "Obama appears to be getting an 'Oprah bounce' in South Carolina, leading Clinton 42% to 37% among women. Clinton is not going to win any states where she doesn't carry the female vote, and this is one that fits that category right now."
In the Republican race, Sen. John McCain leads with 28%, followed by Mike Huckabee at 21%, Mitt Romney at 17% and Fred Thompson at 14%.
January 14, 2008 2:03 AM | Reply | Permalink
Barack Hussein Obama- drugs, membership and endorsement in a black separtist, Afican-centrist church (www,tucc,org), Muslim youth (once a Muslim always a Muslim), corrupt Chicago politics machine behind him ("rough and tumble politics-read corruot politics"),absenteee Senate record - this guy is dangerous and a disaster, a fraud and a con man with several hidden agendas. It is sad that many young, naive and emotional American voters are falling for his BS and sweet talk- Are you surprised? American voters voted for Bush last two times, they obviously vote for any con man that promises them anything...
January 14, 2008 2:03 AM | Reply | Permalink
Mike Pridemore - are you looking at the same numbers we are or did you just forget to take your meds? Wasn't Hillary up 35-40 points just a month ago? Yes....
January 14, 2008 2:05 AM | Reply | Permalink
Paul Williamson = Bill Clinton.
Good thing all of Hillary's more senior compadres in the Senate and more believable female governors with track records all came out and endorsed Obama this weekend. Claire McCaskill, Janet Napolitano, George Miller (Pelosi's 2nd in command), Bill Bradley, Tim Johnson, John Kerry, Ben Nelson....yup, they must either:
1. hate the shit out of Hillary
2. like "rolling the dice"
3. realize they are staking their well earned political capital on the next President of the United States (just like Gore, Edwards, Biden and others will shortly).
Bye Bye Clinton Soap Opera
January 14, 2008 2:10 AM | Reply | Permalink
Paul Williamson is giving us a preview of what the Republicans will do to Obama should we nominate him. This guy is just not electable. We should cut our losses and go with Clinton, for all her faults. It will still be a historic days when a woman enters the White House.
I'm also concerned that people get too enthralled by Obama's captivating speeches. I found myself often saying "so that's a nice speech, but what exactly has he said" apart from grand statements about hope and uniting the country. It lacks concreteness, just as his record lacks any content.
Hopefully Dems will think this through carefully before Feb 5. It's too easy to get overly enthusiastic only to be correspondingly disappointed later.
January 14, 2008 2:28 AM | Reply | Permalink
Hillary is falling like a rock. As predicted. Her support was always soft and would "inevitably" collapse.
January 14, 2008 2:45 AM | Reply | Permalink
Paul Williamson,
Why don't you take your bigotry away from this site, we are interested in constructive arguments not in lower lives argument from people like you. Next time you are going to start blaming Barack from your miserable, failing life. And by the way, Barack is half white, half black.
January 14, 2008 5:49 AM | Reply | Permalink
Anonymous,
So what if republicans will attack Barack, should we vote out of fear because few bigots like Paul Williamson won't vote for Barack? By the way, not all republicans are bigots, democrats have some too, check Hillary supporters lately what they have been doing. Empirical evidence from IA and NH refutes your whole argument that Barack is not electable, he attracted more independents and moderates republicans than Hillary. Plus if he can manage to increase youth participation in GE like he did in IA, he will win the presidency. Please, stop labeling America as a racist nation, Americans are better than that, true that we will always have people like that but the majority of American people do not agree with you. Move on, race or gender won't be issues, people care more about their bank accounts, mortgage payments, healthcare than who is white or who is black.
January 14, 2008 5:57 AM | Reply | Permalink
Yay new polls! Always accurate! Always reliable! Always… er… umm… no.
January 14, 2008 6:27 AM | Reply | Permalink
Btw: ask Obama if he can spell the word b-a-c-k-l-a-s-h too…
January 14, 2008 6:33 AM | Reply | Permalink
urg, Clinton supporters = most ignorant and despicable bastards this side of Rudy Giuliani supporters.
Go read a book, you are embarrassingly misinformed.
January 14, 2008 7:03 AM | Reply | Permalink
And good morning to you too grover_rover. Nice to see you in such a sunny mode.
Kiss and love :-)
January 14, 2008 7:32 AM | Reply | Permalink
You’re preaching to the choir here I guess. You have better go tell that to camp Obama instead. They are already on a very slippery slope, obvioulsy detecting racism behind every corner and accusing the Clinton’s of racially charged remarks.
No, in point of fact, the Obama campaign has only made one official statement on the subject:
“A cross-section of voters are alarmed at the tenor of some of these statements,” said Obama spokeswoman Candice Tolliver, who said that Clinton would have to decide whether she owed anyone an apology. There’s a groundswell of reaction to these comments — and not just these latest comments but really a pattern, or a series of comments that we’ve heard for several months,” she said. “Folks are beginning to wonder: Is this really an isolated situation or is there something bigger behind all of this?”
And the spokesperson, of course, is correct. Real democrats are very alarmed that "slips" continue to come out the Clinton campaign.
January 14, 2008 7:45 AM | Reply | Permalink
ask Obama if he can spell the word b-a-c-k-l-a-s-h too
By the by, is that what you are banking on? Because I guarantee you cannot make it happen for two reasons:
1. Barack Obama is a classy candidate who stays above this stuff.
2. You aren't in the Republican party.
January 14, 2008 7:51 AM | Reply | Permalink
This isn't surprising. Not after her surprise win the other day. By the way, have you seen the Hillary Clinton Comeback movie?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U7hpNLudaO4
January 14, 2008 7:53 AM | Reply | Permalink
I only have two things to say: (1) i love the obama candidacy and if he wins, I will vote for him and support him. I like the man and would love to have drinks with him, which is why I am voting for Hillary Rodham Clinton. We need a leader not another buddy. (2) Hillary Clinton is Good! She makes cogent arguments, she knows the system, she's been beaten down and has come back up. Admit it- if she were a man, she'd be a consensus candidate. She has bigger balls than Kerry, Edwards, and Obama combined. Perhaps that's why there's so much Clinton antipathy. Finally, a strong woman is running for President. We shouldnt be afraid of that- we should embrace it. Hillary is the better person for the job. Obama for VP.
January 14, 2008 8:13 AM | Reply | Permalink
Note that Hillary lost 11 points in the Wapo poll, but only 2 in the NYT, where Obama had no gain at all. If Hillary lost 11 points, that means she was at 53% in the last wapo poll. That seems to be an outlier. Most polls had her more in the low to mid 40s all along. So, I would put more stock in the NYT poll. Though, the Dem polls have just been unreliable in both contests already, so it all should be taken with a grain of salt. Frustrating for all around that the only time we ever seem to know anything on the Dem side is after the polls close.
January 14, 2008 8:29 AM | Reply | Permalink
When was the last time CNN or Wash. Post report true news? I don't believe any of the news media. Isn't that something to think about?
January 14, 2008 8:39 AM | Reply | Permalink
Corporate news finds institutional candidates most acceptable . . . News at . . . This is not news . . . This is more "No Duh, $herlock" (Dollar sign intentional).
January 14, 2008 9:34 AM | Reply | Permalink
What's ironic is the Hillary slander machine is giving Barack a great workout. He is seeing exactly what the GOP slander machine will throw in the fall. And he's not making any rookie mistakes, winning primaries and has cut her national lead by 20+ points in just a month. Thanks Clintons. At least you're good for something!
January 14, 2008 10:00 AM | Reply | Permalink
When do we get the truth about the vote being fixed in NH?
January 14, 2008 10:01 AM | Reply | Permalink
Polls differ. Fine. But a journalistic headline would be: "Obama moves up in national poll." The news is the change in standings. Headlines like this on content like this torpedo claims to neutrality on the site. Isn't there a famous saying to the effect: "Stories be damned; let me write the headlines?"
January 14, 2008 10:06 AM | Reply | Permalink
Like many progressives I have determined to support Edwards all the way, but vote for the democratic nominee no matter what.
The Clinton entity is making that very hard to do. The more I see the more want them to go away. There indeed is a strong message in the endorsements this week, and that is: not electable.
January 14, 2008 10:20 AM | Reply | Permalink
What jumps out at me when I look at the Dem numbers between the polls is this. The one that has hillary much further ahead of Obama also has 20% of the respondents not endorsing any of the front-runners. The one that has hillary and Obama closer has only 10% not endorsing any of the front runners. You could almost explain the difference in Obama's numbers by saying that the undecideds seems to breaking his way.
My sentiments echo moondancer's. I'm not a hillary supporter; I prefer Obama and Edwards. Until now I've always thought I'd support whoever was nominated. But recent events are leaving a very, very, very bad taste in my mouth with regard to hillary.
January 14, 2008 10:27 AM | Reply | Permalink
As long as the subject is polls, am I right in thinking that the only repub-dem contest that the dems could possibly lose is mccain-HRC? I seem to remember a consistent ten-point difference in this particular gaming scenario.
January 14, 2008 12:09 PM | Reply | Permalink
It is not Hillary's fault if you are too gullible and believe everything that read, no matter how ridiculous. Regarding Hillary's MLK/LBJ comment that's been called racist, I would add that it is not Hillary fault if people are so uninformed that they would distort her historically factual comment to become racist. If you are courageous and open-minded, you'd follow that link to an absolutely terrific piece about the facts surrounding the events that Hillary had alluded to in her comment. She got it historically and factually right, and her detractors got it wrong, why then are you holding it against her? We'll be waiting with bated breath to be enlightened...
January 14, 2008 12:47 PM | Reply | Permalink
Voters don't have to defend their votes.
But candidates are responsible for their campaigns.
Attack my preferences all you want. But that's not going to change my views. To which a voter is entitled, I might add.
It amuses me to think that attacking voters will gain any campaign supporters. But go ahead and try.... what the heck? Sounds like a losing strategy to me!
January 14, 2008 1:15 PM | Reply | Permalink
Believing those polls again. Have you not learned yet? People will tell you anything.
HRC will be the Madem Prez. Clinton/Obama 08.
January 14, 2008 1:23 PM | Reply | Permalink
I think it's more likely to be Obama/Clinton, if only because the arc of history brought voting rights first to black Americans, then to women and brought civil rights first to blacks, then to women. I'm not arguing that it's fair or right, but it appears that political progress first embraces racial equity, then gender equity. With the public perception being that this is a competitive race, I expect voters to be more likely to support a black male before a white (or black) female. I think the Clintons make a mistake in turning the primaries into a referendum on his Presidency, the co-dependency of wives on husbands being a meme Hillary could have done without. The stronger theme is "Female and Proud," which resonates with a potential 52%, where "Black and Proud" is an identity slogan for just 23% (or more, depending on the empathies of all minorities).
I personally prefer Edwards on the issues, but he's a white male, so it isn't his year, is it? My job in my caucus is to increase the necessity for Obamans and Clintonites to try to earn my vote by being cordial and issue-specific, all the way to the state and national conventions. Then we'll see who leads the ticket they BOTH are on.
January 14, 2008 2:22 PM | Reply | Permalink