« Democrats Win Dennis Hastert's House Seat! | Home | Hillary: Pledged Delegates Can Switch Candidates »
Gallup: Obama Retakes National Lead Over Hillary
After several days in which Hillary Clinton had led in Gallup's national Democratic polling, Barack Obama has again retaken a slight lead. Here are the numbers, compared to yesterday:
Obama 47% (+2)
Clinton 45% (-1)
Hillary lead was as high as 48%-44% for a few days in the tracking poll. As this race goes on longer, expect the lead to probably shift back and forth quite a few more times.
Advertisement















Still within the margin of error, but I'll take it.
March 9, 2008 11:00 PM | Reply | Permalink
Eric: Any reason you haven't reported the Rasmussen poll from March 9th, showing Hillary ahead 47-45?
http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/election_20082/2008_presidential_election/daily_presidential_tracking_poll
March 10, 2008 4:05 AM | Reply | Permalink
Didn't matter when she was up, doesn't matter when he is up, most people have already voted, the delegate math isn't changing, he has won, it is just a matter of when the MSM is going to admit it so we can get on with the real election.
March 9, 2008 11:01 PM | Reply | Permalink
Sinbad has a feeling that Hillary's numbers will rebound once the press finally does a little digging and reveals the fact that HILLARY AND SINBAD SOLVED THE CRISIS IN KOSOVO!
Come on TPM! Scoop the MSM on this one, and give Sinbad some LOVE!
Clinton/Sinbad '08 - Pandering to African-American voters by putting a black guy on the ticket so as not to anger Obama supporters because that's how cynically we view the political process ON DAY ONE!
March 9, 2008 11:11 PM | Reply | Permalink
oh wow!
how desperate...
LOL
March 9, 2008 11:20 PM | Reply | Permalink
Sadly they [i.e., the MSM] won't, wwjb. And this is not some political axe-grinding on my part, it's just what I see as the sadly reliable outcome once you've embraced a realism about the way in which the profit-motive directs the behavior of for-profit (political) media providers in largely predictable ways. Without a horse-race, however fabricated and self-spun-and-encouraged, on the Dem side there's merely the specter of covering a five-month McTrain-wreck. At least, that's how these chumps see it. History will sheepishly relish the irony of Hillary lambasting her "unfavorable" media coverage when the cold reality was far more sinister: a media-industrial complex enabled and promoted the self-sabotage of the Democratic party.
March 9, 2008 11:30 PM | Reply | Permalink
I am readly afraid for the Obama campaign at this point. Obama's vulnerable point has finally been spotted and locked onto by Hillary: David Plouffe, his campaign manager.
Hillary probed and probed and probed, and finally found it. She now knows she can say very provocative things and get away with it as far as the voters are concerned - Plouffe is just simply at a loss as to how to respond and consequently allows Hillary's unchallenged smears and insults to hang forever in the smokey air and win the day. Plouffe was also targeted earlier this past week for blame by several analysts on Obermann's Countdown program.
So, after Mississippi, an opportunistic period of six weeks will allow a good test of Obama's reputation for rapid learning and adjustment: can he repair or replace this obviously weak link in his organization in time for Pennsylvania?
March 10, 2008 12:43 AM | Reply | Permalink
THIS IS EXCELLENT NEWS FOR HILLARY!!!!!!HILMENTUM
-Not Idiot
March 10, 2008 12:53 AM | Reply | Permalink
Funny nobody has reported on Hillary attending the funeral of the cop who died in Texas as part of her motorcade.
Knowing that the Clintons would exploit anything to get sympathy, I wonder why no one has images of her looking sympathetic and maybe even teary at the funeral. Maybe no pictures out of respect. But not even a single report?
Hillary has made promise to attend the funeral on the Monday before Texas's primary.
Did she break the promise? Anyone checked?
If she did neglect the promise because she had a busy schedule in Ohio, that's fine. I don't think there is anything to gain politically.
But it goes to show her "character".
March 10, 2008 1:05 AM | Reply | Permalink
She did attend. It was on local radio. I live in the DFW area. While I genuinely despise the woman. She did attend the funeral and cancelled all her events the day the officer died. And seemed to make no political hay over her attending the funeral, so when she wants to, she can actually be a decent human being.
March 10, 2008 9:18 AM | Reply | Permalink
I have to be consistent about this. I said it when Hillary is up and I have to say it when Obama's up: Who cares about national polling when 3/4 of the states have already voted?
Primaries aren't national!
March 10, 2008 7:21 AM | Reply | Permalink
This really is meaningless. I am sooooo sick of polls.
March 10, 2008 7:36 AM | Reply | Permalink
I will say this, the MSM creamed all over each other the other day when IT took over the "lead" in this poll. Now, as he takes over the "lead" I hear crickets in the background. Nothing. Gee, I'm shocked.
I think Wolf Blitzer may have pulled 100 hairs out of his nose in solidarity with the monster's supporters.
March 10, 2008 8:02 AM | Reply | Permalink
Not all Dems are dopes. Zellery's scorched earth scheme is turning people's stomachs.
March 10, 2008 8:23 AM | Reply | Permalink
This means nothing either way.
I understand why Gallup runs daily polls - they're in the polling business, they make money doing this meaningless nonsense.
But I don't understand why TPM insists on devoting space to this. Especially when TPM has barely covered the many stories from the last few days on Hillary's "exagerations" about her role in foreign affairs (I made peace in Ireland! Don't listen to Sinbad - only I brought peace to Kosovo!) Even KOS has called her on her bullshit claims that "As First Lady, she helped pass the Family and Medical Leave Act" (link: http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2008/3/9/111930/6389/50/472849).
But of course this isn't as interesting or exciting as whether daily polls move an inch back or forth (why just daily, why not hourly?).
C'mon guys - you know better than this. Don't you?
March 10, 2008 8:45 AM | Reply | Permalink
Small swings in polls like this probably don't signify much of anything, but one can at least hope that Hillary's pro-McCain "threshold" strategy is starting to backfire -- that a growing number Democratic primary voters are fed up with a candidate whose strategy for gaining the nomination is based on helping the presumptive Republican nominee and hurting the party's chances in November.
March 10, 2008 9:01 AM | Reply | Permalink
I agree. The poll swinging back and forth only means a differing sample of voters. However, if we see one candidate remain in the lead as the number of states left to vote decreases, this could speak to the national trend. Almost as if you start with a National poll meaning something before the primaries begin, become meaningless as we go through the primary process and then become relevant again at the end of the primaries.
March 10, 2008 9:18 AM | Reply | Permalink
Sinbad has never, ever, ever, ever, ever been funnier. I'd bet my wife's life on it.
March 10, 2008 10:13 AM | Reply | Permalink
If I could de-recommend this, I would. It's a meaningless national survey, as others have commented. This isn't so much the horse race as it is asking spectators about the horse race. Not only have most of these people already voted or caucused, but it also has no bearing on the coming states, and the results in those states have little bearing on what will happen at the convention. It will either be won by Obama or underhandedly usurped by Clinton.
March 10, 2008 10:36 AM | Reply | Permalink
honsing: "Funny nobody has reported on Hillary attending the funeral of the cop who died in Texas as part of her motorcade."
Come on, as much as I've grown to dislike Hillary for her campaign tactics the last few months, but it was totally correct and responsible for her to attend that funeral.
LarsThorwald "Sinbad has never, ever, ever, ever, ever been funnier."
That's a very low bar to set. That said, the "new" Sinbad cracks me up. He and idiotic should team up.
Anyway, on to Mississippi.
Yes we can!
March 10, 2008 11:21 AM | Reply | Permalink
Let's catch a breath here before we put too much stock into these national polls. If neither Hillary or Obama can garner the needed delegates before the convention, the focus will intensify on the "super delegates." What's their priority? To go with the candidate who can win in November.
Why is there so little MSM coverage on the characteristics of many of states Obama won, primarily through caucus and the fact that these states are RED. My sense is that the MSM doesn't want to stand up to the barrage of negative reaction of Obama supporters.
I don't deny Obama's "wins" and his superb campaigning, far superior in many ways to Hillary. But now that the bottom-line issue for the party and therefore the super delegates is who is best for the general election. One factor about Obama's wins that must be analyzed is how many electoral votes (not caucus delegates) will he bring in from those same RED states?
March 10, 2008 11:35 AM | Reply | Permalink
BTW I found a fantastic article…A MUST read for EVERYONE “The Hussein Dynamic” at http://savagepolitics.com.
Brilliant writing that goes beyond what the MSM is feeding us!!!!
Here is an excerpt: “The issue of Barack Obama’s religious definition has captivated many Americans to the point were charges of terrorism and counter charges of racism have been thrown into the fray of the discussion, aimed at either side. To many Liberal Americans, whether or not Obama is a Muslim (or was a Muslim) is irrelevant to the feelings of “hope” and “change” that he inspires in them, which they consider to have a higher merit than petty religious or ethnic associations. To many Conservative Americans, the mere allocation of any candidate within the realm of Islam is sufficient reason to vote against him, irrespective of the details that may lie in the penumbra of his personal story. Either way, it is impossible for any citizen to make an intelligent assessment of either perspective, without knowing the details and the relevant information regarding Mr. Obama’s past. Unlike the Mainstream Media, who has automatically assumed that Obama has no relation to Islam, in a vague attempt to paint themselves as “reasonable” and “progressives”, most thinking citizens should not follow suit. There is ample evidence to make any reasonable citizen conclude that the Obama campaign and the Media have been hiding some crucial elements of this candidate’s past that should become widely known and discussed in the open. Let us then ask ourselves; Is Barack Obama a Muslim?” get the rest at http://savagepolitics.com/?p=171
March 10, 2008 1:21 PM | Reply | Permalink
eisylee, quit spamming please.
March 10, 2008 1:35 PM | Reply | Permalink
I am sure Hillary still has a lead. You cannot take something placed on TPM seriously.
I realized this when TPM fired Linda Hirshman for her postings at TPM Café were not in keeping with the overwhelming majority of their articles, making and making the case for Senator Barack Obama. I mean Obama voted for Dick Cheney's Energy Bill, the worst in history, deals with the likes of Rezco, and just parrots what Hillary says on most issues. He did not even hold any hearings on a committee he is Chairman of responsible for Nato and Afganistan.
March 10, 2008 4:06 PM | Reply | Permalink
I am sure Hillary still has a lead. You cannot take something placed on TPM seriously.
I realized this when TPM fired Linda Hirshman for her postings at TPM Café were not in keeping with the overwhelming majority of their articles, making and making the case for Senator Barack Obama. I mean Obama voted for Dick Cheney's Energy Bill, the worst in history, deals with the likes of Rezco, and just parrots what Hillary says on most issues. He did not even hold any hearings on a committee he is Chairman of responsible for Nato and Afganistan.
March 10, 2008 4:06 PM | Reply | Permalink