« Audio: Hillary Privately Blasted "The Activist Base Of The Democratic Party" For Caucus Defeats | Home | New Obama Ads In Pennsylvania Attack Clinton »

Gallup: Clinton Edges Obama By One Point

Hillary Clinton has taken a one-point lead in today's Gallup poll. While it's not statistically significant, it's in fact the first time in a month that she's had any kind of lead in Gallup's tracker. Here are the numbers, compared to yesterday:

Clinton 46% (+2)
Obama 45% (-2)

Less than a week ago, Obama was enjoying an 11-point lead -- a sign that the rough debate on Wednesday might have combined with the "small town" controversy to drag his numbers down quite a bit.


46 Comments

| Leave a comment

Question about the Gallup poll - these are the same voters? Polled day after day? And there's only a thousand of them? Which averages, what, 20 people per state?

Also, we seem to have no idea whether or not Gallup is accurate, because they offer no polls for primary states, so we can't compare their predictions with results.

Noam Scheiber has the best analysis out there. Right here.

THIS IS WHAT YOU GET WHEN YOU POLL THOSE GOOBERS WITH GUNS HIDDEN IN BIBLES !

What part of "Change" don't these gomers understand? Get your guilt on inbreeders! You don't want me unhappy.

Sincerly
M. Obama

Sure, it's had an effect -- but "drag his numbers down quite a bit"? Nonsense. "Down" to what? Statistically significant to statistically insignificant? Come on. This is one daily tracker. Daily trackers always fluctuate. That's why you don't take them to the bank.

And what you should get out of this is that Hillary has to win by 20+%, in every remaining race, including PA, to even have a shot at beating Obama.

1%? Not happening.

I just hope Obama can actually BEAT her in PA so we can wrap this up fast, we need a knockout blow. Some Hillary supporters just need to realize it is over and switch over to Obama for the good of the party. She is now trying to tie him to terrorists for the Republicans, time to wake up and see that she needs to be finished.

Noam Scheiber has the best analysis out there. Right here.

The worst is now over. Starting Monday, the numbers will be on their way back up.

Asthe Moveon story hits harder and harder, the daily polls will adjust again.

2 - 3 million (thought it's probably close to 2 now that her supporters hate MoveOn) angry democrats won't be a good thing for daily tracking numbers.

As for PA, NC & IA's who are actually paying attention to the race and not just the sound bites, he moving up.

Big time.

My prediction. He win's PA. I know it's a long shot in most people's eyes, but PAer's are pissed (*anbd bitter) and the debate they were waiting for was a joke in their eyes and since it was their eyes that mattered most for this week, it's hurting her not him. Combined with "bitter" that wasn't, there's a chance she loses.

He wins 52 to 48. Mark it down.

Oops, Indiana is IN.

I don't think it is going to hit, the media doesn't care about that, even though they just finished up an orgy over the "bitter" comments, which were spot on and something he has repeated in public.

Gotta love how much that media hates Hillary so much...

yeah, what a wonderful thing... the media hates Hillary. that's just what i want. i want the media to poison the waters when they identify an undeserving candidate... just like they trashed Al Gore back in 2000. he was just not qualified to be president. the media really saved us there. thank goodness for the media.

the media is out of control. they don't know how to do their job anymore. they are lazy, unethical, ratings whores.

NH voters basically told the media to shove it by voting for Hillary. i hope the rest of america does the same thing. not only do i prefer Hillary, but the media deserves to get taken down a few notches, so that they consider going back to being journalists instead of what they have become.

I kind of hope it doesn't hit the media, because it'll stir up all that "General Betray Us" ad stuff again and that's what they'll all end up talking about, not Hillary saying one thing in private and another thing to someone's face. I have a feeling MoveOn wants it to stay subtle as well.

I wonder... how many MoveOn members there are in Pennsylvania?

With 35,000 coming out in Philly, it looks like the enthusiasm and energy is all on Obama's side. I hope this means he's got the timing on the momentum.

Actually, I kind of like the moderate and targeted exposure the "Democratic activist" story is getting. (I avoid saying just MoveOn because more than just MoveOn members are pissed about her comments.)

This story won't do much to hurt Hillary among moderate Dems; might even help her with some. But it's not good for her among progressives and, even more so, superdelegates. Those are the audiences who need to see this.

Yeah, well unfortunately this is going to die a quick death in the MSM because Obama won't push it. The WaPo had it as part of The Trail (not even on the regular news feed) and it is already off the headlines. I guess it is only okay to insult blue-collar workers in PA but the rest of us well, too f-ing bad.

Noam Scheiber has the best analysis out there. Right here.

Hey sparky, nobody except for hairy, troop-hating liberals gives a shit about the MoveOn "controversy." This is why blue states lose.

"Obama goes negative in Pennsylvania, after
promising to have a positive and upbeat campaign

Barack Obama cast his Democratic presidential rival Saturday as a game-player who uses "slash and burn" tactics and will say whatever people want to hear, a sharp jab at her character in the final chapter of the pivotal Pennsylvania primary campaign."

He will flip her off again.

That's not negative so much as stating the obvious. He isn't trying to tie her to terrorists or use right wing talking points against him, THAT is negative, this? Not negative.

But I do love your double standard...Hillary can do anything and you worship the ground she walks on, and Obama points out that she is going for blood (which she is, pretty much everyone has noted this) and you are on here trying to attacking him for it.

Give me a break.

June 3rd.
It's over then.

Are you dead at the keyboard? It seems that you've posted the same thing over and over in recent days. Almost like idiotic, though a lot easier on the eyes.

Matthew
http://www.TheIndependentView.com

Noam Scheiber has the best analysis out there. Right here.

While we've been watching the press get distracted by all the "shiny objects" tossed into the air at the debate, something's been happening with the polls.

What's up with the Polster.com averages? If I'm reading that right, Obama's pulling away still.

that poll is dated Feb 26th 2008
You aren't reading it wrong it's just 6 weeks old

Who the hell are these "Democrats" that are moving towards Clinton? What the hell does she have to do to lose your support? Light an old woman on fire and push her down a flight of stairs?

As happy as I am to see the polls shift, I don't see much reason to get very excited yet. Gallup has been pretty resistent to change, though, so if Sunday and Monday show continuation, we'll see enough to mark a trend, which will be very helpful and positive going into the Pennsylvania primary on Tuesday.

Matthew
http://www.TheProblemWithObama.com

wow Mathhew..you must be very bitter..clicking on that link was nothing but hostility and lies spewing forth that you took the time to actually write?

Noam Scheiber has the best analysis out there. Right here.

Funny the way painting someone as tied to Hamas, terrorist, Farrakhan, angry black scary minister, being unpatriotic, dishonest, and insulting can affect peoples opinions.

I can't get over them making Wright an issue the way they did, acting like those clips portrayed him. They know it isn't true. Let me just share what George already knew.
On his March 30th "This Week" it came up twice. First Cynthia Tucker said her brother and friends went there and it was really quite mainstream conventional. Her brother found it a bit too conservative because of sermon's emphasis on family and responsibility and that more tapes should be shown.
George interrupted and changed the subject.
At the end if that segment George asked Jay Carney of Time Magazine if we'd be hearing more about Wright soon. Carney said reporters had been culling through years of sermons ever since it broke and hadn't found anything that controversial so the story seemed essentially over. George moved on.
THE OTHER SERMONS IN THOSE YEARS ARE NOT CONTROVERSIAL SO THERE IS NO STORY? Are they nuts?

And yet they tried to make him look bad with it again...Anyway if people don't know these things are not true they raise concerns about him.

The media scares me and not just ABC.

Here's my take on the daily polls. It seems clear at this point that the movement to Hillary in the recent days is real. But what can one take from this regarding PA...which is the only thing that matters right now? Well, the people in the national tracking poll are only kinda paying attention - it's background noise for them. I mean, most and I really mean MOST, people do not follow this race to the same degree that we all do. The MSM is creaming him right now (in order to keep the race alive and get them more $$) and those voters who are easily swayed are swinging back to Hillary.

But those in PA, at least to a much larger degree, are actually paying attention. They are getting a lot more information and up close and personal campaigning. Their votes are influenced by a lot more than just background noise. It's their turn to vote and they are taking a lot more in to account than just MSM narrative.

None of this is to say he is going to win PA. The hill is just way too steep to climb in that state. 7-10 point loss is realistic. Less than 5% would be fantastic. But a win? No way.

TaraV

I agree. No way Obama wins the state. the only question is how much does he lose by. I hope he can keep it close.

Noam Scheiber has the best analysis out there. Right here.

Noam Scheiber has the best analysis out there. Right here.

Obama is very negative on Hillary today.

Internal polling with the Obama camp must be bad news.

I wish he wouldn't tear her down so much.
It'll give the Republicans ammunition in the Fall.

I agree it's crap that this didn't get more coverage. I'm just not surprised, I guess, and think there's an incidental bright side to it.

I think the Dems Clinton is whining about here (I include myself among them) feel that they've been taken for granted for years now. And that's one of the reasons I like the idea of the superdelegates hearing about Clinton's comments. It reminds them to ask, "What would happen if we couldn't take them for granted anymore?" Hillary's obviously so annoyed that she would actually have to earn our vote! She was expecting to only have to pander to the center.

Sorry. Meant to be in response to newfapalooza above.

"Yeah, well unfortunately this is going to die a quick death in the MSM because Obama won't push it. The WaPo had it as part of The Trail (not even on the regular news feed) and it is already off the headlines. I guess it is only okay to insult blue-collar workers in PA but the rest of us well, too f-ing bad."

Yep and the reason the MSM buries bad news about Hillary and McCain, while blowing a gasket over every tenuous "guilt by assocation" of Obama, is because they are all obviously in the tank for Obama. Too soft on him. ;-)

It's the candidate's job to open himself/herself to the public. Any question about their background or history is legitimate issue. It's up to voters to determine what matters to them.
The poll shows that ABC did a fine job in its line of questioning. Little is known about Obama and ABC provided more background on the candidates that helped voters size up the candidates.

The agent of change is now showing his real colors by trashing Bill and Hillary. Truly this must be the change we seek.

eh, I dated a prof at City College once. Nice girl, but a real dumb bint when it came to understanding the real world. But even she understood what a disaster open admissions had been for CCNY. Once the "poor man's Harvard," exactly the kind of school for poor but bright kids like myself, in 1974 or so the city buckled to African-American demands to offer admission to anyone who showed up. Result? Within two years the teaching standards of the school were shit, as was the reputation. And nobody even benefited, because now all the kids getting once golden degrees had a piece of worthless paper. And no education either, just four years sitting in a classroom. Now CCNY is making its way back, admitting students on the basis of merit, and a CCNY degree is again a respected credential. Any lessons here?

Er, no, no lesson here since this is an irrelevant comment. Have you not realized that Obama's run a better, more disciplined campaign than Clinton? Obama's not the one whose campaign keeps running out of money because the campaign staff is staying at the Four Seasons. Obama's not the one who's behind in delegates because they had no plan and just expected a coronation. Obama's not the one who's had no consistent message and just keeps going from Rovian tactic to Rovian tactic hoping something will stick.

I guess this is a window into the mentality of Clinton supporters. Although there are many Clinton supporters that are voting for her based on the issues, I find a lot of them fall into two camps: 1) voting for Clinton because she's a woman, and 2) voting against Obama because he's black.

#1 I can't really begrudge - if I was an older woman that thought I may not have another chance to vote a woman into the White House, I would probably do the same thing. It's no different most Catholics voting for JFK, or most Greeks voting for Dukakis.

#2 however, are just racists like yourself. Where most of us more objective supporters have seen rare intelligence, rare talent to inspire, *and* a very effective manager (e.g. the splendid campaign he's run), other people see an "empty suit" despite the fact that his writings show *far* more depth of thought than Clinton's, and despite the fact that he's been been a co-author on as many significant bills (e.g. lobbyist reform, nuclear proliferation, searchable government spending database) in 3 years in the Senate as Clinton has had in 7 years in Senate)

lmalave, you didn't include the categories of those who vote for Obama because (1) they're voting AGAINST a woman candidate, and (2) he's black.

And you bring up "issues, issues, issues". But we are not electing a county clerk here. We're electing a president, and character is also extremely important, perhaps as much if not more than "issues, issues, issues".

Personally, I hold Obama's lack of experience and of track record against him, i.e. I have no idea how to predict what he would actually do if handed the keys to the Oval Office. I also hold against him the easy way he associated himself with that preacher. Since he does not have a long track record, I have to look at his past to try and take the measure of the guy. I have been around the block way too many times to simply believe a nice speech that he gave, with his cadre of advisors and speech-writers behind him.

But from the very beginning, the thing that has worried me most about him is the cult-like zealotry and venom of his supporters. Frankly it scares me to think that these people (such as on this message board) would be setting the agenda of this country. And I strongly believe it MUST be stopped, either by Hillary or by McCain, for the good of this nation.

people...people will be bitter, the most bitter of them all....slowly image forms in mind of public...arrogant and bitter..change we have not been looking for, people people who love people, are not bitter they are just better so much better than bitter

words do matter drip by drip obamas image gels in the public mind..be careful obama supporters folks are watching

user-pic

But Obama won't win PA. Which is Hillary's point. Obama Can't Win. He has had four chances to knock her out: NH, Cal, Oh, Tex. Results:L,L,L,L. He does not have the ability to deliver the knock out punch. Not even after Iowa when everybody said she was dead and he was ahead by ten points in the polls. And he won't win PA, even though he is outspending her 3 to 1 and all the news coverage of her says she is on her electoral death bed. He does not have the ability to land the knock out punch.
If he does win the nomination by attrition, he will lose the general election. Which maybe the better outcome for Dems anyway, as the price of four years of Jimmy Carter was eight years of Ronald Reagan.

In reply to sisyphusjns....

Vooooooooommmmmmmmmmmiiiiiiiiiittttt....

No offense,

user-pic

And today Obama is back ahead by 1 percentage point. So?

What exactly is the point of making a headline about minor changes in a daily tracking poll that are all within the margin of error?

user-pic

I'm always happy when Obama leads. But again today, the change is within the margin of error. I don't get why an insignificant change in a daily tracking poll is worthy of a headline.

Leave a comment

Advertise Liberally
Share
Close Social Web Email

"To" Email Address

Your Name

Your Email Address