Clinton's Advantage Unchanged In Two Months
by Chris Bowers, Fri May 11, 2007 at 08:29:32 AM EDT
I just completed my new polling averages for May 12th, and I find it extremely frustrating to report that Hillary Clinton's lead has returned to early-March levels:
High-End Estimate
Low-End Estimate
As you can see, Clinton's margin over Obama, after shrinking precipitously throughout April, is now virtually identical, and actually slightly larger, to the margin she held in early March. The May12th estimate shows her advantage to be 12.5%-13.0%, while the March 12th estimate showed her ahead 11.5%-12.2%. Also, she is once again virtually the equal of Obama and Edwards combined, trailing only 39.0%-41.0% in the high-end estimate, and 34.8%-35.6% in the low-end estimate. If you don't want to see Hillary Clinton become the nominee, about the only solace you can take from these numbers is that her margin on April 10th was about the same as it is now.
Much more in the extended entry.
High-End Estimate
| Date | Clinton | Obama | Edwards | Other / Unsure |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| May 12 | 39.0 | 26.5 | 15.5 | 19.0 |
| Apr 30 | 33.5 | 30.3 | 18.0 | 18.2 |
| Apr 10 | 37.8 | 22.8 | 17.3 | 22.1 |
| Mar 12 | 39.0 | 26.8 | 14.0 | 20.2 |
| Mar 02 | 37.8 | 24.8 | 14.0 | 23.4 |
Low-End Estimate
| Date | Clinton | Obama | Edwards | Other / Unsure |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| May 12 | 34.8 | 21.8 | 13.8 | 29.5 |
| Apr 30 | 34.2 | 27.0 | 16.7 | 22.2 | Apr 10 | 35.8 | 22.0 | 15.5 | 26.7 |
| Mar 12 | 36.3 | 24.8 | 12.7 | 26.2 |
| Mar 02 | 35.6 | 24.0 | 11.2 | 29.2 |
As you can see, Clinton's margin over Obama, after shrinking precipitously throughout April, is now virtually identical, and actually slightly larger, to the margin she held in early March. The May12th estimate shows her advantage to be 12.5%-13.0%, while the March 12th estimate showed her ahead 11.5%-12.2%. Also, she is once again virtually the equal of Obama and Edwards combined, trailing only 39.0%-41.0% in the high-end estimate, and 34.8%-35.6% in the low-end estimate. If you don't want to see Hillary Clinton become the nominee, about the only solace you can take from these numbers is that her margin on April 10th was about the same as it is now.
Much more in the extended entry.
These fairly rapid shifts are not simply a function of the polling firms included in the averages at any given point in time. CNN, Gallup and Rasmussen have all shown positive movement favoring Clinton, just as, along with NBC and Cook, they had all shown positive movement favoring Obama and Edwards from April 10-April 30. While her current lead is smaller than it was during the first two weeks of February, when she led by a whopping twenty points, and easily outpaced Edwards and Obama combined, that does not make me feel any better. Even if her lead is not as its all-time high point, it still doesn't feel like it is going anywhere.
What happened in the last two or three weeks? First, I think the debate hurt Obama and Edwards relative to the rest of the non-Clinton field. For a while, those two were the entire non-Clinton field to most Democratic voters, but the debate presented the Democratic rank and file with more options from to choose. Second, Hillary Clinton's support appears to be stronger and have more depth than many have assumed. She has had a long-term, fifteen year history with the Democratic rank and file, which is a barrier all other, "newer" candidates will have a difficult time overcoming.
In the back of my mind, I wonder if Clinton's recent return to the troposphere is partially the fault of the blogosphere not doing its job, as we become embroiled in Edwards vs. Obama inanity. The Politico has an article today arguing that the progressive, political blogosphere might be Clinton's biggest obstacle to earning the nomination, something which the BlogPac Netroots survey has led me to argue for about eleven months now. I personally have tremendous worries about, if she became President, the number of troops Clinton would keep in Iraq, her connection to neoliberals who force through economic policy that Republicans like more than Democrats, ala the pending trade deal, her connection to DLC-nexus consultants that backstab the party for pay and attack the grassroots for fun, as well as what I perceive to be her at least somewhat lower (though not drastically lower) chances of winning a general election than Obama and Edwards. A Clinton nomination would feel like the complete triumph of the insider machine over the grassroots--the national equivalent of "machine boss" Bob Brady winning the Philadelphia mayoral election--which would return us squarely to the Democratic troubled times of 1994-2004. At the same time, because I consider myself a good Democrat, because of my belief in progressive Realpolitk, and because there are many people in the Clinton campaign that I respect quite a bit, I want to make certain that if "we" are able to beat her, that we do so fairly, according to the rules, and in a way that does not damage the party overall.
However, for one reason or another, we are just not making much progress on that front. Maybe it is because Obama and Edwards want to keep troops in Iraq, too. Maybe it is because many attacks against the netroots are not particularly fair, as Jonathan Chait has shown. Maybe it is because the Democratic base has become used to the idea that it needs to sell itself out on economic policy in order to supposedly "win over swing voters." Maybe it is because the red flags the blogosphere identifies about Clinton do not resonate with the base, or that the messages we use to communicate those red flags don't work. Maybe it is because the established media is already heavily engaged in this election, and we do better when they don't pay attention. Maybe the Clinton machine is just too tough a nut to crack, and we haven't made strong enough or wide enough coalitions to counter it. Or, possibly, maybe the election is still almost eight months away, and I am hyperventilating over nothing.
This is very frustrating. Of course I would support Clinton if she was the nominee, and of course I would rather she become President than any Republican. But, for a number of reasons I laid out in this post, I don't want her to become the nominee. I seriously wonder if I am having any impact whatsoever on preventing a Clinton nomination from happening.
Update: Gallup has some interesting information on Clinton and Obama supporters.
What happened in the last two or three weeks? First, I think the debate hurt Obama and Edwards relative to the rest of the non-Clinton field. For a while, those two were the entire non-Clinton field to most Democratic voters, but the debate presented the Democratic rank and file with more options from to choose. Second, Hillary Clinton's support appears to be stronger and have more depth than many have assumed. She has had a long-term, fifteen year history with the Democratic rank and file, which is a barrier all other, "newer" candidates will have a difficult time overcoming.
In the back of my mind, I wonder if Clinton's recent return to the troposphere is partially the fault of the blogosphere not doing its job, as we become embroiled in Edwards vs. Obama inanity. The Politico has an article today arguing that the progressive, political blogosphere might be Clinton's biggest obstacle to earning the nomination, something which the BlogPac Netroots survey has led me to argue for about eleven months now. I personally have tremendous worries about, if she became President, the number of troops Clinton would keep in Iraq, her connection to neoliberals who force through economic policy that Republicans like more than Democrats, ala the pending trade deal, her connection to DLC-nexus consultants that backstab the party for pay and attack the grassroots for fun, as well as what I perceive to be her at least somewhat lower (though not drastically lower) chances of winning a general election than Obama and Edwards. A Clinton nomination would feel like the complete triumph of the insider machine over the grassroots--the national equivalent of "machine boss" Bob Brady winning the Philadelphia mayoral election--which would return us squarely to the Democratic troubled times of 1994-2004. At the same time, because I consider myself a good Democrat, because of my belief in progressive Realpolitk, and because there are many people in the Clinton campaign that I respect quite a bit, I want to make certain that if "we" are able to beat her, that we do so fairly, according to the rules, and in a way that does not damage the party overall.
However, for one reason or another, we are just not making much progress on that front. Maybe it is because Obama and Edwards want to keep troops in Iraq, too. Maybe it is because many attacks against the netroots are not particularly fair, as Jonathan Chait has shown. Maybe it is because the Democratic base has become used to the idea that it needs to sell itself out on economic policy in order to supposedly "win over swing voters." Maybe it is because the red flags the blogosphere identifies about Clinton do not resonate with the base, or that the messages we use to communicate those red flags don't work. Maybe it is because the established media is already heavily engaged in this election, and we do better when they don't pay attention. Maybe the Clinton machine is just too tough a nut to crack, and we haven't made strong enough or wide enough coalitions to counter it. Or, possibly, maybe the election is still almost eight months away, and I am hyperventilating over nothing.
This is very frustrating. Of course I would support Clinton if she was the nominee, and of course I would rather she become President than any Republican. But, for a number of reasons I laid out in this post, I don't want her to become the nominee. I seriously wonder if I am having any impact whatsoever on preventing a Clinton nomination from happening.
Update: Gallup has some interesting information on Clinton and Obama supporters.
Tags: Blogosphere, Democrats, Hillary Clinton, netroots, polling averages, polls (all tags)
-----------
myDD - skin
-----------
262 Comments