New Gallup: Clinton 50, Obama 21

by areyouready, Mon Oct 15, 2007 at 09:17:37 PM EDT

Gallup has just released a new poll.
http://www.usatoday.com/news/polls/table s/live/2007-10-15-poll.htm

Further evidence Obama's blistering attack on Clinton over the past two weeks may have started to backfire on him big time. Since Gallup has taken two consecutive polls over the past two weeks, the trendline is unmistakeable.

Oct 12-14 (Oct 4-7)
Clinton 50 (47)
Obama 21 (26)
Edwards 13 (10)

The support for Clinton has increased by 3, at the same time, Obama's support has dropped 5 during his 'new phase of campaigning'. Clinton's lead has widened from 21 pts to almost 30 pts. This is the first time Clinton is topping 50 mark in Gallup surveys. This is also the third national poll putting Clinton above critical 50 mark.

Hillary's favorables are also increasing while Obama's negatives are creeping up.

Clinton:
Favorable Unfavorable
Oct 12-14 53 44
Oct 4-7 51 44
Sept 14-16 49 49

Caution: Gallup's fav/unfav survey is quite volatile if you look at its history on each candidate.

Coventional DC and netroots punditry should be alarmed by the so-called 'enthusiastic gap', well it's certainly not what they were expecting... LOL...

Vote for enthusiastically Vote for, mainly against GOP
Clint 64 22
Obama 49 31
Edwards 41 37

It should be no surprise to us Clinton fans though. We see diary after diary of other candidates' supporters focusing on tearing down on Hillary. We seldom see positive diaries on their own candidate. Basically the vocal minority are not mainly voting against Hillary, not for their candidates.

Tags: Hillary Clinton (all tags)

Comments

42 Comments

Sort by

permalink

Woot!!!!!!!!!

Go Hillary! 64% will vote for enthusiastically! Wow. And those favorables are really creeping up. This happened for Bill too when he ran.

by bookgrl 2007-10-15 09:20PM | 0 recs

permalink

Re: Woot!!!!!!!!!

obama spending more money than he raised in the 3rd quarter and all he got was being 29 points behind? he has a lot of explainin to do with his doners.

by terrondt 2007-10-16 02:45AM | 0 recs

permalink

When you recommend a dairy by

a sexist and homophobic troll like areyouready, you enable such conduct. Can't you write the same diary? This author is sexist and homophobic. Check out Hidden Comments.

Hillary Clitnon opposes sexist and homophobia. Live up to her standards and reject areyouready's odious conduct.

by TomP 2007-10-16 06:46AM | 0 recs

permalink

Do you agree with this?

garbage?

This is typical.

funny (0.00 / 3)

I find it's funny that Edwards and his supporters are so afraid of people calling him a whimp, limp-wristed politican. I guess there's lots of truth to that.Interesting.

He needs to hide behind EE's skirt.

Hillary: We will finally have a president who doesn't mind pulling over and asking for directions. Am I right, ladies?
by areyouready on Mon Oct 15, 2007 at 12:31:46 AM EST

by TomP 2007-10-16 01:11PM | 0 recs

permalink

Re: When you recommend a dairy by

When you attack a user which was unprovoked you get troll rated. It is agains't the rules of MyDD. From my understanding, candidates are fair game, with some level of civility.

BTW, that quote was from Clinton herself in a top 10 on Letterman, which is always meant to be comical.

by RJEvans 2007-10-16 03:26PM | 0 recs

permalink

Re: Woot!!!!!!!!!

also cnn just reported their new poll of hillary at 51% to obama 21%. this confirms 2 other polls of her leading by 29 to 33 points nationally. NO OUTLIERS!!!!!!!

by terrondt 2007-10-16 12:10PM | 0 recs

permalink

Further evidence

Further evidence Obama's negative campaigning is helping Hillary.

Hillary's lead has widened to from 21 to 29 points for the past two weeks, while Rudy's lead over Thompson has essentially unchanged (12 to 14).

by areyouready 2007-10-15 09:22PM | 0 recs

permalink

Re: Further evidence

areyouready,

I've just got to let you know that your signature tag:

Hillary: We will finally have a president who doesn't mind pulling over and asking for directions. Am I right, ladies?

Cracks me up every time I read it.

by Andre Walker 2007-10-16 04:05PM | 0 recs

permalink

Re: Further evidence

John Poet -- do you know how to rate?

by sepulvedaj3 2007-10-16 04:06PM | 0 recs

permalink

CA

Maybe somebody should write a separate diary:

New Survey USA CA poll, incredible...
http://cbs5.com/politics/local_file_2882 25535

Clinton 57
Obama 20
Edwards 14

by areyouready 2007-10-15 09:37PM | 0 recs

permalink

Re: CA

I can't believe the crosstabs on that California poll (page 3 of the PDF).

Of course, the sample sizes of subgroups are small and margin of errors high but:

a) Clinton leads among women 68% to 16% over over Obama.

b) 11% of the Democratic sample voted for Bush in 2004. Clinton leads this group 36% to 26% for Edwards.

c) 18% of the sample is pro-life. Clinton gets 56% of these.

d) Clinton gets 66% of the Latino vote. 69% of the Asian American vote.

by hwc 2007-10-15 10:04PM | 0 recs

permalink

Re: CA

All true ... but Hillary also leads with 60% among those who voted for Kerry (vs. 18 for Obama and 13 for Edwards), and leads 58% among those who are pro-choice.

Among those who think Bush is "one of the worst in history" Hillary leads w/ 60% (20 for Obama; 13 Edwards). Interestingly, among those who think Bush is "one of the best in history" it's Hillary 21; Obama 3; Edwards 35 -- but ofcourse the sample size on this last one is miniscule .... !

by silver spring 2007-10-16 04:47AM | 0 recs

permalink

Re: Even Minority Groups solid for Clinton

If you want to get a pulse of a diversed group of Democratic voters, California is the state.

Its just amazing that Hillary Clinton is winning the Asian-American vote by a whopping 52 points & the winning the Latino vote by 53 points.

That just shows you that her support is beyond the White/Black realm.

Remember that this is VERY SIGNIFICANT in California where the number of Asian-Americans voters is almost double the number of Black voters, while Latino voters is almost 5 TIMES larger than African-americans in California.

by labanman 2007-10-16 05:03AM | 0 recs

permalink

Re: New Gallup: Clinton 50, Obama 21

Go Hillary! Why aren't the causes and primaries tomorrow, so she can win and slay the GOP dragon and win the White House?

by American1989 2007-10-15 10:09PM | 0 recs

permalink

Re: New Gallup: Clinton 50, Obama 21

A lot of people get sucked into the echo chamber of mydd and daily kos and think that Clinton would not rally her base , the sooner some folks realize there is a world outside the blogs the better , it's not a coincidence that Clinton has been in the mid 40's in the presidential race basically since Howard Dean thought he would win the nomination.

Most people around me love Bill and Hillary to death and also Obama as well , the know they will vote for her but hope she picks him as the VP.

But If you listen to folks on daily kos and some here on mydd a lot of them just echo the same views about Hillary Clinton that those on the right echo , which I find very bizarre. Hillary Clinton is exactly where mainstream democrats her and she ha been there for the past 15 yrs.

Only a true liberal will think of an idea of baby bonds lol

by lori 2007-10-15 10:58PM | 0 recs

permalink

Did you see this article

about the SC radio ad?

http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/C/C LINTON_AD?SITE=MOSTP&SECTION=HOME&am p;TEMPLATE=DEFAULT

Also, apparently an Obama supporter in SC has jumped ship per the article. Also, not the five headlines on the right. Three are positive Hillary stories, each of the others is an Obama/Edwards going after Clinton story. Interesting.

by bookgrl 2007-10-15 11:15PM | 0 recs

permalink

"note" not "not"

by bookgrl 2007-10-15 11:16PM | 0 recs

permalink

Re: "note" not "not"

Wow , thats funny a state senator actually jumped ship from Obama to Clinton . I can't recall how many times I have ever seen that happen . Someone who had endorsed you , switch his endorsement.

Those ads a close to perfect , those are the kinds of ads I like.

This was what Gallup said in the analysis of the recent polling , i thought it was interesting.

She continues to widen her lead over rival Barack Obama, now 50%-21%, her biggest edge since spring. Former North Carolina senator John Edwards is at 13%. What's more, two-thirds of Clinton's supporters say they are "certain to support" her.

Fewer than half of the supporters of any other candidate in either party are firmly committed.

For Clinton, reaching the threshold of 50% support may have some value. Only once has a presidential candidate received as much as 50% support in a Gallup Poll and then gone on to lose his party's nomination. That was Massachusetts Sen. Edward Kennedy in 1980.

"Some of the other campaigns have tried negative strategies that have backfired while she has continued to be out there saying where she wants to take the country," says Mark Penn, Clinton's chief strategist. Obama has sharpened his criticism of Clinton's judgment in voting to authorize the Iraq invasion in 2002, and Edwards has faulted her recent vote to designate Iran's Revolutionary Guards as a terrorist organization.

by lori 2007-10-15 11:26PM | 0 recs

permalink

It happens.

Did Gallop say when Kennedy was at 50%? What month? A blogger from Chicago, very early on, wrote a piece where he said he thought Obama was like the Ted Kennedy candidate, so I'm sort of curious. This race wa alot tighter at the end of june.

by bookgrl 2007-10-15 11:40PM | 0 recs

permalink

Re: It happens.

No I don't think so . I don't know what the blogger meant.

Did he say he was going to end up like Ted Kennedy and lose or that Clinton was like Ted Kennedy and Obama would come from behind and lose .

by lori 2007-10-15 11:44PM | 0 recs

permalink

He meant that there was alot of

energy around Obama in the early part of this election, like there was for Ted in his, but that he would not win the primary, like Ted.

by bookgrl 2007-10-15 11:53PM | 0 recs

permalink

Re: He meant that there was alot of

The 1980 race is the one primary race that we can ignore. It pitted the last of the Kennedy brothers against an incumbent democratic president. That's unique on so many levels that we can't use it for any comparison.

It's easy to see why, on the one hand we could easily cast Hillary in both the Carter or the Kennedy role. (A virtual incumbent as was Carter. The beneficiary of a strong long established political machine, based around a family like Ted Kennedy.)

But non of her opponents fit either role, there is no Carter or Kennedy opposite her. Niether Obama nor Edwards have the kind of powerbase that Kennedy or Carter had nor any of their liabilities. '08 will be completely different then '80.

by Ernst 2007-10-16 01:14AM | 0 recs

permalink

Re: He meant that there was alot of

How about Hubert Humphrey vs Nixon in '68? Moderate, liberal, quasi-incumbent, war enabler changes stripes during height of opposition to a failed foreign war and gets narrowly trashed by an arch-conservative Republican after dissing progressives and prevaricating on solutions.

I realise the primary was incomparably shambolic that year, no parallel there, but the general campaign may contain a lesson or two on managing conservatives during a campaign focussed on the honourable conclusion of a failed foreign war.

by Shaun Appleby 2007-10-16 06:25PM | 0 recs

permalink

Re: He meant that there was alot of

I don't think it's possible to compare the elections before '72 with those after. Because of the changed primary rules caused by the '68 election.

Not only was the primary shambolic, Humprey never really participated in it at all. While the opponents change after the convention I really do believe the primaries and the general are part of a single campaign.

Because of the primaries Nixon started out with a huge lead and Humprey was thought to have no chance at all. I don't think Humpreys problems with progressives was due to his campaign for the general as much as it was the campaign during the primary.

Nixon was able to use his peace with honor trope because the republicans hadn't been in charge of the war. Vietnam was a war associated with democratic party started with Humprey fully supporting is a vice president. That is far more damning as voting for AUMF.

I think that if your looking for lessons from this race you should look for general appliable tactics then specific actions.

Personally I think the primary will resemble '84 the most for the democrats. '04 without dean for the republicans and the general will likely be similar to '96.

by Ernst 2007-10-17 06:59AM | 0 recs

permalink

Re: New Gallup: Clinton 50, Obama 21

I've come to the conclusion for a variety of reasons that Hillary will actually be our strongest candidate, and this poll that shows 64% of Democrats will vote enthusiastically for her is just farther evidence of that. Tell me what Democrat, even including Gore if he ran, could unify all of the Democratic groups--African Americans, Latinos, Gays, Unions, Feminists, Environmentalists, and so on--like she could. Also I stongly believe among independents she'd do better than either Obama or Edwards.

Those anti Hillary left wingers, particularly on the Daily Kos, are so insignificant. They're guided by emotion not logic. They can support her eventually if they want, but if they don't it won't mean much. They're primarly white, male, upper middle class liberals who say to hell with anyone that doesn't believe in 95% of what they do. Well I'm a white, male, middle class liberal who kind of feels sorry they think like that.

by Christopher Lib 2007-10-16 08:32AM | 0 recs

permalink

Re: New Gallup: Clinton 50, Obama 21

That's a great point- she does unify all those groups.

by reasonwarrior 2007-10-16 11:33AM | 0 recs

permalink

Re: New Gallup: Clinton 50, Obama 21

Christopher, good post.

I believe you are new here. Welcome.

I had written a diary on the 5 main constituencies that support Clinton very strongly (by 2 to 1 margins,) but beyond that there are more. If interested, here is the diary:

http://www.mydd.com/story/2007/10/1/2293 9/9317#commenttop

by georgep 2007-10-16 12:17PM | 0 recs

permalink

Re: New Gallup: Clinton 50, Obama 21

Tell me what Democrat, even including Gore if he ran, could unify all of the Democratic groups--African Americans, Latinos, Gays, Unions, Feminists, Environmentalists, and so on--like she could. Also I stongly believe among independents she'd do better than either Obama or Edwards.

Bingo.

There are five reasons for her unifying ability:

1. A resevoir of good will towards the Clinton administration.

2. An obviously top performing, well-prepared candidate and campaign.

3. The support of women (and us men who think women bring a nice balance to 230 years of old white dudes in office) cuts across all of the major Democratic constituent groups -- and, in fact, across all traditional political groupings.

4. The most famous larger-than-life "superstar" candidate in the field, from either party.

5. Brilliantly positioned politically. Too moderate for some, too liberal for others, just right for many to go into the general election as a left-center candidate able to put together a winning coalition of moderately liberal and centrist voters. The simultaneous attacks from the netroots left and the rabid right wing are helping Clinton immensely.

by hwc 2007-10-16 12:24PM | 0 recs

permalink

Re: New Gallup: Clinton 50, Obama 21

I am almost speechless over these numbers!

Hallelujah!

by samueldem 2007-10-15 11:08PM | 0 recs

permalink

Re: New Gallup: Clinton 50, Obama 21

What's amazing is not just this poll by itself .. but the fact that the RCP average of 6 separate national polls (9/27 through 10/14) is:
Clinton 48.2
Obama 21.0
Edwards 12.0

by silver spring 2007-10-16 05:28AM | 0 recs

permalink

ADULTS ! 500 ADULTS !

They have resorted to polling adults rather than Registered Voters and Caucus Goers. Ha Ha Ha . I guess that's the only way they can push the Hillary Inevitability Meme.

(Asked of Democrats and independents who lean to the Democratic Party) Which of the following candidates would you be most likely to support for the Democratic nomination for president in 2008, or if you would support someone else.

BASED ON --500-- DEMOCRATS AND DEMOCRATIC LEANERS

http://www.usatoday.com/news/polls/table s/live/2007-10-15-poll.htm

by BlueDiamond 2007-10-16 06:13AM | 0 recs

permalink

Re: ADULTS ! 500 ADULTS !

Sure, a LV screen would have shown Obama making major inroads. Get real.

Marist's New Hampshire poll from a couple of days ago released two screens, one for LV and one for A. There was no difference between the two results.

by georgep 2007-10-16 06:40AM | 0 recs

permalink

Re: ADULTS ! 500 ADULTS !

You would probably like this week's ARG national poll better. They use a very tight voter screen, only including those who say they will "definitely vote" in their primary or caucus:

http://americanresearchgroup.com/

Clinton: 45%
Obama: 20%
Edwards: 13%

by hwc 2007-10-16 07:23AM | 0 recs

permalink

Re: New Gallup: Clinton 50, Obama 21

Hillary should be doing MUCH better then these polls. She's had 15-20 years of being IN THE NEWS almost daily, compared to Obama's fame starting this past year.

If Obama got a little more of the same POSITIVE press coverage that Hillary's been getting this past year (GOP seems to be laying low and the media is pushing Hillary - Clinton name brings more NEWS SCOOPS in the FUTURE), that he'd be tied or above Hillary in the polls.

by coonbug 2007-10-16 08:21AM | 0 recs

permalink

Re: New Gallup: Clinton 50, Obama 21

Amazing stuff.

1. Ignorance in not knowing that 50% in an 8-man race is absolutely outstanding.

2. Blaming the media is an easy copout. Push the responsibility for 30% gaps (and growing) as far away from the candidate as possible. Nevermind that Obama was much closer than this in March/April, which brings us back to #1 and ignorance.

by georgep 2007-10-16 08:50AM | 0 recs

permalink

Re: New Gallup: Clinton 50, Obama 21

Fantastic! It's great to see America sees through all the people who spend most of their time misrepresenting her position and distorting her record.

by reasonwarrior 2007-10-16 11:41AM | 0 recs

permalink

Re: New Gallup: Clinton 50, Obama 21

Her overall support in national/state polls is growing. the well of reserves she is keeping will deflect any Upset in Iowa (and by upset, i mean more than 5%).

by sepulvedaj3 2007-10-16 03:17PM | 0 recs

permalink

Re: New Gallup: Clinton 50, Obama 21

Already bracing for a loss in Iowa. Good thinking.

by Lawdawg 2007-10-16 03:32PM | 0 recs

permalink

Re: New Gallup: Clinton 50, Obama 21

HELLO FOLKS!!

SORRY THAT HILLARY IS NOT LIKED BY THE MAJORITY OF AMERICANS.
IT IS A FACT! SHE WILL NEVER GET ELECTED.

by win 2007-10-16 07:59PM | 0 recs

permalink

Re: New Gallup: Clinton 50, Obama 21

Uh, you must have been living in a cave for the last 4 weeks?

Clinton's favorables are now in the mid-50s. Last time I checked, that would be a majority.

Don't get yourself too upset about all of this. Stuff happens that is out of anyone's control.

by georgep 2007-10-16 08:13PM | 0 recs

permalink

Re: New Gallup: Clinton 50, Obama 21

Are you kidding me?

POLLS HAVE BEEN DEBUNKED !

The likes Norman Hsu, lobbyists, shady personalities....(the list goes on with the Clintons) are behind those inflated numbers. Nobody believes it!

Believe me, I am actually happy that Hillary worships the polls. I work at the grassroot level!

by win 2007-10-16 08:28PM | 0 recs

permalink

Re: New Gallup: Clinton 50, Obama 21

Seriously, don't let it get to you too much. Relax. Nobody has debunked these polls. Everybody (aside from yourself) believes they are real. How could one not? There are way too many of them stating the same thing for one or two to be an outlier.

It is the CURRENT state of the race. Nothing more, nothing less, although the trends and internals don't look promising for Obama.

by georgep 2007-10-16 08:54PM | 0 recs