CE Week #5: “Clinton Widens Lead In Poll”
Senator Also Tops Obama in Latest Fundraising Data
By Jon Cohen and Anne E. Kornblut
Washington Post Staff Writers
Wednesday, October 3, 2007; A01
Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton has consolidated her place as the front-runner in the contest for the Democratic presidential nomination, outpacing her main rivals in fundraising in the most recent quarter and widening her lead in a new Washington Post-ABC News poll.
For the first time, Clinton (N.Y.) is drawing support from a majority of Democrats — and has opened up a lead of 33 percentage points over Sen. Barack Obama (Ill.). Her popularity, the poll suggests, is being driven by her strength on key issues and a growing perception among voters that she would best represent change.
The new numbers come on the heels of an aggressive push by Clinton to dominate the political landscape. She unveiled her health-care proposal and then appeared on all five Sunday news shows on the same day — all while her husband, former president Bill Clinton, went on tour to promote a new book. Within the past month, at least one Clinton has appeared on television virtually every day, increasing the campaign’s exposure among millions of Americans.
Yesterday, her campaign announced that it had topped Obama for the first time in a fundraising period, taking in $22 million in the past three months in funds that can be used for the primary campaign, to Obama’s $19 million.
When all funds raised in the period were included, Clinton raised a total of $27 million in the quarter and Obama took in $20 million. While Obama topped her performance in the first two fundraising periods this year, the two are virtually even in the amount they have raised for the primaries, with Obama bringing in about $75 million for the nominating contests and Clinton about $72.5 million.
Even with the avalanche of publicity the Clintons have received, the Post-ABC News poll suggests that there is more than name recognition at work.
Among Democrats and Democratic-leaning independents, 53 percent support Clinton, compared with 20 percent for Obama and 13 percent for former senator John Edwards (N.C.).
Despite rivals’ efforts to portray her as too polarizing to win the general election, a clear majority of those surveyed, 57 percent, said Clinton is the Democratic candidate with the best chance on Nov. 4, 2008. The percentage saying Clinton has the best shot at winning is up 14 points since June. By contrast, 20 percent think Edwards is most electable and 16 percent think Obama is, numbers that represent a huge blow to the “electability” argument rivals have sought to use against her.
One of the central claims of Obama’s campaign is that he is best suited to lower partisan tensions in Washington. But, in this poll, more see Clinton as best able to reduce partisanship.
On major issues, Democrats are far more likely to trust her than her main competitors — 52 percent trust her most on Iraq, compared with 22 percent who trust Obama most on the war and 17 percent who trust Edwards most. On health care, 66 percent trust her most to handle the issue, compared with 15 percent for Obama and 14 percent for Edwards. Half see Clinton as the candidate who best reflects the “core values” of the Democratic Party.
Democrats remain roughly evenly divided over whether they want a candidate of change or of experience, the dichotomy that has been widely used to sum up the party’s race so far. Fifty percent said they prefer a candidate who emphasizes a new direction, and 42 percent said they want a proven, steady leader.
In both cases, support for Clinton has grown.
Two months ago, 51 percent of voters seeking a candidate of “strength and experience” picked Clinton as their favorite. Now 62 percent of voters in this category support Clinton.
Among those looking for a “new direction and new ideas,” Clinton now has an edge, with support from 45 percent — compared with 31 percent for Obama. Previously, these “change voters” were split evenly between Clinton and Obama.
Overall, support for Clinton exceeds 50 percent for the first time in the campaign. In five previous Post-ABC polls this year, she hovered in the low to mid-40s.
Support for Obama, now at 20 percent, has softened since early September and stands at its lowest point since he entered the race in February. Support for Edwards has remained essentially stable. New Mexico Gov. Bill Richardson, Sens. Joseph R. Biden Jr. (Del.) and Christopher J. Dodd (Conn.), Rep. Dennis J. Kucinich (Ohio), and former senator Mike Gravel (Alaska) all registered in the low single digits.
In the new poll, Clinton has gained among both women and men. She leads Obama in the race for the Democratic nomination by 22 percentage points among men, and by 42 points among women. Fully 57 percent of women said they would support Clinton in a primary, compared with 15 percent for Obama and 13 percent for Edwards.
Since early September, Clinton has picked up support both among Democrats (up 9 percentage points) and independents who lean toward Democrats (up 16 points). For the first time, a majority of married women, 56 percent, back Clinton. There is little difference between people who are tracking the campaign closely and those who are paying scant attention: Majorities in both groups said they would vote for Clinton if the election were held today.
Clinton also has a wide lead among whites, besting both Obama and Edwards by a 3 to 1 ratio. She has a narrower edge among African Americans: 51 percent support Clinton, compared with 38 percent for Obama.
Whether she can continue to consolidate support will be the test over the next three months, as the contenders head into the first primary contests in early January. The poll indicates that, at least right now, she is well positioned to do so.
Clinton’s backers remain firmly behind her candidacy. Sixty-one percent of those who said they would vote for her support her “strongly.” In another sign that Clinton has neutralized skepticism of her acceptability as a candidate, about three-quarters ranked her as a first or second choice. Half rate Obama in the top two; a third do so of Edwards.
After Clinton outraised Obama in the third quarter, her advisers worked to maximize the news. The campaign stayed silent on Monday as Obama announced his $19 million fundraising total, then released its total yesterday morning, just as Obama was poised to begin a major speech about the war in Iraq.
For the first time since Clinton launched her campaign in January, her financial success appears to have turned much more directly on the support of small donors — a domain that Obama and, to a lesser extent, Edwards had dominated in the first six months of the year. Clinton reported receiving money from 100,000 new donors this quarter — double the number she recruited during the first three months of the campaign.
The Post-ABC poll was conducted by telephone Sept. 27 to 30, among a national random sample of 1,114 adults, including interviews with 592 self-identified Democrats and Democratic-leaning independents. The margin of sampling error for the Democratic sample is plus or minus four percentage points.
Polling analyst Jennifer Agiesta and staff writer Matthew Mosk contributed to this report.
The URI to TrackBack this entry is: http://pkautzman.edublogs.org/2007/10/03/ce-week-5-clinton-widens-lead-in-poll/trackback/
Whether you are for her or against her you just cannot help but admit that Hilary Clinton does have some merit as a politician. In the upcoming election she will most likely be one of the key democrat candidates. Her success with raising campaign money is in my opinion surprising. I wouldn’t give her money. But somehow she has managed to pull in a buttload (however big that may be) of money and in the polls she’s jogging ahead of Obama. Polls are showing that a majority of people believe Hilary can best reduce partisanship. Whoever was answering that poll must have been out of their minds. While I may not agree with people on that topic – I cannot deny that Mrs. Clinton must be a damn good politician to have roused up that much support. Either you love this woman or you despise this woman. Personally I don’t hate her but I wouldn’t vote for her. Of the Democratic candidates I support Obama on his position on the war on Terror. However – I am not likely going to vote Democrat.
After reading this article it seems that Hillary Clinton is not only in the lead for the democrat nomination, but also dominating. Even with a four percent error and a random poll of 1,114 adults, Clinton receives more support than Barrack Obama and John Edwards. Hillary would make a great candidate for the presidency because the United States needs a leader of change and strong leadership. Unlike the other Democrat candidates, Hillary Clinton provides both necessities. First of all, Clinton is a woman, which will be a huge change for the United States. Second of all, Clinton will become a great leader because she has had experience by being the first lady. Support for Clinton’s main opponent, Barack Obama, reached its lowest at 20% since first entering the race in February. This gives Hillary another advantage for the nomination along with the raising of $22 million during the fundraising period. When I first heard that Hillary Clinton was running for President, I thought she would not receive any support from the public or get the nomination, let alone the presidency. But now seeing her leadership and plans for the United States, I believe that she has a good chance of getting the nomination and the presidency.
I agree somewhat with Ethan, except if Hilary becomes the democratic candidate, I will vote for her.
I think there is one thing that people, who don’t like Hilary, need to think about: She isn’t her husband. I even heard her say that to a reporter who asked why her husband in his presidency vetoed a bill that was similar to one she’s proposing. She just laughed it off and said, I am not my husband, I’ll have to talk to him when I get home.
There is no doubt that these statistics show the great political leadership of Hilary Clinton. To me she has proven that she is more than just a former first lady, but a possible president. She has her own agenda, and although I don’t agree with all of her policies. I think she has the experience to be a good president that the other candidates just don’t have. She has spent 8 years in the white house and has stood by her husbands side throughout his presidency, met the same political people, and has hosted dinners.
She would be the most qualified person period.
Sidenote: I like Obama too, I wish him luck but it looks like it’s no competition. I think it’s surprizing that he didn’t get more money with Oprah on his side… hmm…
Hillary Clinton seems to be doing a lot better than I originally thought. A year back when Hillary was still undecided whether to run for president or not I though she would have more trouble. When you think about it who would most people trust in office? A black man or a white woman. Mr. Ayers ask this question in his classroom last year and I found that like most people in my class that I was most likely to vote for a black man. Needless to say looking at the news articles and morning show I’m surprised. Reflecting about Clinton I first think about the husband. She was the First Lady for eight years. She sat though two campians
Continuing from where the computer I was on whacked out: she has been through two campaigns and has had a first row seat to watch what her husband was doing. When you think about it she is, in a way, an old hand at this process of politics. Obama does not seen to be doing so well but I don’t think he is out of the race. While Hillary is in the lead she isn’t really taking a stand while Obama does. That could come back and hurt her. In truth I am surprised at the turn of events but the curtain has yet to close.
It’s funny; sitting here discussing the Clinton Clan with my family there is mixed feelings. My dad seems to only remember the worst things about the eight years Bill was in office. But I have a distinct advantage of not being politically aware then. So sitting here thinking about Hillary and it seems to me that a two-headed monster is up for President this year. I’ve heard that when Bill comes to Hillary’s rallies, the turnout is much larger. So who is really running? Hillary is the brains, but Bill is the face. Think of them as the “Wonder Twins.” The stat that stuns most people is Hillary’s large popularity in the African American society, over Obama. Something that I can understand because Bill seemed to take care of African American issue while he was in office, so why wouldn’t she? I mean there are lots of opinions left to be set straight, but I think people are so hopeful about what Hillary can do, they don’t really care. The prosperous nation of yesterday that was described to us in class today does sound nice, but I would like some clearer stances on key issues. Or at least someone who would describe them to me. I don’t mind the idea of Hillary in office, I would just like to know what she would do in office.
Connor Christeson
All of these statistics were much better than I had expected from Hillary. I just thought that Obama was ahead of her overall. The one statistic that was very interesting was that 50 percent of people want a president that will promise change and new direction and only 42 percent said they wanted a proven president. But Clintin deffinitly should be taken seriously. Clintin has gotten over 40 percent of peoples support any many different areas from the women, supports of new ideas and change, the Iraq war, and healthcare. And her overall rating is just north of 50 percent.I think hilliary is doing unexpectedly well. People are now taking her and her issues seriously. However, I support Oboma and I hope he gets the democratic nomine over clintin, but if she was to get it I would not be all that dissapointed. It also shows from the amount of support that she has gained in term of money raised for her campaign. She is now pulling in more financial support than Obama by 3 million. The key factors that could help her when it comes down to the wire is that she is gaining percent points from first men which is a little suprising and secondly the independant party which is now giving her some support. Thats a change that is big and we will just have to see if she can keep this trend going or not.
Hilary Clinton, many think she has a chance to be the next U.S. president. Well I think yes. All these polls show he in the lead on aspects like the Iraq War and illegal immigration. There are many who think that Barrack Obama still ahs a chance to take the primary. These polls show otherwise. Though I favor Barrack over Hilary, and Hilary is not Bill, she has the name recognition and some of the same ideas that Bill had and a lot of people favored. This I think will help he take the primary and then hopefully the first woman president of the U.S.
Not only are women more likely to vote democrat, but for a woman president definitely. So not only is Hilary taking the polls in that category, but she in not far behind Barrack in taking the African American votes. People seem to like that aspect she ahs taken on the Iraqi war. I do believe that part of the reason why Hilary is doing so well is the name recognition from Bill. Though it was Obama’s idea to lower partisan tensions more people saw Hilary’s way of reducing it better. This is one of the many things that Hilary’s stances are winning in the polls over Obama
Just the fact that Clinton ¬has a 33% lead over Obama is an insane statistic. Correct me if I’m wrong, but I’m pretty sure that I’m not when I reiterate the fact that Hillary is leading not only the worst of the Democrats, she is leading the next best in the competition of liberals. (Obama is in second place for the race, of course) This next election will be a very interesting one. Not only is Clinton leading the rest of the liberals in votes, she has just surpassed a money collecting guru in Obama in the aspect of fund raising. Clinton’s really seeming to be taking a powerful lead on the race, leading all candidates, democrat and republican.
The Democrats took the popularity vote a couple elections ago, but obviously lost through the ways of the electoral college. (personally, I think that the electoral college should be ridden of but not because of said election, but that’s beside the point) The 2008 election will be an interesting one. When looking at the Washington Post Poll in the given article, I have come to the conclusion that the Democrats are pulverizing the GOP in almost all the key issues this country is currently involved in, with the exception of prevention of terrorism. (they are still winning by 1%) This includes health care, the war in Iraq, the economy, and the federal budget. Obviously there are many other voting issues like abortions, capital punishment, and others, but in the said issues that the democrats are completely dominating, the winnings due to percentages is in the double digits. The net lean of the democratic party is 50 while the republican party has 38 and 9 for independents, as of September 30, 2007. It will be interesting to see how many people will actually agree with democratic ideals, but go back to the Republican side just to vote their party lines, not that the democrats don’t do it as well.
This new poll raises a lot of key questions.
1. Is it accurate?
I do not think it can be. I suppose it must if the idea of “sampling” is done correctly. But Hillary TRIPLED her lead in Obama from 10 to 30 points in LESS than a month. I just don’t see how it was done. If it is that still leaves a lot of other questions.
2. Who will pick up the VP spot?
Edwards seems an easy, likeable enough choice. He was last election. I mean aside from his eight thousand hair cut. Obama and Hillary of course had that whole feud thing, which puts that possibility out, or does it? Maybe not because, of Obama’s huge amount of money. The two could pool together and win big?
3. What will we call our first man and, what will he do?
Seriously, its important. Will we call him gentleman, husband, man? And what will his role be. Will he take a Elanor Roosevelt role? And spread the U.S word abroad. Or will he work domestically like Hillary did, giving speeches on her plan.
There are many other questions to be asked. I like Hillary but, I love Obama.
I have to say that I had the same feelings as Connor when reading this article, who is really running this campaign, Hillary or her husband? One would expect Bill to help his wife somewhat, because he is experienced in running for President, and a pretty well known guy, but I feel like seeing at least one of the Clintons on TV everyday for a month is a lot of campaign exposure that some people may not even notice. I’m sure that Hillary has some great ideas of her own, but part of me makes me wonder if most of her issues that she stands for are her ideas or her husbands. It can be really easy for her to just lean over and ask Bill what he thinks, you know, for a second opinion, or even just an opinion. This also brings up the issue of Hillary racing ahead in the campaign and raising more money that Obama. Did Hillary raise all of this money on her own, or did Bill have a lot to do with who she asked for support and who would give her money? I must say that I have to give the Clinton campaign, whoever that may be, some credit for getting ahead in the race just within the past couple months. It will be interesting to see if this article’s polls will serve justice when the time of the election comes.
Re: Connor
“I’ve heard that when Bill comes to Hillary’s rallies, the turnout is much larger. So who is really running? Hillary is the brains, but Bill is the face.”
I don’t like this statement Connor. I think it is unreliable, you may have heard that, but I want to know where you heard it. But when you say Hillary is the brains and Bill is the face, what is negative about that? Hillary is the one running; I would hope she was the one with the brains. Aside from that, I don’t think that this is another term for Bill. At campaign rallies, whether more people are there for Bill or not, he steps aside, and draws attention to Hillary’s campaign and not himself. Apart from Bills interaction in Hillary’s campaign, I would have to agree with you when you stated “The stat that stuns most people is Hillary’s large popularity in the African American society, over Obama.” That surprised me as well. Yes, perhaps the positive impact that Bill had over the African American influenced her votes. But not all of Bills action has helped her campaign. I think she has done well trying to break away from her husbands fame and as presented herself as a strong (not only woman) candidate. The polls show that Hillary is a force that may be hard to stop. I believe Hillary is going to win the primary elections.
-Caitlin Barschig
Re: Ethan, Connor, and Derrick
Ethan, while I know it is hard to believe that Hillary will reduce partisanship, it is very likely for one main reason: She is a Democrat that supports smaller government, which has traditionally been a Republican tendency. I think this fact alone will make Republicans more likely to compromise with her, largely because it will be an easier way for her to gain political capital. In other words, if she throws the Reps a bone by reducing government size, they will return the favor by passing her plans.
Also, I really liked how Connor dubbed the Clintons the “Wonder Twins.” Bill has been an awesome face for the Dems, even after his presidency, largely because he did so much good. It is unfortunate that his presidency is often overshadowed by one incident, but so it goes. Many Democrats are quick to forget that incident, which I think is why Hillary’s rallies see increased attendance at her rallies when Bill is there.
Also, I think that Derrick brings up a good point when he says Edwards will probably be the Vice Presidential candidate. While I have made it clear in past blog posts that I would prefer it if he were to be on the ballot for the presidency next November, I know that it is highly unlikely. Also, after Hillary and Obama’s little spat, I don’t think they will be running together.
And as for what William will be called if Hillary wins…. It will be “First Gentleman.”
I have to disagree with you on a few points Vanessa. I really don’t think that Hillary has a lot of merit as a politician. What has she done as a Senator from New York, I hear about all the good that Obama has done, and even all the good that Giuliani did when he was in New York so I have to take what she says with a grain of salt. Even though Hillary says that she stands on different issues as her husband you even said “I even heard her say that to a reporter who asked why her husband in his presidency vetoed a bill that was similar to one she’s proposing” yes it’s not the same bill but it is a similar bill. The fact that they are also from the same political standing supports that she is more like her husband than she would like to admit. Yes Hillary has spent time in the White house and meet all the right political people, but why would that make her the best candidate and the most qualified? Just because you know the right people and have done things that “make” you qualified doesn’t mean that you are the most qualified person to lead this Nation.
Reply to Ians reply.
The reason people here about the good that Obama has done is because he has helped smaller communities personally within his states cities, and most of his work was done befor he became senator. In fact Hillary has done a lot of things for New York, but not only New York but all of our civil liberties. This may be due that she graduated from Yale Law School in 1973. She has voted down many proposals for bills that invade into our first amendment rights. For example the amenment that would have passed with one more vote that prohibited flag burning.
She also has done many things for businesses in New York, and although she has a different approach to helping people as Obama has done.
She wouldn’t be fazed by being the first woman president because she was the first woman to do a lot of things. She was named the first female partner at Rose Law Firm in 1979 and was named one of the hundred most influential lawyers in America in 1988 and 1991.
She would be most qualified, because unlike Obama who is a senator by miracle anyway, she was voted in while being opposed. Obama was vitually unopposed when he first ran for senator. He has also hasn’t been senator very long, so out of the democratic candidates that actually have a chance she’s it. I would say that not having to navigate the White House, not having to learn who to trust, and not having to meet everyone I would think the average person would call, experience. Barack Obama actually based his senatoring on Clintons, as wikipedia says (so its pretty reliable).
Hillary is responsible for 21.4 billion dollars in funding for the World Trade Center redevelopement.
She took a leading role in health issues after 9/11.
I think she has done a lot for the state of New York, not only that but she has done a lot for the American people already as a senator, so yes, I think it is safe to say that she is the most qualified, because she is experienced, and cares about those things that are most important to our individual rights.
So qualifications, which usually mean experience, (like when you apply for a job, if someone has experience they are more qualified).
So knowing the right people, and being qualified are a great start to running a nation. (it also helps if you aren’t illiterate and got into college because ur daddys famous hint hint *cough* bush *cough*)