December 14, 2007
Posted: December 14th, 2007 01:32 PM ET

Obama has a 1 point lead over Clint in New Hampshire, according to a new poll.

WASHINGTON (CNN) - Democrat Hillary Clinton has lost her once-comfortable lead over rival Barack Obama in the crucial primary state of New Hampshire, according to a poll released Friday.

In the new poll conducted by the Concord Monitor, Obama surpasses the New York senator by 1 percentage point: 32 percent to 31 percent. Meanwhile, John Edwards comes in a distant third with 15 percent support among likely Democratic voters, while Bill Richardson is fourth with 7 percent.

Speaking to reporters in Iowa Friday, Clinton commented on several recent polls both in Iowa and New Hampshire that show she is tied with Obama.

"I guess I've been in enough campaigns over a lot of years to know that there is no predictability and there certainly is no inevitability," she said. "You have to get out and work for every single vote. That's what I have always done. I don't know any other way to do it."

Meanwhile, at a separate event in Iowa, Obama commented on his rise in the polls, saying, "people are receptive to this message of change."

"I am confident in my ability to lead this country," he said. "And increasingly we are doing well. Not just here in Iowa but across the country."

Obama's chances of success in the Granite State will likely hinge on how many independents show up at the polls. Unlike many states, New Hampshire allows unaffiliated voters to vote in either the Republican primary or the Democratic primary - an allowance that often can give a boost to candidates who are viewed as outside their party establishment.

Of independent voters who are likely to vote in the Democratic primary, the poll shows Obama has a wide lead over Clinton, 40 percent to 23 percent. Meanwhile Clinton holds the lead over Obama when it comes to registered Democrats in the state, 36 percent to 27 percent.

The poll also shows Obama is making inroads with women in the Granite State. The Illinois senator now edges out Clinton in that demographic, 34 percent to 32 percent.

The poll carries a margin of error of plus or minus 4 percentage points.

– CNN Ticker Producer Alexander Mooney

Filed under: Barack Obama • Hillary Clinton • New Hampshire


Mary, Ocean City, NJ   December 25th, 2007 6:45 am ET

Wow! I didn't know how many people loath Hillary! She wrote "It takes a Village"...hopefully none of you will be in my village!

Barack is a charismatic speaker, but Hillary is ready to be President now...Obama later?

Rose Hann New London, CT   December 17th, 2007 10:26 am ET

This constant unfairness of Hillary is exhuasting. She as ALL the other cndidates numbers rise and fall, but when we can't tell the whole truth about ALL the candidates, then it's called "Let us change the perception" and not tell all the story. I count o the intellegence of the American people to see what the truth is and news, all news enjoys kicking the woman. Are we still in the 50s Come on, Hillary is srong. If I was attacked by republicans as much as she has been, I'm not certain I would have her courage to forge on, but she does. Polls are just that, POLLS! It's the vote which counts.
Howard Dean didn't fall because he wasn't capable, he fell because the media made a laughing stock out of him because of his "sream". I wish people would be honest and deliver the truth.

Ann ME   December 17th, 2007 7:20 am ET

YaaHoo!!!!

Kyu Reisch, Radcliff, Kentucky   December 16th, 2007 10:49 pm ET

Mooney, you will be sorry, NH voters are smarter than double 'O', they will show us how to vote.

James, Lawrencevile GA   December 16th, 2007 12:45 pm ET

Obama's lead in the polls is Oprah/media driven. America need to look at the real call for change. A Clinton White House is a real call for change. Obama, and this to shall pass.

Marcy Green IOWA   December 16th, 2007 10:07 am ET

MASON CITY, Iowa - Sen. Hillary Clinton won endorsements Saturday evening from The Des Moines Register, the largest newspaper in the first-in-the-nation presidential caucus state of Iowa.

T. Fox , Ashland, Ma.   December 16th, 2007 1:56 am ET

Well educated people are voting for HILLARY. WALL STREET is for HILLARY 100%. ONLY HILLARY can turn this country around.

Kubrick   December 15th, 2007 4:24 pm ET

Obama has made the right move to shine a light on Hillary, and at the right time. Now is when people are listening and primary/caucus voters are deciding who to support in January. Iowa is up for grabs. And the rest will follow from there..
11/4/2007 10:11:14 PM

Kirsten, Keene, New Hampshire   December 15th, 2007 12:53 pm ET

It is time that Bill Richardson gets the attention he deserves. This guy is incredible. He is so experienced, calm, intelligent. 'The real Bartlet'. I have seen him yesterday and my doubt about whether to vote for Hillary or Barack is gone now. Richardson is the man. He might surprise you all in the primary...

ED winterpark Fl   December 15th, 2007 9:33 am ET

The worlds current situation and the US economy will negate the chance at this time for an African American[not mature enough at this time] and certainly not ready for the first Woman president,to be elected. The time for a Biden, Richardson, Edwards. to fill both positions is upon us and it will probably happen for the best choices at this time and situation of the low esteem and respect that this Bush admin has brought upon the U.S. Time for the first two choices are close but NOT THIS TIME. To much at stake for inexperience and learning curve.

Joesy Col SC   December 15th, 2007 8:43 am ET

FIRST! I’M AN EDUCATED BLACK VOTER AND WILL NEVER SUPPORT A OPRAHBAMA! CLINTON AS SEALED MY VOTE! IM ASHAMED FOR ALL WOMAN AND MOSTLY WOMAN OF COLOR FOR THE WAY OPRAH SINGLE HANDIDLY TUNRED THIS ELECTION AWAY FROM WHAT MATTERS AND INTO RACE FIGHT COMPLETELY DIVIDING THIS COUNTRY! EXACTLY WHAT WILL ELECT A REPUBLICAN, SO THANK OPRAH AMERICA! WHEN YOU CAN’T TAKE YOUR CHILD TO A DOCTOR, OR LOOSE YOUR HOME AND JOB. Those supporting oprahbama because of winphrey are the same ones who insisted OJ was innocent. My child’s future and health are more important that oprahs being power hungry or the color of a mans skin. Obamawinphrey would have done better without her support. Most people left the venues in IOWA/NH/SC before obamaboy even came onstage. What’s that tell you secondly, Oprahs mentor Mya Angelo and her so-called boyfriend (no not Gail king) Steadman both support Clinton.

Hillary is one of the most outstanding women of the 21 century. Because of that and had a large lead in the polls, she is continually dragged through the mud, bashed, ridiculed and called numerous names; by ALL media outlets (men controlled)Osama's camp started circulating bogus memos and lies about her early in the campaign and now about her mother and daughter, of course obama said he didn’t know. Where’s the ridicule media? DISGUSTING! What a nasty sick group at oprhabama camp! That's what you're voting for when you support the likes of him. NO OTHER WOMAN IN POLITICS HAS EVER HAD TO WITHSTAND, SUCH PERSONAL ATTACKS TRYING TO HELP THE SAD DISFUCTIONAL STATE THIS GREAT COUNTRY. It makes me ASHAMED OF HOW WE DO THINGS IN THIS COUNTRY! Even today, she continues to with stand numerous personal attacks from men who are imitated like obama and Edwards. The media has not reported on her campaign or outstanding public service record and that she outshines all other on the stage. She continues to be attacked by any supporter that has a negative opinion about oprahbama. THIS IS A DISGRACE TO OUR POLITICAL SYSTEM, that the media types like oprah are selling the Dream yes, oprah has put a dollar amount on Dr. Kings dream. NO ONE APPEARS TO BE INTERESTED IN WHATS BEST FOR THE US AND THE FUTURE SAFETY AND HEALTH CARE OF OUR CHILDREN like Hillary Clinton does. Obama would rather try the race game when he was down in the polls; again EXACTLY like OJ Simpson’s losing trial, the race card ALWAYS gets thrown around because they don't want to be held accountable for their failures and or lack of experience. Oprah Winphrey and Obama are trying to sell America just like bush/Chaney. If obamawinphrey gets the nom WE KNOW VERY WELL, HE CANT WIN IN THE GENERAL ELECTION, THIS COUNTRY WILL FALTER UNDER A NEW 2008 REPUBLICAN PRESIDENCY... OBAMA IS HUGH MISTAKE FOR THIS COUNTRY, HE CANNOT BRING THIS COUNTRY TOGETHER, AND HE AND OPRAH HAVE DIVIDED US MORE THAN ANY OTHER CANDIDATE. AND NOW, EVEN MOVE DIVIDED AS A COUNTRY AFTER LAST WEEKENDS DOG AND PONY SHOW Yes Oprah has power, look what she did with it! She put women, black or white back 50 years! She makes it difficult for any other educated BLACK WOMAN TO SUCCEED NOW! I would never watch, read or use a product Oprah endorses. DO NOT VOTE FOR OBAMAWINPHREY, YOU’RE SELLING YOUR CHILDS FUTURE!

beep beep - middle class america   December 15th, 2007 6:38 am ET

Two excerpts from earlier posts: ...He is the candidate who represents some kind of change from the failing establishent...

...I mean, all these people who worked for President Clinton are now putting their support behind Obama, and not Hillary. What does that say?
___________

Well, it could say that even though Senator Obama "Holds out the promise of change" now – he would still ultimately turn around and PACK his Personal Staff, Cabinet Posts, and all his other appointments with President Clinton's FORMER STAFF = THE SAME OLD GUARD which he is currently rallying against!!! Well... so much for the sweeping winds of change from the "failing establishment"

And his apparent eagerness to bring on board TeamObama THE SAME OLD TIRED AND STALE ESTABLISHMENT from the 90s Clinton Administraton may very well come back to haunt him = Perhaps by bringing alot sharper focus on his level of experience and his goals, creating some degree of caution and doubt as to his ability to be an effective President and to "hit the ground running" (especially if he has to figure out how to drive first with his Learner's Permit ;=)

On the other hand if they are merely cheerleaders in Senator Obama's camp, then maybe the question was misunderstood? YET it still could end up looking like maybe they were offered the promise of a position on Obama's Staff for an endorsement? (Of course the same could be said of Hillary, but SHE IS ALREADY a part of the establishment and has personally known these people for years. I doubt it looks so odd... And in fact, may start looking better all the time??)______________

... Hillary wins the nomination if it is held today. She averages 19 points ahead of Obama nationally. Obama has yet to make a dent in many later states with larger electoral votes... (another excerpt from an earlier post)

AND this is precisely why even if Hillary were to lose IA, NH, SC the race is far from over yet!!! THERE ARE STILL 47 OTHER STATES TO GO until the Democratic National Conventon Aug 25. And it can't be simply assumed that all 47 are going to fall in line behind the first 3. The OTHER factor is that as candidates start dropping out, who are they going to throw their support to?? Remember ALL of those OTHERS (except maybe Edwards) are part of the Establishment too. Then there would still be the question of running mates? Obama would definitely have to go with the OLD GUARD (not necessarily one of the other candidates and Edwards has already failed to win with Kerry). So perhaps Senator Obama's candidacy is starting to look more and more like the same old thing – filled with the Clinton era staff!!

It may prove to be a very long drawn out battle indeed = The messages might start to lose sparkle and fizz if too many fatal flaws start showing. (AND after so much controvery would Obama ask for Oprah's help again? I highly doubt it.)

I'm excited to see how it finally all plays out :o )

MARGIE   December 15th, 2007 2:23 am ET

WE WILL NEVER HEAR THE WORDS.. I BARAK HUSSEIN OSAMA DO SOLOMNLY SWEAR TO UPHOLD THE CONSTITUTION OF THE UNITED STATES. IT'S NOT GOING TO HAPPEN... WHITE DEMS WILL VOTE FOR A REPUBLICAN FIRST. NOBODY IS TALKING ABOUT THE BACKLASH ON OPRAHS WEBSITE BECAUSE OF HER ENDORSEMENT. WHAT'S UP WITH THAT?

Jose Card   December 15th, 2007 2:00 am ET

We need not only change, but also change for the better.

Who can deliver change for the better?

Kyu Reisch, Radcliff, Kentucky   December 15th, 2007 1:29 am ET

Mooney, do you remember that Obama said polls is just number, he didn't care about polls, how come he is excited with the polls now? We see the real votes by Americans.

Chad, Dallas TX   December 14th, 2007 9:03 pm ET

Why is it that on the exact same day, another poll shows Hillary with a 9 point lead. Let's face it, CNN likes a close election because it sells. Perhaps if there was more in depth coverage of positions, people might realize that Obama really offers little beyond a good speech and celebrity endorsements.

Kate, gb   December 14th, 2007 8:20 pm ET

Feel the momentum! GO OBAMA!!!

stan pitts pa   December 14th, 2007 7:33 pm ET

American are gonna vote based on sound ideas, research and gut, obama stands out please folks check him out and vote wisely obama will deliver real change, one we can all believe in!

Kim, Dallas, TX   December 14th, 2007 7:10 pm ET

Salita in SC, you are not reading the polls...every poll that comes out says that Obama and/or Edwards are more electable if they run against a Republican than Clinton is. There are many anti Clinton Republicans. If Clinton gets the Democratic nomination, many fear that another Republican will be elected into the white house. Try not to go by personal bias and pay attention to what's going on around you. Obama stands the biggest chance against the Republican candidates.

Bobby Marquette MI   December 14th, 2007 6:44 pm ET

I'm 'still" Voting FOR HER !!!!!

Clinton will walk the walk and fight the fight needed to succeed for all americans
I am Over the "O" ring Oprah & Obama
I with Hillary all tyhe way to the WHITEHOUSE

Maggie SC   December 14th, 2007 5:32 pm ET

depends on which NH poll your looking at? and which day, but which news media..
This guy thinks Oprah make the rules of the country...SHE DOESNT! SHE SELLS SOAP, BOOKS AND BULL to white women, then turns her back on them. What a poor example!

Kim, Dallas, TX   December 14th, 2007 5:28 pm ET

Gee Monte in New York, why don't you just tell us what your crystal ball says and we can stop the whole campaign nonsense now???? My 8-ball is telling me that Obama will win in Iowa? Did I get it right? LOL

"Obama will not win New Hampshire. Hillary will win New Hampshire."

Rick, Ruler, Iowa   December 14th, 2007 4:58 pm ET

Its a poll a minute. FOX NEWS just released a poll that has Clinton ahead in New Hampshire by nine points. This poll was taken from Dec 11–13. The FOX pollster theorized that once you move the conversation from Oprah to cocaine use–Clinton jumps ahead. I'm not a Clinton fan but that was a brillant move. She's tough.

Earl, Ohio   December 14th, 2007 4:48 pm ET

Na na na ... na na ...
Na na na ... na na ...
Hey hey ...
Goodbye Hillary!

Raman, Plano TX   December 14th, 2007 4:47 pm ET

:Ben, Medford, MA :

The polls being touted on CNN.com are definitely skewed. That is the polls are being conducted in such a away that it is more favorable to Sen. Clinton's opponents.

Unless John Edwards can pull it off, it is a very safe bet that Sen. Clinton is going to carry NH primary.

Iowa is a toss up and may favor John Edwards. The newsweek poll giving Obama the lead is two cents worth.

Not that Obama does not stand a good chance, but you have to keep in mind how sometimes pollsters can create a poll result just to give the poll winner a blue face at the actual polls (Remember the Dean Debacle during 2004 primaries).

LillianDesMoinesIA   December 14th, 2007 4:39 pm ET

Why is it that when Hillary was slightly ahead, you called it a "dead heat", but now Barack is slightly ahead, you say he's "leading in the polls." Sexism?? Preferential treatment?? Either way, please be equitable.

ted orlando   December 14th, 2007 4:24 pm ET

Iowa Please get rid of Hillary by voting for Obama by a landslide....

Bye bye hillary not even cnn can help you any more thank god for msnbc

MK, Los Angeles, California   December 14th, 2007 4:06 pm ET

On a related note, a new Iowa poll came out today (conducted between Dec. 10 to Dec. 13) by Research 2000 that shows Senator Obama now has a 9 point lead in Iowa:

Obama 33 (+8 from last poll)
Clinton 24 (-3 from last poll)
Edwards 24 (+3 from last poll)

Jim McDaniel, Escondido, CA   December 14th, 2007 3:59 pm ET

Yes, the new poll is statistically a tie, but the significance is the movement – a major shift in Obama's direction. This IS really significant and likely means as people start paying attention they are liking Obama better. Momentum wins elections.

Michel Huyghues-Despointes, Gretna, LA.   December 14th, 2007 3:53 pm ET

I will vote for Obama in 2016 after Hillary win in 2008, and I want Mrs Clinton to name Obama as her Vice president. Like that we can have 16 years of thrue Democratie; not like the last 8 years, a anti democratic party who do not respect the law.

John, Brunswick, MD   December 14th, 2007 3:46 pm ET

Good catch by Scott. Where does Ms. Clinton get off saying she has so much "experience"? "That's what I have always done...." What the hell is she talking about? Since when, before she carpet bagged a NY senate slot, did SHE run for office? Where is her "experience" other than to cover Bill's ass when he screwed up. Hillary ought to note the similarities between her husband (the man from Hope – the first black president) and the authentic thing (the audacity of hope – the REAL first black president). Bill's life story was inspiring, Obama's is even more so.

Tara, Chicago, IL   December 14th, 2007 3:30 pm ET

Of course Obama should be showing some lead in the polls...he is out there making random comments when his senate office sits empty! It's embarrassing when he has missed approximately 36% of his Senate voting opportunities. I don't even know what he has done as an Illinois senator...how can anyone say what he will do as President?

AJ, IL   December 14th, 2007 3:22 pm ET

All together now!! FIRED UP! READY TO GO! FIRED UP! READY TO GO! FIRED UP! READY TO GO! FIRED UP! READY TO GO!

Obama in '08!

Kevin, SF, CA   December 14th, 2007 3:09 pm ET

My prediction: Hillary vs Obama is going to become boring and CNN/MSNBC/FoxNews viewership is going to fall a bit. This is when you'll see names like Biden, Dodd, and Richardson begin to get covered more in an attempt to shake things up a bit.

Another prediction: Edwards will fall off the map because us-vs-big-corps message is wearing thin and people see little substance there.

Evelyn, Eldorado, OH   December 14th, 2007 3:00 pm ET

Isn't this the third person that's had to resign from Clinton's campaign in the last 2 weeks because they said or sent email that was negative and incorrect? That, in my opinion, says something about the character of the campaign. It seems some sensitivity, and integrety training is needed. Obama is really a breath of fresh air and I personally hope he wins and I will vote for him and not Clinton. If she is nominated I'll vote Republican this year.

Ben, Medford, MA   December 14th, 2007 2:53 pm ET

"Please notice how this article highlights the one percentage point lead of Obama over Clinton in a poll with an error of 4 percentage points.
that means, that in fact, Clinton may be three points ahead.

Conclusions shouldn't be drawn from such inconclusive polls."

Actually, what it means is that they are in a statistical dead heat in a state that Hillary was winning by over 20 percentage points just over a month ago. Nice try on that spin though.

Ito   December 14th, 2007 2:45 pm ET

Now, if we can just get Clinton to vanish.

By the way, I'm a Republican who supports Obama.

Why?

Because I'm hoping he will stear this country away from politics as usual.

I'm hoping, that is. What a shame it will be if his administration turns out to be smoke and mirros. That would be akin to treason.

I support you, Obama...but I do so with hope and optimism, tempered by a great deal of caution.

Micahel Guinn, Ventura, CA   December 14th, 2007 2:37 pm ET

I am so glad that this Primary Season will soon be over and the inside smears will stop (hopefully). Barack Obama can help unify us but we have to be willing.
I really believe that OBAMA is the one for this moment in history!

donna tamaqua pa   December 14th, 2007 2:27 pm ET

I was undecied between hilary and obama. until obama got opra on his side.i like opra but she needs to stay out of politics. she to big of a role model. now when i think of obamas campain i see opra carrieing him in her pocket to the white house. not like hilary walking all the way by herself and standing on her own feet. obama needs to stand up for hisself and not behind opra. i am now voting for hilary. i feel she will stand on her own in the white house and not behind someone elses fame. go hilary

Pat Huntington NY   December 14th, 2007 2:23 pm ET

But Obama will not win the general election because the swing states like Ohio and Florida

Truth   December 14th, 2007 2:19 pm ET

The Titanic: The Obama Campaign Tries to Preemptively Self-Destruct (in the General Election)
http://www.theleftcoaster.com/

JON, COLUMBIA SOUTH CAROLINA   December 14th, 2007 2:15 pm ET

GO OBAMA WE ARE FIRED UP AND READY TO GO. OBAMA WILL WIN THE NOMINATION.

Matt, California   December 14th, 2007 2:11 pm ET

Hillary for President all the Way, don't worry, one poll with a margin of error of a million isn't going to stop Hillary. She will win this nominatin, and I can't wait to see Obama give his speech in support of Hillary at the national convention. Priceless.

Angel, Los Angeles of Anaheim   December 14th, 2007 2:03 pm ET

Monte Brown,

Are you the same Monte Brown that spent several years as a professional wrestler after playing in the NFL. If so, I think that says loads about your credibility.

bbln   December 14th, 2007 2:01 pm ET

Can you imagine if the MSM and all its headlines only decided to focus on Clinton's national leads which according to an ABC/Washington Post poll is now 53 to Obama's 23? The MSM is selective for what's dramatic and what becomes a horserace, so let's let the media pick our President (they certainly helped against Gore)...if only the MSM were all like McNeil Lehrer, the country would be a better place.

skyz miami beach fl   December 14th, 2007 1:57 pm ET

obama keeps using the word 'change' as if it were a magic spell – change is inevitable but it is as easily for worse than better – and we can't afford worse – hope means nothing when it comes down to cold hard reality – hope is emotional not practical -

Gloria, NY, NYC   December 14th, 2007 1:52 pm ET

HRC = Hopless Repulsive Coward

HRC is either a liar or a clueless dirty woman. Either way, I would be hard press to see how someone who cannot even manage her campaign pretend to be able to govern a country.

I am a woman and guess what? I am not voting for this disgraceful woman...Mrs. Clinton! The woman has no pride and self esteem!

GO Biden, Edwards, Obama, Richardson, and Dodd!!!

Liberal Chic   December 14th, 2007 1:52 pm ET

Go, Hillary! You can do it! Just eke out Iowa and it's all downhill from there.

We can't have a rookie with no experience and fluff ideas running this country. You have to come through!

Surrealist, Fort Myers, FL   December 14th, 2007 1:49 pm ET

Hillary is sinking!! Obama appears to be in line for her throne. Why isn't John Edwards number 2?

This man (Mr. Obama)–poll conscious and driven by focus group popularity points–his message is all over the place! Just read his senate records and his stump speeches! He is so politically correct he makes me itch!!

He (Mr. Obama) is not the man to represent ME in Washington!

He inspires no confidence in me! He does not possess the ability or the will to successfully negotiate or block the massive efforts from the GOP, special interests, major corporations, and the military defense industries–which will ensue as he attempts to change the paradigm in Washington. We all know, any efforts to change executive orders or laws...tilted to benefit those entities (wealthy executives, board members, and corporations, investment consortiums)–will be met with massive attacks, road blocks, and retaliation.

Edwards is the only one who has the passion, drive and will to make meaningful change–if it is even possible. He's got no baggage. His honesty, integrity, and moral character are above reproach. He has been on message as a proponent and catalyst for change–unwaiveringly since 2000. His determination to battle for justice and equality in the marketplace for the wages and healthcare rights of all Americans–is inspiring to all working class Americans, including middle management professionals who see their industries vanishing over seas as their wealth potential and benefits decline. His mission and desire–is a message that truly crosses party-lines...because our future and our families are at stake.

Obama is great man–but he is not great enough for this task. There are no GOP candidates who possess his passion, nor his eloquence on the issues. We need someone with a different paradigm–to really change the paradigm in Washington...and allow average American voices to be heard–and listened to.

Please take another look at John Edwards. This may be our last hope to undo the decades of negligence, cronyism, and lassitude in Washington.

Scott, Royal Oak, MI   December 14th, 2007 1:49 pm ET

upon actually seeing video from yesterday's debate...
nothing was uglier than Hillary's inappropriate cackling after the question was posed to Obama about Bill Clinton staff members in his campaign. and nothing was more beautiful than Obama cooly knocking her off of her high horse with his quip.

Fair,Washington DC   December 14th, 2007 1:46 pm ET

I guess the polls do matter to you Obama supporters now...when Hillary was ahead the polss didn't mean anything...anyway we'll see how this plays out. I still think Hillary will win the nomination at the end of the day.

V.Novosad, Sugar Land, Texas   December 14th, 2007 1:39 pm ET

Obama's cute little retort toward Hillary should remind us what it would be like if she is the nominee. Would she want him to advise her? I think not. Case made.

It is so hard to imagine our electing someone whose education and experience (or lack thereof) in all things statesmanship is just about equal with the person we elected seven years ago. The only difference is that Obama can pronounce more than one syllable words, and GWB is still stumbling. One more thing. I think it would be a good move for Hillary, in order to counter the personal clout Oprah brought to the table, to ask her constituents in New York to tell the country what an excellent job she's done for them over the past seven years.

jean,boston,ma   December 14th, 2007 1:38 pm ET

I don't post here often, and I admit that I am not pleased Clinton has managed not to consolidate her support over the past few months. However, wouldn't it benefit a supporter of another candidate to appreciate the significance of the WaPo poll, and work against it accordingly, rather than declaim or discount its results?

Brooke, Philadelphia, PA   December 14th, 2007 1:37 pm ET

I can't believe people are saying Hillary has less experience than Obama. GIVE ME A BREAK!! Hillary will bounce back from this and win NH and Iowa. No doubt.

GO HILLARY GO!!!!!

Doug, Boston, MA   December 14th, 2007 1:37 pm ET

I find myself somewhat torn – on one hand Obama is the embodiment of what politics should be and where we should go as a country. On the other hand, we are a very primitive civilization and I can't help but be amazed at Hillary's ability to work the system in a way that Obama never could. There's something to be said for that.

There's also a lot of racists in this country. Even though Obama is a melting pot, I worry – then again, there's a lot of sexists to so maybe it's a wash.

Boy, Edwards has certainly disappeared.

Ryan, New Jersey   December 14th, 2007 1:35 pm ET

The Democratic party needs to, as a whole, shift their support at least to a non-biased position now. If Obama gets the nomination they want to have been behind him from the start. I could think of a dozen VPs for Obama that could give the Dems a win in a landslide come next November, but they need to start getting behind him now!

Jessica M., El Paso, TX   December 14th, 2007 1:28 pm ET

I can tell you this for a fact, Democrats in Congress are scared that Obama might be the nominee. They know that he CAN'T win the general. There is only one guy that can save the day now...Senator Edward Kennedy.
I suspect he'll be coming out soon and endorsing Clinton.
I agree with the poster above about all the things Republicans will be tossing at Obama if he is the nominee. Not only that, but he has shifted positions on so many issues. He's a political opportunist, and Repubs will exploit this.

William, Atlanta   December 14th, 2007 1:27 pm ET

I watched the debate and was thoroughly disappointed with ALL the candidates. The format, of course, was a joke, but it wasn't just the format. It was painfully apparent why the trailing candidates are so low in the polls. They had nothing watsoever to say and mostly stumbled. The big disappointments were Clinton and yes, even Obama. Clinton was polished, rehersed and completely on script. For all I knew, I could have been watching a Republican deliver empty sound-bytes. Obama was the real disappointment. While he did better than the others, he, too, was scripted and polished and it was plain that he is now being handled by political strategists. Gone was the Barack Obama, who made me sit up and take notice a few months back. The Democratic tradition of debate and discussion seems to have been killed. My only consolation is that the Republican field is in even worse shape than the Democrats. The problem is that I don't see anyone I want to be my President. All I see are candidates who have been bought and paid for.

Ken,boston,ma   December 14th, 2007 1:22 pm ET

It's intriguing that despite Hillary's campaign's negative diatribes and her desperation, people are listening to Obama more than ever.

I really think her campaign is failing and will be over if she loses in IA and NH.

People are simply too curios as to whethere Obama can do what he wants to do.

They won't give up on him.

terrified in, fairfax, va   December 14th, 2007 1:18 pm ET

Oh god, time for the rise of all the bad candidates- Huckabee... Obama, omg.

Timothy,nyc,ny   December 14th, 2007 1:13 pm ET

I think this shows that Hillary has a certain percent of soft supporters. People who say they back her because they are told on the cable news that she is inevitable and she is loved by all democrats.
But, the democrats who are waking up and seeing that they do indeed have a choice and that there are excellent candidates who are superior to Hillary to pick.
I am an Obama supporter and see how deep his support is. but, if someone who sees that Hillary is not the only candidate and does not want to pick Obama, I hope they look hard at the other ones. I can live very easily with any of our candidates as president as long as it is not Hillary.
I will not vote for her at all. So, yes, this is good news. finally!

mark,boston,ma   December 14th, 2007 1:12 pm ET

I would like Hillary to be the first female president. Obama will be the first black President in 2012 if hillary doesn't rerun.

Shawn, Cincinnati OH   December 14th, 2007 1:11 pm ET

I don't really like either of their positions, but in a gun to my head situation, I'll take the self-made friendly socialist(Obama, for you slow thinkers and Clintonistas out there), over the coat-tail-riding shrew socialist who's never probably never even run a lemonade stand, much less anything important(Sen D – NY? How is that a accoplishment? O.J. Simpson could run as a democrat in NY and win).

vw,cat   December 14th, 2007 1:11 pm ET

I think this shows that Hillary has a certain percent of soft supporters. People who say they back her because they are told on the cable news that she is inevitable and she is loved by all democrats.
But, the democrats who are waking up and seeing that they do indeed have a choice and that there are excellent candidates who are superior to Hillary to pick.
I am an Obama supporter and see how deep his support is. but, if someone who sees that Hillary is not the only candidate and does not want to pick Obama, I hope they look hard at the other ones. I can live very easily with any of our candidates as president as long as it is not Hillary.
I will not vote for her at all. So, yes, this is good news. finally!

joan,boston,ma   December 14th, 2007 1:08 pm ET

In this discussion, "experience," whether not so good or lack thereof, seems to be the key to how electable each Dem candidate is. What about Richardson and his incredible resumé? Governor, Energy Secretary, UN Ambassador, Congressman. I think once the country gets to know him, he probably will look good. Is he vulnerable on anything?

I think Resume don't work this time around,change in washington is the key!

Salita, SC   December 14th, 2007 1:08 pm ET

At this point Hillary should be slippin in the polls...70-80% bad/jealous/spiteful press will do that to you. Question still remains: Can Obama win the general election in the real country of America in 2008? Answer for me....NO! if he could then Tennessee would have a Senator with the last name FORD!

Dems dont be stupid Republicans already admit they wont beat Hillary....Obama they know they can because using race in america works for their memebers.

Rob   December 14th, 2007 1:08 pm ET

Hahahahahahahahaha! Is this the fun part Hillary? Obama 08!

Bob,nyc,ny   December 14th, 2007 1:06 pm ET

Obama has an army of under the radar supporters who are growing by the day, as they pay attention and he makes them understand change is within their power and their decisions.

Black folks are listening when he talks of real issues of education, family values and responsibility. Yet all we hear is "they love Clinton" an empty, patronizing, degrading rhetoric.

or

could it be the reason they are so badly off foolishly being taken for a ride by the Clintons who would rather babysit them than put a mirror infront of their faces for some self reflection?

dan   December 14th, 2007 12:58 pm ET

The more people pay attention to the elections the less people will be impressed with Hilary Clinton. She is a nepotist candidate who doesn't stand for anything except getting elected

Tom, San Francisco   December 14th, 2007 12:57 pm ET

Hillary is the person we need as president at this point. Obama can work as a trainee in her adminstration and then run for office in 2016.

Ron, NJ   December 14th, 2007 12:49 pm ET

YAY!!
Obama will win Iowa, New Hampshire and SC.
It'll be like dominoes. Right now they are about tied. He will win Iowa, that boost along with Independant support will carry New Hampshire.
With two significant wins Baracks boost will grow thus turning tied polls into break out leads.

Note about the "comeback kid" scenerio. That was unique to that election. Tom Harkin...who is Iowas senatorial god made Iowa completely unviable and didn't count for anything. No one ran there because of Harkins dominance. Clinton campaigned hard in NH and then won, which gave him the boost to win.
It'll be that way for Barack, winning Iowa and propelling him through the bulk of the rest of the states.

Robert, Vivian, La   December 14th, 2007 12:47 pm ET

I'm so sick of polls! Why not just do a constantly running poll where we can check the up to the milisecond results?

The only poll that counts is the elections.

Obama is this year's Howard Dean.

The democrats will vote for the safe establishment candidate like they always do. GOP will vote for the safe, pro-life candidate they always choose.

Zack,MI   December 14th, 2007 12:45 pm ET

I hope that all the"yellow dog Dems"" will demand the most electable ticket of Al Gore and Barack Obama. I do not care how much money Hillary can raise, she can not be elected. The "swift boaters" have too many accepted lies to use against her. Al Gore won once and can win again, so is Obama!

Rob,va   December 14th, 2007 12:44 pm ET

4 years of Bill in the White House with no official responsibilities and unlimited free time ... I don't think DC is ready for that.

Patrick,NH   December 14th, 2007 12:44 pm ET

If the democrats were smart, they would line up behind Obama now. He is the candidate who represents some kind of change from the failing establishent - and their failing party. This is their only chance to really bring some momentum into the white house. If they don't do it now, it's over for them.

Robb, New York   December 14th, 2007 12:44 pm ET

I hope and pray that this is a sign of things to come. The heir apparent to the White House is looking pretty vulnerable now. The truth is finally coming out. And all the queen's horse and all the queen's men couldn't put Hillary's lead back together again. Let's hope that the people, not the politicians, win out in Iowa, New Hampshire and elsewhere.

Naom,nyc,ny   December 14th, 2007 12:43 pm ET

Reference UGH's post, that is exactly the thesis of my new book, "Hillary Clinton Nude: Naked Ambition, Hillary Clinton And America's Demise." Just reflect on what a two term Hillary presidency would mean; 7 consecutive presidential terms or 28 years dominated by two families in a nation of 300 million (and 9 terms or 36 years if Bush senior's two terms as Vice President are counted). This is de facto aristocracy.

James, Phoenix AZ   December 14th, 2007 12:42 pm ET

Tom – Albuquerque
TheInsider
Kyu Reisch
Steve Lyons, CO
Wynter, Loudon, NH
Pixie – Murphysboro, TN
Hillarylover in SA

And the rest of the Hillary-apologists that have repeatedly criticized all others suggesting Hillary's victory has been "inevitable"...

PLEASE explain to us just how it is that Hillary Clinton managed to BUNGLE her "sure thing"??

Bahhaaahaahaha

Mondale   December 14th, 2007 12:42 pm ET

Well to heck with the Dems who want to nominate Hillary. If they want her - they can have her. If they think yet another Northeastern Liberal Establishment Senator with zero warmth and no passion is going to win a general election - they deserve her.

41% is staggering given her flaws and recent history of losing Dem nominees. Sure hope Dems wake the heck up and soon. Edwards and Obama are so very attractive. What is wrong with 41% of Dems.

Hillaryhater   December 14th, 2007 12:41 pm ET

Why even pretend we are a democracy anymore? Lets just run Jeb vs Jillary and decalre it the "Return to Aristocracy" election!

SFC Chicago   December 14th, 2007 12:38 pm ET

Please stop de-emphasizing the polls and focus on issues, differences in opinion, and strategies of the various candidates. You are adversely effecting the democratic process by focusing on polls that are gathered from people that in truth haven't made up their mind yet. The only poll that matters is on voting day. The political spin doctor's play into the media's addiction to polls. Nobody wants to vote for a "looser". And polls tend to lead to misrepresentations of candidates and/or public opinion as being more popular/unpopular than they really are. If I were Karl Rove, I'd be spinning poll results like crazy and behind-the-scenes conducting some polls on my own, in order to manipulate public opinion.
If pollsters were around, say, during the Civil War, we wouldn't have an Abraham Lincoln. Help to educate the public on the candidates, so that they can make an educated decision at the polls, instead of encouraging the mob mentality by encouraging the public to vote for who is popular.

Will, NYC   December 14th, 2007 12:38 pm ET

Here's to real choices and real debate. I give Obama credit for not going negative when he was lower in the polls. He stayed true to his word. Keep up the good work, maybe you really are a candidate for honest change!

Algernon, Los Angeles, CA   December 14th, 2007 12:37 pm ET

There is nothing newsworthy about this report. A one percent lead is well within the poll's margin of error; and at any rate, the media's emphasis on daily opinion polls instead of issues, policies, and ideas contributes to the further dumbing down of our discourse. Voters should really boycott these polls by saying, "I only have time for two polls this year: my party's primary, and the general elections." Those are the only polls that should count.

EE, syracuse, ny   December 14th, 2007 12:33 pm ET

Hillary wins the nomination if it is held today. She averages 19 points ahead of Obama nationally. Obama has yet to make a dent in many later states with larger electoral votes.

Iowa debate viewer   December 14th, 2007 12:31 pm ET

If you just listen to the question, it seems like it puts Hillary in a worse light than Obama. I mean, all these people who worked for President Clinton are now putting their support behind Obama, and not Hillary. What does that say?

zak,alabama   December 14th, 2007 12:29 pm ET

My fellow Ron Paul supporters, this article has nothing to do with him so please shut up about him. Everyone on Digg knows about him. Go out and campaign and stop spamming stories that have zero relevance to him.

henry,boston,ma   December 14th, 2007 12:29 pm ET

Hillary reminds me of the Wicked Witch of the West from The Wizard of Oz....
Go Obama

Ben,Iowa   December 14th, 2007 12:27 pm ET

Very nice "save" by Obama. Her cackling turned into an embarassed chuckle of denial

iva18   December 14th, 2007 12:27 pm ET

Obama just became my second choice after Ron Paul.

My man... That is you respond to clowns like Hillary.

Lev Klinemann, Redondo Beach CA   December 14th, 2007 12:23 pm ET

I am so sick of states like Iowa, New Hampshire and even some southern states deciding our elections. If it wasn't for the economy of California (6th largest economy in the world) this country would be in much worse shape than it already is.

California should be where the first election happens, not the Iowa, or New Hapshire caucuses.

Until they give California the first vote, we should get back every tax dollar we Californians put into the Federal budget. Today we get back 75 cents on every dollar, where as states like Alabama and Alaska get back over 2 dollars for every dollar they put in.

Its about time California flexes its muscles.

If they don't give it to us, I say California seccedes from the US, becasue we can't let politicans from the south or midwest or whoever else bring California down with them.

Blayze Kohime, Columbus, OH   December 14th, 2007 12:18 pm ET

Hilary has made some critical errors in her campaign, and it is costing her. I really hope Obama gets this; since he is more middle-of-the-road than Clinton he will be more ought to best a Republican opponent. I also thinks he has fewer things in his past that can be used against him in the main election by the typical Republican mud-slinging platform.

Lance,Monrovia,CA   December 14th, 2007 12:18 pm ET

Funny how you have to read all the way down to the bottom to find ONLY 24 percent of this three hundred some odd voters polled have ACTUALLY PICKED A CANDIDATE. If they're all still undecided, they certaintly won't go with the known commodity Hillary Clinton, she's old news.

The only reason 70 percent of that 300 voters think Hillary is inevitable is because CNN is saying so. This is classic Emperor has no clothes politics. If they tell the lie long enough, maybe people will believe it.

But then again, maybe people will be smart enough to see through the lies and actually elect a leader they can trust for a change.

That's why I'm supporting Barack Obama. I'm working my tail off for him. We've collected canvass data from around California and out of 5000 samples, 30 percent are Obama, 7 percent Hillary, 40 percent undecided.

Those numbers sound more like the truth to me.

When Obama speaks, I believe it. When Hillary speaks, I run for the air raid shelter.

Jeff, The Republic of Illinois   December 14th, 2007 12:16 pm ET

Bad news for Republicans, Good news for Democratic White House hopes.

I don't believe Democratic support for Clinton will be all that strong, with her combination War-Hawk/Socialist agenda, but a Clinton nomination would be just the tonic the Republicans need to fire up their base.

"Clint" on the picture text. heh

Eileen, Oley, PA   December 14th, 2007 12:15 pm ET

This news comes as no surprise to those of us who have followed Barack Obama's campaign. But I find it very entertaining that it is surprising the so-called "pundits" who called this race for Hillary all year long.

insider   December 14th, 2007 12:15 pm ET

Trustworthyness is a problem for her. I mean you can fool some of the people some of the times…….

She paniced today when she saw the new IA poll showing Sen Obama leading. Hum…….the American people aren't stupid. I for one, am still waiting to hear an answer to any question asked of her.

Now folks, lets see how dirty the lady will get to bring her poll numbers back up.

John Smith New Jersey...a real state   December 14th, 2007 12:13 pm ET

What can you say? Its beyond belief that a shi%$y little state like Iowa and laughable New Hampshire can influence the rest of this moronic country who goes with the flow of latest flavor of the month. Primary voting should be held natioanlly on just one day...the same day. I can't believe the idiots in South Carolina will let what happens in Iowa and NH influence them. Mind boggling. No wonder we rank 25th in education

Alfred, Memphis Tn   December 14th, 2007 12:13 pm ET

In the beginning a lie might always take the lead but the truth always catches up and surpasses in the end.

Obama 08!

Robert, Houston TX   December 14th, 2007 12:12 pm ET

Why must we have a daily report of polling numbers? This has a huge effect on people's idea of who to support.

People are sheep. It shouldn't be legal to publish numbers like this so frequently. It is tampering with the election by influencing people's vote.

Just let people listen to the candidates and vote when it's time. We'll find out who won when the votes are counted!

Steve, Hartford, CT   December 14th, 2007 12:10 pm ET

The eggs are covering numerous Hillary supporters' faces now. Obama's support among independents (the crucial factor in any election) is WAY higher than Clinton's.

And Obama is turning out to be the new Teflon candidate–nothing sticks. Probably because there isn't any dirt to find.

As for experience, he doesn't need any more than he already has–he has great judgement (google his 2002 Iraq speech and tell me he doesn't!) and he knows how to surround himself with intelligent people that will tell him things he may not want to hear, unlike some Presidents I could name. Also, only crazy people and racists don't like him, whereas Hillary is absolutely hated by almost half the nation. Good luck getting HER elected.

scarlette   December 14th, 2007 12:08 pm ET

CAN'T IMAGINE 25 YRS OF BUSH CLINTON ADMINISTRATION, I SIMPLY WILL NOT VOTE FOR HILLARY, I AM A WOMAN, IN THIS DAY, WE ARE NOT READY FOR A LADY PRESIDENT, ALTHOUGH I RESPECT HER AND HER AMBITIONS. WE ARE AT WAR, WE NEED A PEACEKEEPER FOR PRESIDENT, PERHAPS OBAMA IS OUR TICKET TO GET THIS COUNTRY IN THE LIMELIGHT. WE HAVE LOST OUR SUPERPOWER STATUS TO JAPAN! WHAT A SHAME, MANY OTHER COUNTRIES HAVE US BEAT TOO!! ECONOMY WISE, ENVIROMMENTAL REFORM AND FOREIGN AFFAIRS. WE NEED TO ELECT A WINNER!!!!

Amanda Orlando, FL   December 14th, 2007 12:08 pm ET

I see a lot of griping from people about how CNN supposedly favor's Hilary over Obama. But I haven't seen a truly positive or biased story about Hilary come up on this ticker for quite a while. I've noticed that on all the cable news networks, even Fox News, have nothing but good things to say about Obama and sound almost excited about his increasing popularity and how he has run his campaign. In contast, all I've been hearing about Hilary is how much of a screw up she is and how much people don't like her cackle.

You all need to take a step back, take a deep breath and look at the big picture. Stop looking for things that aren't there that support your opinions and prejudices.

CNN is giving Obama a load of good press. And I'm sure as soon as Hilary does something right for a change, that will make headlines too.

OBAMA 08!

Margot, Cayman   December 14th, 2007 12:07 pm ET

As a non American following the candidates with a neutral eye I think Hillary is by far the best candidate. I think the comment by Obama at the last debate that "Hillary could advise him" is not a joke like it is being presented in the media but underscores that even he has to admit (albeit jokingly) that she is more experienced.

richard,manchester,nh   December 14th, 2007 12:06 pm ET

Has Hillary given out the records that she had said will be out in 2012 yet? I am still awaiting and that is why I am supporting Obama because he is atleast honest and no baggage

michael, grand prairie tx.   December 14th, 2007 12:05 pm ET

Her lead in South Carolina Has also vanished.Dirty Politics.........Hillary the Beast.
uuuuggggghhhh.Leaves a dirty taste in my mouth.

Maria, Houston   December 14th, 2007 12:03 pm ET

People are starting to pay attention. We are fed up with lying conniving politicians of both parties. "It is INTEGRITY, stupid". Simple as that.

GO BARACK.

Eli, Brandeis university, MA   December 14th, 2007 12:02 pm ET

Please notice how this article highlights the one percentage point lead of Obama over Clinton in a poll with an error of 4 percentage points.
that means, that in fact, Clinton may be three points ahead.

Conclusions shouldn't be drawn from such inconclusive polls.

michael, ny   December 14th, 2007 12:02 pm ET

"Well, Hillary, I'm looking forward to you advising me as well."

Monte Brown, New York, NY   December 14th, 2007 12:01 pm ET

Obama will not win New Hampshire. Hillary will win New Hampshire.

Manny CA   December 14th, 2007 12:01 pm ET

Its a tie in NH, independent voters in NH can cast their vote during primary.

Why is it CNN did not mention Hillary now is +8 against Obama in SC according to their poll?

Bill Clinton lost in Iowa and NH during primary election, he was elected President. Why would people think NH or Iowa is the true measure who'll be the next President of USA?

That's just my two cents of opinion.

Alice, TN   December 14th, 2007 12:01 pm ET

Burn, Burn, Burn!!!!

Doug, GA   December 14th, 2007 11:58 am ET

Great news that Clinton's lead has vanished. The best news will be that Bill & Hilary have vanished...

Shawn, Lincoln, NE   December 14th, 2007 11:57 am ET

I guess she is claiming all of Bill's campaigns in her own campaign experiences just like her having all of this policy experience she seems to tout. A pair of landslide wins in an East Coast state does not constitute a wealth of campaign experience. Obama is not going to claim an edge in experience in campaigns. And Another Thing!!! Do NOT use the addage "I will get out and work for every single vote." It sent chills down my spine to hear Bush Speak from her lips. It's hard work? Get real.
Seriously. Hillary, Get real!

matt,springfield,md   December 14th, 2007 11:54 am ET

Obama is a genuine politician who can clearly write and express his points validly. His inspiration and positive spirit has led many people to follow his mission of Hope and Change. However, this person before me is most likely a conservative status quo Baby Boomer struggling with their narrow-mindedness. It just shows you that America has a lot of growing to do in order to prosper as a nation. Good Luck

Frank, San Diego   December 14th, 2007 11:52 am ET

Great news for Democrats. No coronation, just a good, old-fashioned campaign. If Clinton still wins, that's fine. Obama and Edwards will have had their chance. If someone else wins, Hillary had the same chance.

Who's it bad news for? Republicans. Given the fact that McCain is their most electable candidate, and that he can't survive a poor finish in NH, he needs the independents voting on the Republican side. If the Democratic primary stays this close, that's where they will gravitate. And the Republican's chance to nominate the only person who might bring independents back to their party will be lost. Too bad:)

Tom, ALBUQUERQUE, NM   December 14th, 2007 11:52 am ET

The SAGE of Albuquerque speakest. Hillary will win the Iowa caucus and will win decisively in New Hampshire. Those victories and her win in South Carolina will be just enough to silence the pundits and dismantle the machines of Obama and Edwards. the rest will be the inevitable nomination of Hillary Clinton. It is a good though to see Americans turning out for Obama, he has redefine the candidacy of diversity.

southcarolina1974   December 14th, 2007 11:52 am ET

Go Barack. This guy has the qualities that all of us would like to see in a president, and that we sorely missed in this current president. I am not a Democrat, but I am hoping that the Democrats are courageous enough and smart enough to nominate him. If they do, I will certainly vote for him. With Hillary, I am not so sure. That will depend on the Republican. With Obama, my vote is a done deal.

sally,Lowell,ma   December 14th, 2007 11:50 am ET

Oprah,drug use. CNN can you tell us something positive about Obama and stop picking fights for us please. We have seen what you can do in your main network for the last 5months. I can not wait this election to be over..

Matt, Arlington, VA   December 14th, 2007 11:50 am ET

oops– this wasn't supposed to happen, the candidate of inevitability was supposed to have a coronation! She's been Obamatized....

MB Nekog   December 14th, 2007 11:48 am ET

Oh what a shocker, CNN has found another poll to support its designated candidate. I'm sure I can find several more polls that indicate the absolute opposite. I find it very biased and slanted to have an entire week where your ticker column always leads with "Hillary slides." She will surprise ALL of you! Remember, who invented the concept of the "Come Back Kid!"

anon New York, NY   December 14th, 2007 11:47 am ET

She just told Katie Couric last week that there was no doubt in her mind that she would be the nominee.

Gabe, Austin TX   December 14th, 2007 11:46 am ET

Looks like that comment she made to KC about "no way I won't win" has come back to haunt her.

That's what you get for your smug sense of self satisfaction hillary, you'd think that with all your "experience" you'd know that nothing is ever a sure thing.

EE   December 14th, 2007 11:46 am ET

As an independent this is what we hear people say. Talking to people from IO or HN alot of the undecided voters say finally they will vote to sanction negativity in campaigns.

Some dont say who is negative but it doesnt take one to be a psycho analyst to know its the Clintons.

I cant imagine Hilary is fallen this cheap to the Senator from Illinois.Hilary stop negativity and that may help you in Nevada given that u will lose IO,NH and SC to Mr Obama.

Lee M   December 14th, 2007 11:44 am ET

Once the "inevitabilty" argument collapses, Hillary's support will continue to crumble.

This is a refreshing development, much like Huckabee's rise over Mitt and Rudy (9-11 Rudy in case you all forgot).

Although the media, talk show hosts etc. may be unhappy, the rank and file in both parties are looking for more authentic candidates, rather than those that give "political" answers to every question. It would be nice if we had a clear choice in November 2008, without triangulation, obfuscation, or dishonest flip-flopping.

I am heartened by the evidence that once voters start paying attention more, they do not always go for the media appointed "frontrunner" but may think outside the box sometimes.

Scott, Royal Oak, MI   December 14th, 2007 11:44 am ET

Hillary : "You have to get out and work for every single vote. That's what I have always done. I don't know any other way to do it."

Riiiiight, Hillary. Interesting words from a campaign which has gone from touting inevitability to reeking of desperation and dirty tricks. I also love how she acts like she has so much experience and has "fought for votes" for so long, but actually has LESS time in elective office than Obama.

Good riddance, Hillary. I actually didn't mind you at first...but with you, familiarity breeds contempt.

R, Boston MA   December 14th, 2007 11:43 am ET

PS –
Alexander, you should really change the title of this post to:
"Obama takes the lead in ket state"

R, Boston MA   December 14th, 2007 11:42 am ET

YAYAYAY!

Go Obama! Love it.

Comments have been closed for this article

subscribe RSS Icon
About The Ticker

The latest political news from CNN's Best Political Team, with campaign coverage, 24-7. Sign up for our twice daily Ticker emails. Got a news tip or feedback? For complete political coverage, bookmark CNNPolitics.com.

CNN=Politics Screensaver

CNN=Politics ScreensaverTap into the power of The Situation Room. Download this powerful new tool that keeps you posted on the latest political news from the campaign trail.
Download (4.1 MB, PC only)

twitter
hambypCNN: @DanDoranBlum nice. hopefully you get two big wins over Pitt in one week.
Updated: Tue, 08 Dec 2009 14:42:32 -0800
hambypCNN: @AP_Ken_Thomas excellent duane spencer reference. let's try to work in lee scruggs, too, before the season ends.
Updated: Tue, 08 Dec 2009 14:14:50 -0800
@wolfblitzercnn: Shocking - what's happening in Baghdad. Five terror attacks. More than 100 killed and 400 injured amid fears the violence will increase.
Updated: Tue, 08 Dec 2009 14:08:29 -0800
hambypCNN: Kaine vs. Steele on Situation Room today in 6P hour.
Updated: Tue, 08 Dec 2009 13:55:02 -0800
@edhenrycnn: My colleague Dan Lothian and I show what's it's like on the road with the President - http://bit.ly/7XSU53 #cnn
Updated: Tue, 08 Dec 2009 13:09:21 -0800
Categories
Powered by WordPress.com VIP