December 28th, 2007
09:45 AM ET
10 years ago

Poll: No clear Democratic frontrunner in New Hampshire


A new poll shows a narrow lead for Obama in New Hampshire (Photo Credit: Getty Images)

WASHINGTON (CNN) - Democrat Barack Obama remains neck-and-neck with rival Hillary Clinton in New Hampshire, according to a just-released L.A. Times/Bloomberg poll - the third survey in a row to show the Illinois senator tied or narrowly leading in a state the Clinton campaign hoped would serve as a firewall.

Obama leads Clinton 32 percent to 30 percent among likely Democratic voters in the new poll – a major shift from L.A. Times/Bloomberg's last survey in September when Clinton held a 19 point lead over Obama. John Edwards meanwhile is at 20 percent with the rest of the candidates in low single digits.

The poll follows the release of a Boston Globe poll late last week that also showed a 2-point lead for Obama in the Granite State, and a USA Today/ Gallup poll that found the two candidates tied.

On the Republican side, the poll shows Mitt Romney leading McCain in New Hampshire among likely Republican voters, 34 percent to 20 percent. Rudy Giuliani is close behind with 17 percent, and Mike Huckabee is at 12 percent.

The L.A. Times/Bloomberg poll of the Iowa race shows a slight Clinton lead a week before the state's caucuses. Among likely Democratic caucus goers, Clinton is at 31 percent, Edwards is at 25 percent, and Obama is at 22 percent. The rest of the candidates are in single digits.

In Iowa, Huckabee continues to lead Romney among likely Republican caucus goers, 36 percent to 28 percent. Fred Thompson stands at 10 percent - the only other candidate in double digits.

The survey was conducted December 20-26 and carries a margin of error of plus or minus 4-6 percentage points.

- CNN Ticker Producer Alexander Mooney

Filed under: Iowa • New Hampshire • Presidential Candidates
soundoff (61 Responses)
  1. Brian, Syracuse NY

    "And to all of those who are missing a loved one, there are no words any of us can express, except to tell you in the clearest possible terms we will — in a united American response — support you, offer assistance to you, stand with you, and pursue those who reached deep into your family homes yesterday and took someone you loved away from you."
    -Hillary Clinton, 12 Sep. 2001

    …How is diverting our forces from Afghanistan to Iraq, a country which had nothing to do with 9/11, pursuing "those who reached deep into your family homes yesterday and took someone you loved away from you"? Saddam Hussein was not responsible for a single American death on 9/11, yet he's dead. Osama Bin Laden was responsible and he remains free because of Clinton and the Neocons' War in Iraq.

    On January 3rd, 2008, the voters in Iowa will take Hillary "Empty Suit" Clinton to task for her empty promises and empty gestures that left America's brave and proud with so many empty hearts and empty pockets.

    December 28, 2007 02:26 pm at 2:26 pm |
  2. David in Tallahassee, FL

    I have finally decided how I shall vote in the upcoming primary and general elections. I shall vote for Obama (even though I live in Florida and the splendid Democratic party won't count my vote). If it turns out that Clinton is the Democratic nominee I shall vote for a random third-party candidate, as I in good conscious could not vote for any of the current crop of Republicans, or Clinton.

    December 28, 2007 03:15 pm at 3:15 pm |
  3. Freda V., Greenwich CT

    I predict the race in Iowa will be Edwards, Billary, and Obama, in that order. I never believed Obama would carry the state of Iowa, folks. I know people from Iowa and I just cannot bring myself to believe Obama can win.

    I would never vote for Hillary Clinton for anything after her subtle stereotyping of Obama. I think Billary knows of what I speak and she used it because she knew it would work. She has no shame. A person who appeals to others racist feelings even though she is probably not racist herself, will do anything to win. Hillary will never receive my vote.

    It brings to mind the fact that the first "Black President" never could find a minority to appoint to the Supreme Court. No Hillary Clinton for me and I hope no Hillary Clinton for other African Americans.

    December 28, 2007 03:40 pm at 3:40 pm |
  4. M.J. Westport Ct

    Joe Ossai, Bedford, NH
    President Barack Obama will win New Hamsphire, Iowa and SC. Republicans and Hillary supporters get use to it. Your lady is a loser. She is cooked, put a fork in that fat ass.

    Joe, that sounds about right to me! I wish I had thought to say thatt.

    December 28, 2007 03:48 pm at 3:48 pm |
  5. Vic Las Vegas, Nevada

    Hillary Clinton is a strong and capable woman and leader.
    She has the experience needed to be a great President.
    OpraBama is all talk. He talk so much about walkin the talk, well, that takes 'know how' and in that regard, Hillary Clinton has him vastly overshadowed with her experience and his lack thereof.
    OpraBama is doing the deplorable, he's trying to make political headway from the death of Mrs. Bhutto. That's not only shabby, it shows his despiration.
    If he were the stand up guy he professes to be he wouldn't behave as he is behaving.
    1st choice HILLARY. 2nd choice RICHARDSON.

    December 28, 2007 05:21 pm at 5:21 pm |
  6. Steve

    What Experience Does Hillary Have? What Makes Her or Obama So much better than the Rest? What do they stand for? What have they accomplished or ran? They will be running the greatest country in the world! Any of the Republican candidates have more qualifications than Clinton and Obama. I want someone in there that doesn't want big government. We as a nation should not be taxed to death over every little program. We need someone in the White house with COMMON SENSE, not the Side-Stepping PHONY that we hear about all the time. Go Fred Thompson as my first choice. Ron Paul is my second!

    December 29, 2007 08:49 am at 8:49 am |
  7. Hillary is the one!

    As first lady, Hillary Clinton had an unique opportunity to observe the give and take of Washington politics which only 43 men (presidents) and 42 women (first ladies) have had. Few first ladies have been better suited to use this opportunity than Hillary Clinton, except for, perhaps, Eleanor Roosevelt. She was able to meet and converse with world leaders and high level government officials from all over the world, learning how they thought and related to America’s role in the world. Mrs. Clinton traveled to over 82 countries from South Africa, to China and India. She met both with government leaders in capitals and ordinary people in small rural villages. In Bangladesh she learned how the micro-loans programs started by Mohammad Yunus stimulated economic development and improved the lives of women and their families. She helped to spread word about micro-lending programs, even before Mr. Yunus became a Nobel laureate. In her travels, she was a strong advocate for human rights and, especially, women’s rights, and she was very well received.

    Hillary Clinton’s White House experience gave her tremendous insight into how the processes of governing at that high level operate. Her biographer Sally Bedell Smith describes her as a confidant of the president. She was the person he always tested his ideas on and sought her advice. From an office in the West Wing (Hillary was the only First Lady to ever have an office in the presidential wing), Hillary Clinton played a strong behind-the-scenes role in policy and political decisions. By all measures, this was a very productive and effective presidency which dealt successfully with many of the biggest issues we are again facing—a huge and growing national debt that has a wide impact throughout the world’s economy and weakens America, a destabilized middle east and troops in harms way, a need for health care reform, rising poverty and a declining middle-class, and more.

    Experience counts and Hillary has had substantial experience through close involvement with the presidency and the experience of a second term Senator. She has the broad perspective to see what needs to be changed and the experience to do it. She doesn’t just talk about the future, she has the experience to make it better.

    December 29, 2007 09:01 am at 9:01 am |
  8. Obama is unelectable

    Obama is unelectable,support for Obama is levelling off after in the polls,Republicans are being soft on Obama because they are scared of Clinton, Republicans are terrified of Clinton as the nominee. We’re already ahead in 11 [Republican] states, and all we’ve got to do is win Ohio. We haven’t even begun to spend the hundreds of millions of dollars we’ll have to get her positive message out. What more are they going to say about this woman? We’ve heard it all before and we’re still beating them.

    ”Incomplete Picture in New Obama Health Care Ad! lieing as usual
    Sen. Barack Obama is touting his health care plan in an Iowa ad unveiled today, six days before the state's caucuses, But the commercial misrepresents.The commercial cites The Washington Post in claiming the Obama approach would be "saving $2,500 for the typical family.senator's aides estimated" such a savings but would not attempt to verify.It's obvious that Obama feels comfortable attempting to trash the credibility of progressives like Krugman. It's even more disturbing when coupled with the admiration that Obama holds for Republicans in his post-partisan quest. But this is just plain stupid.

    December 29, 2007 07:24 pm at 7:24 pm |
  9. Anne K. Westchester NY

    MJ Westport CT December 29, 2007 2:25 pm ET

    My uncle, a heart surgeon for 35 years has been married to my aunt for 42 years and they are very close.
    My question is: Would any of you Hillary Clinton fans let my aunt operate on your heart? That makes about as much sense as Hillary having experience just because Bill Clinton was president for eight years? My aunt went to AMA functions with my uncle and she says she was his confidant during stressful times in his career as a heart surgeon. She even read a lot of his medical books.

    Or, maybe Hillary supporters would let my friend handle a case for you just because her husband is a lawyer and she typed legal documents for him when she worked as a legal secretary.

    If so, please sign up to let my neighbor pull your teeth and do dental surgery on you or a member of your family because she was a dental assistant to her dentist husband early in their marriage.
    To M.J., Makes good sense to me. I am waiting for Laura Bush to jump into the race with all her years of experience as wife of a president and governor; and let's not forget the experience she gathered as daughter-in-law of a vice president and president. Much more qualified than Lady Macbeth; and she is a much nicer person.

    Why stop there, maybe we can get Roger Clemens wife to come out and pitch next year because she was a witness to his pitching career.

    Hillary Clinton has higher negatives than positives. Also, if you want true experience, why not go for Joe Biden, Richardson, or Dodd. How about someone who has real first-hand experience as a participant; not second-hand experience as a witness to history?

    December 29, 2007 09:38 pm at 9:38 pm |
  10. tomdc


    All the polls, including the new Zogby's show Mrs. Clinton way behind Obama or Edwards against Republicans. Almost 50% of American voters would vote for anyone except Mrs. Clinton. (I'm a life-long yellow dog democrat and I would never vote for her). Even polls showing her 1 or 2 points ahead of Rudy have her losing New Jersey and Pennsylvania- hence no way she can win the electoral college.

    The polls on Iowa are totally insane. There is no way Obama has come up 20 points in New Hampshire and remained the same in Iowa. The campaigns in the two states are the identical.

    If the democratic machine is successful in forcing this war-mongering corrupt former first lady on us dems our party will not only not regain the White House but lose the House and Senate. Mrs. Clinton= death of Democratic party.

    December 31, 2007 05:50 pm at 5:50 pm |
  11. Paul

    Hey Curtis, the evil Lady Clinton will never be on a ticket with Obama.
    Why because she is dishonest and he is honest.
    She is a manifpulating liar....a hoax...a sham....the Dems trying to shove Bill Clinton into the Whitehouse ain't going to happen

    January 6, 2008 10:56 pm at 10:56 pm |
1 2 3