January 5th, 2008
06:30 PM ET
10 years ago

Tight race in New Hampshire, post caucus poll shows

O'Reilly got into a confrontation with an Obama staffer Saturday.

Clinton and Obama are dead even in New Hampshire, a new poll shows.

MANCHESTER, New Hampshire (CNN) - With three days to go until the New Hampshire primary, it’s dead even in the race for the Democratic presidential nomination.

A new CNN/WMUR New Hampshire presidential primary poll conducted by the University of New Hampshire has Senators Hillary Clinton of New York and Barack Obama of Illinois all tied up, with each grabbing the support of 33 percent of likely Democratic primary voters in the Granite State.

Former Senator John Edwards of North Carolina is in third place with 20 percent. (Full poll results [PDF])

“Both Obama and Edwards appear to have benefited form the Iowa caucuses. Each picked up 3 points in New Hampshire. Clinton lost one point, since our last poll taken before the caucuses,” says CNN Senior Political Analyst Bill Schneider.

The new CNN/WMUR survey was conducted Friday and Saturday, after the Iowa caucuses.

Full story

Related video: N.H. Poll: Clinton, Obama tied

- CNN Deputy Political Director Paul Steinhauser

Filed under: New Hampshire
soundoff (226 Responses)
  1. Anonymous, Somewhere, MI

    Be careful when looking at the polling data coming out of New Hampshire. There's not only a lot of conflicting data, but some of it is coming from dubious sources. Unfortunately the two agencies that got the results most correctly in Iowa, Strategic Vision and Seltzer & Co., haven't done much polling outside of Iowa. ARG, Zogby, and CNN all got it wrong when they polled that state. That means you have to scrap any data they have in New Hampshire. Of the recent polls released by the various agencies, the most prolific is Suffolk University. Unfortunately they seem to be producing consistantly skewed results towards Clinton. The University of New Hampshire poll shows a tied race, while Rasmussen and Research 2000 show Obama leads (10 points and 1 point respectively.) My guess is Obama probably has a solid lead of around 6-8 points over Clinton in New Hampshire at the moment.

    January 6, 2008 02:33 am at 2:33 am |
  2. Gavin, Merrillville, Indiana

    By Mark Penn:

    "Two polls that had the race within a few points before the Iowa caucuses have the race tied after the Iowa caucuses.

    In today's CNN/WMUR poll, Hillary Clinton and Senator Barack Obama are tied at 33 percent - their last two polls had Hillary up 4 points and before that had Hillary down 2 points, so there is no statistically significant change in their numbers before and after the Iowa caucuses.

    And the Concord Monitor is out as well today with a poll showing the race at 33 percent for Hillary Clinton, 34 percent for Barack Obama, and 23 percent for John Edwards - exactly the same margin as before Iowa.

    Contrast that with the 17 points John Kerry gained in 2004 in the Boston Globe poll, which catapulted him from a 17-point deficit to a 20-point lead in New Hampshire after the Iowa caucuses. Or with the 7 points Al Gore gained in 2000 in the CNN/USA Today/Gallup poll, increasing his lead in New Hampshire from 5 points to 18 points.

    New Hampshire voters are fiercely independent. They will make their own decisions about who to support."

    January 6, 2008 02:38 am at 2:38 am |
  3. Lance in Monrovia

    I have absolutely zero respect for CNN at this point. They have shamelessly huckstered for Hillary day and night and its now beyond way obvious. Shame on you cnn, shame on you cnn, shame on you.

    You are a part of a free and supposedly open dialogue. You should not be trying to influence the votes of the American people by putting up bogus polls and misleading headlines that try to benefit your candidate, the candidate that will be most friendly to big business if she were to win, Hillary Clinton.

    I hope Barack Obama takes a wrecking ball to you and the entire big media machine that tries to constantly tell us what to think.

    I'm fed up with you CNN. I'm sick and tired of the media manipulation and I take great joy in seeing a real leader actually get a shot at getting elected for a change.

    Barack Obama is for real, while you and your ilk are all smoke and mirrors.

    Pack up your bogus polls and start kissing Barack Obama's keester. Maybe then he'll only break up your monopoly of information and spare you the wrecking ball.


    Obama 08

    January 6, 2008 02:42 am at 2:42 am |
  4. IHearYa

    "As an African American, I have no doubt about Barack Obama's ability to run this country. However, I will support Hillary Clinton all the way because I believe if she can pick up where her husband left off, we will have a great Country again."

    Good you put out the disclaimer first. How much are you being paid to write this? Take me to your leader I want to get paid to promote Hillary too, even though I'm against her.

    January 6, 2008 02:46 am at 2:46 am |
  5. ifymens

    Why do you Obama supporters believe in affirmative action when it comes to electing a president.The press have refused to do their job but has become Hillary bashers and Obama cheerleaders.This debate should show everybody that Hillary was the only person on that fit to be the President of this great country.John Edward makes me sick . He should stick with his $400 hair cut.

    January 6, 2008 02:47 am at 2:47 am |

    obama is full of air pure talk and no substance

    January 6, 2008 02:49 am at 2:49 am |
  7. kc

    i have to agree with you herold ,I too like Obama I'm just not sure he's ready to run this country at this time ,we need to mend afew fences even those who are with us ,british goverment ,but not the people and other goverments as well ,Bush has done tremendous damage to the credibility of this coountry and its people and we need someone like Hillary who knows the ropes .

    January 6, 2008 03:06 am at 3:06 am |
  8. alan St Louis

    This poll only show the 65 years and older group 🙂

    When you add the middle age and young people who don’t participate in the polls because there at work or school or parting with there friends come to swarm the booths in drove we see the dead heat turn into Obama heat of a land slide victory 🙂 Just like Iowa.

    January 6, 2008 03:17 am at 3:17 am |
  9. Pat Parker

    Let me get this straight! Barack Obama does NOT salute our nations flag, nor does he recite our Pledge of Allegiance! If he refuses to do either of these acts, then how can we even think about electing this man to be our President??? If he himself refuses to make these gestures, then what makes us think that he will defend out nations Constitution or our Declaration of Independence??? We all have ancestors who fought in wars and gave their lives to defend our freedoms. And yet we are actually thinking about electing Barack Obama to our nations highest office. I think the people of this nation had better wake up and see what we are setting ourselves up for! I hope someone in this country finds enough guts to stand up and say that we have lost enough of our freedoms already, in the name of Political Correctness! We have always been a nation who defended itself against tyrants in defense of freedoms. I'm not about to vote a man into office whom I cannot trust to defend those freedoms. I hope you do a lot of soul searching before you vote. Are you ready to give up all the freedoms that we enjoy today? Not me! Our forefathers forged a great nation for us to live in and we are getting ready to flush it all away with just one vote.

    January 6, 2008 03:17 am at 3:17 am |
  10. Bobby

    In reply to Hugh's comment above, who said:

    "I am starting being disappointed in CNN ethics of equal coverage and provide viewers with the reality"

    No disrespect, but did you really use CNN and ethics in the same sentence? Equal coverage and reality? CNN? That ship sailed a long time ago.

    January 6, 2008 03:20 am at 3:20 am |
  11. Brenda

    I totally agree with Herold's comments. Stop and really take a look at what Hillary has and is accomplishing. She is a tireless worker for the People. She has proven-even to the tougher conservatives, such as Dick Armey, who admitted that Hillary was probably the most qualified candidate out there- that she can work across the aisle for real change.

    Compare the work that has to be done to fix our country to having open-heart surgery. Who would you rather have operate on you? A Dr. with a lot of experience, education and who is always looking forward, or a Dr. who may have a nice bedside manner, but not the experience? I'll go with experience every time. I don't understand how Hillary can be criticized for being too thorough, too professional, too planned; isn't that what we want from of our leaders? I do not want to settle for inexperience, for idealism without plans, without the lessons learned. I don't pick my president like I'm picking a stand-up comic in a reality show. We have our own reality show and it's called "America in trouble," produced by George W. Bush. We need a new director/producer, once who understands what we need, not what we'll settle for. Hillary will produce "America Moves UP!"

    Please examine the overall positives of each candidate. If you're objective and thorough, I think you'll agree that Hillary is well-equipped to take on the challenges our country faces and give us the change we want.

    January 6, 2008 03:57 am at 3:57 am |
  12. Independent in IA

    After watching the NH debate I am inclined to disregard ALL candidates from both parties. Not one of them would fulfill the expectations of either the United States in particular or the world in general.

    The Republicans all came across as war-mongering bullies, with the exception of Ron Paul who sounded more demented than anything else, and would exacerbate the distrust and antipathy already prevalent in other nations.

    The Democrats sounded like whiney children who fight over the size of the piece of candy being apportioned.

    All invoke the Constitution of this nation, yet all have, at one time or another, twisted the words laid down to suit their own purposes. This was especially true of the Republican candidates, who were using it as an obvious ploy to attempt to distance themselves from the current Bush in the Oval Office who has abused it so flagrantly. Every one of them would do exactly the same if it suited his purpose.

    Charles Gibson did an outstanding job of moderating the debate. He asked a question and let them duke it out with a minimum of oversight. My guess is he was having a hard time keeping a straight face as every candidate was exposed as petty, self-aggrandizing and mean-spirited.

    I, for one, will vote for none of them.

    January 6, 2008 03:59 am at 3:59 am |
  13. Samson Lim

    I don't believe in polls – Let's Go Out and Vote!! Choose Who is the strong Presidential Democratic Candidate that can face the Republican Presidential Candidates in the Primary Election? That can surely win the White House. I believe its Senator Hillary Clinton .

    January 6, 2008 04:02 am at 4:02 am |
  14. James Tanaka

    Strange but political followers are appearing to be passionated with their idol. Let us respect the survey.

    When CNN describes Hillary to be "talking" while Barack is "speaking", I have not read a Clinton fan complain. If the pictures of Obama usually appears with a large crowd as against Clinton's cropped images, no one raised concern for the kind of presentation. As news were reported favorably about the first-timer Senator from Illinois while putting up sour lines for the former First Lady and re-elected Senator, I have not read resentment.

    If one would observe meticulously, the rookie African-American Senator now a Presidential hopeful is getting most of the benefits from CNN and Yahoo news. There is no reason to whine.

    January 6, 2008 04:17 am at 4:17 am |
  15. Lucky

    Wake up and and join the tomorrows of this country. How poor were you that you can't aspire for a greater tomorrow? If after Clinton's 35+ years experience has not changed this country for the better, it never will even if you give her another 40 years in office. Vote Obama and watch real changes take place for good!!!

    January 6, 2008 04:46 am at 4:46 am |
  16. Eli Post

    Thank you for updating your post online on the latest CNN poll and adding additional information concerning the polling methodology and the entire poll results. Hopefully, such additional information can also be included when the results are broadcast.

    January 6, 2008 05:23 am at 5:23 am |
  17. A Newly Annointed Democrat

    I just read through what CNN has for all the candidates, under "ISSUES", especially between the top three Democratic candidates, namely, Obama, Hillary and Edwards.

    I am sorry to say that when I compared these three candidates, I found that Obama is repeating Hillary's in most of the issues, except on the last issue of taxes. He sure is a copycat! Obama doesn't have any original ideas himself and I don't understand why people would vote for him. Is it because he is a "fresh face"? And if it is, you people really are too shallow. Or maybe you are a woman-basher? Don't get hung up on the name Clinton. Hillary is Hillary. Although she carries the same last name Clinton, yet she is independent of her husband! And why would you think she will bring Bill back into the White House?
    Just think!!

    Read more about Hillary, whether it is the book about her, or the articles by Newsweek!!She is intelligent; she has depth; she is experienced; she can work with the Republican party in a bi-partisan way which she had learned through her mistake in the health reform back in the Clinton era. Besides, she is a two-term New York Senator. Doesn't this tell you something? Most of New Yorkers chose her because they know she can make a difference in their lives. We do want somebody who has the experience and expertise to lead our country back to the previous Clinton era, where we had surplus, we were respected in the international arena!!

    I was an independent throughout the years but this time, I applied to be a Democrat, because I will vote for Hillary in the California primary. Go Hillary, I support you 100% and I have full faith in you!

    Obama may be a good VP because Hillary can teach him a lot! He is just too green. He is only a one-term Senator. The Republicans are hoping Obama will get the nomination because if he does, they have a better chance of defeating him, just like they foulmouthed about John Kary. But if Hillary gets the nomination. it will be a tough match. Hillary is so transparent to everybody that the Republicans cannot find more damage to bring upon her! So you Democrats out there, let us unite and vote for Hillary! Don't let the Republicans keep the seat for another 4 years!

    January 6, 2008 06:03 am at 6:03 am |
  18. Harold Bishop, NH

    Herold, regarding Bill Clinton's administration:

    "a lot of job creation"

    Define "a lot". If by "a lot" you mean more jobs for kids in Macdonald's, then you have a slim point. Generally speaking, Bill's record of job creation is similar to that of George H. W. Bush. I'm not being flippant. I love your thoughtfulness, but I think you haven't looked at the facts.

    "a balanced budget with big surplus"

    The budget has not been balanced for some time, and the present global credit crunch is in no small part due to uncontrolled expenditure over the past twenty years – attriiutable to Presidents Reagan, Senior Bush, Clinton and the current incumbent.

    "a great economy which lifted my family out of poverty"

    This is wonderful, and I have no comment to make except to congratulate you.

    "our moral authority was outstanding around the world"

    Really? Are you forgetting Bill Clinton signing the biggest EVER sale of military helicopters to Israel, which in turn wrought havoc on the West Bank? America's reputation was better than now under Bush, but come on brother, that's not saying much is it?

    The truth is, Republicans are not calling for an Obama nomination. They are TERRIFIED of an Obama nomination because nobody more than him, an African American man, embodies REAL CHANGE.

    Polls show that Obama beats Republicans in every single match up, while Hillary loses many contests.

    I'm being fair – Hillary is not change. Hillary is the past. WAKE UP AND SMELL THE COFFEE.

    Much love to you Herold, please do reply if you so wish.

    And let's be united in a Democratic presidency!

    January 6, 2008 06:27 am at 6:27 am |
  19. Lillian

    New Hampshire allows any one to vote, Illegal or not, So I don't take it's primary as Very Valid any longer.
    Obamson/ Clinton funded by big Business and Special Interest groups like La RAza and ACLU. And they have always supported them and probably will continue to if elected. And will be the same Status Quo in Washington, I see neither of them as people of Change, Same old do as big business and special interests want. Not the American People.
    I checked all there records. Try it , you might be shocked

    January 6, 2008 06:43 am at 6:43 am |
  20. Lillian

    Here is Romney's actual conservative record:

    -In the four balanced budgets he signed into law, Governor Romney used the line-item veto or program reduction power to cut spending by nearly $1 Billion. Over the course of four budgets, Governor Romney made over 300 line-item reductions, 350 line-item eliminations and struck language 150 times.

    - Gov. Romney was instrumental in passing a bill abolishing a retroactive capital gains tax in the state that would have forced nearly 50,000 taxpayers to pay an additional $200 million in state taxes and fees

    - 4 years ago - before the illegals marched in our streets - Romney opposed a bill that would have allowed illegal aliens to get driver’s licenses. "Those who are here illegally should not receive tacit support from our government that gives an indication of legitimacy," the governor said. (Scott S. Greenberger, "Romney Stand Dims Chances Of License For Undocumented," The Boston Globe, 10/28/03)

    - Romney vetoed a bill in 2004 that would have permitted illegal aliens to pay the same in-state tuition rate paid by citizens at public colleges and universities in Massachusetts.

    - Romney vetoed the bill providing state funding for human embryonic stem cell research

    - Romney vetoed a bill that provided for the "morning after pill" without a prescription because it is an abortifacient and would have been available to minors without parental notification and consent

    - He vetoed legislation which would have redefined Massachusetts longstanding definition of the beginning of human life from fertilization to implantation

    - Governor Romney strongly supported a successful ballot initiative that replaced the state's bilingual program with English immersion. (Romney Vows to Protect English Immersion Law, May 1, 2003)

    - Governor Romney demonstrated his commitment to school-choice by vetoing a bill that would have canceled funding for Massachusetts' charter-school program. (Romney to Veto Charter School Moratorium, June 23, 2004)

    - He supported parental notification laws and opposed efforts to weaken parental involvement

    - He fought to promote abstinence education in public school classrooms with a program offered by faith-based Boston group Healthy Futures to middle school students.

    Governor Romney filed and signed into law the most significant expansion of military benefits in recent years. The new law reduced to zero the cost members of the Massachusetts National Guard must pay to attend public colleges and universities, increased twenty-fold the death benefit paid to families of members killed in the line of duty, created a new annuity benefit for Gold Star spouses and boosted the amount paid to Gold Star parents. (Romney Signs Legislation Expanding Military Benefits, November 11, 2005)

    January 6, 2008 06:45 am at 6:45 am |
  21. Lillian

    Mccain runs on his military/ war record yet he votes against bills for soldiers and veterans most of the time. And he stood firm by Kennedy & Reid. for Amnesty for Illegals and voted to remove the money for the fence and border Security. Would never vote for mccain even if he was the only Candidate. He gets the nomination and we will totally vote Independent

    January 6, 2008 06:48 am at 6:48 am |
  22. florence campbell


    January 6, 2008 07:11 am at 7:11 am |
  23. nash_12

    It's Deja Vu (remember 3 days before iowa caucus they were again neck and neck?) My guess is obama will win NH by a good margin, and it ll be the end of the road for Hillary.

    January 6, 2008 08:08 am at 8:08 am |
  24. rudi

    Obama is charismatic, dynamic and believable. Hillary is style is static, sterile and stage-managed. They are both junior senators, but what has she achieved that constitutes more experience? The failed health-care plan? He was a law professor, and clearly able to 'think on his feet'. I have seen the question rightfully asked elsewhere, "has she run a city, a state or a business?"
    And neither should she get a freee pass just because she is a woman. Women do not have any more inate ability when it comes to handling the world in troubled times. (Look how the highly talented and educated Rice provided no added value to the country.)
    Character counts most. The world has seen many great charismatic leaders, not a new precident.

    January 6, 2008 08:14 am at 8:14 am |
  25. Jean in NH

    The real shame of all of this is that the media had decided long ago that only Hillary and Obama are the candidates to watch and cover and therefore affect the thought process of American voters. Sadly, many voters are lead around by the nose and do not do any checking on their own.
    Meanwhile the most viable, believable, honest candidate gets little to NO coverage. Bill Richardson was the calm, clear, voice of reason during the debates last night while the other 3 children were squabbling amongst each other.
    It is a sad shame for all of us that the media has so much power.

    January 6, 2008 08:35 am at 8:35 am |
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10