January 6th, 2008
05:49 PM ET
4 years ago

Poll: Obama jumps ahead of Clinton in New Hampshire

ALT TEXT

A new CNN/WMUR poll shows Obama has a 10 point lead over Clinton. (Photo Credit: AP)

MANCHESTER, New Hampshire (CNN) - MANCHESTER, New Hampshire (CNN) - Two days before New Hampshire's Democratic primary, Sen. Barack Obama has opened a double-digit lead over Sen. Hillary Clinton in that state, a new CNN-WMUR poll found Sunday.

Obama, the first-term senator from Illinois who won last week's Iowa caucuses, led the New York senator and former first lady 39 percent to 29 percent in a poll conducted Saturday and Sunday - a sharp change from a poll out Saturday that showed the Democratic front-runners tied at 33 percent.

Former Sen. John Edwards of North Carolina is at 16 percent in the new survey, down four points from Saturday. Gov. Bill Richardson of New Mexico is in fourth place, with the support of 7 percent of likely New Hampshire Democratic primary voters, with Rep. Dennis Kucinich of Ohio at 2 percent.

Full story

Full poll results [PDF]

Related video: New poll sends shockwaves

Related video: Stakes high in New Hampshire

– CNN Deputy Political Director Paul Steinhauser

soundoff (516 Responses)
  1. EDWARD LEAK

    OBAMA. WHY IS IT THAT OUR GOVERNMENT CANNOT ANSWER MY QUESTIONS: WHY DOES IT TAKE SEVEN YEARS TO CLOSEOUT AN PROBATE ESTATE WHEN THERE IS LITTLE DISPUTE IF ANY AMONG PARTIES. SECONDLY, WHEN DEVELOPER ,GOVERNMENT EXPAND THEIR CITIES WITH STATE FUNDING, TAXPAYER MONIES, INTO YOUR COMMUNITY; WHY NOT REQUIRE EQUAL CREEK BUFFER FROM EQUAL PROPERTY OWNERS AS IN CONSTRUCTION OF HIGHWAYS. WHY DO ONE PERSON HAVE TO GIVE UP MORE PARCEL OF LAND THAN THE OTHER? THIRD: WHEN LAND WAS NOT A LUXURY OR COMMODY; A DEED WAS OBTAIN QUICKLY FROM BLACKS THAT COULD NOT WRITE OR READ. NOW THAT BLACKS HAVE BEEN EDUCATED ;WHY HAVE THEY LOOSE MORE THAN THEIR ANCESTORS? ANSWER: THE SYSTEM IS SLOWER WHEN WORKING FOR AFRICAN AMERICANS INTEREST WHERE PROGRESS IS CONCERNED. FOR SALE OF PROPERTY IS THE ONLY SIGN OF INTEREST.

    January 6, 2008 08:36 pm at 8:36 pm |
  2. Simon

    We have a divided country, a dangerous and hateful world, and an untenable governing structure heavily dependent and driven by the high dollar funding of well financed corporate interests. Clinton will not bring this country together, will struggle to heal the world, and has actively built and utilized the system of government we currently are trying to fix. She may indeed be ready to lead, just as every one of her primary opponents are, but the question is where would she lead?

    I am voting for Barack Obama not because he is perfect, but because he has integrity and the judgment to change this country, this time and this world and all for the better.

    January 6, 2008 08:41 pm at 8:41 pm |
  3. Norman

    Looks like from this viewer that a Clinton will not be in the White House in January 2009. Personally I am a Hillary supporter but I will support the Democratic Nominee to be the next President.

    From my prospective all I have heard from the Republican candidates is a lot of garbage recycled. Even tonight they are telling the public lies. What Social Security needs is to be left alone and stop being a soccer ball to be kicked around. The Social Security Trust Fund is safe except the politicians who want you to believe otherwise. Also small business is not creating jobs and if it is they are some of the worst paying jobs. This is all part of a regressive republican strategy .

    The fact is that republicans in the last 7 years have taken a surplus and turned it into a huge deficit. They have no positive agenda.

    So come November I am voting for a president who wants real change and not some recycled garbage that the republicans want us to buy.

    January 6, 2008 08:43 pm at 8:43 pm |
  4. Steve J

    I don't know if you realize it or not, but their has been a Clinton or Bush in the White House for the past 20 years, and if you look at what has happened to America over that time period you will see the development of the division that exists today. If you hear HRC talk about the republicans and independents like they are lepers. They are all people who have a stake and share in the success of this nation. That is what Obama means when he talks about change, HRC can go on to win the election, but I guarantee you that we will be stuck in the same partisan politics that has bogged down DC for the past 20 years. No matter how much we want to deny it, true change for America means unity not experience. If experience were the biggest factor, then GWB should be great as president. Since he is the only one with the experience, but as we all know that is not the case. I remember a time when Ross Perot was running for president because he wanted to change politics in DC, and he had no public service at all. Yet somehow people want to discount the service of senator Obama. Please open your eyes and see that the act of insanity is doing the same thing over and over and somehow expecting DIFFERENT results. Its time for a new agenda and a new mindset to enter Washington not another member of the Clinton-Bush Dynasty. —————- Obama 08—————

    January 6, 2008 08:48 pm at 8:48 pm |
  5. Bill, OHIO

    PLEASE AMERICA LISTEN!!! OBAMA IS THE REPUBLICANS WMD!! His running will destroy the Democratic partys chances of winning the Presidency! A vote for Obama is a vote for the Republicans. Period. They will, I promise you, maintain the Presidency if Obama is the Democratic candidate. Like Karl Rove spurred on the Bible Belt for Bush, the Republicans will fear-monger the racists and anti-anybody-named-Hussein faction to come out in DROVES to vote against Obama. They will chew him up and spit him out. It is not fair but politics rarely are. He is not ready to lead and America is not ready for a Black President. America is BARELY ready for a woman President, but this is the next logical step...PLEASE USE YOUR VOTE WISELY!

    January 6, 2008 08:48 pm at 8:48 pm |
  6. Big Ben

    Senator Obama has talked a lot about hope and unity during this campaign. Apparently if we vote for him we can hope everything goes OK. I don’t want to hope though, I want to know. I don’t want to hope that everything will go OK if Senator Obama is elected. I want to know that he will stand up and fight for what is right even if it makes a lot of people mad.
    We have spent too many years watching politicians take us into illegal wars, we have watched for too long as corporations were allowed to exploit us for their own profit. We have watched as too much debt has been piled up to be passed on to our children and grandchildren. This is not a time to try to bring about unity with those who are destroying this nation; this is a time to fight.
    Show me that you are willing to take on and fight the big corporations. I don’t get hope from simply hearing nice sounding abstract words that promise a pleasant, fuzzy and warm future. I get hope from people who are willing to stand up and say they will fight.
    You can’t unite the whole country, so don’t try to get the Republicans who are opposed to everything we stand for to unite behind you. Tell us who you are going to unite. Do you unite those who are working for social justice and peace or do you unite those who are going to stick with the status quo that is destroying our nation?
    Your choice will determine whether or not I can ever be united behind you campaign.

    January 6, 2008 08:50 pm at 8:50 pm |
  7. j Allen

    Obama.. The Candidate of Change.

    Someone, please... CHANGE WHAT? He is a Liberal Democrat. What in the world will he possibly change?

    Health Care? Will never happen. Why? Congress men & women have their own plan, which is free and much better than yours and mine - So, do you actually think they will do didly squat to fix this? Here's a plan for CHANGE – put ALL of the US Congress on a public health care plan that you and I have access to. (Lets see how this mess gets cleaned up.)

    Social Security? Do you think Congress participates in Social Security? NOPE. So, do you think they will do ANYTHING to change the current plan? NOPE.

    Why should ANYONE raise our taxes to pay down the deficit? Clinton left us with a Surplus and Bush pissed it away. This is the 2nd time in history we have done this. SO, raise our taxes to pay for the out of control spending of our Congress??? NO WAY! Maybe its high time we tell Congress – you got us in this mess, get us out of it. Cut Pork Spending, etc. You want to raise my taxes? Put a bill in front of the US Public that says we will raise your taxes x% for 1 year in order to rebuild the majority of infrastructure in this country. GUARANTEE me that the money you raise will be spent for that – and ONLY that – and I will agree to a tax raise. (Best way to do this – have a 3rd party watch over the program and report to Congress a monthly status)

    Obama, Clinton, Thompson, Edwards, McCain, Romney, etc. etc. DOES ANYONE THINK ANY OF THESE PEOPLE REPRESENTS AMERICA? They are all multi-millionaires who are after one thing - POWER. This is like saying John Kerry – the multi-billionaire – was an "average guy".

    WAKE UP PEOPLE! Time for a 3rd party in this country that stands for something neither the left or right in this country stands for..... COMMON SENSE.

    January 6, 2008 08:51 pm at 8:51 pm |
  8. Rferr

    Obama is well intentioned but naive. He believes that he is going to go to Washington, DC and work with the republicans for change! Only Edwards and Clinton recognize the Republicans for what they are and know what they have to do to implement change. If Obama thinks he is going to go to Washington riding a new wave of cooperation he is dreaming. After his election they will use every dirty trick they know to destroy him and his presidency.

    January 6, 2008 08:52 pm at 8:52 pm |
  9. abdiver12

    If Hillary is so experienced and ready to lead, then why did she support the Iraq War and the Patriot Act all the way till 2005? Don't you think an experienced, competent, and ethical leader would have stood up to Bush during those crucial years instead of backing him every step of the way? There are stories of her not even reading the NIE intelligence report on Iraq before authorizing the war. And she steadfastly refuses to apologize for that support. Hillary has consistently put her political ambitions ahead of the country's best interests and that's despicable. She stands for nothing but her own advancement. The blood of 4000 US soldiers is on her hands and she doesn't belong in the Oval Office. Besides, how much experience did her husband have when he became president in '92?

    January 6, 2008 08:55 pm at 8:55 pm |
  10. ethel rosenberg

    NOTE to Michael-

    Yeah, guy, there is- It's called the 22d Amendment, it's in the US Constitution,
    circa 1951

    Section 1. No person shall be elected to the office of the President more than twice, and no person who has held the office of President, or acted as President, for more than two years of a term [a term is four years] to which some other person was elected President shall be elected to the office of the President more than once. But this article shall not apply to any person holding the office of President when this article was proposed by the Congress, and shall not prevent any person who may be holding the office of President, or acting as President, during the term within which this article becomes operative from holding the office of President or acting as President during the remainder of such term.
    Section 2. This article shall be inoperative unless it shall have been ratified as an amendment to the Constitution by the legislatures of three-fourths of the several states within seven years from the date of its submission to the states by the Congress.

    January 6, 2008 08:55 pm at 8:55 pm |
  11. Wild Bill?Sweet William

    Show me a man who wants to go to Washington to change things and what he offers to do this with is Hope, Unity and Bipartisanship and I will show you a man going to a brass knuckle brawl armed with only good intentions.

    January 6, 2008 08:56 pm at 8:56 pm |
  12. Lone Ranger

    I would just like to remind the news media in this country that John Edwards in is the race for the White House and He is moving up in the national polls and moving in New Hampshire!

    Can someone on here tell me why the news media in this country is not covering John Edwards?

    Rasmussen Reports Daily Presidential Tracking Poll shows
    Clinton 36
    Obama 25
    Edwards 23

    Clinton is down 6 points, Obama down one point, and Edwards Up 6 points!!!

    Edwards is moving more than Obama and no one is covering that!

    January 6, 2008 08:59 pm at 8:59 pm |
  13. ethel rosenberg

    Somebody get a fork, Hillary's cooked.

    Thank you lord! Obama is a LEADER. I'm sure he "works hard" but it takes more than technical prowess and "35 years of experience" to bring new democrats in and win elections. You do have to believe and inspire others to believe or you don't get elected.

    Hard to change things without being elected.

    January 6, 2008 08:59 pm at 8:59 pm |
  14. Infuriated Voting Citizen

    It is amazing to me that the media is once again picking our nominees and our future President. Aren't journalists suppose to be impartial??? It appears that so far they are blatent supporters of Barack Obama, calling him a rockstar and purporting him to be a larger "idea" or "movement" versus a candidate. C'mon CNN, MSNBC, FOX News and all the rest of the mainstream media....why don't you go back to school and learn to do some objective reporting again instead of getting on the bandwagon because of one small midwestern state's caucuses, that hardly represents the rest of us! The last time I checked, I thought this was a nationwide campaign...but I guess not according to all of you. So goodbye to the democratic process, when the media are too busy brainwashing the public of who the "better candidate" is. It is really sad that the media basically gave George W. Bush a free ride into the white house two terms in a row and now has decided to give another inexperienced person – aka the rockstar, or the Great Obama into the whitehouse. Why don't you spend sometime slamming his credentials as much as you do Hillary Clintons. If your going to nit pick with candidates, at least do it to all of them instead of clearly picking a "media favorite". And furthermore, where has all of the good ole investigating reporting gone to? It seems that mainstream journalism has become more of a popularity contest with the "X" factor as you call it being more important, and overriding every other quality of a candidate including experience where it counts in foreign affairs, diplomacy ane years of public service. It sickens me that CNN and many others have become nothing more than Hollywood style reporters.

    January 6, 2008 09:00 pm at 9:00 pm |
  15. Andrew

    Wow, Barack should be proud to have this person supporting them:

    Sayed S.Shah January 6, 2008 6:39 pm ET:
    It is very much reassuring to note that how the Founding Fathers of this great nations had the wisdom and fortitude to devise such a practical mechanism for the election of the President of the United States of America ,which work as effectively today as it worked almost two and a half centuries ago. Thus, enabling the Americans to be the masters of their own national destiny.

    ------ ------- ------- ------– -----

    ACTUALLY, we do not use the system our founding fathers devised. Back in the day, THERE WAS NO POPULAR VOTE for the president. The Electoral College (which we still use today, but in a different way) was what voted for president. Actually, the public didn't vote for US senators back in the day either, only representatives for the HouseGood to know Obama's groupies are educated.....but no one ever accused them of being informed, did they

    January 6, 2008 09:02 pm at 9:02 pm |
  16. Patrick, Portland, Oregon

    "Change", I only hope that americans aren't as stupid this time with this word as they were with "terrorism", these are words, that strike a nerve, action and coming together is what we need. I like Barak, I like Hillary, I like John, I hope we pick the right candidate, but I am starting to be suspect of people talking vague talking points with no substance, change is just a word, just like terrorism. Hope is a word as well, just like experience. I hope we make the right choice for change whether is comes with experience or with none, but just remember George W. was change, and the lets not blame the Clintons, for the slime politics that was created from the power hungry and corrupt right. Lets hope that change comes from both sides, Left and Right, we need to viable good parties, because without both we will end up right back where we are.....

    January 6, 2008 09:02 pm at 9:02 pm |
  17. noans

    WOW, Curiosityhasme. Your comment rings more of racism than politics. Reading some of the other comments, it's sadly apparent that, unfortunately, racism still appears to be alive and well in the land of the free.

    January 6, 2008 09:03 pm at 9:03 pm |
  18. ldc

    I'm sick of people claiming that Barack lacks enough experience to be President.

    This is a man who has worked on behalf of the public for the past 20-years of his life as an attorney, community organizer and legislator. He's been in Washington for the past four.

    In anything, he is perfect, because he has just enough knowledge of the D.C. machine, but is still connected to the people, as opposed to people who have been in D.C. most of their lives.

    Another thing people forget is that being an executive is more about leadership and judgment than anything else.

    Clinton, for all her experience, will get nothing done, because she will not be able to bring Republicans to back her policies. She will not help sweep in new Democrats and moderate Republicans in the elections. She will not inspire a nation to pressure their legislators to get behind the president and make change happen.

    Barack, as a symbol, will get this done. He will build the Democratic majority and bring new people into the party. He's already done so. And because of this, he will have a better chance to actually getting his agenda passed in a way that no other president has enjoyed since LBJ. People will not put up with the partisanship with Obama.

    Another thing . . . if Obama needs advice, he is not the type who will not seek it out, and not listen to those who may have better insights into a situation. I am sure he will pick a talented cabinet, an experienced VP and actually LISTEN to both Democrats and Republicans when they offer advice.

    Again, that's judgment. That's leadership. And that is the type of open, pragmatic leader we need in this day and age.

    And as far as the racists on the board. . .who cares? It's not like you were going to vote for him anyway.

    GO OBAMA GO !

    January 6, 2008 09:05 pm at 9:05 pm |
  19. Bill Culver, Covington,LA

    I would expect Barak will be elected president immediately following the eight year presidency of Kushnich. I am now eighty so doubt that I will be around for the comedy that will follow, thank Gaud!

    January 6, 2008 09:06 pm at 9:06 pm |
  20. Mati

    American Democrats are insane to vote this let-wing politician as a nominee. I guess all they want is to have some years of fun watching the news, they don't care about unemployment, gas price, national security, name the issues... Obama has nothing to deliver.. change or no change. Because he has some ideological views about politics only. No political record, no vision. Good luck America on other 4 years of darkness..

    January 6, 2008 09:06 pm at 9:06 pm |
  21. andy

    Look at the "experience" Bush surrounded himself with in his first term. Where did that get us? Clinton's "experience" (I'm still confused; I'm not sure when being first lady qualifies you for anything) lead to her decision to go to war in Iraq. That's not the kind of experience we need any more. Experience is only as good as the judgments based upon it. I believe Obama's experience lead him to the right position on Iraq from the start. 24 years of Bush/Clinton is an oligarchy. Dare to dream of something better! Have courage. Obama for President!

    January 6, 2008 09:08 pm at 9:08 pm |
  22. Pam Holt Los Angeles, CA

    Wow, thanks for finally giving Kucinich a mention! I'm impressed CNN. That 2% is certainly no thanks to you or the rest of the mainstream media. It's a shame when he is so far superior to the rest with his voting record and plans, such as not-for-profit health care which is the only way to fix our health care crisis and be like the rest of the developed countries where health care is a right and not a privilege, and health care isn't in the hands of those that profit from NOT giving health care.

    January 6, 2008 09:08 pm at 9:08 pm |
  23. Matt A.

    "Why isn't Bush settled to President election. Of course I would vote him instead of the other candidates. Is there somekind of official valid maximum time period for president's incumbent."

    WOW. I don't know where to start. Maybe this is why we don't have mandatory voting like Australia? Are our citizens really this stupid? I mean REALLY?!?!?!!?!?
    WOWWWWW!!!!!!!!!

    January 6, 2008 09:15 pm at 9:15 pm |
  24. Brian

    I give up on the mentality and intelligence with the people of this country.

    There are no intelligent voters anymore. Look at why we had George W Bush for 8 years.

    People – the Republicans want Obama to be the nominee – because HE CAN BE BEATEN and the REPUBLICANS WILL OWN THE WHITE HOUSE AGAIN.

    Wake up – they may even be helping him. I do not doubt this.

    Do not elect Obama for President – he will lose.

    It's your mistake. Hillary is the only one with experience – EXPERIENCE to lead us forward and beat the Republicans in November.

    If you choose Obama – you choose distaster and another Republican administration. If you think I am wrong, feel free to state this.

    Please pick the right candidate on Tuesday – and it's not Obama.

    January 6, 2008 09:15 pm at 9:15 pm |
  25. GO GETTEM OBAMA

    TIME FOR A CHANGE IN THIS NATION- YOU HAVE A HELL OF A MESS TO CLEAN UP. HELP US WIN BACK OUR STATUS IN THIS COUNTRY, WE SURE CAN'T.

    January 6, 2008 09:21 pm at 9:21 pm |
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21