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. Sick of obama

    Its sad that voters refuse to look at a candidates record or the lack there of, and only concentrate on the color of his skin. We'd be better off with Bush than to elect oprahbama.. This guy is a black racist! Im regisiterd dem if obama wins the nom, I will surly vote republican

    January 7, 2008 07:36 am at 7:36 am |
  2. Al B

    Go Obama, I like you. i will vote for you. Let the Muslim blood Prince rule the US.

    OBAMA '08

    January 7, 2008 07:40 am at 7:40 am |
  3. Christine Atlanta, Ga.

    Obama wii be defeated in the general election.

    When the 'average' moderate democrat or conservative will have it presented to them that the White House will be filled with Oprah and P Diddy. Or that Louis Farrakan will be advising Obama, they will ditch him for whichever Republican is running.

    Pushing Obama is the Rove strategy, and it is working perfectly.

    January 7, 2008 07:49 am at 7:49 am |
  4. Sierra

    If the best argument you can make against Obama is to regurgitate the brain-dead Ann Coulter's ad hominem objections to his middle name, perhaps you're better off exercising your right to vote on American Idol or Dancing with the Stars...democracy is clearly out of your league. Leave it to those of us with the ability to make informed decisions.

    Go Obama!

    January 7, 2008 07:51 am at 7:51 am |
  5. hollie

    If there is a Lord, please make sure that Clinton is the nominee....otherwise we are doomed for more Republican Rule....

    January 7, 2008 07:55 am at 7:55 am |
  6. Jeff, Houston, Texas

    I could easily vote for Obama. I could easily support him as President. But the ugly truth is that I do not beleive there are enough Secret Service agents around to ensure his safety or that of his family. The extreme right will simply not accept him, and becasue of that, I will fear for his life with each state he picks up.

    Remember the type of people who are still in control of this country.

    Obama is too valuable a resource to loose to this country at this time. It would shatter this country if we lost him during this time when this country is making the decision to move forward or live in the dark ages again.

    January 7, 2008 07:58 am at 7:58 am |
  7. brenda.ohio

    i will vote hillary.i wish someone would ask barack hussein obama the same questions they are asking hillary.i woukd like to here him tell us what change he is talking about.i still havent herd yet. i wish it we could go back to the clinton era.at least i had a job and money in my pocket.now i am almost homeless without a pot to piss in or a window to throw it out of. this country needs to wake up. i would like to see a hillary/edwards ticket.

    January 7, 2008 08:00 am at 8:00 am |
  8. Linda

    We don't need the kind of experience that Clinton has-lying, cover-up, etc. She would be a disaster for our country. As for Obama, we don't need the kind of change he wants either. In fact, if any democrat becomes president, the terrorists have won, and we will find that the war has moved right here to the homefront. The best hope for positive change and safety for our country is MIke Huckabee!!!!! Check out his web site to see where he stands on the issues. Although various candidates have their strong points, he's the one that makes sense on ALL of the issues. (I'm a former democrat)

    January 7, 2008 08:04 am at 8:04 am |
  9. Tim

    Do you want a president with no political experience or a president with years of experience. Popularity cannot run a country. That is what we had with Bush. This Obama craze is all about Popularity. Hillary has the experience and the knowledge to do wonderful things for this country. Do not pass up this opportunity to elect a great leader.

    January 7, 2008 08:20 am at 8:20 am |
  10. canadada

    Tend to agree that Obama WON'T 'win' Presidential race....BUT, what if he chooses Hillary has his VP? Then Americans would get the 'best' of both leaders', ie. one team with an inbuilt 'check and balance' where inexperienced is tempered by experience, and overly enthusiastic euphoric 'hope' is sensibly and pragamatically cautioned. They would make a much more credible team if they 'aligned' together. It would also make CLEAR that this alliance is between Hillary and Obama, and that Americans are NOT giving that wily Bill Clinton the key to the White House AGAIN.....Democrats, united in this way, MAY stand a chance against the Republican Mean & Greed Money Machine....And yes, Obama has Islamic 'roots', but that does not make him a threat to America or a 'terrorist'. If you do CHOOSE to think in this way, then consider the MANY so-called 'Christian' evangelicals pose more of a serious threat to the long term sanity and security of this new nation state then any 'muslim'. .... Seriously. Good luck America. Vote wisely. The world is watching ...

    January 7, 2008 08:29 am at 8:29 am |
  11. Marti, FL

    curiosityhasme,

    This country is really tired of dirty politics....

    Have you ever attended the United Church of Christ? Please try it sometime and open your mind. As one of the many white people who attend that type of congregation, I can assure you it is not racist the way it is desperately portrayed on-line. It appears you guys cannot win with honesty, as Obama is doing, so you resort to outright lying. How sad.

    January 7, 2008 08:38 am at 8:38 am |
  12. Ike Woodbridge VA

    Hurray, independents. Obama will win the nomination. Come January 09 we will have another Republican President. Thanks guys for the job well done.

    January 7, 2008 08:40 am at 8:40 am |
  13. Check your facts. No Obama!

    OBAMA: PRO-WAR, PRO-TYRANNY, ANTI-CHOICE, AND
    A RECORD OF LYING TO EVERYONE
    Ignore His Right-Wing Voting Record and Believe his Words
    By Gary F. (age 17)

    Obama has a big burden. He has to go to his events and pretend he is something he is not. His voting record shows that he supports the war. He voted twice in 2006 against bringing America's troops back home. He votes for war appropriations as if giving our money to Halliburton and Blackwater is his sworn duty. His latest bit of posturing S 433 allows the Bush Administration to suspend any troop withdrawal, which if not suspended, still keeps the troops in Iraq for a long time to come. The suspension is written right into Section 4 (b). The bill tells Bush to bring the troops home some day unless he doesn't want to. The very name of the bill, "Iraq War De-Escalation Act of 2007" is a lie. This is par for the course for Obama.

    Bruce Dixon and Glen Ford of the Black Agenda Report have written articles exposing Obama's fraud in pretending to represent the interests of African-American voters. Before anyone believes that Obama cares about African-Americans, they should read, "Barack Obama and the Winds of War," "Putting Black Faces on Imperial Aggression," "Barack Obama: the Mania and the Mirage," "Barack Obama: Hypocrisy on Health Care," "The Barack and Hillary Show Plays Selma," "Black America's Real Issue With Barack Obama," and "Barack Obama vs. Charles Hamilton Houston." From these articles and others, readers can see Obama come down on the side of the oppressors of African-Americans. For someone whose ancestors owned black slaves, Obama tries to put pressure on African-Americans and fails. Al Sharpton's reaction to pressure to back Obama was, "I'm not going to be cajoled or intimidated by any candidate not for my support." Instead of supporting African American's Obama is into lying to them and intimidating them. What makes him different than others who oppress African-Americans?

    Paul Street exposes the real Barack Obama very clearly in his article, "The Obama Illusion." Street shows how Obama, a Hamiltonian believer in free trade and supporters of globalization has lent his support to the "...Hamilton Project, formed by corporate-neoliberal Citigroup chair Robert Rubin and other 'Wall Street Democrats' to counter populist rebellion against corporate tendencies within the Democratic Party... ," how Obama provided valuable assistance to pro-war candidates (such as Joe Lieberman), and how he criticized the filibuster proceedings against Samuel Alito. Street shows how Obama voted for "... a business-friendly 'tort reform' bill that rolls back working peoples' ability to obtain reasonable redress and compensation..." from corporations. Obama considers single payer universal health care too socialist and has stated that he prefers voluntary solutions. Street's article goes on to discuss Obama's support for other aspects of the neo-con agenda, including neo-con propaganda against African-American culture.

    Obama voted to bring low-cost foreign labor into New Orleans after Hurricane Katrina. This was a slap in the face against the African-Americans who were displaced in that city. Obama also voted to place Michael Cheftoff, the man responsible for the Katrina catastrophe, in charge of Homeland Security. Obama voted for the bills that gave Blackwater the funding they needed to shoot the people of New Orleans who were only trying to save their own lives. He voted to allow Michael Chetoff to waive all laws, including murder, torture and kidnapping.

    In voting for the Real ID Act, Obama voted to end political asylum for people seeking shelter in this country because of terrorism at home.

    African-Americans consider Dennis Kucinich, not Obama, to be their candidate. See Bruce Dixon's article "Is Dennis Kucinich the "black candidate?"

    Obama voted more than five times for USA-PATRIOT's renewal. This is a bill that is patently offensive to most Americans. City after city has passed resolutions condemning USA-PATRIOT. Obama chose to side with tyranny over freedom and Bush over the people on this issue. The Real ID Act, which would allow Michael Cheftoff to declare martial law and imprison all Americans, was supported by Obama, as noted above.

    Obama's record on choice is less than 50%. He pretends to be pro-choice while voting for anti-choice justices who have vowed to end choice. Obama even voted for cloture on Priscilla Owen, a justice Alberto Gonzales felt was too far to the right.

    Obama's pretense at being anti-war is a fraud on the American people. His actions are fully pro-war. He has voted anti-choice and to keep the USA-PATRIOT Act. A win for Obama will be a win for the neo-con agenda. An Obama nomination is a guaranteed loss for the American people who would have no major candidates to support in 2008.

    If Obama had a conscience, he'd vote against himself. Voting takes place in closed booths. Will some decency overtake Obama in the voting booth? Or has he become so used to lying that he doesn't know what is up and what is down?

    This is part of the reason the voting age should be lowered While some complacent, uneducated voters might support Obama, most Americans under 18 are studying the facts and have no intention of supporting such an obvious liar.

    January 7, 2008 08:42 am at 8:42 am |
  14. Cherry

    Wake up alll....... go and wash ur face! A vote for Obama will b a Republican President for 2008. And I doubt that not all people in this comments r for democrats bcoz they try to persue the ppl by saying how Obama is good so that if Obama is elected as democrats candidate then republican can easily torn apart Obama and democrats piece by piece in 2008 election. Sooo.. wake up all democrats, forget about who is inspirational and talk nice just choose who should be in reality. Think Reality okkkkk....

    January 7, 2008 08:43 am at 8:43 am |
  15. Ardelia Burse

    I was leading towards Hillary initially but the more I hear her talk the less I like her. Her performance in the debate was antagonistic. I'm not sure where I hear this but it stuck in my mind. "You can not antagonized and inspire at the same time". I can't rememeber where I hear that quote but it has stuck in my mind. Hillary stated in the debate "pretty words" and speeches don't amount to change. Every signicant change in this country began with someone' s "pretty words" that spark a nation to change.

    America it is time for a new kind of leadership.

    January 7, 2008 09:14 am at 9:14 am |
  16. Lenora

    Is anyone else ready for some dialouge about a 1-2 punch in the whitehouse.... where we have two democratic alphas running our federal government? Why do we have to choose between the inspiring but green Obama and the demonizable but effective Clinton? #2 swallow your pride and #1 think about the good of the country. If you guys can bring people together en masse as you both say, and you're both so committed to our nation as to throw your whole self in, surely you can work with a former rival. Too bad that the VP spot won't go to the number 2, but hopefully the top alpha standing at the end of it all will still pick a bulldog like Richardson.

    January 7, 2008 09:14 am at 9:14 am |
  17. Jaqueline

    Obama doesn't use I because he has no experience to speak of. My friend who lives just outside of Chicago tells me Obama was a horrible representive. He was never around to vote when he should been and when he did vote he did things like letting child molesters off. When the media wakes up and looks into the guys very liberal record, Obama will have a snow balls chance in hell of winning the White House.

    January 7, 2008 09:16 am at 9:16 am |
  18. therealist

    Oh here it is.., way down here below the "Ballot Bowls". Typical of CNN to lead with Bush hate in their confusion. But guess what, America is not fooled by your Goldwater Golden Girl. What will you do now? Politics of persional destruction anyone??

    January 7, 2008 09:23 am at 9:23 am |
  19. RedSea Foreign National

    To 'Check your facts – Nobama' You have restored my faith that we have educated ,and not ignorant voters in America. Notice also the new legislation Obama sponsored or co_sponsored that requires the president to secure 'around the world' all nuclear weapons and nuclear usable material, and if this is not a law to support US interventionism worldwide, I do not know what is!

    January 7, 2008 09:25 am at 9:25 am |
  20. Trudy R.

    Obama has been annointed by the press; he is their darling and they refuse to cast a critical eye on him like they do the other candidates. When he loses in November, and we have to endure 4 more years of a Republican White House and all the ramifications, the media should seriously examine it's role (but it won't).

    January 7, 2008 09:25 am at 9:25 am |
  21. Trudy R.

    Obama has been annointed by the press; he is their darling and they refuse to cast a critical eye on him like they do the other candidates. When he loses in November, and we have to endure 4 more years of a Republican White House and all the ramifications, the media should seriously examine it's role (but it won't).

    January 7, 2008 09:26 am at 9:26 am |
  22. gam

    I am the exact demographic Ms Clinton wants. A 62 year old Deomcrat and a woman. I will vote on experience. My experience. The eight years Ms Clinton and her husband "shared the Presidency" my experience was as follows. No change in the health care system, jobs sent off shore, our borders were not secured and the threat of terriosm not address to any great degree. We were being attack here and world wide during their administration. Granted not on the scale of 9/11 but the threat was real. So little was done in education that my husband was laid off by the College he worked for. Our solution was to send him overseas to work. Ironically that is where many jobs started going. I am a life long Democrat. It would kill me not to vote. I can never see myself voting Republican because of the total lack of human compassion in all their rhetoric. I support John Edwards but am very excited about the energy and interest Mr Obama has ignited in the young and the independents. I will support either and would love for Mr Edwards to swallow his pride and run again as VP. They seemed a great team in the last debate.
    GAM NC

    January 7, 2008 09:30 am at 9:30 am |
  23. Mark

    Here's my bottom line:

    I don't worry about experience. It's WAY over rated.

    I worry about competence. How do I determine competence? I watch me message coming out of the campaign. Obama's message is clear, consistent and very well crafted. A good sign for a man who hope's to occupy the bully pulpit.

    We have had seven years of an administration who has convinced Americans to consistently vote against their own best interests. I want a president who can convince Americans to vote for what's good for them.

    Obama has the gift. Hillary does not.

    **

    January 7, 2008 09:30 am at 9:30 am |
  24. Alan Harkness

    Various things in this thread are stunning and depressing at once. The most remarkable, to me, is the absolute vitriol of most of the anti-Obama poster, who I suspect must be closeted Republicans getting in early on trashing the man who will almost certainly take the nomination now. Once Obama cleans up in NH, those other state polls showing HRC leading will be irrelevant. Momentum is a powerful force in primaries, and Barack Obama has it.

    Lots of covertly racist nonsense in here too. And some of it seems to be coming from actual HRC supporters. Guys, she has no *experience* to speak of that is *any* greater than Obama's or Edward's experience. She was *never* elected the first lady of Arkansas or the United States. She was along for the ride with Bill. She had *no* policy brief whatsoever in either position, and that she is claiming she had one (or that Bill gave her one) is *prime* evidence of the Clintonian corruption we all know too well. HRC's only *real* experience in *elected* office is a 6 year stint in the senate, where I grant she has been relatively effective at retail politics, but where she let down my side terribly with her votes on Iraq war authorization *and* more recently on a precursor to war with Iran.

    Barack Obama has served longer in elected office than HRC if you count his state legislative work. He's also been a *real* community organizer, which matters a great deal more to me than HRC's boardroom experience. The whole "experience" thing seems to come down to how many world leaders Ms. Clinton met while she was first lady.

    It wasn't her job to do more than serve them tea and smile.

    For me, it's this simple: we have had either a Bush or a Clinton at the helm for the past 20 years. We do not live in a monarchy, and it is time for the people to say so. Even *were* HRC as experienced as she claims (and her supporters trumpet), I would not vote for her in a primary (though I will in the general if she is the nominee). We do not have dynasties. And our country is reeling and unable to accomplish *anything* because of the intense and bitter polarization of our political life. HRC represents that awful history, whether she wants to or not, and cannot transcend it. Too many people despise her and her husband. Too many people will feel her election as a call to arms - again - for a right wing crusade. We'll waste *another* 4 or 8 years fighting each other while the earth warms and the economy tanks and all the rest of it. We can't afford that.

    It is time for a uniting candidate. Barack Obama has the potential to be that candidate. He is my candidate.

    (PS: I'm also amused by the illiteracy and political ignorance of many posters in this thread, especially the Obama-bashers. That's why I think they are GOP moles.)

    January 7, 2008 09:41 am at 9:41 am |
  25. Alan Harkness

    Because - I meant to add - that it is quite obvious that the GOP would rather face Hillary CLinton than Barack Obama, nine ways to sunday.

    That is enough evidence for me that Obama is the truly electable democrat here, especially if the GOP continues to tear itself asunder as the "three legged stool" of Reganism collapses and each faction sticks its stool leg deep into the other factions' rear ends.

    January 7, 2008 09:45 am at 9:45 am |
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21