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

Poll: Obama jumps ahead of Clinton in New Hampshire


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. Jeff, Houston, Texas

    uh,....Jr. in California:

    Corporations ARE, for the most part, EVIL.

    The sad part is they behave as little more than a reflection of the society that created them. They do just what we created them to do: feed, produce profit for themselves, no conscience, no restraints, don't give a flip about regular people on the street, yet we give them some of the rights of real human beings, just none of the responsibility.

    You know, kind of like George, Dick, Donald, and the rest of of the twelve trolls.

    January 7, 2008 11:29 am at 11:29 am |
  2. Russ

    I thought I had lived long enough to see the best and worst of politics, but alas now we still have the worst I have seen. Since when do candidates say they are for change but don't base it on anything they say they will do. Obama has in my opinion said nothing to indicate he's capable of running this country. What did he do before his two year stint as Senator? He says he didn't vote for the Iraq war, but he wasn't in a position having to make that decision. He say very little substantive information about his plans. Both Clinton and Edwards have stated they will get our people out of Iraq beginning with the first week in office. Universal health care was proposed in 1994? by Mrs. Clinton.
    I see too much suggestion by the polls being broadcast about Obams's jump ahead, etc, etc, etc, Do any of these polls being touted so strongly on the network indicate where they were taken and the amount of people polled. It amazes me that so many people would fall for the rhetoric being spewed on the tube.
    Can you say that Obama has the demeanor or background to interact with world leaders? I think not. Look at his body language and you will see a person with little projection. Smooth slogan words for change are not enough.

    January 7, 2008 11:30 am at 11:30 am |
  3. BuckEdwards

    I would rather have someone with principles, and a comittment to changing America and its image both here and globally, as president than someone with "experience" in the same old same old status quo Washington!!
    Hillary is not going to Change America....Obama will!! If Obama beats her by double digits in NH he will steamroll through SC and then he will be the "Inevitable" candidate for the dems

    January 7, 2008 11:42 am at 11:42 am |
  4. joe

    An inspirational tone does not make you an agent of change. Talking about changing does not change anything.
    Obama has done nothing in the house and has looked lost in the debates. He has improved lately but says nothing of substance. He sounds better but there's nothing there. Sound familiar ? (George Bush) Sounds alot like Bush. He's using the same tactics. Not much experiance so he uses the inspirational card.
    At the moment, the candidates are taking it easy on each just to maintain an aura of civility. If anyone remembers when Obama was asked questions out of left field he blanked. The Dem's have been easy. If he gets the nomanation the republic smear machine will eat him alive. the message of good will can only take you so far. I have no faith in Obama to take on the other side.
    He and Hillary are basicly the same candidate. He just has a more inspirational message. Remember, so did George Bush.
    He has lobbyists on his payroll and he has a lobbyist running his campaign. And these guys are from the biggest lobbying firm in Washington.
    So where is the money coming from? Yes, he has a grass roots following but he is taking money form lobbyist too.
    If we really want change Obama is not the man for that. the Republic's will destroy him

    January 7, 2008 11:50 am at 11:50 am |
  5. PrObama

    to Margaret:

    I don't mean to dismiss your personal experience with Sen. Clinton, but if you want to know which candidate has the edge when it comes to meeting voters either in public forums or one on one, I would say the winner is Obama. That said, I will admit, that despite her characterization as icy, nearly everyone who sees her in person echoes your sentiments. But do you doubt you'd find the same intellect, focus, or charm in Obama? because that runs counter to just about everything anyone has seen and heard. As far as decision making, I think the most important decisions count not in the minor ways the dems differ, but in the way repubs hold completely opposing views. On the issue of healthcare, Hillary is already damaged, she'll have to work to beat back an old narrative. On the War: she voted for it, and now says if "she were president after 9/11" she wouldn't have.

    she is trying to appeal to/energize a liberal base while proposing govt from the center. Obama is bringing people to the center while proposing left of center reform. You see this in her Iran/Iraq/Immigration Policy. She had in her "baby bond" a really substantive policy idea that was immediately savaged then scrapped after two days of criticism. The Republicans are able to typify just about all her centrist stances as socialist, while Obama is able to make his liberal stances and policy proposals appear centrist. Who's really standing for what counts.

    In any case, I think she would be a good president, but since much of the argument was electability and people chose him and look to be choosing him in NH, perhaps it's Hillary who is unelectable.

    January 7, 2008 11:57 am at 11:57 am |
  6. RedSea Foreign National

    To Alex in the Netherlands, Hillary has changed. When she was first lady I was one of her biggest crtics, now I am one of her biggest fans.

    To Carole Miskin, saying Hillary is to bitter...... What can you reference to lake your case? Do you know her? Have you let her? Have you spoken to her?

    She wants to one up the Republicans? Notice during her debate that republican Ron Paul was on her stage, banned from the debate, because he would kick the butt of all republicans and democrats in his knowledge about the constitution and how to resstore democracy in the states!

    January 7, 2008 12:01 pm at 12:01 pm |
  7. Cliff

    I like all three Democratic candidates, but I believe Hillary is the smartest of the bunch and will fight the hardest against the swiftboat slime machine. I also believe intellegence along with empathy towards the the American people the most important attribute for a president. Look at what happened when the stupiest and the least empathy for the masses. We are in serious problems and we need the smartest and most most experienced canidate to fight off the GOP and win the election and to be qualified in reversing 8 years of Bush's America

    You also have to ask yourself why the right and the MSM is so elated by Obama's successes

    If Obama wins the primaries I hope he can weather the storm of slime

    (Obama the muslim) (the white mother with a black man) Obama Hussin)

    January 7, 2008 12:11 pm at 12:11 pm |
  8. Sam I am

    Bush is a charismatic speaker?

    What planet are you on???

    Can't wait until that lame duck is outta the office...

    January 7, 2008 12:27 pm at 12:27 pm |
  9. michael

    listen people,

    we Americans keept sending the same people to Washington year after year, because they all feed us what we want to eat not what we have to eat, i personaly am ready for change and ready to eat what obama has to offer. i know he may not have much of an experience, but lets learn from this, all the people we have elected with experiense so far got us noting, so like he said, there is nobody that have more experience than Dick Cheney and George W, Bush, but look where we are. Experience with out a good judgment is worthless.
    So please, lets not make it Black and White issues, give the guy a chance.

    January 7, 2008 12:35 pm at 12:35 pm |
  10. Hehe..in Cali

    Republicans, we are rejoicing becus the Dems r putting such a novice up against us. Another GOP in the office in 08. Obama will be destroyed with his record...oh wait he has none. hahahah....McCain 08!

    January 7, 2008 12:58 pm at 12:58 pm |
  11. Dom

    What is the issue with not having decades a years of experience in Washington ?

    JFK was in his 40's and had a few years experience in the senate before he was elected.

    Did he not perform well and handled the Missle crisis very well?
    Please stop this lack of decades of experience hurray
    If Obama has the vision for this country lets vote for him

    He has already shown leadership skills and ability to bring people together.
    Every president has advisers and am sure his team will be a sound one when he gets to the oval office.

    By the way it's remarkable to see that"white" America has come to this point where people are jugded by their character and not by the color of their skin

    Cheers to the white folks in IOWA

    January 7, 2008 12:59 pm at 12:59 pm |
  12. Henk

    Yup, two corporatists in the lead, whooopeee! There is another choice, someone who will get us out of Iraq, get the Insurance companies out of Health Care and bring an end to the corporate greed that is killing our country.


    January 7, 2008 01:05 pm at 1:05 pm |
  13. John, OH

    Michael, when George W Bush got elected, he was considered somebody outside from Washington. Like Obama he didn't have foreign policy experience so he had to relay on somebody like Chenny and Donald Rumsfeld. Look at the result today. Hillary may not sound or look nice but she is tough which Obama lacks and which I believe is one of the important character to beat Republicans and to be US President. Why do you think somebody like Rush Limbuag is calling Obama victory a historic victory because they know they can punch him real hard after the primary. I’m a Democrat and have never voted for Republican but given the scenario of McCain Vs Obama, I’ve to vote for McCain. Not sure about other Republicans though.

    January 7, 2008 01:11 pm at 1:11 pm |
  14. NMB

    I'm routing for Obama but I have to say I'd be perfectly happy with Hillary.
    After 8 years of Bush, anyone (except Huckabee) would call for a celebration.

    Although I realize that the majority of Americans disapprove him by now, I still can't believe you voted for him TWICE, and some people still support him.
    You should be ashamed.
    People around the world are disgusted with him, and I'd be ashamed if my country was looked at like that.

    Thank god for January 09.
    NMB (No More Bush) in the world.

    January 7, 2008 01:15 pm at 1:15 pm |
  15. MG

    Michael says "give the guy a chance".

    Dom says Obama as "vision" for the country, and compares him to JFK.

    Let's get this straight: the Presidency is NOT an apprenticeship, we have ONE chance to get it right, or we're screwed. And to compare Obama to JFK is not only laughable, but also offensive. Not only did JFK have more years of experience, but also he was a war hero, risking his life, for the sake of his country. A true patriot. Obama, meanwhile, has done diddly-squat, and talks and talks and talks, but if you look at his Senate record, a whole list of nothing, and inconsistencies. Did you see how he voted "present" more than a hundred times as state senator? This is a man who refuses to make a committment, with political aspirations, an opportunist. He brainwashes his audience into thinking that he is the only one who can change washington. What proof does he have of that? What proof do YOU have?

    I repeat again, if the safety of YOUR family was at stake, and you were hiring someone to protect YOUR family, would you give the least experienced person a "chance", especially if he had "vision" and talked about "hope" and "change", with no experience to justify that? If you are not willing to risk YOUR family's welfare, then don't have the audacity to risk my family's safety either, by voting for such an inexperienced candidate like Obama, just because you like him, he's friendly, talks good, and is a "uniter". NONE of those things will keep your families safe. You have ONE chance, please make the right choice!

    January 7, 2008 01:19 pm at 1:19 pm |
  16. doro, USA

    One significant theme that jumps out in these comments is 'fear.' When we are afraid we go to our reptilian brain and we come up with the worst possible outcomes. Fellow Americans: what has happened to us?

    We are really a positive people – optimistic, risk-takers, can- do attitude with phenominal achievements, and a generous spirit, for starters.

    As for Obama's " inexperience,": he has many excellent leadership qualities. He and any of the Democratic candidates are quite capable of 'leading' this country today. As for 'managing' the country, the President and the Administrative Branch is only one part of the 'Federal Management Team;' the Judicial and Legislative Branches are co-equal partners (remember?). Additionally, a free press with investigative journalism and an informed and participating citizenry make up the full complement of our democracy. So, do not be afraid. Be well informed, and let's tell the candidates what's truly important to us and vote with our heads and your hearts with the best interests for the whole country (and the world, too) in focus.

    January 7, 2008 02:12 pm at 2:12 pm |
  17. Just a Soldier

    Edwards, Obama, Clinton. All good candidates who share similar views. What we want is to beat the Republicans and get our country back on track. Which candidate can do that?

    Obama, No, the Republicans will tear him to shreds and also in close Southern states the race issue will hurt him because it will energize white redneck voters. I wish this were not so but it is. The Hispanic community will also not vote for Obama due to his work on some of the immigration reform acts and tensions between the african-american and hispanic communities.

    Clinton, No, there is just too much baggage. She comes off as cold and vengeful. This is not a woman thing. It is her public personna. I believe our country would vote for the right woman. The campaign would be so completely negative from both sides that it would result in a low voter turnout which would help the Republicans.

    Edwards, Yes, his views are similar to Obama's and he does a better job of outlining his plans. He also is seen as representing change. He is personable, unlike Mrs Clinton and he would fare well in Southern states.

    Fellow Democrats, we can not afford to get this wrong. The country nor I can handle four more years of Republican leadership.

    Army Strong for 22 years!

    January 7, 2008 02:21 pm at 2:21 pm |
  18. Andrew

    Alan: You say that we Hillary Supporters are secretly rascist, then as evidence you bring up a case for Hillary's experience.....I hope that voters will read these sorts of things and realize that it is actually OBAMA supporters who are inappropriately using race in all of this. "Why don't you vote for Obama, what are ya rascist?!" I hear them all saying.

    As far as experience goes, I made a nice list of the things she's done in her life and posted it earlier in the thread. It's a list that Barack Obama cannot compare to. I'm not just talking about government work. She has spent a lifetime devoted to changing things for the better. If you Obama groupies were interested in anything but the sheer newness of your superstar, then you might be able to appreciate the things she has done. Instead you perpetuate Obama's baseless rhetoric and you're immature, untruthful accusations against Hillary suppporters.

    I want to be inspired by the things my president can accomplish, not the flowery language they use.

    January 7, 2008 02:24 pm at 2:24 pm |
  19. Tann Mann

    Had the stakes not been so high, I might have been tickled by the realization that G.W. Bush has managed to handicap this next presidential race in favor of someone who shares his early traits of charisma and inexperience. Ironically enough, folk are enamored of Obama for the same qualities they adored in Bush, but for opposite reasons, i.e. his anti-war stance and his intellect. The result of all this should make for a really interesting four more years.

    January 7, 2008 02:24 pm at 2:24 pm |
  20. Andrew

    Plus, so much for Obama just being a uniter. He seems to be dividing the Democratic party quite a bit.

    January 7, 2008 02:26 pm at 2:26 pm |
  21. Dom

    I can fill the anger tearing some of you apart becuase of Obama
    If he was white, am sure you wouldnt feel the way you do
    The good thing is that all you haters are in the minority

    January 7, 2008 02:27 pm at 2:27 pm |
  22. TJ Evans

    To Michael: RE: January 6, 2008 5:55 pm ET

    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.

    After Franklin Roosevelt, a Democrat, was elected to a fourth term of office as our president , in 1946 the Republican Party took control of Capitol Hill and passed a constitutional amendment that limits presidents to two full terms. The U.S. Constitution is as official and valid as it can get.

    January 7, 2008 02:41 pm at 2:41 pm |
  23. Hehe..in Cali

    Obama's gonna give a speach about change to thw worold...and then everyone init goes "Ok...we're changed." Hahaha....speaches dont work, actions do. That's why when the DEMS elect Obama as their candidate, us in the GOP will be very pleased. It means we'll have our guy in there. Because we aint as blind to rhetoric as you all seem to be.

    McCain 08!

    January 7, 2008 03:32 pm at 3:32 pm |
  24. PF

    I love the claims that if Obama wins the nomination, republicans will "crush him."

    I have voted republican ever since I could vote, except this year, when I will either vote for Obama or anyone but Hilary. I think you may see this trend more and more.

    Honesty in a candidate is compelling, and to read the transcript of Obama's '04 democratic keynote speech offers some great insight to who he is, how real he is. And the claim of lack of Hilary's experience or having the same experience as GW is getting stale as well. His intelligence is far superior; that means a greater ability to adapt. Turning down the bedsheets for 8 years in the White House doesn't constitute meaningful political experience.

    January 7, 2008 04:27 pm at 4:27 pm |
  25. bob

    Mike, good job of spreading the GOP lies about Obama. For anyone interested in seeing what B.S. his post about Obama and Islam is, go to snopes.com.

    Obama has been a member of a Christian church since the '80s, when he was in his 20s and far away from a political career. This is the lame routine of GOP misinformation. One of my friends even believed that Obama had taken his oath of office on a Koran. It's a total, complete, utter lie. Go to snopes.com to confirm.

    January 7, 2008 04:40 pm at 4:40 pm |
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21