June 3rd, 2008
06:51 PM ET
6 years ago

Schneider: Split on issue priorities shows up at the polls

(CNN) - In South Dakota, domestic-minded Democratic primary voters had a different pick than their foreign-policy focused peers.

Voters who said their top concern was the state of the nation’s economy voted for Hillary Clinton over Barack Obama, 58 to 42 percent. But those who said the war in Iraq was their No. 1 concern supported Obama over Clinton by an even wider margin: 61-39 percent.

Obama’s early opposition to the Iraq war has made him the top pick for voters most worried about that conflict – but are international concerns taking a back seat to economic woes?

soundoff (48 Responses)
  1. Mr. B.

    America Is Ready
    Obama 08

    June 3, 2008 06:53 pm at 6:53 pm |
  2. marianna

    Clinton/Obama – yes we can

    Obama/Clinton – will vote McCain

    June 3, 2008 06:53 pm at 6:53 pm |
  3. Nevada

    Resolving some of our international concerns could go a long way in helping the economy. After all, quite a bit of money is going into Iraq with not much coming out of it.

    June 3, 2008 06:54 pm at 6:54 pm |
  4. Shawn from Kansas

    Bill, are you saying she's going to win S Dakota??? Boy this would make a real mess of things. He may be forced to have her on the ticket !!!! If the do team up ..... LANDSLIDE general election victory, but problems between them when they get to Washington.

    June 3, 2008 06:55 pm at 6:55 pm |
  5. Yes to Obama

    Sorry NY Newspaper, the slot of VP is not determined through an endorsement game. Our winner Barak Obama will make a deciscion about this based on his own creteria. Once again keep the rules clear.

    June 3, 2008 06:56 pm at 6:56 pm |
  6. TonyNJHC

    If the market does not pick up, and with $125.00 a barrel oil, soon everybody will be concerned with the economy.

    June 3, 2008 06:59 pm at 6:59 pm |
  7. john williams san diego, ca.

    it seems a lot of West Virginia hillbillies moved to South Dakota. 54% of the people in the exit polls think that Hillary is honest...but then again maybe they don't have cable TV. or don't read newspapers.

    June 3, 2008 06:59 pm at 6:59 pm |
  8. Anonymous

    It is only natural for the Iraq war to take a back seat to the economy. The economy issue is present in the everyday lives of Americans. Whereas the Iraq war is able to be put out of sight and out of mind.

    June 3, 2008 06:59 pm at 6:59 pm |
  9. True Democrat

    Let me get that straight:

    Obama says he wants to meet with all enemies of the USA without preconditions.
    Then he is pressed on that and admits "oh, of course I will have lower level meetings go on first and have them make concessions…"

    Obama says he will end the war in Iraq immediately.
    Pressed by McCain, he says "oh, i will consider the progress on the ground and withdraw them slowly"

    Obama says he won't need to visit Iraq to make a political point.
    Pressed by McCain, he agrees to visit Iraq with him.

    So how is Obama different from Clinton I ask??? She had the ideas of lower level meetings+preconditions as well as a drawdown of forces based on progress first and now Obama is starting to agree with everything she says when he is pressed? What kind of parrot is that?

    June 3, 2008 07:01 pm at 7:01 pm |
  10. D.J.

    Is it so difficult to see that the economic woes are a result of compromising our resources in a foreign and undesired war that will last for years if it is allowed to continue?

    June 3, 2008 07:01 pm at 7:01 pm |
  11. Dave

    Amen, Nevada.

    A lot of people are being seriously hurt by this economy. I am not aware of over 4000 people being killed by it.

    June 3, 2008 07:01 pm at 7:01 pm |
  12. DAvid Frederick

    The popular vote means more to me than the super-delagates.
    In my opinion Hillary actually is the winner. I believe that if legitimate new elections had been held in Florida and Michigan,
    Hillary Clinton would have already been our Presidential nominee.

    June 3, 2008 07:01 pm at 7:01 pm |
  13. Mr. & Mrs E Renfro

    We are definitely opposed to Obama choosing Hillary Clinton as Vice President. Many people voted for Obama because they do not want the Clinton's back in the White House.

    June 3, 2008 07:02 pm at 7:02 pm |
  14. NEW DEMACAIN

    Obama will make sure that america gets exactly what it deserves.

    June 3, 2008 07:02 pm at 7:02 pm |
  15. Steve

    Barack Obama, as the presumptive nominee, can unify the Democratic Party by selecting Hillary Clinton as his running mate. Clinton has made the offer to be VP. Now it's up to Obama.

    June 3, 2008 07:02 pm at 7:02 pm |
  16. Ratgurl

    You can't really pick a representative without considering ALL of the issues. Economy is directly affected by war – it's no wonder there's minimal discrepancy. And perhaps these same people should be asked what their second concern was with regard to voting....

    June 3, 2008 07:03 pm at 7:03 pm |
  17. O-blah-ma

    Riiight.... because Obama was against the war before he voted to FUND the war!!

    June 3, 2008 07:03 pm at 7:03 pm |
  18. B - NYC

    With all due respects, hats off to Senator Obama for a campaign well done. He only needed four times the money and the aid of the press that slammed her and adored him… But, he did it with "politics as usual"… Well done sir.

    So, to all of the Obama supporters that have continued to be so rude and disrespectful throughout this election… Word of warning… You NEED us, we don/t need you and your tone should shift soon because most Clinton backers will NEVER vote for Obama…

    Think before you speak…

    June 3, 2008 07:03 pm at 7:03 pm |
  19. john

    Thank heavens this race will be over tonight

    June 3, 2008 07:03 pm at 7:03 pm |
  20. Danny G. Boca Raton, FL

    Don't count your pennies yet... even after a democrat is elected into office (January 2009) it will take them anywhere from 90-120 days to draw out a plan to reduce forces. the International community does not want a bigger mess in Iraq so the U.S is going to confront the real possibility of having to have a precense in the region. Sen. Obama is going to have a very hard time making this work... don't get me wrong Sen. Clinton would have had an equal size problem. However I believe that an Obama Cabinet (if he chooses close to the vest line Bush did) is going to allow for a grace period, so at best we will see some of the savings of the war starting in late 2009 or 2010. this is not going to be as easy as Sen. Obama has suggested in the past.

    June 3, 2008 07:04 pm at 7:04 pm |
  21. Enlightened Voter

    Let's also not forget besides Barack's brilliant judgement, brilliant campaign management skills he is a constitutional scholar, neither of which hillary or mccain can claim. Barack can teach at any university constitutional law and could be a supreme court justice.

    June 3, 2008 07:07 pm at 7:07 pm |
  22. Ratgurl

    You can't really pick a representative without considering ALL of the issues. Economy is directly affected by war – it's no wonder there's minimal discrepancy. And perhaps these same people should be asked what their second concern was with regard to voting….

    June 3, 2008 07:09 pm at 7:09 pm |
  23. shawn

    Change, we need change. How about gas at $10 a gallon. That is change. Is that good? Is change by itself good? Gosh, "change" what a slogan. I was employed, now I am layed off, what a "change". Just like the dot com bubble, and then the housing bubble, people just want to believe in the silliest stuff.

    June 3, 2008 07:09 pm at 7:09 pm |
  24. Ratgurl

    What's with the Obama bashing here?

    If you're a Democrat & you don't like him, please state a VALID reason why not.

    June 3, 2008 07:10 pm at 7:10 pm |
  25. Addressing Clinton Supporters

    I would have happily voted for Clinton, even if I agreed with her campaign, because I do, believe this or not, care if another 4,000 young men and women are killed.

    I've seen many, many people say they're willing to glide through the next four years with McCain and then get Hillary again. Two things about that, though, you see:

    1. Another four years is another 4,000 men and women lost because of your arrogance and childish behavior. There is so much at stake it sickens me to think you won't back Obama, and you provide NO REASONS for it. I would have voted for Clinton because I really do care, and I think she is vastly better than McCain.

    2. Sure, let Obama lose and Clinton come back in 2012. Guess who will be getting pay back? Do you think we'd all fall in line after the nasty comments about how you wouldn't support Obama? Think before you make threats. We need you, and you will eventually need us, no matter when Clinton decides to run next.

    3. You talked about how this campaign needed to be on issues because Clinton was and is strong on the issues. Now you're willing to turn your back on them?

    I beg you, yes beg, because I really want to see this country move forward, and you're all threatening to make the country go stagnant. I ask you simply to think before you vote in November and really think about your children, your job, and our country as a whole.

    I hope you come to the right conclusion. God Bless.

    Obama '08,'12 – Clinton '16, '20
    ---Democratic Unity----

    June 3, 2008 07:15 pm at 7:15 pm |
1 2