June 11th, 2007
06:34 PM ET
10 years ago

Poll: Clinton stronger leader, Obama more likeable

Clinton has increased her lead over Obama in New Hampshire according to a new CNN/WMUR poll.

WASHINGTON (CNN) - Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton appears to have lengthened her lead among likely New Hampshire primary voters after last week's debate among Democratic presidential candidates, winning points for being strong, even if she's not necessarily the most likeable, a poll said Monday.

The CNN/WMUR presidential primary poll, conducted by the University of New Hampshire, placed the senator from New York at the front of the pack, supported by 36 percent of likely voters versus 22 percent for Sen. Barack Obama of Illinois, her closest rival. (Read full poll results [PDF])

Since April, Clinton's support has grown by 9 points - from 27 percent, the poll said. Obama's position has grown by just 2 points - from 20 percent - in April.

Most of those increases appear to have come at the expense of Sen. John Edwards of North Carolina, whose support tumbled from 21 percent in April to his current 12 percent.

Former Vice President Al Gore, who has not said he is running, tied Edwards at 12 percent, up from 11 percent in April. And New Mexico Gov. Bill Richardson garnered 10 percent, up from 4 percent in April. The rest of the field included Sen. Joseph Biden of Delaware, with 4 percent; Rep. Dennis Kucinich of Ohio, with 1 percent; and Sen. Christopher Dodd of Connecticut and former Sen. Mike Gravel of Alaska, each of whom garnered less than 0.5 percent.

Clinton fell behind when it came to likeability. Asked which candidate is most likeable, likely voters cited Obama (40 percent) nearly three times as often as Clinton (14 percent). Clinton also trailed Edwards (20 percent) while Gore attracted 9 percent and Richardson 6 percent.

But the former first lady fared considerably better when likely voters were asked which candidate is the strongest leader. She led the pack, with 48 percent, followed distantly by Gore and Obama - each with 12 percent - and then Edwards, with 6 percent.

Asked which candidate has the best chance of beating the Republican nominee in November's general election, Clinton again came out on top, with 37 percent, more than double the 15 percent garnered by Obama and more than triple the 12 percent who cited Gore or the 10 percent who cited Edwards.

Since the April poll, Iraq gained in importance, with 57 percent citing it as the most important issue that will affect their vote in the primary, up from 39 percent.

Health care was cited by just 8 percent, down from 21 percent in April. The economy also attracted 8 percent, down from 11 percent in April.

New Hampshire holds the nation's first primary, part of the process by which the Democratic and Republican parties select their candidate for the general elections, to be held in November 2008.

The telephone poll of 309 Granite State residents who say they will vote in the primary has a sampling error of plus-or-minus 5.5 points. It was carried out Wednesday through Sunday, after the June 3 debate among Democratic presidential candidates, which was sponsored by CNN, the New Hampshire Union-Leader and WMUR-TV.

Filed under: New Hampshire • Polls • Uncategorized
soundoff (40 Responses)
  1. John Lavis, New Orleans, LA

    CNN scares me more then FOX news when they pick three candidates to feature in an hour long show on Sunday night when we are a year and a half away from the presidential elections.

    June 11, 2007 07:05 pm at 7:05 pm |
  2. Buddy Lee, Tulsa OK

    Hillary Clinton leads the pack inre: strength and the issues, Barack Obama leads the pack in likeability, ok...
    I hope and pray that when election day rolls around people remember the 2000 election when people said they voted for bush because He was more likeable than Gore, or somebody they would want to have a beer with, etc. The majority of voters said that Gore was more "Presidential" and the more experienced candidate but too stiff???
    Well, We see now what mess the country is in, thanks to people voting for the more "likeable" candidate.

    June 11, 2007 07:19 pm at 7:19 pm |
  3. Nick in New York

    Chris in Phoenix said:

    Matt from Texas said “I bet I am not alone in saying that I would vote for Obama or Edwards, but will never vote for Clinton.

    As someone else said, she is only a candidate because of her husband, not because of anything she has done.”

    That is not even close to true. I’m not sure yet who I’ll vote for, but Hillary has a longer senate career than either Obama or Edwards. Not to mention 8 years serving as an active First Lady (not like the Bush women who drink tea and knit all day). I know it’s hard for some people to accept, but she actually has a better resume than most of the democrats that are running.

    I live in New York, just because she has been in the Senate longer doesn't mean squat. And an active first lady – please, she did nothing but make sure she was preparing her presidential bid. She's done nothing for this state except agreeing with whomever she's around or speaking in front of.

    June 11, 2007 07:27 pm at 7:27 pm |
  4. John Tiner, Colorado

    Haven't we already learned the lesson about choosing a president based on likeability? The next president should be the person most qualified for the job, not the person that you would most like to hang out with. This isn't a popularity contest people ... this is the most important job in our country!!!! If the last eight years taught us nothing else, it should be to choose wisely and based on ability and not name or personality. Let's elect someone who is qualified, understands the complexity of internation relations, and leaves his personal faith out of the office (nothing against religion ... there should just be a separate of church and state). I don't even care which party it is! Let's just bring some sanity, wisdom and rationality back to the oval office.

    June 11, 2007 07:39 pm at 7:39 pm |
  5. Jill, New York, NY

    Clinton is owned by the extreme left special interest groups. Just follow the money trail. She will not have the conviction or courage to break free.

    June 11, 2007 07:50 pm at 7:50 pm |
  6. Yassin, Ulsan South Korea

    I really don't trust these network news polls. Check out the gallup polls. I posted them on my blog PrimarySourceNews. If you cannot find them on the main page, click on the category "Election 2008".

    June 11, 2007 08:16 pm at 8:16 pm |
  7. Rich

    simply put anyone who votes for any of these people is voting for the north american union say goodbye America hello homeland the new name for America
    and do not forget the Amero our new money. A vote for them is a vote to remove our constitution and our sovergnity Their is plenty of info on the webb to back this up search it out
    before its too late

    June 11, 2007 09:48 pm at 9:48 pm |
  8. alex v.p.,la.

    George W. Bush has created THE 2008 campaign issue:COMPETENCY.

    June 11, 2007 10:43 pm at 10:43 pm |
  9. alex v.p.,la.

    Dear DMW of Kansas: I often asked myself the same question about the Bill Clinton Haters; WHY? It couldn't be that he was a dope smoking, draft dodger because they would've held that against George W. No, I think the hatred is based upon the fact that Bill Clinton had the audacity to take the Presidency away from a small group of wealthy power brokers who don't share their toys with others very well.

    June 11, 2007 10:56 pm at 10:56 pm |
  10. Matt Houston, Texas

    To Chris, Phoenix

    Not even close to true? Lets see what some facts are.

    She served 8 years as First Lady...She didnt run for that position did she? She had that role because of her husband.

    With no real political past, she won in New York...how??? Because of the name recognition that came from...her husband.

    But that may not even be her biggest political hurdle. Whats worse is that she eventually will have to take a side on issues on a national level and not be able to pander to whoever she is speaking to at that moment.

    Obama and Edwards for all their "inexperience" have both made their opinions clear and will actually debate.

    June 12, 2007 08:57 am at 8:57 am |
  11. Ajay Jain, Dallas, USA

    Go Hillary Go.President Hillary Clinton. Sounds good to me.

    June 12, 2007 01:27 pm at 1:27 pm |
  12. Amanda

    I will never vote for Hillary. Women in general are just too emotional to lead a country. Of course I'm probably not going to vote democratically but if I had to choose between the three I would choose Obama for sure!!!

    July 17, 2007 05:48 pm at 5:48 pm |
  13. Amanda, Bakersfield CA

    I would never vote for Clinton mostly because I fail to see her as a leader. But I would also never vote for any woman president. Women are too emotional to lead a country the US would be a mess! Obama all the way!

    July 17, 2007 05:52 pm at 5:52 pm |
  14. Kevin, Bethany CT

    This country is definitely not ready for a woman president, no matter her qualifications. It's unfortunate, but true, and there is not a thing we can do about it. Hillary will not be elected solely on that fact, and her political background is far stronger than that of Obama's. I don't know that I see a democratic president winning this presidency anyhow, but it's best to hope that someone like Hillary does make it.

    July 18, 2007 10:34 am at 10:34 am |
1 2