August 7th, 2007
02:12 PM ET
12 years ago

Poll shows Clinton widens lead over Obama

Clinton has widened her lead over Obama, according to a new poll.

WASHINGTON (CNN) - New York Sen. Hillary Clinton has notably widened her lead over her closest competitor in the 2008 Democratic presidential race, Illinois Sen. Barack Obama, according to a new national USA/Today Gallup Poll released Monday night.

The survey, following a high-profile spat between the two candidates over who is better suited to handle foreign policy, shows Clinton at 48 percent - a 22 point lead over Obama. Clinton's support is up 8 percentage points from a similar poll conducted three weeks ago, while Obama, at 26 percent, is down 2 percentage points. Former North Carolina Sen. John Edwards stands at 12 percent.

"[Voters are] taking a good hard look at all the candidates and concluding that Hillary has what it takes to be president and what it takes to take on the Republicans," wrote Mark Penn, a top strategist to the New York Democrat, in a memo to supporters Monday. "They know that Hillary Clinton has the experience and strength to bring about real change."

Full story

Related: Clinton proposes $1 billion in mortgage help

- CNN Ticker Producer Alexander Mooney

soundoff (103 Responses)
  1. Mary, Beaver, PA

    This is nausiating. No wonder they call CNN the "Clinton News Network." If the Democrats are stupid enough to nominate her as their candidate, they will go down in flames in 2008 AGAIN! She must be the most hated woman in America, despite CNN's love affair with her.

    August 7, 2007 01:42 pm at 1:42 pm |
  2. Rose Hillrose, Chicago, IL

    Thanks CNN for your objective reporting. Clinton is doing just fine. You go girl. Obama supporters are getting pissed of with reality.

    August 7, 2007 01:47 pm at 1:47 pm |
  3. Joe Memphis, TN

    This was a poll of only 500 people. What a small sample. This is meaningless

    August 7, 2007 01:49 pm at 1:49 pm |
  4. Liz Wiley Las Vegas, NV

    I'm sorry, this might also be "irrelevant" but I don't appreciate David Plouffe saying that the people the participate in polling have to real meaning to these candidates. That sure makes my choice in the democratic primaries alot easier. Maybe Obama is to naive to be our president.

    August 7, 2007 01:49 pm at 1:49 pm |
  5. La'Goro, Albany, NY

    It is a Clinton/Biden run. Obama goes back to obscurity licking his wounds. No Vice Presidency either.

    August 7, 2007 01:52 pm at 1:52 pm |
  6. Jake, Iowa

    The Clinton News Network pulling all the stops for their candidate.I see why more people have started watching MSNBC. National polls are irrelevant.

    August 7, 2007 01:52 pm at 1:52 pm |
  7. Andy Austin TX

    You are all being duped! Clinton, Obama, and Edwards are not the only candidates. Wake up! Don't you know when you are being brainwashed. The media wants to make up your mind for you. Start talking about the other candidates and don't let them give you this only choice. If you want change don't rely on these candidates to give it to you. CNN won't report on change, just the status quo.

    August 7, 2007 01:52 pm at 1:52 pm |
  8. J.B. Oak Lawn IL

    I found an article on archives from January of 2004.

    It was written by CNN political reporter John Mercurio and said:

    "Dean has established himself as such an indisputable front-runner at this point, and has run such a shockingly successful campaign, that we're numb. He can surprise us no more...We still cling to the notion that someone could emerge from the 2004 scrum - Dick Gephardt, Wesley Clark or, perhaps, John Kerry - as the consensus challenger to the former governor. But Dean is doing more each day to discredit that notion than his foes are doing to reinforce it."

    People, look at history. It's only August and so much could happen between now and the spring of 2008. It's okay to have a long campaign as long as a substantive debate takes place! So, comment-posters out there, have a nice summer...and fall..and winter until the nomination is decided.

    August 7, 2007 01:53 pm at 1:53 pm |
  9. Brett

    I think it's a joke that Clinton is in the lead. Anyone with 1/2 a brain knows that Edwards is the smartest, most resolute candidate there is. His background is solid, and he knows how to take on the big boys and get things done. I thought that is what concerned our citizenship: Corporations running the country. Don't let the Iraq war fool you...we aren't leaving there any time soon. We need someone willing to focus on healthcare and the environment, and Edwards will make good things happen. He is strong, and he is very, very intelligent. Clinton may have experience, but is so cliche and generic on every one of the issues that it is not any different than what we have in the white house right now. Edwards and Obama are not afraid to get specific and mean it. Please people, come to your senses and realize that is the ticket: Edwards and Obama. I feel like Americans have gotten painfully dumb as shown by the last election. The same thing is happening again, except Clinton is a democrat. IN ANY ELECTION, ALWAYS VOTE FOR THE SMARTEST PERSON THAT HAS THE MOST INTEGRITY AND THE MOST RESOLUTE PLANS FOR ISSUES THAT ACTUALLY MATTER. Clinton is not that person. Edwards is.

    August 7, 2007 01:53 pm at 1:53 pm |
  10. Ryan, Boston MA

    Good point Marc from Briarcliff, New York. I'm a 24 year old young professional, and neither my boyfriend nor I use landlines, we only use our cells. Most of my friends and colleagues my age display the same behavior...

    ... and we're all Obama supporters. Go figure! 😉

    August 7, 2007 01:54 pm at 1:54 pm |
  11. matthew, gainesville, fl

    It'll be a bad move for Obama if he tries to further his feud with Hillary during the debate tonight. He needs to really show that he's different by dropping the nastiness and strictly discussing the many differences between his positions and those of Hillary.

    Good Democratic debate preview

    August 7, 2007 01:56 pm at 1:56 pm |
  12. Don, Athens-Illinois

    The thing that the poll doesn't account for is how rabid Obama supporters are (as the comments on these stories will attest). Its one thing to poll voters and ask who they will support, but when you look at turnout for the primaries you can expect a large percentage of Obama voters to go to the polls. I'm not sure the same could be said of Clinton.

    August 7, 2007 01:59 pm at 1:59 pm |
  13. Joe, Boulder, CO

    Haha, I'm soooo glad to see the Obama train falling fast. This guy has absolutely no experience, and every time he opens his mouth Hillary just looks better and better.

    This country has been ran into the ground by greedy crooks. It's time for a woman who has shown strength and wisdom to lead us in the right way (and I'm a man). Go Hillary!

    August 7, 2007 02:00 pm at 2:00 pm |
  14. Stephen. Tallahassee, FL

    National polls do not matter ... People know her name, does not mean they will support or even show up at the polls. She has no policy positions, she is trying to skate by on her husband's name recognition. They she will try and poll her way through the general election, just like she polls her way through everything else.

    August 7, 2007 02:05 pm at 2:05 pm |
  15. Eustace, New York, NY

    Here goes CNN again claiming that Hillary's superficial and irrelevant lead in national polls is in reponse to voters preferring her foreign policy stance...a stance which as proven to be exactly according to what Bush Cheney has practised. I don't think the poll is a result of that. I think Americans are smart enough to know that no matter what problems you have with other countries, they cannot be solved without talking forcefull to them. Clinton worried about propoganda, while Obama said he is not afraid to lose to PR war if it means advancing America's interest. To me, an international politics student, is a very bold and anti establishment foreign policy. Something that will America's image abroad and reduce the view of people seeing America as arrogant, unilateral and intransigent.

    CNN stop insinuating your false claims and misguided punditry into your postings. Be a credible news station.

    August 7, 2007 02:05 pm at 2:05 pm |
  16. IV, Dallas

    South Carolina's most recent polls show Obama leading Clinton. Why didn't this information make your story?

    August 7, 2007 02:08 pm at 2:08 pm |
  17. Independent Voter, TN

    It never ceases to amaze me that if a story reports that a particular candidate has something going for them, every one who supports any other candidate immediately starts whining about the unfairness of CNN and the political process.

    Hey people, this is how the system works. If Obama or Edwards are trailing in the polls, there's a reason. Just because you support someone else doesn't mean that other people's support of their candidate is wrong or that your candidate is the only smart or correct choice for everyone.

    I don't support Hillary or Obama or Edwards, but this is a legitimate news story and if you don't like the results, cite some polls that support your stance. Just don't keep calling CNN the "Clinton News Network." As an impartial bystander, I don't get that at all.

    August 7, 2007 02:08 pm at 2:08 pm |
  18. La'Goro, Albany, NY

    Don, Athens-Illinois:

    Your comment is called self-consolation. Accept the fact that Obama has lost. The Obama train is derailed and can't get back. It is a Clinton/Biden run. Obama goes back to obscurity licking his wounds. No Vice Presidency either.

    August 7, 2007 02:08 pm at 2:08 pm |
  19. Len, Sparks, NV

    Clinton if the nominee will repeat the Kerry disaster, because she does not appeal to independents. They despise her. Obama went to Elko Nevada and found a standing room only crowd that cheered his target Al Qaeda strategy that Clinton dismissed. She won't play well in these independent/conservative areas of the country, and so we will lose the election if she is the candidate. And of course these polls don't adequately represent younger voters with cell phones who may favor Obama.

    August 7, 2007 02:11 pm at 2:11 pm |
  20. Rose Hillrose, Chicago, IL

    Let's say the polls were reporting Obama increasing the lead over Clinton. His Liberal supporters would be ululating like the hooligans on Bagdhad's Sadar City streets.

    August 7, 2007 02:13 pm at 2:13 pm |
  21. A, NY, NY

    Does any one here know of any other reputable news network that is acutually unbiased and just reports the truth? I thought that was CNN but now I am not so sure.

    This is a real question, if anyone knows of another network or website to get the real news, please let me know.

    August 7, 2007 02:15 pm at 2:15 pm |
  22. A Staffer, D.C.

    Dear La'Goro,

    Get a grip. Biden stands as much of a chance as McCain does – in hell. Don from Illinois is allowed to as much opinion on this blog as anybody else.

    I agree with Independent Voter. It would be nice to see comments on the ticker that consisted more of educated opinions than obnoxious complaining.

    As a Democrat who has not yet decided who to support, I'm glad CNN ran this story. We're supposed to be getting the complete 360 coverage of the elections, and I believe that we are.

    August 7, 2007 02:16 pm at 2:16 pm |
  23. Akilok, Austin, TX

    Stephen from Tallahassee, FL.

    Lay low and lick your wounds. The polls have spoken and momentum has increased for Clinton. Your comment is called self-consolation. It will never change the informed Americans who know the ingredients of a good leader: Clinton.

    August 7, 2007 02:18 pm at 2:18 pm |
  24. Anon, Needham MA

    I find it funny that the same few people comment on this article over and over just to make it seem as if the more their points are expressed, the more validity their points will have.

    It's August '07, people...chill...Clinton supporters watch out and do not rest on your laurels...Obama supporters, Edwards supports, et al...just get your acts together and keep fighting!

    August 7, 2007 02:21 pm at 2:21 pm |
  25. Dan, TX

    If someone can point to any difference in plans of Obama and Clinton for Iraq, Afganistan and terrorism in general, please point it out. If you read their speeches they are saying essentially the same thing. Only difference is Obama is naive for being more open and direct and not hiding his views in wishy washy language, like Clinton. This is Clinton's political experience showing through. And she's absolutely right. She has the media eating out of her hands. She's good.

    August 7, 2007 02:21 pm at 2:21 pm |
1 2 3 4 5