January 14th, 2008
08:04 AM ET
9 years ago

Clinton, McCain lead in two new national polls

[cnn-photo-caption image= http://i.l.cnn.net/cnn/2008/POLITICS/01/09/nh.analysis/art.me.clinton.mccain.ap.jpg caption=" McCain and Clinton are the leaders in two new national polls."] WASHINGTON (CNN) - Two new national polls out Monday morning offer different snapshots of how the presidential race is shaping up in both parties.

In a new ABC News/Washington Post Poll, Democrat Hillary Clinton holds a 5-point lead over Barack Obama, 42 percent to 37 percent. John Edwards is back at 11 percent. Meanwhile, a new CBS/New York Times poll shows Clinton with a wider lead over Obama, 42 percent to 27 percent. Edwards is also at 11 percent in that poll.

On the Republican side, John McCain leads Mike Huckabee by 8 points, 28 percent to 20 percent in the ABC News/Washington Post poll. Former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney is essentially tied with Huckabee at 19 percent, and Rudy Giuliani is close behind with 15 percent. Fred Thompson stands at 8 percent in that poll.

In the CBS/New York Times Poll, McCain holds a slightly wider 15-point lead over Huckabee, 33 percent to 18 percent. Rudy Giuliani is back at 10 percent in that poll and Romney and Thompson are tied at 8 percent.

Both polls find the economy has easily eclipsed the war in Iraq as the most important issue on voters' minds.

The ABC News/Washington Post poll carries a margin of error of five points while the CBS/New York Times poll's margin of error is plus or minus three points.

- CNN Ticker Producer Alexander Mooney


Filed under: Polls • Presidential Candidates
soundoff (452 Responses)
  1. Joao Hernandez

    Time to scrap the 22nd Amendent so that George W Bush can run for a third term. Right, I've got that off my chest. Now it's back to the asylum for me. Ta, ta.

    January 14, 2008 05:21 pm at 5:21 pm |
  2. dave

    If people want change, don't vote Hillary. Hillary is the opposite of change, the white house needs new blood, its as simple as that. For the past 20 years (24 if you count Bush senior as vice president) its been bush/clinton/bush/clinton? Do people really want another possible 8 years of clinton? Its frightening........ Obama for 08' please.

    January 14, 2008 05:33 pm at 5:33 pm |
  3. Tom

    "Empty vessels make the most noise. "

    -– I like Obama but he does not have anything to show for his four years in the senate, missing important votes,etc..

    "Slow and steady wins the race".
    --Clinton has been campaigning since 2004.Her plans and goals are practical and achievable.

    Go Hillary. !!

    The golden state has your votes!!!

    Hillary 08'

    January 14, 2008 05:45 pm at 5:45 pm |
  4. Abram

    I am a very staunch republican and believe strongly in what they represent. If these polls are correct I will not vote for John McCain if he gets the nomination. I live in Arizona and have seen first hand his tolerance for Illegal immigrants and his lack of courage to do something about the situation. His partner in this all along has been the Gov. of Arizona Janet Napolitano and she has failed to do anything about this problem. If immigration is such an important topic for my fellow Americans than I suggest not voting for John McCain based on his record with illegal immigrants or his lack of dealing with illegal immigration.

    January 14, 2008 05:49 pm at 5:49 pm |
  5. Rick

    If Obama's behavior durit the campaigning is any indication of his strategy to bring people together, we are in serious trouble! Now he's playing the race card? Against a candidate who has a demonstrated track record of supporting equal rights and opportunities for minorities? WOW, this is more evidence of his lack of experience playing in the big league.

    January 14, 2008 06:01 pm at 6:01 pm |
  6. Kristin R

    What about Ron Paul? Come on people, everyone says they want "change" and Dr. Paul will give it to America. He stands for lower taxes, smaller government, protecting our OWN borders and people, rather than the rest of the worlds. He wants to bring our troops home from Iraq so that this country does not continue to get deeper in debt. Borrowing money from China to fund the war in Iraq is ludacris. No matter what poltical party you belong to, you can see that.

    As a young person, I support Dr. Paul, because I am tired of giving my money to the government for "social security" that I will never see again. I am tired of big government investing MY money and using it to fund their absurd pensions. The bottom line is that the government is inefficient and it must change now.

    As Americans, we should not vote for the candidate that is the best-looking, or the most suave debater. Or just vote for them because they are black, or a woman. We need to seriously evaluate each candiates views and then place our vote. I feel that too many in my generation have no clue what each candidate stands for and just vote by what they hear in the media. We must so our own research! This is an important election that will effect our generation greatly. Do we want to inherit out nations debt, no social security, and unsafe borders? NO!

    Now is the time for change.

    January 14, 2008 06:23 pm at 6:23 pm |
  7. Maria

    In my opinion I think it would be DEAD WRONG to vote for someone who is so green to this whole thing. Obama does not have the experience nor the support to lead this great country of ours. Hillary has been there for us through thick and thin. She addresses problems nobody else cares to, and acts on them! Among all the politicians out there can you name me one other person who has addressed something and acted on it? I didn't think so. All we hear is talk, Hillary has shown us that actions speak louder than words. Hillary has always moved forward with her plans instead of just talking about them.

    Also, I could NEVER vote for someone who refuses to say the pledge of alligence. Our men and women are overseas fighting for the freedom we have to say such a pledge! He does not believe in saying "one nation under God"! That is the grounds that our contry was founded on! How can Obama call himself American???

    ***************HILLARY 2008******************

    January 14, 2008 06:29 pm at 6:29 pm |
  8. Eric

    All you obama supporters need stop acting like he is such a saint. He's so "honest". Our current president got Cs in government courses. Now you all want to vote for a pothead, inexperienced president??? C'mon it's bad enough that a lot of people voted for Bush twice so he could be president for 8 yrs!!! I bet you obama supporters are those exact people who voted for Bush. I can tell b/c yet again you all are making a wrong decision. Letting yourselves gat sweet talked into voting for him. Well I won't be fooled Hillary for '08!!!

    January 14, 2008 06:42 pm at 6:42 pm |
  9. Robin Wagner from ct

    Amen to Jack,
    He said the truth on cafferty . Barack did NOT REPEAT did NOT run a or have not ran race campaign . Hillary Clinton is the one been talking , As well as Bill ,
    It's very simple . The truth coming out about the Clinton's all these years said there for Black men and women's , When they lose the push the truth all along . OK racist all along . We are just now seeing it because now Barack in this race for president . Sad Because i supported Bill . Now the light open my eyes.
    Even if Hillary win . This girl will not vote this year .

    January 14, 2008 07:02 pm at 7:02 pm |
  10. Bryan, CA

    I find it surprising that Hillary supporters are looking at this poll as a victory. On the contrary. Barack Obama has completely erased her huge lead from 20 points a month ago to 5 points within the statistical margin of error. Essentially they are tied. Hillary is losing ground and that is the only thing that recent Democratic national polls are showing.

    January 14, 2008 07:05 pm at 7:05 pm |
  11. David

    I don’t see a huge difference between Obama and Hillary’s positions on most issues and the changes they say they would like to make. With that in mind, I lean strongly towards Hillary because I feel her experience and track record are superior to Obama’s. What was Obama doing in the 90’s when Hillary was trying to bring universal health care to America? I do also feel Hillary has come across in the debates as having a better grasp of the issues than Obama.

    I plan to vote for the candidate who I believe would do the best job, not for who I think has the best shot in the general election. Having said that, I do feel Hillary stands the better chance in the general election. Hillary may be afraid to bring up Obama’s admitted drug use, but you bet the Republican’s won’t have that same hesitancy. I don’t have a problem with recreational drug use, unless it’s the president of the free world who’s been smoking out. Also, with the economy doing so badly, among this country’s other huge problems, I think the Republicans would rightly be able the scare people away from voting for a candidate with as little experience as Obama.

    Sorry Obama (and your cult-like supporters), but I am voting for Hillary!

    January 14, 2008 07:13 pm at 7:13 pm |
  12. stan pitts pa

    its time to regain some decency in American politics, obama 08!

    January 14, 2008 07:17 pm at 7:17 pm |
  13. Beth, Seattle WA

    How well have polls told us what is going on so far? Iowa and New Hampshire polls didn't end up having to do anything with the election results. I guess I'm pretty young for politics (16 yrs), but most of what I've learned recently is to never trust polls. Voting demographics change too much.

    January 14, 2008 07:19 pm at 7:19 pm |
  14. carlos

    Hillary side started this race issue, come on people we are at dangerous times, need a strong person to deal with dictators, and do not need status quo politics. so I am saying si se puede, yes we can, go Obama, Obama, Obama

    January 14, 2008 07:20 pm at 7:20 pm |
  15. Russell, NC

    Is Hillary going to cry her way to the White House?

    January 14, 2008 07:23 pm at 7:23 pm |
  16. FIRSTWOMAN4PRES

    AMERICAN'S UNITED 1-2-3 END THE
    CLINTON-BUSH DYNASTY !!!! FOOD FOR THOUGHT SR BUSH AND MR. CLINTON HIMSELF ARE GOOD BUDDIES. END IT! IT HELPS THE RICH, AND DOESN'T HELP THE MIDDLE WORKING CLASS!!! 1-2-3 END THE CLINTON-BUSH DYNASTY!!!

    January 14, 2008 07:27 pm at 7:27 pm |
  17. anngonzalez

    I'll say again - if Obama is able to bring the country together why didn't he do so in order to get the Iraq War Funding bills with timetables for withdrawals passed through the senate. He had three opportunities and he never once led, formed a coalition, or effectively reached across the aisle.

    He is empty, a ghost - there's no there there. Inspiration is a vital leadership quality, but only if it is supported by action and only if it is effective. If Obama thinks republicans are going to vote for him when he is pro-choice, wants to raise social security taxes, wants universal health insurance and to end the Iraq war - he is the most naive person running.

    Hillary is an agent of change, an effective leader, and will do more for the poor and middle class than any president in the last 60+ years.

    January 14, 2008 07:31 pm at 7:31 pm |
  18. Lea

    Look at the facts people!! Hillary has a track record longer than Obama's in helping minorities, she has dedicated her life to these individuals and people are actually calling her a racist. This is the lowest of the low. You wanna see trouble put the "I talk about change and can fire up a crowd" talking candidate in office. Obama talks and talks and talks but says nothing.

    Obama where is the beef??

    Hillary 08'

    January 14, 2008 07:46 pm at 7:46 pm |
  19. Felipe

    It is astonishing to me that a real attempt at minority and working-class voter suppression by Democratic supporters would not get more CNN coverage. The Nevada State Education Association, an affiliate of a national organization that endorses Senator Clinton, filed a lawsuit to remove caucus sites from places where members of the Culinary Workers Union work on the strip, only two days after that Union endorsed Senator Obama. Senator Clinton
    has repeatedly failed to condemn the lawsuit and ask for it to be withdrawn, leaving the impression that she approves of this 11th hour attempt to disempower minorities and working class citizens simply because their choice is not her own. One could imaging her outrage if such a tactic were used on her supporters, and the press coverage CNN would give it..

    January 14, 2008 07:52 pm at 7:52 pm |
  20. michael

    I love Hillary

    January 14, 2008 07:53 pm at 7:53 pm |
  21. Scott

    A 5-point margin of error is ridiculous. The ABC/Washington Post poll should be ignored when there is a poll out at the same time with a 3-point margin of error (i.e., the CBS/NY Times Poll). A 5-point margin of error is huge statistically, and shows that the pollsters were lazy, poorly-funded, or wanting to skew the results in Obama's favor, or a combination of these three things. Thankfully, responsible pollsters are showing that Hillary is still well in the lead. If Obama became the nominee, it would be McCain 60%, Obama 40%, and only get worse from there.

    I said after Obama won Iowa, McCain would surge on the Republican side - guess what? I was right! For you Obama supporters, let me explain why this is so. The Republicans have been scared s-less because they couldn't decide how they could beat the Clintons (they can't). But with Obama as the nominee, it's easy. Put the white, ex-military, ex-POW, multi-term Senator that everyone knows as the nominee, return him to his "maverick" status, and BAM- Obama's got nothing. Fortunately, there are enough Democrats left to know that we can't afford this rare opportunity to place the Clintons back in the White House, expand the majority in the House, and hopefully secure a fillibuster-proof majority in the Senate.

    As for the Greg from Ohio, who said that Edwards's supporters would go to Obama- what planet are you on? He only has 11% of the Democrats now and Hillary has gained support as he lost support! Duh! Oh yeah, and the blue-collared and moderate part of the party is who Clinton has the majority of her support from now. So, why would Obama receive their votes? Of course, why am I surprised that someone from my old, loser home state of Ohio would say such a thing. These are the same people who thrived under Clinton, voted for him twice, then voted for "W" twice and lost what jobs they had left and became the foreclosure capital of America. Ohio's number one export is its educated children. Glad to say I got out of there!

    January 14, 2008 07:55 pm at 7:55 pm |
  22. kevin

    I hope everyone read CNN's article about the candidates not talking about the war in Iraq while troops are dying overseas. If you read about 33% through it you would notice that the only person talking about Iraq is John Mccain. Mostly because everyone was saying "withdraw" but he said "send more troops". Something he had said for years. At the time is was political suicide. Finally "the surge" was given a chance and one could say we are now winning the war in Iraq. Whats pathetic is that Democrats almost hope we lose in Iraq to further their political agenda. Obviously im a supporter of John Mccain, not because I agree with all of his ideas but because it seems everything he accomplishes and tries to accomplish benefits America, even if it disagrees with his own party. So while people criticize all the times he has sided with Democrats and made proposals that at the time seemed ridiculous, I see those points as a positive exclamation that says "Im here to serve America, not politics".

    January 14, 2008 07:58 pm at 7:58 pm |
  23. dee

    Polls are just how the question are asked nothing else. Let us not all fall for the old poll fairy tale again. I am a Hillary supporter but I am not taking my cues from polls. We hardworking "roll up our sleeves" and get it done women supporting Hillary know we need keep our eye on the prize not the polls.

    January 14, 2008 08:00 pm at 8:00 pm |
  24. valerie summer

    If you would publish information about someone other than the top 4, perhaps they could get some votes. The only candidate for CHANGE is Dr. Ron Paul. Why do you refuse to give him coverage? Each candidate should get an equal amount of coverage from all forms of media.

    January 14, 2008 08:11 pm at 8:11 pm |
  25. valerie summer

    Is there a reason you absolutely refuse to give any coverage to Ron Paul? He is the only hope we have. Everyone else is simply pandering for votes. Dr. Paul is the only one with enough guts to say what no one wants to hear.

    January 14, 2008 08:14 pm at 8:14 pm |
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19