January 14th, 2008
08:04 AM ET
10 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. Louisiana for Hillary

    STRONG Hillary supporter!!!!! Our next president needs to have experience to lead our nation and Hillary Rodham Clinton is the candidate for the change we need. This country was in better shape when President Bill Clinton was in office. Look at what President George Bush and the Republicans have done to this economy. The Clintons left the white house with a balanced budged. They had to clean up the mess of Republicans and WE NEED TO VOTE FOR HILLARY SO SHE CAN MAKE THIS HAPPEN AGAIN. We DO NOT need another Republican in office. The United States will only getter deeper and deeper in debt. Have FAITH that your vote for Hillary Rodham Clinton WILL BRING THE RESULTS we all need. They all offer change, but Hillary will deliver RESULTS!!!!!! Go Hillary!

    January 14, 2008 10:48 am at 10:48 am |
  2. isaac coolguy

    Barack Obama is the only candidate who is able to unite all people. Regardless of race, age or nationality. Hillary, can only copy what has already been said by Obama, she has a record of habitually changing her stance on various issues. Especially the war! While our kids are being killed at an alarming rate Hillary is sticking to her usual rhetoric. It's time for a change, for the old politicians to give the new political leaders (like Obama) an opportunity to make the necessary changes that they never had the guts to implement. Hillary, is a user and will change her mood (crying) according to what ever climate is prevalent in a particular area to win votes.

    January 14, 2008 10:49 am at 10:49 am |
  3. Jimmy

    actually, I believe they are two peas in a pod, should they both win the nomination, there really wont be a reason to vote, one is just like the other, my hope is they dont, vote on the issues folks and you will vote for Romney

    January 14, 2008 10:50 am at 10:50 am |
  4. Sean, Detroit, MI

    Franky, New York: you couldn't be more misinformed.

    This is a NATIONAL poll. Hillary has always led in national polling. Her lead is now the SMALLEST it has ever been, and this poll represents her losing a ton of ground to Obama.

    pay attention to the facts, please

    January 14, 2008 10:52 am at 10:52 am |
  5. Mel

    Everyone is attacking Hillary but I don't see anyone asking Barack about his church that is all about building up African-Americans. What about a president that is working for everyone not just certain people? If Hillary Clinton was the member of a church that said only give to white charities, we'd never hear the end of it. I actually thought when this began, if Hillary didn't get the nomination I'd vote for Barack but, now I'm disgusted with this stuff that came out about Martin Luther King, Jr. If you listen to what she's saying, she is in no way indicating that Dr. King didn't have a major role in civil rights. She is just saying that it took a President to actually put the legislation through.

    January 14, 2008 10:54 am at 10:54 am |
  6. Marti, San Diego CA


    The Real McCain Record
    Obstacles in the way of conservative support.

    By Mark R. Levin (National Review)

    There’s a reason some of John McCain's conservative supporters avoid discussing his record. They want to talk about his personal story, his position on the surge, his supposed electability. But whenever the rest of his career comes up, the knee-jerk reply is to characterize the inquiries as attacks.

    The McCain domestic record is a disaster. To say he fought spending, most particularly earmarks, is to nibble around the edges and miss the heart of the matter. For starters, consider:

    McCain-Feingold — the most brazen frontal assault on political speech since Buckley v. Valeo.

    McCain-Kennedy — the most far-reaching amnesty program in American history.

    McCain-Lieberman — the most onerous and intrusive attack on American industry — through reporting, regulating, and taxing authority of greenhouse gases — in American history.

    McCain-Kennedy-Edwards — the biggest boon to the trial bar since the tobacco settlement, under the rubric of a patients’ bill of rights.

    McCain-Reimportantion of Drugs — a significant blow to pharmaceutical research and development, not to mention consumer safety (hey Rudy, pay attention, see link).

    And McCain’s stated opposition to the Bush 2001 and 2003 tax cuts was largely based on socialist, class-warfare rhetoric — tax cuts for the rich, not for the middle class. The public record is full of these statements. Today, he recalls only his insistence on accompanying spending cuts.

    As chairman of the Senate Committee on Commerce, Science and Transportation, McCain was consistently hostile to American enterprise, from media and pharmaceutical companies to technology and energy companies.

    McCain also led the Gang of 14, which prevented the Republican leadership in the Senate from mounting a rule change that would have ended the systematic use (actual and threatened) of the filibuster to prevent majority approval of judicial nominee.

    Vote Romney – the candidate with a very impressive record of decades of achievements in business, as governor of MA, and with the SLC Olympics. Romney is a *proven* leader who has shown time and time again that he can actually get things done. Talk is cheap, accomplishments matter.

    January 14, 2008 10:54 am at 10:54 am |
  7. Chi-town

    If Hillary wins, it's a great opportunity for Bloomberg. Many Dems including myself don't trust Hillary and unless she can get Obama's followers, she will not win.

    Dem/Ind will split. Republicans will win the election...

    January 14, 2008 10:57 am at 10:57 am |
  8. veronica

    One of the things I don't like about Obama is the fact that he often doesn't take a stand on tough votes by voting either "Yes" or "No". Instead he votes "Present".
    He appears to be sidestepping so that he can claim all sides of an issue.

    It appears very calculating by him, so I think all of the Obama fans are not seeing that Barack Obama is NO different than any other politician. He is not heaven-sent after all.

    I also don't like it that he and his minions are trying to stir up race in this campaign. That is more dividing than anything else! He ought to be ashamed, and it calls his character into question to me.
    As a Democrat, I won't be voting for him, for these reasons, and others.

    I think CNN should be ashamed at how they have approached this political season, with their obvious biases showing. CNN used to be a respected news organization. This type of reporting makes them appear very tabloid to say the least.

    (I suppose now you won't print my comments, or will you not print them based on the fact that they are anti-Obama?)

    January 14, 2008 10:57 am at 10:57 am |
  9. Bobbie

    Clinton ma woju uche,obama should wait another 8 years to get his turn,meanwhile he should learn under clinton's tutelage

    January 14, 2008 10:58 am at 10:58 am |
  10. linda

    Not Hillary, not seth lord Mccain. Both of them have been in the whitehouse for so long that I don't think they can make any changes. Hillary, when she was the first lady, she created a big mess with the health care plan, what make you think she can do the job. As for Mccain, you can't teach an old dog with new tricks. Plus, there is nothing in his brain. 8 years of the clinton's in the whitehouse is long enough, and 27 years of Mccain in Washington is even worst. These two are career politicians. Get them out of Washington ASAP.

    Michigan, Vote for someone that has the executive experience, leadership skill, and know how to create jobs and fix our economy. Romney is the one.

    Go for Romney, Michigan.

    January 14, 2008 10:59 am at 10:59 am |
  11. Sabine from Berlin

    !!!!!!!!!!! WE WANT HILLARY !!!!!!!!!!!

    January 14, 2008 11:00 am at 11:00 am |
  12. Howard Hewlett Des Moines IA

    It will all change for Barack once Edwards realizes that he can't win, bails out, and throws his support towards the "change" candidate that can take on the Clinton machine.

    Enjoy the numbers while they last Clinton fans, once Edwards bails out the election is over for the Dems.

    January 14, 2008 11:04 am at 11:04 am |
  13. Brian

    Part of me has to wonder about these polls and their accuracy.

    With more and more people, especially young people, forgoing landlines in favor of mobile phones, are these polls setting us up for another "Dewey Defeats Truman" scenario?
    Are these pollsters only calling landlines? Are they conducting in person interviews? What methods are they using to reach people?
    I think these are important questions because they could greatly impact how accurate they are.

    January 14, 2008 11:06 am at 11:06 am |
  14. Mike

    Anybody who believes this is an idiot. 48% of the country HATES Hillary Clinton, and will not vote for her under ANY circumstance. The Republicans are DROOLING to have her as the Democratic candidate, because they will fry her for lunch with her own words, her own actions, and her own video clips. WATCH.

    January 14, 2008 11:08 am at 11:08 am |

    Obama will unite America. I just can't wait to vote for this handsome and intelligent guy. God bless Obama, God bless America.

    January 14, 2008 11:09 am at 11:09 am |
  16. Franky, New York, NY

    Sean (in Detroit). My blurb on Hillary leading the polls was based on this morning's facts.

    Hillary has led in the national polls for quite some time, indeed. But she did have interrupted moments (as the leader) when Obama Fever hit, and all the "inspired" folks jumped on the bandwagon. So, I think I'm plenty informed, but thanks for your concern.

    I suggest you pick up a paper – every now and then. You'll find that if YOU read the facts, you won't need to write baseless blog entries.

    I wish you and your candidate luck in the upcoming primaries..

    Hillary 2008!

    January 14, 2008 11:09 am at 11:09 am |
  17. RealChange

    Who cares who is up in the polls, they are all the same......

    Clinton: globalist, open borders, amnesty, social welfare
    McCain: globalist, open borders, amnesty (my friends, they are all gods children and your tax dollars will support them), corporate welfare (bail-outs)
    Obama: globalist, open borders, amnesty, social welfare
    How many people have contacted their representative and let them know their position on these issues?

    I'm not sure why the candidates say they can change anything. They don't make law. If their policies were believed and supported they would be left in Congress. If the people truly thought their candidate could change anything, they should be in Congress. Nothing will change but you'll feel better? Good strategy.

    Transparency in govt isn't putting more legalese info on the net as Clinton proposes. It would be doing like our state does in it's voter pamphlet, publishing the legal (dull, complex, usually not comprehensible), but also publishing all legislation in a version that is easily understood along with a pro and con argument. This should be done before the debate begins so that the people can participate. Why aren't the people insisting on it? It's not the candidates that create change, it's the people.

    January 14, 2008 11:10 am at 11:10 am |
  18. BilL W - PA

    Yeah, Hillary holds a lead anywhere there is a DIEBOLD machine – and gee, isn't this just about the the percentage she HAPPENED to allegedly win New Hampshire by – 42 to 37%??? Don't accept it, its a Republican fix – they control the DIEBOLDS, and they WANT to run against Clinton.

    January 14, 2008 11:10 am at 11:10 am |
  19. David

    God help us....

    January 14, 2008 11:11 am at 11:11 am |

    Its time for Edward to unite with Obama. You both guys are smart and i believe that Obama/Edward ticket is what we need now.

    January 14, 2008 11:13 am at 11:13 am |
  21. Tim

    some how i expected a lot of HC supports stapled to CNN -america is being led to the slaughter house -our Media is so intertwined in a folly of selling headlines, 1/2 truths and upskirts that we have really forgotten who we are and where we want to be in history. our economy is collapsing, dollar losing value and are more thraten then ever before. since 1980 with VP Bush to Pres Bush to Clinton to Clinton to Bush to Bush and now i cant believe that people are so blind, so brainwashed to actually believe in another Clinton. try something different, time for a NEW FACE, a NEW DIRECTION and that cant be provided by the same old master.

    January 14, 2008 11:14 am at 11:14 am |
  22. Schnarfe

    Hillary v. McCain? If that what it comes down to, I think I am moving to Canada. I will have lost hope if either gets elected. I do know what is worse, a Bush-Clinton monarchy or an imperialist military dictatorship.

    Ron Paul
    John Edwards
    Barack Obama
    Dennis Kucinich
    hell, even the San Diego Chicken!


    After 8-12 years (20 years if you count Bill Clinton as a "neocon") of neoconservative presidents, America really needs some kind of CHANGE!

    January 14, 2008 11:16 am at 11:16 am |
  23. Ray

    TO isaac coolguy –

    He's not doing a good job uniting people now regarding race. All he's doing is using this out of line quote to gain votes. Thats not how you unite!!

    January 14, 2008 11:17 am at 11:17 am |
  24. margie

    I am glad America is beginning to see what is real and what is not.
    Hillary is the only one that can salvage and undo the damage Bush is going to leave behind. Obama is not ready. The USA is a super powerful nation that needs a strong leader. Yes Obama is likeable BUT can you take that to the bank?. No.
    Please NO repeat of the Bush era which was inexperience, inexperience, inexperience.
    Lets see what a woman can do. (An experienced, smart and tough woman). Hillary reminds me of Margaret Thatcher. She was not called the "Iron Lady" for nothing. She was soooo good for the UK. Hillary will also be soooooo good for the USA. Give a girl a chance.
    God bless you all.

    January 14, 2008 11:18 am at 11:18 am |
  25. Greg

    this would be a disaster. two war mongers vying for the nation's highest office. sickening. no change. we get two Bush juniors. the elites (military-industrial complex) are shaping things their way again. we only think our votes decide things.

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