January 14th, 2008
04:01 PM ET
15 years ago

Poll: California voters still making up their minds

[cnn-photo-caption image= http://i.l.cnn.net/cnn/2008/POLITICS/01/14/california.poll/art.california.surfer.gi.jpg caption="While Californians may have no doubts about surfing, they are indecisive when it comes to the Republican candidates."](CNN) - California is the biggest prize on "Super Tuesday," with 540 delegates in both parties at stake. But with just more than three weeks until the February 5 primary, a poll suggests the front-runner in California, at least among Republicans, appears to be indecision.

A CNN/Los Angeles Times/Politico poll released Monday indicates 61 percent of likely Republican primary voters have yet to make up their minds. Thirty-nine percent of those polled said their vote is certain.

The numbers are the opposite for likely Democratic primary voters, with 62 percent of those polled certain on their choice and 38 percent indicating they may vote for someone else.

Full story

Filed under: Polls • Presidential Candidates
soundoff (90 Responses)
  1. Tim Calhoun '08, Moreno Valley, CA

    Jack, you're a riot. You say the country isn't ready for a female president...then you tell us to vote for Hillary Clinton.

    Obama is catching up to Hillary out here. In fact, he's opened two more offices nearby, and I live in the middle of nowhere. A fundraiser he held at Universal Citywalk last month was packed with thousands of people. If he takes Nevada and South Carolina, expect him to be right at her heels in the California polls.

    January 15, 2008 05:23 am at 5:23 am |
  2. Tim Calhoun '08, Moreno Valley, CA

    I find it interesting that there is disparity in how this story is reported here and on Yahoo. On Yahoo, it's "Clinton, McCain Leading California." Personally I think CNN's headline is more accurate. Over a third of these voters are undecided! (Remember what happened in New Hampshire when we published polls on who was ahead...when about 40% of voters were undecided?)

    Also, nobama's flat out wrong. The vast majority of Californians (especially in southern California) are Democratic. That's why the GOP tried to introduce a ridiculous law here that would have split California's votes up proportionally.

    That's probably also why the GOP primary is closed this year, while undeclared voters may choose an Independent or Democratic ballot.

    January 15, 2008 06:01 am at 6:01 am |
  3. Rus, Whitburn

    Obama has consistently been shown to be the most electable against the republican candidates, the closest Clinton comes is just about as good as Obama in some polls (and nowhere near as good in others) – why is it that Californians haven't noticed?

    January 15, 2008 08:14 am at 8:14 am |
  4. Bryan, Illinois

    Rus, Whitburn is right on the money. Obama is the most electable candidate. Especially when John McCain is the possible Republican nominee, one wonders how Clinton will beat him – he commands a strong independent (moderate) vote. We need a candidate with a good rapport with the moderates and independents.

    January 15, 2008 08:22 am at 8:22 am |
  5. Jack K.

    California–in a great way helped decide Robert Kennedy's fate, Ronald Reagan, Bill Clinton–and urg...GW Bush.

    I feel they will come through again–thankfully taking their time to take a clear look at all the candidates.

    Since CHANGE is the new mantra for the Democratic and....suddenly...the Republican Party...let's look at the candidates who have stood for change recently...............

    Define recent (within the past 1-5 years in the public sector)..............

    John Edwards. A proponent for change in 2004....and still hanging in there. His passion and commitment to "bringing Washington back to the people"....as caught hold like a prairie fire. Hell, even the conservatives in the GOP are starting to adopt his agenda...because they see how much Americans want it.

    John Edwards–a change agent before it was cool to be one!!!

    Like Coca Cola–he's the "real thing".

    Please take another look at John Edwards. Let's a man with character–who will set aside the petty ranglings and get down to business on our behalf!!

    January 15, 2008 08:59 am at 8:59 am |
  6. purple

    who are all the illegal immigrants that are bankrupting California voting for?

    January 15, 2008 09:38 am at 9:38 am |
  7. Nobama!

    As we saw in recent polls and polls out of NH, Democrats favor Hillary Clinton. Independents are split between the three and last minute deciders favor Hillary Clinton.

    If it's McCain and Bam Bam, McCain wins by a landslide. The only person Bam Bam could beat is...maybe...Rudy.

    January 15, 2008 09:54 am at 9:54 am |
  8. Kate, Aurora CO

    My family & I recently left So. Cal due to the overwhelming number of illegal immigrants loitering on the street corners and taking advantage of the free education system. Unfortunately large areas of So. Cal are slowly but surely turning into third world countries all onto their own. If a candidate wants to win CA, just promise amnesty for the over 12.5 million illegal immigrants residing in CA taking advantage for "free" hospital health care, "free" public education and welfare services provided to babies of illegals. Afterall remember this is the state that allowed over 50,000 illegals to march in the streets demanding "rights".

    January 15, 2008 10:36 am at 10:36 am |
  9. Robert C TN

    I appreciate everything you are doing. I am too a Paul supporter. Im probably one of the most peaceful guys on earth i would like to think. Im no kook. Sure each candidate has their fringe supporters. But a majority of Paul's supporters are just like me, in the sense we only want whats best for this great country. PeacE to you all. I wish Ron Paul the best.
    Robert C of Knoxville, TN

    January 15, 2008 11:28 am at 11:28 am |
  10. nobama

    interesting how California elected a Republican governor, yet they "vast majority" of the state are Democrats. how does that happen?

    January 15, 2008 01:32 pm at 1:32 pm |
  11. Jack


    Just like all Republicans, you only read that part of my posting that suits your ploy to keep the GOP in the White House.

    What I said and I still stick by it -" Obama doesn't have a chance in hell of getting elected President" He will continue to be supported by good progressive people and A LOT OF GOP MONEY!

    John Edwards has failed to inspire a majority of Democrats so, the DEMOCRATIC PARTY's best chance of capturing the White House is in fact Hillary Clinton!


    January 15, 2008 03:43 pm at 3:43 pm |
  12. Chris in Silicon Valley

    He isn't really a Republican in a lot of ways, and he's an actor. That's worth a lot here.

    Robert C, TN,
    Thanks for the kind comments, and likewise, all the Paul supporters I've met are normal Americans who just want less government. That is really what we have in common. In fact, I would say Dr. Paul is the catalyst that caused me to realize that more government – for all its good intentions – usually ends up doing more harm.

    Whom do they support? I'd be interesting in knowing more.

    January 16, 2008 02:20 am at 2:20 am |
  13. Tim Calhoun '08, Moreno Valley, CA

    Jack, I'm not a Republican...but there's no way I'd vote for Hillary Clinton. And I'm certainly not alone among liberals.

    As for what you said:

    "This country is not ready for a Black President and most likely not ready for a Female President."

    "Vote for Sen. Clinton and help turn this country around."

    "I know I already said John Edwards is the most electable but, he won't win the nomination with Clinton/Obama in the race."

    I think I see why you favor Hillary...you flip flop as much as she does!

    Nobama, the reason we have a Republican governor is because our previous Democratic governor, Gray Davis, screwed things up so bad he was RECALLED. Schwarzenegger won because he's a social liberal and obviously had the name recognition.

    January 16, 2008 10:34 am at 10:34 am |
  14. anon middle america

    george January 14, 2008 7:38 pm ET

    Why are all the Obama supporters so arrogant and repulsive? If you keep talking like this, how could you unite the nation (as Obama talked)?

    ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ because the Obama supporters think they're better than the REST of the Democratic party. Here's two prime examples:

    beser January 16, 2008:
    At first I found it surprising when I kept hearing and reading so many pundits allude to the fact that Hillary draws most of her support from the poorly educated. Then I read the comments by Hillary fanatics here and elsewhere who seem determined to provide anecdotal evidence to bolster that claim.

    John, boston, MA January 15, 2008:
    Hillary lovers have dirtied this whole forum.

    ^^^^^^^^^ THESE are the supporters of the candidate promising UNITY?

    Versus the nasty lewd filth that spews out of the mouths of the hillaryhaters without end? Maybe we should all hope that Obama decides to split the Democratic party and make a third Rhetorical Party for himself and all of his base fans because clearly the Democratic Party of THE people and for THE people no longer applies here.

    Obama the candidate for a Change 🙁 FROM the Democratic party!

    Please do GO AWAY Obama and take your more upscale academia highfalutin' yuppie guppies and wannabes with you – wasn't once with Kerry enough? The rest of us will even all chip in and send you a nice bottle of French Bordeaux wine – so sorry we can only AFFORFD to buy one.

    Oh and further apologies if Barack Obama's group of smug supporters have their snobby sensibilities offended because not everyone in America is as highly educated, more affluent and of a better socio-economic classier status than they are. Yes, it certainly is true that the rich are getting richer and the poor are getting poorer and the middle class is definitely getting smaller after eight years of the Republicans in office. Let us all pray that these same individuals never find themselves in less than flush or fortunate times or older!!

    But cheers to OBAMA'S NEW RHETORICAL PARTY… maybe in 2012 THE OLD Democratic Party can finally field its OWN candidate for a change!

    January 17, 2008 09:05 am at 9:05 am |
  15. anon middle america

    sherry January 14, 2008 9:26 pm ET

    She just wants a white house wedding for Chelsey, thats all.

    ^^^^^^^^^^^^^ YET ANOTHER brilliant example of the mental capacity of the obamalovers. And they call themselves the better educated – when they can't even manage one decent rebuttal without throwing in the sophomoric garbage? Doesn't hardly sound like you are even old enough to vote now – rather than repeating rumors that you've heard on MySpace. At least you had enough brains not to lapse into the obscene gutter 🙁 trash talk that is so typical of most hillaryhaters.

    And Annie (while maybe an airhead) is correct = there ARE STATISTICALLY MORE Democratic voters than there are Repulican. Yet the Democrats insist on fielding a candidate that does not represent their base (ie the same ones that the OBAMA supporters continually bash, make fun of, and feel they are so much more superior2)... And the GOP wins again.

    January 17, 2008 10:04 am at 10:04 am |
1 2 3 4