May 1st, 2008
02:27 PM ET
14 years ago

Blitzer: Should Clinton's swing state edge be a factor?

[cnn-photo-caption image= caption=" Blitzer: Could new polls sway some superdelegates?"] WASHINGTON (CNN) - There are new polls suggesting Hillary Clinton might fare better against John McCain in three key Electoral College battleground states in November than Barack Obama. These are states the two parties will be fighting over desperately in the general election – Florida, Ohio and Pennsylvania.

The polls are snapshots and are certainly not conclusive evidence that she would in fact be a more formidable candidate against McCain in those states than Obama. A lot, of course, can change between now and November. But the polls are significant because they could influence those still-undecided superdelegates – and perhaps even some decided superdelegates who can change their minds.

The Quinnipiac University poll shows Clinton is currently ahead of McCain in Florida, 49 percent to 41 percent. In the same poll, McCain is statistically tied with Obama, 44 percent to 43 percent.

In Ohio, the poll shows Clinton ahead of McCain, 48 percent to 38 percent. McCain is statistically tied with Obama, 43 percent to 42 percent.

In Pennsylvania, Clinton is ahead of McCain, 51 percent to 37 percent. Obama is also ahead of McCain in this state, but by a slightly smaller margin - 47 percent to 38 percent.

As you know, Clinton defeated Obama by about ten points in both Ohio and Pennsylvania. In Florida, there was no campaigning because the state had moved up its primary against Democratic Party rules. But all the candidates’ names were on the ballots, and Clinton won decisively.

Florida, Ohio and Pennsylvania will see a lot of campaigning in the months ahead. McCain is already spending lots of time there – as he should if he wants to be president. So should these latest polls be a serious factor in the minds of superdelegates?

Filed under: Wolf Blitzer
soundoff (325 Responses)
  1. bessie

    Justin wrote: Do you seriously think Dems will lose PA and win FL and Ohio?

    Hello? Didn't Kerry lose to Bush because of Ohio in 2004? And Gore lost to Bush because Florida in 2000?

    May 1, 2008 05:55 pm at 5:55 pm |
  2. Herman in LA

    Listen to all Barack Obama supporters don’t fall for the hype. This is just a test for Barack to see how he would hold up under pressure being president of the United States. The media is playing this thing out to the last, it’s all being media driven now. He is the front runner Hillary can not win by the numbers and her high un-favorability rating is still much higher than Baracks will ever be.

    They will not, I repeat, they will not take this from him; it will turn the demarcate party up side down.

    Mark my word...

    May 1, 2008 05:55 pm at 5:55 pm |
  3. Addis - observer

    Here comes wolf!... When he see some inclination of the poll to Clinton... he will always have sometthing to say in her favour. Shame on you Wolf!.... As an achor, please be fair. I follow ur articles everytime... Please for God's sake b fair... Journalism!!! ...

    May 1, 2008 05:59 pm at 5:59 pm |
  4. Mary


    The rules say that you need to win by winning the DELEGATE count.

    Its NOT by polls, its not by swing states, its not only states where Hillary has her demographic skew.

    It’s just as funny as when I hear the media say Obama needs to win Indiana. While that would be a good thing for him there shouldn’t be any “must” for the candidate that has a stranglehold on the number of delegates!

    Funnier thing is that the media is not saying that Hillary needs to win big in BOTH Indiana & NC to even have a chance.


    May 1, 2008 05:59 pm at 5:59 pm |
  5. douadavid, PA

    Can anyone tell us about Obama Crook friend in Chicago? Is he still federal jail? What happen to the property that Obama bought from this crook?

    May 1, 2008 05:59 pm at 5:59 pm |
  6. Ostriches burying our heads in the sand

    Wolf....Hillary's edge will mean zilch in the general...McCain is tied at the hip to Bush because of Iraq and Bush has the lowest approval ratings ever and 43% in a recent poll consider him to be McCain's albatross!

    Plus, once Hillary's out of the race, Obama will regain some of the Hillary supporters in the swing states....

    May 1, 2008 06:00 pm at 6:00 pm |
  7. Tracy, Los Angeles, CA

    The Democrats have elected only one person to the presidency since 1976 because they consistently offer up a strongly liberal candidate who projects an aloof, superior air and is incapable of connecting to the "blue collar" voter. If Barack Obama is our candidate it will be more of the same. And, once again, we will lose. Hillary Clinton is the only chance we have to win in November...which means the Democrats will nominate Obama. It's just our way.

    May 1, 2008 06:00 pm at 6:00 pm |
  8. Lonnie H.

    Is the media ignoring this? CNN, what's the problem? At least post this one...

    Los Angeles Judge Saves Hillary's Presidential Bid

    In the landmark civil fraud case against Bill Clinton in Los Angeles, where the former President is charged with defrauding a Hollywood dot com millionaire to help Hillary Clinton obtain more than $1.2 million from him for her 2000 Senate campaign, Los Angeles Superior Court Judge Aurelio Munoz ruled on Friday, April 25 that Hillary Clinton would not be required to testify in a sworn deposition as a material witness in the case until AFTER the November election!

    Lonnie H.- Toledo, OH

    May 1, 2008 06:00 pm at 6:00 pm |
  9. kathleen retired Professional w/woman for obama

    No, Wolf. This is a s–t disturber question!!! and you seem to favor
    Hillary these days. The titles of the Political Ticker Today are very
    disturbing. You must know that most of the people that came out
    to vote for the very first time, came out for Obama. Stop it CNN, you
    are for sure favoring Hillary, and right before Tues. Primaries. FOUL!

    May 1, 2008 06:01 pm at 6:01 pm |
  10. Alex


    May 1, 2008 06:02 pm at 6:02 pm |
  11. kathleen retired Professional w/woman for obama

    Wolf, You had 10.000 questions to choose from!!!!

    May 1, 2008 06:02 pm at 6:02 pm |
  12. Berg Levin

    All our troubles with Iran today originated from the inexperience of a naïve and weak presidency by Jimmy Carter…and now, thirty years later this man resurfaces talking foreign politics…and chatting with terrorists….

    High gas prices, lines at the grocery store….this is the 70’s all over again….please wake me up!!

    Obama is just another Carter soon to happen…no foreign relations experience, actually no real experience at all….a good man doesn’t make a good president!

    Wolf, pleeeeeaase help us!!!!

    May 1, 2008 06:04 pm at 6:04 pm |
  13. Ben

    How can you Hillary supporters make such a bold prediction that Obama "can't beat McCain in November" Stop acting out of fear. You've all fallen for the Republican tricks to keep this primary going. Hillary has already mathematically lost. When Rush Limbaugh tells his supporters to vote for Hillary does a light bulb not go off in your head.

    May 1, 2008 06:05 pm at 6:05 pm |
  14. dave

    also need to look at how many black voters will be moving AWAY from obama due to his rejection of rev wright..... 1 in 4 black voters? 1 in 5? 1 in 10 or 20? basically obama was pulling the black vote nationally at 80 to 92 percent most recently (his highest pull being 92 percent in Mississippi),,, but if his black support drops off by 10 or 20 or 30 percent, that could do some major damage to him in a lot of states should he be the dem nominee::: Florida is about 15 percent black, so a 1/3 drop in black support in FL for obama could mean a drop in total vote of 5 percent.... etc etc.... would expect that 10 to 20 percent of black vote will no longer go with Obama due to his break with wright, altho the pollsters need to begin collecting that data.... first indications on this will be on how black voters turn out (or don't turn out) for obama in RECORD NUMBERS next week in NC and indiana.....

    May 1, 2008 06:06 pm at 6:06 pm |
  15. william

    It appears that more than half of the comments summitted would not no the truth if it slap them in the face. It does not appear to me that wolf is being bias. He just stated the facts from polling. How often do any of you guys spend real time observing, lisitening and watching the news draw your conclusions based on what is before you. Stop running with the black card, the bias card, everyone in america knows that 99% of Black America are voting for Obama, regardless of what he represents or presents and that CNN IS PRO BARACK. if you don't , you have to blind and stupiddddddddddddddd!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Stop the ranting and vote for an American for President!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    May 1, 2008 06:07 pm at 6:07 pm |
  16. The Truth Always Win

    I'm tired of hearing that Hillary is vetted...if i'm not mistaken most of the things that came out was about her husband not her. If she has so much experience why are we currently in the situation we're in? She's had 8 years in the White House and 6 years as a Senator and have done nothing. The time she did have an opportunity to do something (health care) she screwed it up and lost us seats in Congress.

    If Obama is nominated, many people will look at the fact that his policies are completely different from McCains. People need to start voting on what's best for them. The policies that will help their families and stop voting on sound bites. These are the same people that voted George Bush into office and look where it got us. George Bush pulled the same stunts that Hillary Clinton is pulling to get into office and everyone is allowing her to do it. I'm sorry but I want a President that is honest, has integrity, knows how to run their campaign, is gracious, humble, accountable and represents me. Hillary Clinton is not and has never been that person.

    May 1, 2008 06:07 pm at 6:07 pm |
  17. Phillip

    It's rare I blog but I have to get this off my chest. I am a democrat, have always voted democratic and choose see things in their simplest terms. Whether you are for man or woman (democrats) believe that the republicans are for McCain. Lately, all I hear is that Obama is damaged and that Clinton is now the stronger candidate or some variation of that, mainly from republicans.

    Republicans know that if the nomination is taken from the candidate who is ahead in the categories determined by the rules committee ahead of time, then the Democratic Party itself is at that point, in shambles. That said, the republicans could very well walk back into the White House. If at the end of the process the person who has won the nomination is the nominee, then there may be some hurt feelings but nothing that will compare to what would happen if it were perceived that the nomination was stolen and awarded to someone who had not earned by the process set forth ahead of time.

    May 1, 2008 06:08 pm at 6:08 pm |

    Blitzer shut the hell up! the libs haven't even chose there candidate yet, but your shooting your beer hole acting like they have and you know more than the next person, you moron! Obama will beat out this witch, so go get a shave, you look like a transient bum!

    May 1, 2008 06:09 pm at 6:09 pm |
  19. JDC

    Thanks to those who have posted insightful comments on the issue being discussed here. To those who are simply repeating posts that they have submitted elsewhere - and which are not relevant to the current topic - please dont waste the space for your ramblings.

    May 1, 2008 06:09 pm at 6:09 pm |
  20. Sharon Minnesota

    Absolutely, if we want to get a democrat in the white house. She will be a winner for the party.

    The DNC should nominate the current choice of the American people. The polls are showing Clinton in the lead over McCain with Obama trailing her. Let's not give in to the ultra liberal wing of the democratic party just to salve the feelings of one group of people.

    I'm hoping that Obama can put aside his ego and talk some sense into his supporters. We do not need protests and riots in the streets as someone on CNN news has suggested would happen. It's time to be adults and stop the tantrums.

    We need a democrat in the White House and Clinton is the only one who can beat John McCain.

    Please use your good judgement when choosing.

    May 1, 2008 06:13 pm at 6:13 pm |
  21. North Carolina

    Well, duh. You can't exactly win without them: and Obama sure can't deliver them.

    May 1, 2008 06:15 pm at 6:15 pm |
  22. kathleen retired Professional w/woman for obama

    First time I said anything about your reporting or questions, Wolf. but this and the rest of the Political Ticker news is all against Obama. and
    now, you are chastising Michelle Obama for her ONE misstatement, and you sure picked a good night for this, just after her wonderful,
    composed, mature, intelligent interview with Diane Sawyer and Caroline Kennedy by her side. This is totally distastful of you, Wolf.
    I am not happy about all of the Todays Topics on the Ticker today all
    against Obama. Now I know who you will be voting for.!!!!!

    May 1, 2008 06:15 pm at 6:15 pm |
  23. Chibiwibi

    Obama Supporters, Clinton Supporters!

    Listen up. Quit fighting over candidates. This isn't about them, it's about our country. When November comes, I will vote for Hillary/Barack. If Barack wins, I will vote for Barack, even though he is not my first choice. And I certainly am not going to sit at home and let others decide for me. This isn't about race or gender. This is about our country. If you can't get over your own prejudice against Hillary/Barack, then at least vote for the House Reps and Senators.

    We can not afford another year of Bush's mentality, much less 4 years.

    May 1, 2008 06:16 pm at 6:16 pm |
  24. John

    The voters elect the leaderof this country not Wolf or C linton N et work N ews
    Obama will win Wolf there is nothing you can do about it

    May 1, 2008 06:18 pm at 6:18 pm |
  25. Lorna, NY

    The best way to understand the case against Hillary Clinton- the frauds she directed to win her Senate seat and the obstructions of justice she orchestrated in plain view to keep it- is to read the explanation of the case of Paul v Clinton presented to California’s Court of Appeals late last year.

    Peter Paul appealed Hillary Clinton’s purported right to first amendment protection from liability for frauds she directed when she was engaged in illegal campaign fundraising. The allegations of huge tort and election law frauds directed by a President and Senate candidate were corroborated with evidence that speaks for itself in the court pleadings- read the outline and click on the links:

    The only judicial panel to ever review Hillary Clinton’s conduct as part of a judicial proceeding (the California Appellate Court) did not deny that Hillary’s conduct in obtaining more than $1.2 million from Paul may have been illegal!

    “Even if some aspect of Senator Clinton’s campaign fundraising
    unrelated to Paul’s claims… were illegal and that illegality could be imputed to Senator Clinton and Clinton for Senate, these defendants are not barred from obtaining the benefit of section 425.16’s right to an early evaluation of Paul’s claims arising from their constitutionally protected activity. ”

    May 1, 2008 06:20 pm at 6:20 pm |
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13