CNN Poll: Hillary Clinton dominates her possible Democratic opponents

[brooklynite]

(CNN email)

Hillary Clinton dominates her possible Democratic opponents, but there is no clear frontrunner for the Republican nomination for president, a new CNN/ORC International poll shows.

Overall, 69% of those polled back Clinton. Her strongest potential opponent is Vice President Joe Biden, who got the backing of 11% of those surveyed. In third was Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders (5%), followed by former Virginia Sen. Jim Webb (3%), former Rhode Island Gov. Lincoln Chafee (1%) and former Maryland Gov. Martin O'Malley (1%).

For the GOP, the poll finds Jeb Bush has the lead, but his edge is slight and there are multiple contenders for the nomination who could overtake him.

Overall, 17% of Republicans and Republican-leaning independents back Bush for the GOP nomination, while 12% support Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker. Rand Paul and Marco Rubio stand at 11% each, with former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee at 9% and Ted Cruz at 7%. Former neurosurgeon Ben Carson and New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie got 4% each.

The poll of 1,018 adults was conducted by telephone April 16-19. The full poll has a margin of sampling error of plus or minus 3 percentage points.

[Renew Deal]

1. Martin O'Malley is tied with Chafee?

That's ridiculous.

[brooklynite]

3. When you're at 1%, that's just polling noise...

[FSogol]

9. I've seen polls with O'Malley as high as 14%. When he offically announces he should go up. n/t

[still_one]

32. No. Problem is most people do not know who Martin O'Malley is at this time

[Renew Deal]

41. I bet more Democrats know O'Malley than Chafee

O'Malley represented a pretty big state and is in the middle of three big media markets (Philly, Baltimore, DC). And yet he's tied with a republican convert.

[still_one]

46. Probably true, but after O'Malley declares that will change

[OKNancy]

2. Here is a link on CNN with the same poll information

http://www.cnn.com/2015/04/20/politics/2016-elections-republican-field-poll/

Clinton declared her candidacy for the Democratic nomination for president with a web video and promptly hit the road to Iowa and New Hampshire. Her campaign begins in an extremely strong position among Democrats nationwide: nearly 7 in 10 Democrats and Democratic-leaning independents support her. Overall, 69% back the former secretary of state over Vice President Joe Biden (11%), Vermont Senator Bernie Sanders (5%), former Virginia senator Jim Webb (3%), former Rhode Island governor Lincoln Chafee (1%) and former Maryland governor Martin O'Malley (1%). Clinton is also the second choice of just over half of the Democrats who prefer someone else for the nomination. All told, Clinton is the first or second choice of 83% of the potential Democratic electorate.

Any possible Democratic competitors face a steep uphill battle in trying to draw support away from Clinton. Democrats are broadly enthusiastic about a Clinton candidacy, far more than they are for any other potential nominee. Overall, 58% of Democrats say they would be enthusiastic if she won the party's nomination. About a quarter say they would be enthusiastic about a Biden nomination (26%) while 11% say so about Sanders, 7% Webb, 6% O'Malley and 2% Chafee.

[brooklynite]

4. Apparently DU wasn't polled.....

"Democrats overwhelmingly see Clinton as holding several presidential characteristics. Nearly 9 in 10 Democrats see Clinton as a strong and decisive leader (88% say that description applies to her) and as having a vision for the country's future (88%). About 8 in 10 say she represents the future of the Democratic Party (82%) and cares about people like them (82%). Democrats are slightly less apt to say Clinton is honest and trustworthy, though three-quarters do view her as honest (75%, about the same as in March)."

[Autumn]

5. I would imagine that those numbers will come down when her possible Democratic opponents

announce and start actually campaigning against her.

[progressoid]

6. Early polls are a joke.

Clinton, Giuliani Top 2008 Presidential Nomination Polls

http://www.gallup.com/poll/23245/clinton-giuliani-top-2008-presidential-nomination-polls.aspx

PRINCETON, NJ -- A new Gallup Poll finds Hillary Clinton with a wide lead over other 2008 Democratic presidential nomination hopefuls among Democrats nationwide, while Rudy Giuliani has a slight lead over John McCain on the Republican side among rank-and-file Republicans. Most Americans apparently have not given much thought to the 2008 election yet -- nearly half do not provide a name when asked separately whom they would most like to see elected president. Clinton is mentioned most often in response to this open-ended question.

The Nominations

The June 1-4 poll finds 36% of Democratic registered voters saying they will most likely support Clinton for the party's nomination in 2008. Al Gore, the 2000 Democratic nominee who has said he does not plan to seek national office again but has not completely ruled out a bid, is second with 16%. The two members of the 2004 Democratic ticket, presidential candidate John Kerry and his running mate John Edwards, are the other candidates who currently register double-digit support, just below Gore.

In a separate question...

Thinking ahead to the election for president in 2008, who would you most like to see elected president? (OPEN-ENDED)

*Obama got 1%

[brooklynite]

8. Perhaps so...I don't look at polls, I look at patterns

Hillary Clinton has CONSISTENTLY had a large lead from the earliest polls that were probably name recognition to the newest polls when the campaigns are underway.

[LondonReign2]

13. "I don't look at polls" says the person posting a poll result and then

talking about historical poll results.

[darkangel218]

27. Lmao!!!!

[brooklynite]

36. Yes, indeed...I look at this poll in the context of the past nine months of polls....

...and it supports my position that Hillary is still overwhelmingly popular. Feel free to disagree.

[DCBob]

14. That was a very early poll (June 2006) and doesn't compare to the current timeframe.

Try looking at a poll from April 2007.. that would be a better comparison. I suspect the numbers were much different.

[progressoid]

17. How about March of 2007

In the CNN/Opinion Research Corporation poll, 37 percent of registered Democrats said they would vote for Clinton as the Democratic 2008 nominee, while 22 percent named Obama. Fourteen percent went with Gore, and 12 percent backed Edwards.

http://www.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/03/14/democrats.poll/

[DCBob]

20. Yes, 37% is not 69%.

Thanks for proving my point.

[progressoid]

22. The numbers are different and are just as meaningless this early in the game.

[DCBob]

24. Well, I will take 69% at any point in the game.

Cheers!

[tritsofme]

16. You cited a poll that was from a year earlier in the 2008 cycle

Compared to today. Not exactly making your point here...

[progressoid]

18. Right you are. How about Dec of 2007...

The Dec. 14-16, 2007, poll shows that Clinton continues to have a large lead over her competitors, with 45% of Democrats and Democratic-leaning independents saying they support her for the nomination. Twenty-seven percent of Democrats support Obama and 15% support Edwards. Sen. Joe Biden (3%), Gov. Bill Richardson (2%), and Rep. Dennis Kucinich (2%) are well behind in what has pretty much been a three-person race the entire campaign.

http://www.gallup.com/poll/103351/clinton-maintains-large-lead-over-obama-nationally.aspx

[yeoman6987]

28. The problem is that when you poll,

You don't take into consideration caucus vs primary. President Obama did well in caucus while Hillary did well in primaries. Very difficult to poll under those situations.

[tritsofme]

35. You're not helping your cause with polls like this.

Obama was within spitting distance, and combined with Edwards matches Clinton.

If you look at polls in the early states at that time, they would show an even more competitive race.

Nothing like that is happening now. The other so called candidates in this field struggle to achieve support that is statistically significant.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

29. I wasn't a particularly stellar math student....

I wasn't a particularly stellar math student

but

The June 1-4 poll finds 36% of Democratic registered voters saying they will most likely support Clinton for the party's nomination in 2008

but 69% is almost twice as high as 36%:


http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2016/president/us/2016_democratic_presidential_nomination-3824.html

[cascadiance]

34. realclearpolitics.com is a bit biased to the right...

And, Hillary Clinton had a pretty dominating lead a LOT later in to the 2008 campaign too!

POLLS ARE USELESS NOW, unless you are trying to use them as a means of keeping others out of the race and stifle the democratic process and arguably rig the process instead.

[zappaman]

7. Wait until America sees the pic

Of her shaking hands with Kissinger!
When it does, game over man!

[Adrahil]

10. I assume you're being sarcastic?

I mean, how many voters actually even know, or care, who Kissinger is these days? And of those who do, how many would change their mind about her because of that pic? My guess? Almost none.

[Stallion]

11. Get Us Out of 'Nam Man!!!

nm

[zappaman]

12. I'm seeing it everywhere on DU!

As goes DU, so goes America!

[tritsofme]

15. I believe the technical term is "token opposition"

The level of support for all of the other candidates besides Biden is statistically insignificant.

[Downtown Hound]

19. Can't be! Everybody here is telling me that she needs a primary challenger!

That she's not inevitable! We need Elizabeth Warren!

Hillary Clinton leads every Democratic and Republican challenger at this point. Like it or not DU'ers, the rest of the country is not as liberal or as informed as you are. She's a good, but not perfect candidate. If you want to defeat the Republicans, start getting behind her. Yes, that's right. I said it. You're not helping anybody by saying you won't vote for her.

[William769]

21. Does this mean now she will be accused of dominatrix?

[seabeyond]

43. that is funny. nt

[CoffeeCat]

23. Uhhhh…there are no other Dem candidates…

…running a serious campaign.

What a joke.

To those of us who want a Progressive candidate who will fight for the middle class, kick corp-political corruption in the ass, stop fracking and stop the egregious banking industry from destroying this country--this is very depressing news.

If just ONE formidable opponent stepped forward to run--Hillary's campaign would be in jeopardy.

Even without anyone else declaring formally--22 percent of Dems want someone else---what does that tell you???

[Downtown Hound]

25. That tells me that 78% of Dems don't want somebody else

And I'll admit that math isn't my best subject, but I do believe that's quite a bit higher than 22%.

[DCBob]

26. Well, I suspect even if Biden, OMalley, Bernie, Webb, etc declare...

the numbers will be more or less the same. This is Hillary's time. I think as we go forward more and more are going to jump on the bandwagon. Voters will want to be part of history electing the first woman President and see the first "First Gentleman".

[Cayenne]

39. They will get kneecapped Kerrigan style

Hillary is going to walk away with the nomination uncontested. At least that's the plan. No more 'Obama' coming up from behind. Not this time.

[CoffeeCat]

40. I know. I get that.

And it sucks!

So much for democracy!

[treestar]

45. How is it not democracy if most people want it? eom

[Downtown Hound]

48. I know, what kind of democracy do we have if a majority of people want Clinton and vote for her?

I mean really, true democracy would be if the 22% of people who don't want her could have their way and ignore the rule of the majority.

[Marr]

47. And Obama was just an alternate candidate from the same small group.

Our system was ridiculously broken then, and since Citizens United, it's just a joke.

[polichick]

30. Meaningless at this point.

[hobbit709]

31. Polls mean nothing in the days of hackable voting machines.

Much less a year and a half out.

[brooklynite]

37. Good thing then that they're not being hacked (2006, 2008, 2012)

[hobbit709]

38. you think EVERY race in EVERY state was 100% legit? I don't

Results where 1000 more votes for the R than were registered voters in that town. Sudden 10% swings in the results compared to polls taken the day before the election.
I work on computers and even my basic programming skills would let me write a self-wiping routine into memory only that would erase at power down.

[brooklynite]

42. Honestly? I do...because Republicans keep trying to steal them the old-fashioned way.

Seriously, I don't start with a presumption and look for data to support it. I've asked REAL Democrats: Party officials, elected officials, candidates, campaign staff. And NOT ONE of the people I've asked (including people who have lost races) believe the machines were hacked.

[KamaAina]

33. Sure, now.

She's got all the name recognition. Only political junkies like us, and Marylanders, have any idea who Martin O'Malley is.

[Marr]

44. This is like a movie studio putting 'the year's biggest hit' on their movie poster...

on January 1st.

lol.

[Scurrilous]

49. Kick