Rasmussen: Hillary 42%, Obama 23%, Edwards 14%...

[SaveElmer]

It's Friday...

And Hillary has moved to her biggest lead so far in this poll a 19% lead over Obama...Hillary has picked up 2 points since the debate last Monday

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/presidential_tracking_poll

[Darth_Kitten]

1. Who are they polling?

:shrug:

I cannot believe she's really this popular.

[Stuckinthebush]

2. It is strange

I know of no one who supports her. I wonder if we are still in name recognition territory here.

[zanne]

4. It does seem peculiar.

I live in NH and volunteer at a certain candidate's headquarters. I help out in the phone bank, calling about 300 people per session. When asked who they support, 90% say they're undecided. The rest are split pretty evenly between Hillary, Obama and Kucinich. There are, of course, a few Richardsons and Dodds in there, too. I just don't know where these polls get all their Hillary supporters.

[bigwillq]

5. No one?

:shrug:

There are quite a few people here on DU who are vocal supporters of HRC and I know quite a few people IRL who support a HRC presidency.

[Stuckinthebush]

13. Sorry...i don't "know" the DUers

I am talking about Democrats in my town. I should have made that more clear.

[bigwillq]

15. No prob

I don't know many of them personally either but I do know that some do support her. IMO, that still counts.

[MGKrebs]

48. You are in Alabama?

There are 110 donations from Alabama with a total of $159,000 to Clinton. That's not much. Georgia coughed up 340 donations for almost $400,000, and there are over 1000 donations from Texas, and it won't even give a total for that many.
If you want to send me your zip code, I'll check and see if anyone there has given. Or you can do it yourself here:
http://www.opensecrets.org/indivs/index.asp

edit to add that I see that Clinton got $1.2 million from Texas in the first quarter alone.

[Stuckinthebush]

61. Perhaps that is why

I'll check the link...thanks!

[wyldwolf]

3. 750-800 Likely Democratic Primary Voters - a pretty good sampling size

[zanne]

6. I guess it depends on the demographics.

Do they poll people in all parts of the country? Do they poll young, middle-aged and old people in equal numbers? How about ethnicity, etc. etc.? I've always wondered how it's done and who chooses how to do it.

[wyldwolf]

11. not as much as you might think

Yes, they poll people at random in various parts of the country. "Random" guarantees a sampling of all demographics. When they're calling Democrats, they're not making a determination of race, gender, etc. It is totally random. Sure, voting patterns are different among different demographics, but not so different to make up a 20 pt. difference - which is where the MOE comes in.

[Ethelk2044]

17. I wonder who they are supporting. I only know one person who is supporting

Hillary. All others Obama.

[wyldwolf]

19. Every Democrat I know supports Clinton

[David Dunham]

7. Obama is fading and will soon be third is some states as Edwards picks up

[mod mom]

60. HARDLY. There are many folks like me sitting it out waiting to hear if Gore will run

If Gore doesn't run-you can bet theis crowd will flock to Obama or Edwards but definitely NOT HRC

[durrrty libby]

8. I love it. Keep going Hillary. You ARE the best

Edit to add. Thank you so much Elmer. I so appreciate the updates

[BeyondGeography]

9. The debates are getting panned...Americans can't be bothered

<Fifteen percent (15%) of American adults say that Presidential debates are exciting. The latest Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey found that 58% say they are boring. Sixty-three percent (63%) of men and 54% of women find the debates boring.

<Thirty percent (30%) say that the debates are informative while 50% say they are useless. Older Americans are more likely to find the debates useless than younger adults.

<Ratings show that the most recent debate attracted 2.6 million viewers, a very small percentage of the electorate. A Rasmussen Reports analysis suggested that the debates may have little impact and that “only a major gaffe or startling policy pronouncement will break through the news clutter and impact the general public’s view of the race.”>

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/58_say_presidential_debates_are_boring_50_say_they_re_useless

[SaveElmer]

10. Why poll all Americans...

Why not poll LV Democrats and Republicans....

That is who the debates are aimed at...

[BeyondGeography]

12. No evidence the numbers would change

From the same article:

"During Election 2004, the debates between President George W. Bush and Democratic nominee John F. Kerry had little impact. Following the first debate when the President did not do well, there was virtually no change in the candidate preference polls. However, Republicans simply decided that debates weren’t that important in determining their vote."

[SaveElmer]

14. Those numbers would change if something happened in the debate...

Nixon 1960, Ford and Dole 1976, Carter 1980, Bush 1992....all were hurt, in some cases fatally by something that happened in a debate...

In addition, primary debates and general election debates are different. Primary debates are aimed at a narrower subset of people...and I think those are the people that should be polled about this...

[jefferson_dem]

16. Not a nice trend, from my perspective.

It is *still* early, right?

No worries. Thanks to Hillary's flub, Obama has been gifted an opportunity to change the dynamics of the race.

[Ethelk2044]

18. I agree. I have been to several websites reading comments from people

They feel she really screwed up on that one. I am not talking about the media. I am talking people voters.

[durrrty libby]

20. Most people don't watch debates. Your little circle of peeps

may think she screwed up, but reality says differently


Sorry about that, but the country thinks Obama is an inexperienced newbie
That is just the way it is and it will not change

[jefferson_dem]

25. But nearly everybody knows this war - the one Hillary authorized - is a clusterfuck.

Now she suggests a continuation of Chimpy's foreign policy approach.

Sorry, her (mis)judgments are a major issue.

[rinsd]

28. "she suggests a continuation of Chimpy's foreign policy approach." Except she doesn't.

Only in Obama talking point land does that ring true.

Seriously, name specific foreign policy differences or votes between Hillary and Obama?

Not BS campaign rhetoric. Not this last little manufactured difference.

Let's get wonky.

[jefferson_dem]

31. Why discount the rhetoric? Isn't that what campaigns are about?

Yesterday, Howard Wolfson sounded like Karl Rove. He rolled out classic "ooga booga" props like Hugo and Castro, even suggesting Obama already had a secret plan to meet with them. Hillary called Obama's approach irresponsible and naive.

You may argue that Hillary and Obama don't differ in terms of the "substance" of their positions so far but, for the moment, that's irrelevant.

[rinsd]

32. Because rhetoric is empty.

Especially from campaign attack dogs like Woflson.

"You may argue that Hillary and Obama don't differ in terms of the "substance" of their positions so far but, for the moment, that's irrelevant."

We know its a pissing match more than any substanitive difference.

So why contribute to it.

Why argue over and over again what we agree upon.

I know Obama is not naive and I know exactly what he was saying.

I Know Hillary's position on this and I know why she went on the attack.

[durrrty libby]

34. Your brain deludes you and the polls prove it

[rinsd]

22. At this point its a minor swing, maybe 2 or 3 pts when averaged out.

Though I am interested to see how the next few polls go and whether this little spat has any effect.

[SaveElmer]

23. She has been at 40 or above 4 out of the last 6 days...

So her uptick is not a blip...

[rinsd]

24. Well she was at 38%, he has been around 25%.

So if he goes down to 24% and she goes up to 39% or 40%, its what I said it would be.

I am happy with it but I want to see what effect if any this latest spat has.

Something tells me the netroots and the chattering class are the only ones paying attention to it.

[Tellurian]

26. You mean Obama-Lite's FLUB...

I guess you have no shame and will continue to misinform Obama-Lites supporters with twisting the Truth of the matter!

You can read all about it here where it explains in detail Obama-Lites untrustworthiness:

http://www.hillaryis44.org/?p=174

[jefferson_dem]

33. Obama-Lite? Cute. What is that - - your little pet name for the guy?

I'll go to that site if you go to this one -- http://www.hillaryproject.com/

[Tellurian]

35. The noticeable anomaly with Obama is he's extremely light in knowledge of US History..

even moreso with tenable knowledge of the history of past US presidents..

He is therefore dubbed...Obama-Lite (forever and ever!)

[jefferson_dem]

36. Shall we all construct critical pet names for the candidates we don't like?

Surely, we could conjure up some doozies for Hillary. That would make DU a really fun place to visit, eh...

[Tellurian]

44. I like Obama-lite. It suits him to a "T"!

Of Hillary, be my guest. See if you can come up with something novel, something I haven't heard before..

[jefferson_dem]

49. Nah, not my style. I'll leave such name-calling to you and the Limpball-freeper-types...

:bounce:

[Tellurian]

51. Uh, you and IllP get your jollys at the Hate Hillary sites?

well, if that serves your inner beauty, I can understand that.

[Forkboy]

55. Irony...it's not just another metal like Bronzy and Goldy.

[Forkboy]

54. Let' all start using repub names!

We can use Hitlery,Osama,The Breck Girl.It'll make Tellurian feel right at home.

[durrrty libby]

39. It is telling that Obama supporters have so little confidence in their

candidate that they visit Hate Hillary sites to get their talking points,
just like the right-wing pigs.

Now I know where Illp gets her "Hillary is cold and selfish routine"

IllP often sounds like a jilted lover when it comes to Hillary, but I guess she

isn't even creative enough to make up her own put-downs.

It would be funny if it it wasn't so pathetic :dunce: :hangover: :freak:

[jefferson_dem]

42. LOL! I provide that site as an example of what kind of trash is out there on both sides.

I won't defend http://www.hillaryproject.com/ just like i hope you wouldn't defend Hillaryis44. They are mirror images of one another.

[Tellurian]

47. Agreed...

She sounds like someone's x-wife so bottled up with hatred, she vents here to allay her frustration..

I don't mind...at least she's not taking it out on the kids..

==="It would be funny if it it wasn't so pathetic"===

you can say that again! :hi:

[IndianaJones]

21. But...But...She made a massive huge colossal mistake. nt.

[Tellurian]

27. But it's Obama-Lite that needs a diaper change...

[IndianaJones]

29. What is the deal with "Obama-Lite"? nt.

[Tellurian]

30. The noticeable anomaly w/Obama is he is extremely Lite on US History..

even moreso with tenable knowledge of past presidents.

[wyldwolf]

37. yep. See the Taylor Marsh thread I just posted.

[jefferson_dem]

38. Rude childishness.

If we all took the approach of this poster, DU would spiral downward really fast.

[IndianaJones]

40. Surely you must admit that much worse is said of Hillary Clinton every day? nt.

[ronnykmarshall]

41. Big DEAL!

Now if you were talking about the Jefferson County (Iowa) Fair numbers ...... well THAT'S the real story.

Nothing to see here. Just another attempt of the "Hil-bots" is distorte the REAL story.

:sarcasm:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x3406257

[beastieboy]

43. But nobody knows ANYONE who likes Hillary.

Doh!

[Colobo]

45. Oh no!!! IT'S OVER!!!

I'm chilling... about six months to go...

[LSK]

46. and yet Edwards leads in Iowa

[Broke Dad]

50. Iowa Poll results from July 23-25 . . . EDWARDS!

Research 2000/KCCI
7/26/2007

See poll details

A new poll from KCCI in Des Moines shows John Edwards and Mitt Romney leading their respective parties.

Edwards was tops among Dems, favored by 27 percent of respondents. He was followed by Hillary Clinton (22 percent), Barack Obama (16 percent) and Bill Richardson (11 percent). Clinton and Obama both saw their numbers drop by 6 percentage points compared to the same poll in May, while Richardson for a boost of 4 percentage points.

On the Republican side, Mitt Romney was favored by 25 percent of respondents, followed by Fred Thompson at 14 percent, Rudy Giuliani at 13 percent and John McCain at 10 percent. Romney saw his numbers jump by 9 percentage points since the May poll, while Giuliani dropped by 4 percentage points and McCain dropped by 8 percentage points.

The telephone poll of 600 likely voters was conducted July 23-25 by Research 2000 and has a margin of error of plus or minus 4 percentage points.


www.iowapolitics.com/index.iml?Article=101148

The more we see Hillary in Iowa, the lower her poll numbers. Hillary lost ground in Iowa since May.

[Adelante]

62. That's all he's got? 5 points?

Jaysus. Hardly seems worth all those years he sunk into Iowa.

[BeyondGeography]

52. And Hillary sank there after she toured the state with Bill

hmmmmmmmmmmmmm.

[rinsd]

53. Obama is outspending everyone in IA and saw his support drop down to 17%

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/07/22/us/politics/22edwards.html?_r=1&hp&oref=slogin

"Mrs. Clinton and Mr. Obama have outspent Mr. Edwards here. The Obama campaign has poured $1.6 million into the state since the beginning of the year, and Mr. Obama has been running biographical commercials on television. Mrs. Clinton’s campaign had spent $837,863 in Iowa as of June 30, compared with Mr. Edwards’s $525,027, the most recent federal filings show. Neither Mrs. Clinton nor Mr. Edwards has run commercials on television."

Hillary has had 22 events in IA since the last Research 2000 poll (but before this latest one)

http://projects.washingtonpost.com/2008-presidential-candidates/tracker/candidates/hillary-clinton/states/ia/

Obama has had 27 event in IA since the last Research 2000 poll (but before this latest one)

http://projects.washingtonpost.com/2008-presidential-candidates/tracker/candidates/barack-obama/states/ia/

[Colobo]

56. OH NO!!! It's freakin' OVER!!!

:sarcasm:

[rinsd]

57. Its a long ways away. But little cheap shots will not go unanswered.

:hi:

[draft_mario_cuomo]

58. Edwards continues to reel Obama in...Obama led him by 15 points last week in this poll

Will this put an end to the hubris from some in the Obama camp regarding Edwards' candidacy? :popcorn:

[DutchLiberal]

59. What has she done to deserve it?

Oh, right, she has the last name 'Clinton'...