Field Poll: Hillary leads California by 30...both she and Obama lead Repubs, Edwards struggles...

[SaveElmer]

Against Rudy...

Hillary 49
Obama 19
Edwards 10

Both Clinton and Obama lead the top Republicans - former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani, former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney, Arizona Sen. John McCain and former Tennessee Sen. Fred Thompson, who has not yet joined the race.

Edwards also leads Romney, Thompson and McCain. But he is only slightly ahead of Giuliani, researchers found.

More info... looking very good for Hillary...Obama "Losing his luster"

"I think what may be happening is that voters are filling in the blanks" as they learn more about Obama, DiCamillo said. "For some voters, maybe he is not as liberal as they wanted him to be and, for others, maybe he is not as conservative.

"He was a shooting star at the beginning of the campaign. Now he is coming down to Earth."

Since March, Clinton has picked up support in particular among male voters and younger voters.

In the last state Field Poll, Obama led Clinton 39 percent to 38 percent among voters between the ages of 18 and 39. In the new poll, Clinton led him among the younger voters by 47 percent to 24 percent.

Meanwhile, she expanded her support among male Democrats from 41 percent in March to 47 percent in the latest poll taken Aug. 3-12.

The California poll results were similar to a recent national Gallup Poll, in which Clinton led among Democrats with 48 percent support to 16 percent for Obama and 12 percent for Edwards.

Officials of the Obama campaign have said they are counting on winning in early primary states -- he led in recent polls in Iowa and South Carolina -- to stir momentum for California. Obama has also outperformed Clinton in campaign fundraising this year.

But Luis Vizcaino, Clinton's California campaign spokesman, said her showing in the state Field Poll "reflects the amount of time, effort and commitment she has dedicated to California."

In the state's coastal counties, Clinton led with 48 percent to 19 percent for Obama and 11 percent for Edwards. She fared even better in inland counties, leading with 52 percent support to 17 percent for Obama and 7 percent for Edwards.

In a poll of likely Nov. 4, 2008, general election voters of all parties, Clinton also fared well against the top GOP contenders. In hypothetical matchups, she led former New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani by 52 percent to 37 percent among California voters, held a 55 percent to 35 percent lead over former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney and led by the same margin over undeclared candidate and former Tennessee Sen. Fred Thompson.

Obama led by 48 percent to 38 percent over Giuliani, 53 percent to 31 percent over Romney and 52 percent to 32 over Thompson. Edwards led Giuliani 47 percent to 42 percent, Romney by 52 percent to 33 percent and Thompson by 55 percent to 30 percent.

http://www.sacbee.com/111/story/330072.html

http://www.examiner.com/a-886095~Poll__Nearly_half_favoring_Clinton_in_Calif__Democratic_primary.html

[alofarabia]

1. Strange...

The linked article doen't give the numbers against the repugs. Anyone know what they are?

[SaveElmer]

2. Probably will be posted later on...

New poll they often release the main points, and then the internals later on...

[SaveElmer]

5. Added the numbers for y ou in original OP...nt

[trayted]

3. Poor SaveElmer, grasping at straws. Clinton and Obama are weaker GE candidates than Edwards

Edwards would not only win every state that Clinton does and avoid losing the states that she or Obama would, but he would pick up states like NC, VA, WV, OH, KY, Arkansas, and a few others against any of the Republicans currently running in a General Election (ironically, except for Mike Huckabee).

I fully expect, if Hagel doesn't get in, for the GOP ticket to be Romney-Jeb Bush.

If you want the lowest number of voters in history to turn out, give us a 2008 matchup that has a Clinton and a Bush on opposite tickets, but gee, wouldn't the corporate media love that.

Apparently, Elmer doesn't mind rehashing the past.

[SaveElmer]

4. Talk about grasping at straws...

Edwards is not even ahead in the polls in his own home state...for the Democratic nomination...

Polls out today show Hillary well in front of Repubs in California(where Edwards struggles against Guiliani), Michigan, and Arkansas...

Recent polls have shown her well ahead in Florida, and ahead in Ohio and Pennsylvania...

And you really think Edwards will take Alaska?

[draft_mario_cuomo]

13. Edwards has led in every NC poll, including the last poll, except one

And in the one he did not lead in he was behind by a whopping 1%. Obama's lead in Illinois is similarly small. Using the special logic applied to Edwards, who left office over two years ago, surely "rock star" incumbent senator Obama is in even more dire straits because he is not up by 40 points in his home state? Of course, none of those using the NC meme against Edwards ever say this about Obama (or Richardson whose lead in NM is in single digits and everyone else who loses their home state--badly with the exception of Biden being a solid 2nd but 13 points behind in Delaware.)...

[SaveElmer]

14. I agree on Obama...

Who should be leading big in his home state...I was responding to the posters assertions...

We don't know for sure if Edwards can win in the south...until he moves up in the polls most firms are not polling him in general election matchups in the states...if he catches fire they will start I am sure...

We do have some data on Hillary though, she is leading in at least two southern state...Florida and Arkansas...and has shown strength in others...Kentucky, Missouri, and Virginia...

[draft_mario_cuomo]

18. We do have some data on Edwards

He is the only candidate who flips North Carolina (10th largest state in the nation), Virginia (12th), and Kentucky. Florida is a purple state and any of our candidates can carry it imo. I have not seen anything about Edwards in Louisiana and Tennessee, but given how he is running in more conservative red states it is reasonable to assume he would flip Louisiana and be competitive in Tennessee. If he can flip Kentucky he likely can win in Tennessee. As far as winning red states in the South it seems only one of our major candidates will have to cede the South, aside from purple state Florida, like Kerry did.

[SaveElmer]

20. Do you have the links on Edwards in the states you mentioned?

Thanks!

[draft_mario_cuomo]

27. Yes

The VA and Kentucky polls are from a multi-state SurveyUSA poll done in the spring. The NC poll was also posted here. I could fish for it later.

http://www.pollster.com/blogs/poll_surveyusa_10_state_ge_res.php

[ccpup]

6. wow!

that was an unnecessarily harsh, inappropriately personal response to someone who just posted information for people to peruse or ignore as is their choosing.

Whether SaveElmer likes Hillary or not, and whether you disagree with his choice or not, this Posting of Poll Info doesn't invite you to (attempt to) slam the OP as mercilessly as you tried to do.

[TwilightGardener]

9. It wasn't harsh at all. Save Elmer always has a pro-Hillary agenda--even Elmer

would agree--he/she is not an impartial poll-slinger. "Slam Mercilessly"? WTF? Way oversensitive.

[wyldwolf]

15. So explain how Elmer is "grasping at straws?"

[TwilightGardener]

24. I'm not bolstering the poster's argument--I didn't make it. Just saying

this person disagreed with Elmer. That's allowed here, right? There was nothing personal or "out of line" about the phrase "grasping at straws".

[wyldwolf]

26. the term has a meaning... one that isn't applicable here.

[ccpup]

22. learn to read

"(attempt to) slam the OP as mercilessly as you tried to do" is much different than your usage of "slam mercilessly". The attempt to attack was so lame that I felt it needed some qualifiers in there. And "it wasn't harsh at all" makes me question what you -- and your obvious choice for candidate Obama -- WOULD consider harsh.

Still haven't explained what "grasping at straws" means, but I don't expect you to.

[TwilightGardener]

25. WTF? I didn't say "grasping at straws"--that's not my argument.

That's someone else's. I'm just defending that person's right to say it. It wasn't an inappropriate personal attack, just an opinion of the OP's post. Jesus H. Christ, you people need to log out if you can't take dissension that isn't couched in polite, apologetic tones. Politics ain't fucking beanbag.

[ccpup]

29. it seems as if YOU

can't take dissension very politely. I couldn't find anything in my Post to you -- save for my mistake in confusing you with the OP in the "grasping at straws" bit -- that would be considered impolite or unapologetic. And I know politics ain't fucking beanbag. Do you?

I do think the Post of yours I'm responding to was a bit, what's the word?, shrill. Perhaps you should log out and take some time away? Just sayin'.

[durrrty libby]

7. I am very happy that Hillary is doing so well. Thanks for the info Elmer

:applause: :applause: :applause:

[SaveElmer]

8. np...nt

[Ron Green]

10. I, for one, welcome my new corporate masters... or mistresses.

:puke:

[Capn Sunshine]

30. LOL

:nuke:

[Karmadillo]

11. Kick since I inadvertently duped this one. I should have

known you would have already posted it. You're always an hour or so ahead of the rest of us.

[SaveElmer]

16. No sweat...given the number of threads that get posted...

Whenever there is bad news for Hillary, I don't think 2 on this topic is excessive

[Alamom]

12. Great news. Thanks. eom

[rinsd]

17. Sort of OT but we must make sure the GOP does not break up CA electroral votes.

[SaveElmer]

19. Good point...

I don't think anyone really believes that initiative will actually pass...but we will have to spend time and money defeating it, which could be put to better use elsewhere...

[rinsd]

21. And I think that is the goal rather than anything in the way of real change to the system.

We have the money advantage now but I fear this will be a pattern. Stupid anti-democratic initiatives across the country that must be fought. Similar to 2004 except then they were meant as a moral draw as opposed to just creating money pits for Democrats/liberals.

[zulchzulu]

23. So there were no Undecided? Hmmm....

Most polls this early have people who aren't sure yet. Great poll! 4.5 MOE!

:sarcasm:

[rinsd]

28. The Field Poll has an excellent reputation. Undecideds were at 12%.

http://www.field.com/fieldpollonline/subscribers/Rls2236.pdf

I guess it hurts to see yet another key primary state in which Obama is losing.