New Hampshire Primary: Clinton Holds Solid Lead (Rasmussen)

[Karmadillo]

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

Wednesday, August 15, 2007

The latest Rasmussen Reports telephone survey of the New Hampshire Presidential Primary shows New York Senator Hillary Clinton leading Illinois Senator Barack Obama by fifteen percentage points, 37% to 22%. In fact, Obama is closer to the third and fourth place candidates than he is to the frontrunner.

Former North Carolina Senator John Edwards attracts support from 14% of Likely Democratic Primary voters while New Mexico Governor Bill Richardson attracts 9%. Ohio Congressman Dennis Kucinich is at 4% and Delaware Senator Joe Biden is at 2% in the poll. Connecticut Senator Chris Dodd and former Alaska Senator fail to reach 1% while 11% remain undecided.

Yesterday, Rasmussen Reports released general election match-ups for New Hampshire and three other states (Colorado, Florida, and Ohio).

Clinton also holds a significant lead nationally in the Rasmussen Reports daily Presidential Tracking Poll. Her lead in New Hampshire, while still substantial, has declined somewhat from the previous Rasmussen Reports poll in this state.

more...

[obnoxiousdrunk]

1. I bet

Rasmussen is pointing a gun to everyones head and making them say they want Clinton.

[draft_mario_cuomo]

2. Good news for Edwards. He is up 4 points, Clobama down 1, and Richardson stayed even

It seems Edwards is recovering in NH after tanking after the June CNN debate in NH. :bounce:

[jsamuel]

5. yep

he is on the up swing in NH

[Muddy Waters Guitar]

3. Useless-- name recognition, anti-Hillary vote, open primary

The polls are far too reflective of name recognition at this point. It's only after Labor Day or thereabouts, that voters really do start to pay closer attention to policies. Remember, Lieberman was very far ahead at this point in 2004, then plummeted when the competition actually began.

Two other factors to consider: the anti-Hillary vote is split among Obama, Edwards and the others at this point. As the actual vote nears and candidates drop out, the "anti-Hillary" vote will increasingly coalesce around one candidate, likely to be Obama. Hillary at only 37% total is rather poor, considering her name recognition advantage.

Another factor here: Many states have open primaries, and Obama and Edwards both do much better than Hillary, consistently, among voters overall. This works greatly in favor of Obama.

[draft_mario_cuomo]

4. The name ID excuse went out the window as Obama has steadily declined as his name ID has risen

[rinsd]

6. Obama and Edwards are around 75% & 80% on name recognition

So its not like they are unknowns.

"Remember, Lieberman was very far ahead at this point in 2004, then plummeted when the competition actually began."

Joe Lieberman was not far ahead at this point. He had a small lead that was dwarfed by the undecideds. He barely broke 20% during early 2003 when he was the only known candidate, let alone 40% that Clinton has.

"Hillary at only 37% total is rather poor, considering her name recognition advantage."

What kind of logic is that? People do not have her as the 1st choice therefore they will not vote for her?

That is belied by polling data that includes and does not include Gore or reduces it to a 2 candidate race.

http://www.galluppoll.com/content/default.aspx?ci=28345

When its just Obama vs Hillary, her lead becomes 59 to 36.

"Another factor here: Many states have open primaries, and Obama and Edwards both do much better than Hillary, consistently, among voters overall. This works greatly in favor of Obama."

It depends on the state. Other than GA & MI on Sooper-Dooper Tuesday, most will not be a factor.