Obama Catches Clinton in National Polls; Continues To Poll Better Against McCain

Obama’s victories of the past week appear to be giving him another bump in the polls. The Gallup Daily Tracking Poll shows Obama back within the margin of error after Clinton briefly moved back out to a lead. Today Clinton leads 46% to 44% with a three point margin of error.

I’ve seen criticism of this poll as underestimating Obama’s strength because, due to the smaller sample size of a daily poll, they allow a larger number of people who are less likely to vote. The argument is that Obama has done better than this poll shows because his supporters are more enthusiastic and turn out in higher percentages. (Apparently the votes of those enthusiastic “activists” who attend caucuses do not count according to the Clinton camp.)

If this argument is true, then Obama should do better in larger polls which can be more selective in counting those likely to vote. Regardless of the reason, Obama does even better in two other polls released today. The USA Today/Gallup Poll (yet a different poll from the Gallup organization than the tracking poll above) shows Obama leading  47% to 44%. This is within the poll’s margin of error, but it is notable that this is the first time Obama has led Clinton. Obama beats McCain 50% to 46% while McCain beats Clinton 49% to 48%.

The AP-Ipsos Poll  has Obama leading Clinton 46% to 41% with a 4.3% margin of error. Obama leads McCain 48% to 42% while Clinton leads McCain 46% to 45%.

Considering both the differences in the candidates and the differences in the polls against McCain, Clive Cook sees the choice as obvious for the Democrats:

What makes Mr Obama remarkable is that his message of hope, resonating so powerfully with black America, is cast to every American, regardless of colour, to Democrats and Republicans alike. This is surpassingly important: a man of outstanding intellect and magnetic personality, he is running on a one-nation platform, as though he merely happened to be black. And the best part is, the whole country is paying attention: polls say that he is more electable in November than Mrs Clinton. In a close election, he could make the difference.

Republicans, of course, are bound to dislike his liberalism – but what is there for Democrats to think about? Why are they even having this conversation? They have been waiting an awfully long time for a politician like Mr Obama. If, having come so close, they still manage to nominate Mrs Clinton, I think it is a choice they will regret for years and maybe decades.


  1. 1
    Christopher says:

    You know Ron, Jim and I turned on CNN after the Sara Connor Chronicles tonight and their political cover was a joke.

    I would conservatively say, 80% of the first 30 minutes was about Hillary Clinton. Even segments introduced as about Obama were really just carefully orchestrated launch points to begin a story about Hillary. Hillary in yellow, in blue, in black.

    They should change their name to CNN: the C.linton N.ews N.etwork.

  2. 2
    gracie taylor says:

    I completly agree Christopher.

    I decided 4 months ago. CNN now stands for Clinton News Network.

    I particularly, noted that during the last debate Wolf Blitzer, consistently stated that Obama was making swipes at Clinton. Which I thought was tacky and biased.

    I submit that should Clinton become the nominee…CNN will be to Clinton what Fox news was to Bush…..a propaganda news machine for her policies and spin on the issues.

  3. 3
    Ron Chusid says:

    No, CNN, especially Blitzer, iis closer to the Conservative News Network, in an establishment, pro-war sense.

    In the general election Blitzer will be biased towards McCain. In the Democratic primary he prefers Clinton as she is most likely to continue Bush administration policies.

  4. 4
    gracie taylor says:

    Conservative then must mean pro-Israel foreign policy?

Leave a comment