Clinton leaving Obama in the dust in latest California state poll: 49% to 19%

[Karmadillo]

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/chronicle/archive/2007/08/17/MNG7RJV1E1.DTL&type=politics

Clinton leaving Obama in the dust in latest state poll
Carla Marinucci, Chronicle Political Writer

New York Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton, bolstered by an aggressive campaign organization in California, has amassed a whopping 30-point lead over Illinois Sen. Barack Obama - and enjoys more support among likely voters in the state Democratic primary than all of her Democratic presidential rivals combined, a Field Poll released today shows.

The poll solidifies Clinton's position as the clear front-runner in the nation's most populous state - and raises questions about Obama's effort in California, whose primary is Feb. 5. The Illinois senator has seen his support drop by one-third since the previous Field Poll taken in March.

The latest poll, taken Aug. 3-12 and involving 418 likely Democratic primary voters, found 49 percent support Clinton, followed by Obama at 19 percent, and former North Carolina Sen. John Edwards with 10 percent. That's a shift from the Field Poll in March, when Clinton held a 41-28 percent lead over Obama, and Edwards had the backing of 13 percent of the voters.

Clinton also has decisive support among likely general election voters in matchups with all the top Republican candidates, the poll showed.

Clinton's impressive poll gains in California - a Democratic-leaning state where her husband, former President Bill Clinton, was a popular and regular visitor during his eight years in the White House - suggest "she seems to have strengthened herself across the board," and appears increasingly unstoppable here, Field Poll Director Mark DiCamillo said.

more...

[bigdarryl]

1. listen very careful, The CA. primary is in Feb. 08 not Aug. 17 of 07 JESUS!!!!

[Karmadillo]

5. Good point. At her current rate of increase in support, Clinton will win by much more than 30%.

The article fails to point this out. Thanks.

[wyldwolf]

6. that is the second person you've called Jesus in the last 24 hours

[Karmadillo]

7. Pay him no need, my son. Be not distracted from preparation of the way

for the one who will lead us out of this slough of despond.

[jobycom]

10. Fundraising is happening now. Endorsements are happening now.

Organizational structures are being formed, strategies are being formulated--all based on polls right now. Polls right now play a major role in what happens in February. Doesn't mean the results will still be the same in February, but they are important. And any candidate who says "Polls don't matter now, JESUS!!!" may not even in the race in February.

[Capn Sunshine]

24. Glad you brough that up- Obama way ahead in fundraising AND endorsements

Even Warren Buffet is giving a fund raising event for him soon.

But more to the point, the Hillary vote is N Cal Pelosi insider types.
No one polled me. I'm quite active within the CA Dem Party. They stuck to San Francisco Chronicle readers.

Until things gel, those who don't want Hillary are split between Obama , Kucinich and Edwards here.

[jobycom]

28. So

Those who don't want Obama are split between Clinton, Kucinich and Edwards, and those who don't want Edwards are split...

We'll see if Obama's recent falling spell has affected his fundraising. That's my point--donors take these polls into account. Obama's fall will cut into his fundraising, too. I'm not predicting who will win, I'm saying these polls are extremely significant.

Though, the old "I know people who are voting for Obama and no one I know wants Clinton" doesn't mean anything, as I'm sure you will agree when I tell you that the majority of people I know here in Central Texas prefer Clinton to Obama or Edwards. We are each in our own spheres of influence, and polls cut across those spheres to get a more complete picture.

[rinsd]

29. Warren Buffet already held a fundraiser for Hillary & she is beating Obama in CA $ & endorsements

Obama edged her out in the 2nd Q (about $4.2M to $3.9M) but Hillary holds the overall lead ($9M to $8.3M)

http://projects.washingtonpost.com/2008-presidential-candidates/finance/states/ca/

She has gotten the endorsements of Sheila Kuehl, Bill Lockyer, Fabian Nunez, Dianne Feinstein just to name a few.

[draft_mario_cuomo]

30. 49% of California Democrats are insiders like the Speaker of the House? nt

[Yukari Yakumo]

40. Correction.

any candidate who says "Polls don't matter now!" will not be in the race in February. (Or, at the very least, be a serious contender.)

[ronnykmarshall]

16. It's Feb 5th! MARY MOITHER OF GOD!!!!

[William769]

31. By then her lead will be even bigger!

:rofl:

[MannyGoldstein]

2. President Dean Heartily Agrees!!!

One month before Iowa, Dean was up almost 30% over Kerry.

As we know, Dean went on to destroy Kerry in the primaries.

Not.

(This "resistance is futile" stuff is silly)

[SaveElmer]

3. Doesn't bode well for Edwards in Iowa then does it?...nt

[MannyGoldstein]

4. Uncorrelated, Not Anticorrelated

Polls have no predictive value at this point, rather than having an anti-predictive value.

[LibDemAlways]

8. The average Californian doesn't pay much attention to

politics. Suspect a lot of people responded "Hillary" because she's been touted as the frontrunner for so long and people want to go with the "winner." If the media told them Obama was the frontrunner, or Edwards was the frontrunner, the outcome of the poll would be very different.

The only poll that counts is the one taken by the voters on the day of the primary.

[SaveElmer]

9. I swear people here will say that right up to election day...doesn't hold water...

If your theory is true, Obama should be gaining not losing support as his visibility increases...yet he is losing ground...

[LibDemAlways]

13. At this point I'm voting for Edwards in the CA primary. So is

everyone in my family. But we're unusual in SoCal because we take an interest in politics. As I mentioned in a response below, there is still too much that can happen in this race to call it at this point.

[SaveElmer]

14. That's a different argument than saying no one is payin attention...

Clearly people are paying attention or Obama's numbers would go up as his visibility goes up...but the exact opposite is happening.

Conversely, Hillary's number should be staying steady, not rising...

[LibDemAlways]

17. If the media had been touting Obama as the frontrunner for

several years already, he'd be in the lead. But it's all Hillary all the time, and she's being treated with kid gloves, unlike Edwards who only gets (negative) attention for his hair.

You are a Hillary supporter. If she wins the nomination, I'll vote for her, too. But it's too early to think she has it sewn up. A lot can happen between now and the primaries, and her numbers now won't matter at all when people are actually casting ballots.

[draft_mario_cuomo]

18. The media created Obama. The media took an obscure politician and hyped him for 3 years...

...and turned him into the most the most sought after Democratic campaigner after Bill Clinton in 2006 and someone who went from obscurity to being a legitimate contender for the presidency in less than three years.

[LibDemAlways]

23. You're right. He is a media creation and hyped

probably to keep the race interesting. There's no logical reason why a first-term senator should leap to the "top tier" as Hillary's main rival other than the fact that it makes for interesting copy, and as a distraction to keep Edwards at bay. He's never been played up as the frontrunner the way Hillary has, though.

[jobycom]

11. Your argument gaurantees a Clinton win, you realize.

If Californians don't pay attention to politics and only go with the frontrunner, then the frontrunner can't possibly change, since someone else would have to become the frontrunner before anyone would pick them. :shrug:

Besides, that's a Berra-ism. "The only reason she's the frontrunner is because everyone is voting for her."

[LibDemAlways]

12. No it doesn't guarantee anything. Only saying that

right now, 8/17/07, Hillary is perceived as the frontrunner. There are lots of events that can change that. For example, Gore gets into the race, or Edwards wins the Iowa caucuses and gains a lot of momentum. Who knows at this point? No way to predict what will happen in Feb.

[jobycom]

25. I agree with that, but that's not what you said.

There are a lot of things that can happen. It's not as simple as Gore getting in the race or Edwards winning Iowa--there's a lot more to a campaign than that. But a lot can happen.

But that wasn't what you said in the previous post. You insulted California (being Texan, I don't care :) ), saying they only voted for the front runner. Thus, my previous post. I agree with your follow up.

[LibDemAlways]

26. Lots of Californians will vote for the frontrunner, whoever that

is at the time. People want to be on the winning side.

But right now people in this state aren't paying attention. They know Hillary is running, and they hear she's ahead, so they say they're for her when asked. I don't believe she's as popular here as the numbers would indicate, though.

[William769]

32. In your little fantasy world campare dean to Hillary all you want.

But in the real world they are different as night and day and so are the polls.

[MannyGoldstein]

34. Yes, They're Very, Very Different

One of them takes actual stands on concrete issues and would never vote for an insane war on Iraq, push "free" trade with China, and so forth.

As to your poll hypothesis - we'll see in a year or so!

[William769]

36. Actuallly we will see in about 5 to 6 Months. NT

[zulchzulu]

15. Overconfidence is just what I like in an opponent

Keep it up! No need to vote! It's over! Stay home!

:rofl:

[draft_mario_cuomo]

19. -9 for Obama...It seems as people get to know him his numbers are falling

So much for the name ID excuse? :nopity:

[Tellurian]

21. You hit the nail on the Head...Obama IS entirely a "media creation"!

plus the fact, he's manufactured his own autobiography... it should be entitled: "The Audacity of Mediocrity!"!

[rinsd]

20. Has Obama's campaign put together a CA operation?

I remember a local blogger complaining that they hadn't seen Obama's people organizing but that was a month or so ago.

With the amount of money he has, he should already have a substantial presence there.

[madfloridian]

22. 418 likely Democratic primary voters

What was the demographic other than that?

[LibDemAlways]

27. Kind of a small sample in a state of over 30 million IMO.

[dmallind]

35. Well there aren't 30MM likely primary voters but

Even if there were the MOE would be 4.8% with that sample size.

[DU GrovelBot]

33. ## PLEASE DONATE TO DEMOCRATIC UNDERGROUND! ##

==================
GROVELBOT.EXE v4.0
==================



This week is our third quarter 2007 fund drive. Democratic
Underground is a completely independent website. We depend on donations
from our members to cover our costs. Thank you so much for your support.

[thatsrightimirish]

37. ouch

Field Polls are by far the most accurate out of probably all polling firms in the country. Having more support then the entire field combined and actually gaining support when others are losing it is definitely no joke.

[mustang]

38. Great!!

Hillary is a great campaigner. She is smart and there are a lot of events for her going on in California.

[rufus dog]

39. woo hoo and the support from Feinstien.

This is one CA dem that won't be voting for her!