CBS/NYTimes Dem Poll Shocker: 31 Point Swing Since January

By: TheGreenMiles
Published On: 2/25/2008 9:39:08 PM

In January, a CBS News/NYTimes poll showed Hillary Clinton led Barack Obama by 15 points.

Three weeks ago, the CBS News/NYTimes poll showed them tied.

Tonight, this:
A new CBS News/New York Times poll finds Barack Obama with a 16-point lead over rival Hillary Clinton among Democratic primary voters nationwide.

Obama, coming off 11 straight primary and caucus victories, had the support of 54 percent of Democratic primary voters nationally. Clinton had 38 percent support.

Clinton has only slipped three points since the last poll, from 41% to 38%. But Obama has surged from 41% to 54% as undecideds break his way. AP also has Obama pulling ahead nationally, 46%-43%. Real Clear Politics has a roundup of other polls.

As for the headline, it's certainly not shocking Obama's ahead. But the speed of the swing has been breathtaking. A month ago, who'd have predicted Obama would open up such a commanding lead before the end of February? Can you believe Obama is now pulling in the same numbers as John "Got It Locked Up" McCain?

 UPDATE: SurveyUSA has Obama up in Texas, 49%-45%.]



Comments



Final thought (TheGreenMiles - 2/25/2008 9:44:28 PM)
Does this make Hillary our Huckabee? Yeesh.


Hillary's latest behavior? (Rebecca - 2/25/2008 9:56:19 PM)
I wonder if Hillary is helping Obama with her recent behavior?  


Yes! (AnonymousIsAWoman - 2/26/2008 11:39:44 AM)


Fact to note (DanG - 2/25/2008 10:10:03 PM)
2/3 of Democratic voters think Obama will win the nomination, and people want to vote for the winner.  If this mentality sticks in Texas and Ohio, Obama has a shot at clinching the nominations that night.


Probably has some truth (AnonymousIsAWoman - 2/26/2008 11:46:15 AM)
But it's more than just a bandwagon effect.  As he becomes more known and people hear his message, I think they like what they hear and they also like the messenger.

In studies done as far back as the 80s, psychologists found that political candidates who have an optimistic message usually win elections.

That doesn't mean they should be afraid to respond to negative attacks on them.  They should answer any untrue or exaggerated charge and always defend themselves.

And there's nothing wrong with a candidate pointing out in a respectful, civil, and low key way the differences between him and his opponent.  It's not negative to disagree with somebody as long as it's kept civil. I think Obama does that very well.

But the main thing is that having a message of hope and genuinely liking people and connecting with them is a winning combination.



look at the whole season of primaries (pvogel - 2/25/2008 11:00:43 PM)
The only places Hillary won had early voting in December, while Hillary had a huge lead in the polls.
Something happened right at new years, i dont know what, that set her  sights on oblivion.


That is an incredible turn around (Alicia - 2/25/2008 11:35:40 PM)
Impressive!


SurveyUSA and CNN both put Obama up in Texas tonight... (JMU Duke - 2/26/2008 1:27:44 AM)
n/t  


This is big news (DanG - 2/26/2008 2:18:16 AM)
I'm becoming more and more convinced that this entire race could come down to Texas, where Obama is gaining suprisingly fast.  This is really odd to me, as I thought it would be Ohio, rather than Texas, that would be in play.  Still, a victory in Texas, with a single-digit loss in Ohio, will keep Obama far enough ahead that there will simply be nothing for Hillary to do.


I thought the same thing (AnonymousIsAWoman - 2/26/2008 11:53:14 AM)
I always thought Hillary would lock up Texas because of the Hispanic vote there and the inroads she has made in the past. She has a history in Texas.

I also thought that Ohio, which is more of a swing state in general would be the one in play for Obama.  Go figure.

But she needs to win in both of them to really stay viable, not just one state. And if she is victorious in Ohio and it's tepid - as you said, by single digits - it's still really over.



Hillary needs to look to her legacy (The Grey Havens - 2/26/2008 2:06:52 AM)
If she puts party first, ahead of her ambitions, she can unify the party.

She needs to bow out gracefully and become Obama's greatest champion.

That would make her a lock for 2012 or 2016 nomination, depending on how things go this year.

btw... isn't John McCain cute... :)



Eh, maybe (DanG - 2/26/2008 2:20:13 AM)
If Obama wins, you'd think his VP would be top choice in 2016, regardless of whether he's re-elected.  That is, if he/she wants the job.  Still, if she keeps this up, I don't see how she'll ever get enough support to be the nominee.  She's just pissing off too many people.


After her behvavior the plast few weeks (Lowell - 2/26/2008 11:49:45 AM)
I don't think Clinton would be a "lock" for anything ever again.  It's very sad what she, her husband, and her campaign have done to all their reputations.


Sadly, the Clintons don't seem to do dignity. (FMArouet21 - 2/26/2008 3:30:39 PM)
I've been puzzled by those in the blogosphere who have suggested that Hillary would make an excellent Senate Majority Leader if Obama were to win the Presidency.

Though Hillary obviously is smart and steeped in policy details, time after time she displays the traits of ill-temper, sarcasm, and condescension that preclude the kind of coalition-building skills required of a Majority Leader. She simply does not have the political instincts for the role. At best, she can continue to be a competent Senator for New York. Perhaps someday she can rise to a committee chairmanship.

Senator Dodd, on the other hand, would be perhaps an ideal replacement for Weak Harry Reid. Dodd is both principled and civil, and one could easily imagine a President Obama and Majority Leader Dodd collaborating closely and effectively to undo the damage of the Bush years.



This is her final Hurrah on a national stage (AnonymousIsAWoman - 2/26/2008 11:58:29 AM)
I think that if she doesn't win the nomination this time, it's the end of her presidential ambitions.  That's why she's fighting so hard.  She's really watching her dream go down the drain.  And it's got to be making her sad.

But she will still be very viable in New York and can remain senator for years to come.  In that position, she can work her way into the Senate leadership.  She is a very capable person.

To do that, however, yes, she has to bow out graciously and prove that she will unite the party.  If we lose the election because of her, then she won't be forgiven even in New York.