Pollsters Say Obama Gains On Clinton In National Poll

Bloomberg:

The race for the Democratic presidential nomination is tightening as voters say they want both Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama on a national ticket, a Bloomberg/Los Angeles Times poll shows.

Clinton leads Obama, 42 percent to 33 percent, down from the 24-point advantage she held in early December. Three out of five supporters of each candidate say they would like Clinton or Obama, if nominated, to choose the other as a running mate.

Read the whole story: Bloomberg

Comments

[imsosure]

What a crock of shit, so much for your polls

[TNFarmer]

If this is true - that Hillary is sliding downward in poll numbers - don't worry supporters. She'll break out the tissue box, sniff, shed a few more tears, appear almost human, and it'll be all better again.

Whether Obama or Edwards, please, Dems, get away from the entrenched, hard-core, politics-as-usual, Washington in-crowd. You're acting more like the Republicans every year.

[ConcernAmerican]

Hillary will not pick Obama, high probability she will pick Edwards as her VP or Webb.

[Tellmethetruth]

New Hampshire just completed recounting the votes and the election was only off by 112 votes - meaning it was a fair and accurate election in which Hillary Clinton won inspite all the polls. Reality versus hype.

Polls are bought and paid for advertising - the media who gets its revenues from advertisers take the polls - and guess who the polls favor? Whoever paid for the polls initially.

Polls are propaganda.

[LoloZ]

Hillary and Bill's nasty, sleazy tactics have convinced me that even if she is the nominee she will never get my vote. She has twisted everything she has dished up on Obama to serve her negative smear of him. She cannot win the general election, but will certainly unify the republicans and guarantee another republican administration. And if she did win, a Hillary Clinton administration would bring us nowhere. Just picture it: Bill would be a huge liability and It would be marked by scandal like her husband's presidency. People think they can relive the 90's--remember, the prosperity was largely due to the dot com boom, which had little to do with Bill. He brought us NAFTA and now we are seeing the ill effects ofthat. There was no health care reform, no improvement of infrastructure, none of those things a good economy should have brought on. And he was impeached.

[freecasey]

From the NY Daily News:

"Later, Obama accused Clinton of changing her position on NAFTA since she began running for President. 'She said that NAFTA has led to all kinds of economic growth. Now it's a different kind of story,' he charged."

For you who value reading comprehension skills, he did not judge her opinion on NAFTA, but asserted only that she capitulated.

[teamsterwife]

Its my understanding Edwards is up in the polls as well. Hmmm, where is that info?

[AnninCA]

Obama is really Republican.

He made that clear with his speach lauding the Reagan years.

So those voting for him?

Go ahead.

You, too, are Republicans in drag.

[AnninCA]

It would be a mistake for my vote, anyway, to choose Obama as a running mate.

But I'm admittedly very mad that he's getting by with consultants/pollster-type politics while pretending he's Mr. Innocent.

I have no doubt, Bill is right. All will be forgiven once the primaries are over.

But right now?

Don't even suggest that ticket.

[cloudy]

I agree that HRC has more people unwilling to vote for her than does Obama. How can this reality be brought to the forefront of the minds of Democratic voters between now, and "Monster Tuesday" a mere 12 days away. This seems to be the problem confronting the Obama campaign.

It would be interesting if Obama tried to shape the one more debate more around his framing of the issues, and left the self-defense to a day of first releasing (overnite) a detailed rebuttal/explanation of the Reagan canard, 'present' votes in Illinois (with a number of illustrations for each of several different purposes), etc, and then appearing on a national TV talk show to hammer out further questions. Then there could be a post-show 'mopping up' that addresses the questions raised and answers given. The whole of that package of material could be referred to or 'incorporated by reference' every time another HRC attack comes up.

He would still have to defend himself in the debate (the Clinton strategy), but he could focus more on his OWN vision rather than their trashing.

[zirk]

Hillary will pick Obama out of necessity just like JFK picked LBJ. They really disliked each other. All of this nastiness is just a blip that will be forgotten come November.

[HowdyDoody]

Both Bill and Hillary Clinton have had rocky relationship with the truth, and no wonder. They have to divert people from her actual record. This "excitement" of Obama attacking keeps the media and others from challenging her narrative of being "ready" on day one, and the most experienced. In fact she has shown a fundamental inability to effect real change, from health care in the 1990's, to her lackluster record as a Senator, to standing up to George Bush about the war in Iraq and most lately her vote supporting Bush's obsession with war in Iran. She can't say "no" to men in power.

Because she makes no attempt to control Bill's selfish use of the Democratic party to play center stage (again), as he used us in the past to prove his sexual prowess with his narcissistic affairs, she won't say no to him if she's elected. She often refers to her candidacy as "us" and "we," quite as self-serving as Bush and Cheney. In fact, Hillary is more a clone of George W. Bush than most people would like to admit.

I'm sick of our country being used by these 2 families.

[coolaid]

But if Hillary is damaged anymore by her campaign's attacks on Obama, she my really wind up in strategical need of bringing him on, especially if she would be running against McCain - who is again proving to attract independents and Democrats - in the general.

Forgettaboutit!!!!!! She has pissed the Obamas off so bad, this is never going to happen. Besides, why would Obama want to run as the VP candidate to a LOSER!

[kcal2000]

Why is anyone trusting the polls these days?

[malarson2]

It’s the electability, stupid. Democrats, please pay attention: Hillary cannot win the general and that is the ONLY point worth putting out at this crucial moment of the primaries. Don't get distracted or side-tracked: put every other piece of info, scrappy fight, comment by surrogates, squabble, newspaper article, blog, story and propaganda-filled speech aside. Its not about race or gender or policies or change or experience. You only need to know ONE piece of information to make your decision: no candidate can win a general election that is not supported by half of her own party. Keep your eye on the 11/08 ball before it’s too late. She is the only thing that will rally the struggling Republican Party. Tell every Democrat and Independent you know: a vote for Hillary is a vote for John McCain, HIS war in Iraq and an economy that will not recover for a very long time. Why does the DNC not recognize this? We are running out of time to put an end to the eight, and I now fear 12, years of negative and never-endingly bad mojo and the moment to do something about it is right now. So stop talking and go out and do something. One simple first step? Email The DNC and tell them how you feel about the way The Clintons are leading our party and running their campaign. http://www.democrats.org/page/s/contactissues . Pass it on.