home

AP-Ipsos National Poll: Hillary Ahead by 7

By Jeralyn, Section Elections 2008
Posted on Mon May 05, 2008 at 08:58:28 PM EST
Tags: Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama, 2008 (all tags)
Share This: Digg! StumbleUpon del.icio.us reddit reddit

A new AP-Ipsos national poll has just been released. Hillary has some serious momentum happening.

Clinton (47%) Overtakes Obama (40%) Nationally On Eve of Indiana And North Carolina Primaries ; Poll Shows Clinton Campaign Picking Up Steam With Democrats Nationally

47% say that if the 2008 Democratic presidential primary or caucus was being held in their state today, they would choose Clinton, while 40% would vote for Barack Obama.

These results are in contrast to a poll conducted by Ipsos from April 23rd to April 27th and released last week which showed that Obama had a forty-six percent to forty-three percent lead over Clinton on this same question.

Hillary's greatest support is coming from women with high school education or less and low income voters. The margin of error is 3.1%.

< Late Night: The Heat is On | Krugman Says Obama Ad Misrepresents His Comments >

  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft


    • Display: Sort:
    AP-Ipsos National Poll: Hillary Ahead by 7 | 58 comments (58 topical)

    Readers Must Login or Create an Account to Comment

    O! M! G! (5.00 / 2) (#1)
    by Kathy on Mon May 05, 2008 at 08:59:54 PM EST
    This is FANTASTIC!!!  Great news for our girl.  She kept winning when they said she'd already lost.  She kept winning when they told her to drop out.  She kept winning when they said there was no way.  She keeps winning!!!

    Rise Hillary Rise!!!!! (5.00 / 4) (#2)
    by athyrio on Mon May 05, 2008 at 09:03:40 PM EST


    Uh. . . (5.00 / 1) (#3)
    by LarryInNYC on Mon May 05, 2008 at 09:06:01 PM EST
    Given that the large majority of those voters have already voted (or missed the opportunity to vote) I'm not sure how this helps Clinton -- as BTD pointed out in a recent post.

    This idea that it's of value to poll people who have already voted to see if the outcome would somehow be different today is new this year, as far as I know.  I'd like to apply it retroactively to the 2000 election if we can.

    It's another (5.00 / 3) (#4)
    by TeresaInSnow2 on Mon May 05, 2008 at 09:08:45 PM EST
    voice in the ear of the superdelegates.

    Parent
    Yes. . . (5.00 / 1) (#8)
    by LarryInNYC on Mon May 05, 2008 at 09:12:06 PM EST
    if it comes down to that, it might actually influence someone's decision.

    Parent
    Don't trust the supers... (none / 0) (#60)
    by Camorrista on Tue May 06, 2008 at 01:26:46 PM EST
    It's another voice in the ear of the superdelegates.

    What worries is me is something Chuck Todd said last night to Charlie Rose--that most of the supposedly uncommitted/undecided superdelegates were, in fact, aching for any excuse to support Senator Obama.  

    Given Obama's lead in pledged delegates and the popular vote, Todd explained, only a only a double-win today for Senator Clinton--a "game-changer," in his words--would prevent the supers from flocking to Obama.  Neither polls nor arguments about demographics or electoral-college math would influence them.

    Todd's argument was that the dominant mood among the supers is Clinton fatigue--that the Clintons not only represent the past, but that President Clinton never benefited downstream Democratic candidates and neither would his wife.  The supers, he said, saw Clinton as the known risk and Obama as the unknown risk, and that they preferred the unknown--especially if the delegates numbers (and the press) gave them cover.      

    I do realize that Todd is very much the voice of Conventional Wisdom, but he's neither stupid nor out of touch, and if he's right--and, yes, I pray he's not--then I can't see much cause for rejoicing in this poll.

    Parent

    It might play (5.00 / 1) (#6)
    by Coldblue on Mon May 05, 2008 at 09:11:08 PM EST
    on the uncommitted superdelegates.

    Certainly can't hurt.

    Parent

    It shows buyer's remorse and yes, in 2001... (5.00 / 4) (#7)
    by alexei on Mon May 05, 2008 at 09:12:04 PM EST
    before 9/11, polls showed buyer's remorse and again after 2004.  As Teresa states, this is another piece for the SDs to consider and they should.  Certainly don't want to have buyer's remorse for a Dem Nominees.

    Parent
    Swwweeeettttt (5.00 / 1) (#5)
    by nell on Mon May 05, 2008 at 09:10:38 PM EST
    A good poll to calm my incredibly nervous self tonight...

    Election day always stresses me out.

    No Kidding...I Wish It Was This Time Tomorrow (none / 0) (#12)
    by PssttCmere08 on Mon May 05, 2008 at 09:31:52 PM EST
    already and we were sipping champagne celebrating
    Hillary's wins in IN and NC.

    Another thing Joe Scarborough said today is that if Hillary can get 20% of the AA vote, that would be significant....they show her polling at 18% today.

    Parent

    And if Hillary is the nominee (5.00 / 3) (#9)
    by cpa1 on Mon May 05, 2008 at 09:25:23 PM EST
    she will get Republican women crossing over. I don't believe Obama would get them.

    Jeralyn is right, when push comes to shove women will think with their heads.  Hopefully, PUSH will come soon enough.

    I also feel that women will be practical and maybe thinking with a longer perspective, understanding that you save someone between $30 and $70 in gas and that will feel to them like $100 or $200.  It will give them "consumer confidence" and when that happens, that multiplier effect we all learned about in economics starts churning away.  

    Of course, it will not help those who are into "conspicuous consumables" as Thorstein Veblen named the "keep up with the Joneses" purchases, so it is not resonating with them.  

    I think you are right (5.00 / 3) (#16)
    by Kathy on Mon May 05, 2008 at 09:48:15 PM EST
    about republican women.  Some are already crossing over.  But, think about this: if our so-called progressive brothers at Kos and HuffPo, et al, can seemingly overnight turn into misogynistic, woman-hating freaks, imagine what some of these republican women's husbands will be like.

    They'll be like my granny, is what.  "Oh, yes, dear, democrats are ruining America!" then, she gets into the booth, pulls the drape, and votes straight dem.

    Parent

    What makes you think. . . (5.00 / 1) (#18)
    by LarryInNYC on Mon May 05, 2008 at 09:50:39 PM EST
    if our so-called progressive brothers at Kos and HuffPo, et al, can seemingly overnight turn into misogynistic, woman-hating freaks,

    this was an overnight transition?

    Parent

    seemingly! (5.00 / 1) (#19)
    by Kathy on Mon May 05, 2008 at 09:53:51 PM EST


    Parent
    Yes, the "women's studies set" (5.00 / 5) (#28)
    by Cream City on Mon May 05, 2008 at 10:38:10 PM EST
    won't forget the Blog That Shall Be Unnamed's infamous brouhaha about bakery, as it were.

    Parent
    You (5.00 / 1) (#53)
    by Ga6thDem on Tue May 06, 2008 at 05:32:52 AM EST
    know what? It really wasn't overnight. It was there all the time. I can't speak for others but for myself I just think that I didn't want to see it. Remember the pie fight? I thought that people like MSOC were over the top. Well, I guess in hindsight they were right.

    Parent
    i said at dinner tonight this just might (5.00 / 1) (#32)
    by hellothere on Mon May 05, 2008 at 10:53:25 PM EST
    start another women't movement. it doesn't have to be the same of course. maybe more to do with equal pay for equal work, etc.

    Parent
    45 years since the Equal Pay Act (5.00 / 2) (#34)
    by Cream City on Mon May 05, 2008 at 11:18:53 PM EST
    of 1963 -- I have a photo of JFK signing it, just before his assassination -- and thanks to the great ER, her national commission on the status of women, and even more her great coworker for decades even before the New Deal, Esther Peterson.

    Now it's so gutted by the Supremes that it's meaningless.  But the Dems as a group wouldn't give it the real push it needed in Congress last week, so the Repubs got to kill the bill to restore it.

    Bless Barbara Mikulsky for her fighting spirit on this -- and every Dem in Congress needs to be asked about it.  We have so much more yet to win for our daughters' daughters, we don't have time to keep going back and redoing what our foremothers won.

    Parent

    the young women take all that has been (none / 0) (#61)
    by hellothere on Tue May 06, 2008 at 06:24:03 PM EST
    achieved for granted. i hope for their sakes that they don't contiue to lose. it is not a pretty picture. when i went into the business world it had never crossed my mind that i was less than. i was shocked at the men's attitudes. i was one of the first to achieve a certain level in my field. some of the guys helped and for that i am grateful.

    Parent
    Frankly I'm stunned (5.00 / 4) (#10)
    by facta non verba on Mon May 05, 2008 at 09:28:08 PM EST
    because I presumed Obama's support fairly steady given his demographics. She has gone from being 3 down to 7 up. Still a little disconcerting is that his fall is not completely translating into gains for Hillary. I'm guessing that has to be among African-Americans and those who with CDS who have now soured on Obama.

    I had coffee with friend over the weekend. She's been a loyal Clinton supporter along but her husband was for Obama. She told me that he had thrown in the towel shaking his head "how could I have been so wrong." I think many Americans are asking themselves that lately. To them I say, welcome aboard the Clinton Express.

    So, Maybe It Will Be a TwoFer For Hillary! (5.00 / 3) (#11)
    by PssttCmere08 on Mon May 05, 2008 at 09:29:44 PM EST
    I don't know how much stock we can put in what Joe
    Scarborough, but he sure is a cheerleader for Hillary.  On "Race To The Whitehouse" when they asked for predictions on IN and NC, his take was that she is going to win both contests....let's hope so....GO HILLARY!

    Comment of the Day on TPM (5.00 / 6) (#13)
    by facta non verba on Mon May 05, 2008 at 09:40:36 PM EST
    Let us not panic.

    TPM sure sounds pretty dreay tonight.

    And then there is Josh Marshll himself:

    But I'm concerned about the widening gap between reality and her campaign trail statements.

    Frankly Josh many of us have been worried about the widening gap between your sanity and reality.

    TPM has become a parody of an informative source.. (5.00 / 1) (#25)
    by white n az on Mon May 05, 2008 at 10:30:08 PM EST
    As pointed out just a little over a month ago on Somerby's Daily Howler - WKJM (who kidnapped Josh Marshall?)

    So Rhodes was calling Clinton a wh*re, and Sirota was calling the public racists. At TPM, whoever has kidnapped Josh was tip-toeing along behind him, trying to wink and insinuate without quite saying such things. (Click here, for example. The person who has kidnapped Josh is quite good at clearing his throat.)

    Thus there really is no need to concern yourself over his ability to deduce reality...it's not really him.

    Parent

    lol (5.00 / 3) (#29)
    by hitchhiker on Mon May 05, 2008 at 10:38:27 PM EST
    Let us not panic

    Oh, hell, go ahead and panic, guys.  It's good for you every once in awhile.  Then you can learn how millions of us feel when the diagnosis spells financial as well as medical catastrophe.  

    You can know how it feels when half the houses on your street are standing empty and the value of yours is falling like a stone.

    You can know what it's like to tell your kid you can't afford college and that unless there's a scholarship it's live at home and go to the local community college.

    Let us not panic!  Our candidate might not have made his case, again.  The fear and loathing must not take over our souls; let us not panic.  

    Thank you, Hillary Clinton, for exposing this weird strain in the Democratic party.  May its tribe decrease.

    Parent

    I swear (second time today) (5.00 / 1) (#14)
    by Lil on Mon May 05, 2008 at 09:43:38 PM EST
    I just about can't sit stand this. I can't wait until this is over; I may have to start a 12 step group soon.

    lol* (none / 0) (#58)
    by AnninCA on Tue May 06, 2008 at 09:10:03 AM EST
    Obsession is not a good think.  :)

    Parent
    There's an interesting map on the (5.00 / 1) (#22)
    by frankly0 on Mon May 05, 2008 at 10:25:48 PM EST
    front page of the NYTimes site, related to an article about the campaigning of Obama and Michelle and that of Hillary and Bill. It shows who went where in IN and NC since Saturday.

    It's breathtaking how much more effort the Clintons have put in.

    Really, who wants to be President among the two sides, and is willing to do what it takes to make it happen? Who really seems dynamic and young, and who seems to have forgotten their Metamucil?

    woweeeee! (5.00 / 1) (#30)
    by Josey on Mon May 05, 2008 at 10:42:48 PM EST
    That is a remarkable graphic of their campaign stops.
    Looks like Obama is avoiding small towns - home to those bitter voters who cling to their God, guns, and racism.
    Who wouldda thunk Hillary would attract the "What's the matter with Kansas crowd?"
    lol

    Parent
    Reference to his inability to keep the same pace (5.00 / 1) (#48)
    by JavaCityPal on Tue May 06, 2008 at 12:03:24 AM EST
    is being made by pundit after pundit.  And, I haven't heard of any vacation time for the Clintons since they started campaigning.

    Parent
    What impresses me... (5.00 / 1) (#54)
    by p lukasiak on Tue May 06, 2008 at 05:59:00 AM EST
    is that Hillary is putting together the original "Clinton coalition" again.  

    Obama, on the other hand, is looking more and more like the unholy spawn of John Kerry, Michael Dukakis, Walter Mondale, and George McGovern.  

    Oh well, we'll always have Minnesota.

    Parent

    Obama might be the Worst Dem Candidate EVER! (none / 0) (#56)
    by Ellie on Tue May 06, 2008 at 06:19:29 AM EST
    At least those others didn't divide their time on the trail between denouncing their own party / supporters and kissing the hard right full on the ...

    Well, put it this way, the last time I saw a pair of lips kissing that much right wing @ss they were on Harriet Meiers.

    Parent

    HILROD (5.00 / 3) (#26)
    by IKE on Mon May 05, 2008 at 10:30:59 PM EST
    IS KICKING ASS AND TAKING NAMES. JUST WHAT THE COUNTRY NEEDS, A KICK ASS FIGHTER TO ATTACK THESE HUGE PROBLEMS WE ARE FACING.

    I thought I saw this wave coming in NC. It's (5.00 / 4) (#33)
    by DeborahNC on Mon May 05, 2008 at 11:10:38 PM EST
    good to know that it wasn't my imagination (or just wishful thinking)! I can't wait to cast my vote for her in the morning. Keep it up Hillary! Show all of the Doubters!

    Take all your friends and family (5.00 / 3) (#36)
    by diplomatic on Mon May 05, 2008 at 11:30:45 PM EST
    Get everyone you know to tell everyone they know to go vote for Hillary and get her this nomination!

    Parent
    Will do!! (5.00 / 2) (#45)
    by DeborahNC on Mon May 05, 2008 at 11:55:19 PM EST


    Parent
    Hillary ahead by 100 (5.00 / 2) (#40)
    by txpolitico67 on Mon May 05, 2008 at 11:41:24 PM EST
    A poll was just conducted at domicile in Fort Worth, Texas. It's trending 100% Hillary right now, with 99% of all pets and owner reporting.

    All precincts are closed and animals have all been counted.  Dog licenses were checked with voter registrar's records to comply with SCOTUS ruling of voter ID's.  One pup tried to withold ID but surrendered ID after treat was offered.

    As exit polling continues, it seems that all pups voted straight Dem ticket with Hillary being the mitigating factor for getting to the polls.  Dog's owner seems to be the super delegate leading the effort in this Hillary household.

    More results posted as wandering cat makes it back later in the evening.

    Developing...

    Snidities aside, evidence of what? (5.00 / 2) (#41)
    by Cream City on Mon May 05, 2008 at 11:45:43 PM EST
    The links are in the post.  So what more in sourcing the poll do you need?

    As for the rest of your remark, I learned long ago to think less of the sort of people who use the label "you people."  I was in a post-doc seminar with allegedly educated sorts who tended to use the term "those people" to delineate themselves from the riff-raff of liberal thought.  I finally let them have it and said I was one of "those people" -- on my way out the door, chucking the rest of the grant.

    There is not money enough in the world to make me waste precious time with the "you people" types.

    That sole claim of JUDGEMENT by Obama (5.00 / 1) (#43)
    by felizarte on Mon May 05, 2008 at 11:49:12 PM EST
    has long been more than off-set by the poor judgement he demonstrated in Rezko, Wright and his bitter/cling remark and more recently, his statement that people who lose their jobs also lose their dignity. Hillary's victories in Ohio, Texas, and Pennsylvania, confirm that. And when she wins in Indiana and North Carolina, that should really seal it.

    PuhLeeze (5.00 / 3) (#44)
    by txpolitico67 on Mon May 05, 2008 at 11:55:14 PM EST
    Let's not forget, shall we, that Senator "I was against this war all along" keeps voting for its financing over and over and over...

    He's not Maxine Waters, Ron Paul or Dennis Kucinich.  They have always voted against the war and its funding.  We're not all fuzzy and oblivious on this site.  We know how HRC voted.

    Try again.

    Hillary's a Winner (5.00 / 3) (#46)
    by hummingbirdv on Mon May 05, 2008 at 11:59:47 PM EST
    And yes, Oprah saw a backlash from her support of Obama.  My sister used to be a BIG fan and couldn't live without "O" magazine.  Now, she has canceled her subscription and no longer watches.  And the ratings tanked.

    And, in a "hopeful" world where we live and learn, maybe she has had second thoughts.  Afterall, one of her mentors - Maya Angelou - is one of Hillary's biggest supporters.  

    Rise Hillary Rise.  And rise and shine N.C. and Indiana... it's your time to let all the pundits and DNC and SD's know just what you are thinking...  and to help Hill be "polished like gold".

    'Issues be damned'? Leftcoast? (5.00 / 2) (#47)
    by felizarte on Mon May 05, 2008 at 11:59:53 PM EST
    From foreign policy to energy policy, healthcare, jobs & economic recovery, global warming, trade policy, Obama has not addressed them as much as Hillary.  He has consistently engaged in character attacks and has the temerity to accuse Hillary (who talks about issues all over) of the sort of negativity and misleading ads that he has done. The people have had time to really examine these two candidates fortunately (may be unfortunately for you) they seem to be gravitating more and more towards Hillary.  Tomorrow should bring a much clearer narrative.

    Hillary is on her way (5.00 / 3) (#49)
    by hummingbirdv on Tue May 06, 2008 at 12:12:41 AM EST
    to a BIG WIN tomorrow.  Deal with it.

    And this whole war speech thing is really getting old.  Hillary did not vote for war.  She voted for the authority to use force only if all other avenues of diplomacy failed.  Check out the speech she gave on the Senate Floor the day of the vote.  It is in the Congressional
    Records.  

    And I have no respect for Senator Obama considering he did not stick by his resolve once he was in the Senate and had the chance to deny funding for Iraq.  While, on the other hand, Hillary did so.  Once again, all words, but when he has the chance to ACT he folds.

    BO: Indy's a tie-breaker, HRC: NC's a game-changer (5.00 / 2) (#50)
    by Ellie on Tue May 06, 2008 at 12:21:57 AM EST
    Clinton threw down that gauntlet on Sunday after Obama failed even to come up to response to the question, How about stepping up for an unmoderated, mano-a-mano debate?

    (Obama's inability even to come up with a plausible answer to the challenge settles who'd win it.)

    Dialing back expectations from TeamObama, I get, but Indiana and NC were supposed to be nails in the coffin of the HRC campaign.

    Does the virtual silence on the Surrender Hillary BS mean the Insurmountable goalpost has shifted to Oregon? (Not a rhetorical question.) And if so, why haven't media "corrected" the months-long pretense that she can't win this straight up?

    My prediction Hillary loses NC by 2 points (5.00 / 1) (#52)
    by ChuckieTomato on Tue May 06, 2008 at 12:49:02 AM EST
    She is now polling ahead in Meck. county and even in N. Raleigh. There could be 2 million people voting which is almost better than an off year general election. The state predicts 46-48 turnout. Remember that poor whites and elderly are always under represented in polls.

    Most people on Kos are predicting a double digit defeat. We'll see.

    Is FOX Drifting into MSM Spin and Beginning to (none / 0) (#15)
    by SunnyLC on Mon May 05, 2008 at 09:47:02 PM EST
    Bash Clinton??
    Some contradictions observed..

    http://insightanalytical.wordpress.com/

    I mention the Gallup tracking poll in passing in this post, but am REALLY HAPPY to see this AP-Ipsos poll!!

    Holy crap! (5.00 / 1) (#17)
    by Kathy on Mon May 05, 2008 at 09:48:44 PM EST
    she must be doing really well if Fox is going after her again!

    Parent
    Yep (none / 0) (#21)
    by BDB on Mon May 05, 2008 at 10:17:11 PM EST
    They were only praising her because Obama is the frontrunner.  They praised Obama when she was the frontrunner.  

    Parent
    Too bad this poll and others like it (none / 0) (#20)
    by kenosharick on Mon May 05, 2008 at 10:11:18 PM EST
    are meaningless. The media takes it seriously, just as the stupid "who has won more states" metric. As if North Dakota=New York. BTW, cnn reported polls showing Obama leading and never mentioned this one.

    my respect for Hillary has SOARED (none / 0) (#23)
    by Josey on Mon May 05, 2008 at 10:28:48 PM EST
    over this gas tax suspension!
    She's taking on the oil companies! nobody messes with the precious oil companies. Certainly not a presidential candidate!
    This is a start - ("her bill won't pass Congress" blah, blah) and the oil companies are on notice - Prez Hillary will go after their tax incentives Obama gave them when he voted for Bush's energy bill.
    Hillary has cajones!
    Woot!

    This is along the lines... (none / 0) (#27)
    by white n az on Mon May 05, 2008 at 10:35:47 PM EST
    of the Gallup/USA Today poll released yesterday which we discussed last night.

    Obama is tanking badly...mark my words that after tomorrow which is certain to be a bad day for Obama...on Wednesday (Thursday at the latest), the calls for Hillary to drop out will be loud. Considering the shellacking that Obama will take in KY and WV their backs will be against the wall.

    If (when) Clinton wins IN and NC (none / 0) (#31)
    by Kathy on Mon May 05, 2008 at 10:44:40 PM EST
    the calls to drop out will taper off, except from the most deluded Obama supporters, who will in turn look ridiculous.

    Parent
    taper off? (5.00 / 1) (#37)
    by white n az on Mon May 05, 2008 at 11:31:41 PM EST
    can I get whatever it is that you're smoking?

    One thing that the OFB has shown is little tolerance for panic...the amount of calls for Hillary to withdraw is directly proportional to the amount of panic...it's a causal relationship. They won't be able to idly stand by and see they guy get slaughtered in KY and WV.

    Parent

    Things could've been worse for Hillary (none / 0) (#35)
    by diplomatic on Mon May 05, 2008 at 11:29:46 PM EST
    Oprah didn't campaign with Obama in NC.  If she had, I think it would have been completely out of reach.  

    Is it possible that Oprah (none / 0) (#39)
    by felizarte on Mon May 05, 2008 at 11:40:19 PM EST
    now realizes that she didn't really know that much about Obama after all?  Or is it because her show's rating has gone down after her political involvement?

    Parent
    Moreso (none / 0) (#42)
    by txpolitico67 on Mon May 05, 2008 at 11:48:18 PM EST
    her creepy church.  Her audience is (was) pretty mainstream. I don't think a lot of them are going for her new age schtick.

    Oprah has every right as an American citizen to voice her opinion on her candidate of choice.  Heck, I remembered when the Huffington Post had as their main headline and picture one time with Hillary and Oprah standing side by side and the headline read:  "For our sake, please run."

    I thought THEN that would be risky for her.  Now with Bullfrog (Jeremiah) and the uncertainty of BHO's campaign, it was wise for her to back WAY off.  I think that she has def lost some of her audience...how much?  I dunno.

    I do know that Ellen has taken over as the fave of daytime chit chatters now.  Ellen's smart just to focus on the latest winners on Dancing with the Stars and Rachel Ray's newest recipes.  That's what daytime tv viewers want; not political speeches and pontifications.

    They can get that with Judge Judy (btw i LOVE JJ!)


    Parent

    Oprah.... (none / 0) (#55)
    by p lukasiak on Tue May 06, 2008 at 06:08:25 AM EST
    Oprah knows that if she shows up on the campaign trail, the "Wright" question resurfaces, because she left UCC Trinity because of Wright's radical stance.

    and I think that Oprah sees the writing on the wall in terms of an Obama --- Oprah is supposed to be "everywoman", and the casual misogyny of the media and Obama supporters, and the fact that the Obama campaign has morphed from populism to elitism, are things she cannot afford to be closely associated with.

    Parent

    Go Hillary! (none / 0) (#51)
    by kaffied on Tue May 06, 2008 at 12:29:14 AM EST
    The KUSA poll is the best.

    Undermine? (none / 0) (#59)
    by AnninCA on Tue May 06, 2008 at 09:14:55 AM EST
    It would undermine ourselves if we agreed with you that it's over.

    Sometimes I do wonder if those who love to say this to Clinton supporters honestly don't understand basic definitions.

    In any case, we all may as well pick and choose polls, since they vary so widely.  Your poll comforts you.  And USA published a devastating poll yesterday for Obama showing the fall-out continues from Wright that comforts me.

    toast

    So we can all be happy.  :)

    AP-Ipsos National Poll: Hillary Ahead by 7 | 58 comments (58 topical)

    Readers Must Login or Create an Account to Comment