Fox Poll: Clinton's Lead Over Republicans Grows, Obama's Fades

The latest Fox News poll out today (9/25-26) has national general election head-to-head match-ups between the top two Democrats and the top three Republicans (nationally.) While both Clinton and Obama beat each of their Republican opponents, the results show Clinton has strengthened her hand against the Republicans over the last two months while Obama's has weakened (July 17-18 results in parentheses.)

Hillary Clinton 46 (46)
Rudy Giuliani 39 (41)

Barack Obama 41 (45)
Rudy Giuliani 40 (41)

Hillary Clinton 48 (47)
Fred Thompson 35 (38)

Barack Obama 45 (48)
Fred Thompson 32 (33)

Hillary Clinton 46 (45)
John McCain 39 (42)

Barack Obama 40 (47)
John McCain 38 (37)

Two factors are contributing to this shift. One is Clinton's increased support among Democrats. Since July, Clinton's net gains among Democrats versus Giuliani, Thompson and McCain are +8, +10 and +12 respectively. This contrasts with Obama whose comparable net gains were -2, -4 and +7. In fact, not only is Obama's post-partisan message not winning over Democrats, but it's not even paying dividends among Republicans or Independents, which is the heart of Obama's unity pitch. In fact, in every head to head match-up, Obama's level of support among Republicans and Independents declined from July to September. Clinton lost support among Republicans but gained slightly among independents in each match-up.

Here are how the match-ups look just among independents (again July 17-18 results in parentheses):

Hillary Clinton 44 (42)
Rudy Giuliani 33 (41)

Barack Obama 37 (37)
Rudy Giuliani 36 (42)

Hillary Clinton 46 (42)
Fred Thompson 29 (39)

Barack Obama 42 (43)
Fred Thompson 30 (31)

Hillary Clinton 43 (40)
John McCain 33 (39)

Barack Obama 32 (45)
John McCain 37 (31)

Interestingly, while independent support for Clinton grows modestly, their support for the Republicans in match-ups against her absolutely plummets. Against Clinton, independent support for Giuliani drops 8 points, support for Thompson drops 10 points and support for McCain drops 6 points. (The undecided column is a larger beneficiary of these defections than Clinton is.) Independents flee Giuliani and Thompson against Obama as well, although in fewer numbers: 6 points and 1 point respectively. But independents' support of John McCain actually jumps 6 points when against Barack Obama and Obama's support falls a stunning 13 points; in fact, independents now prefer McCain to Obama 37% to 32%. But one thing is clear: no matter who he is matched up against, Rudy Giuliani is losing independents.

Tags: 2008 Presidential election, Barack Obama, fox news poll, Hillary Clinton (all tags)



Re: Fox Poll: Clinton's Lead Over Republicans Grow

Hi Todd ,

I know this is a cynical view , but do you trust this Fox news polls , do they have any integrity .

I just always have it at the back of my mind when I read Fox news polls that they might be playing with the numbers.

Plus the kind of questions they ask in the polling are biased questions , in terms of the move on polls , etc

by lori 2007-09-28 11:45AM | 0 recs
Opinion Dynamic

Fox news is using Opinion Dynamic as their polling outlet this cycle. If my memory is correct, this polling firm used to work for CNN.

by areyouready 2007-09-28 11:46AM | 0 recs
Re: Opinion Dynamic

You're thinking of Opinion Research, which is CNN's current polling polling firm.

Potential problems there, too, since Opinion Research is owned by Clinton bankroller Vinod Gupta.

More info here and here.

by horizonr 2007-09-28 02:15PM | 0 recs
All networks sub out their polling to legit firms

Legit, independent firms.

by dpANDREWS 2007-09-28 11:52AM | 0 recs
And John

Edwards consistently does better than both.

Why does MyDD remind me more and more of the MSM?  Oh yeah, some ignore that it is not a two person race.

by TomP 2007-09-28 01:00PM | 0 recs
Re: And John

Especially when the top the Rethuglicans are included.

by Calvin Jones and the 13th Apostle 2007-09-28 01:01PM | 0 recs
Re: And John

That is an absolutely unfair assessment of this diary.  The comparison of the poll happens to be between Clinton and Obama.   That is all Todd had to work with.   These bashes of the frontpagers and MyDD as "being like the MSM" or "in the backpocket of the Clinton's" are getting very tiresome.  

by georgep 2007-09-28 01:18PM | 0 recs
When Democrats Unite Behind Clinton

When Democrats unite behind Clinton in February, the Republicans are going to shiite their pants.  She will open up a 10 point lead on Tootsie Giuliani and the yapping on the Republican side will start, as will the finger pointing, and the talk of "we should have picked a real conservative, yada, yada, yada."

It is goig to be fun to see.

I hope Clinton goes for the shock and awe knock out and drops $40 mil of advertising right on Sir Tootsie's head in March and April and leaves him crying and bleeding.

by dpANDREWS 2007-09-28 11:50AM | 0 recs
Re: When Democrats Unite Behind Clinton

I want to see just how you try to walk back from this when the Dems (most likely Hillary) win the White House and increase both their House & Senate majorities.

by InigoMontoya 2007-09-28 07:20PM | 0 recs
Re: When Democrats Unite Behind Clinton
Exactly!!  the Repubs want Hillary to be the nominee.  Get ready for a lot of "I did not have sex with that woman." Oh - and don't expect Hillary to say too much about restoring America's moral authority in the world. LOL
I know a lot of Dems who will not vote to place an adulterer back into the White House. I know I won't.
by annefrank 2007-09-28 10:30PM | 0 recs
Re: When Democrats Unite Behind Clinton

I know a lot of Dems who will not vote to place an adulterer back into the White House. I know I won't.

Well, that's a relief. At least we know you'll vote for Hillary over Rudy. You had us all worried there for a while.

by hwc 2007-09-29 06:52AM | 0 recs
Clinton's Lead Over Republicans Grows


Enjoyable diary, excellent analysis.

I think that what we are seeing with the Clinton numbers with independents is the consistent message from "country-club Republican" pundits over the last few months that Hillary is not the cartoon character, but a thoughtful, serious politician who is clearly "presidential" and who "wouldn't be so bad". I'm not talking the firebrand pundits, but the David Brooks, the Mort Kondrakes, and so forth.

The dynamic here is not that Hillary will every have moderate Republicans and Reagan Democrats throwing kisses at her, but rather that -- as she did in NY -- she could soften the irrational hatred. She has done this by acting Presidential, laughing off attacks, staying disciplined and on message, and offering a leftish-center agenda with sufficient strength on national security issues to avoid the "Dukakis" trap.

If she can continue to soften up the hatred from the political center, her natural advantage among women offers the potential of a decisive win in 2008.

Here's what Reagan's 1980 campaign manager Ed Rollins wrote recently in Human Events: d=22494

I won't deal with who is going to be the Rep nominee. It is a race that is extremely close and a few capable candidates have real chances of being the nominee. But in view of the history Hillary Clinton is the strongest candidate in years and is not only going to be the democratic nominee; she can be elected President. I am not happy about that, but those are the facts.

And Republicans and conservatives better wake up to those facts. Underestimating her appeal or her campaign team and over focusing on her negatives, is not smart. I repeat she can win and we better start working on ways to beat her. The first Republican President, I worked for instructed me on all that matters in Presidential elections, the Electoral College. That man, Richard Nixon, always kept a yellow pad somewhere in or on his desk with two columns listed on it. In one column were states he thought he could win. The other column listed states he thought he could lose. He looked at it daily and discussed it with whoever was around him. No domestic decision was ever made that he didn't look at those states and figure out which ones might be affected by his presidential actions. He would move them around from time to time but he always made sure at least 270 electoral votes were in his win column.

I am sure Bill Clinton -- the next "Strategist in Chief" -- has a similar system. And it's not the national polls or the Iowa or New Hampshire polls that worry me. It's putting those states on one side or the other of a yellow pad that bothers me. We are now a divided nation ideologically and geographically. Republicans are now a southern party and that is our base. Hillary is not going to erode that base no matter who we nominate. But on the other side, Hillary is not going to lose a state Al Gore carried or John Kerry won.

Gore carried 21 states and Kerry 20 .

That gives her more than 250 electoral votes and within striking distance of the magic 270.We all know that a change of 537 votes in Florida in 2000, and Texans wouldn't be raising money for a George W. Bush Library. Less than 60,000 votes in Ohio kept John Kerry from being Commander in Chief, a frightening thought. What you might not know is that 18,777 vote shift in 3 states Iowa, New Mexico, and Nevada and a electoral college tie would have occurred and the House would have decided the election. Florida, Ohio, Iowa, New Mexico, and Nevada are in play again along with some other states like Virginia, Colorado and many of the swing states of the last 2 elections.

Hillary is not just a contender, I rate her a favorite.

by hwc 2007-09-28 11:52AM | 0 recs
Come election time, these GE polls will change

As a Biden supporter, I like all our candidates pretty much. However, what troubles me about Hillary Clinton if you talk to veteran activists is that she doesn't inspire them to get them to work for her. Here in my little small town in Georgia, there is genuine apprehension about Hillary's candidacy among members of our local democratic committe. Is this going to be a problem heading into Nov? Is the 'base' really that excited about Hillary? To be honest, I'm not so sure.  

by richochet 2007-09-28 11:53AM | 0 recs
Re: Come election time, these GE polls will change


I hate to be the bearer of bad news, but there isn't a Democrat nominee on the face of the earth who could win Georgia's electoral college votes in November 2008. Hell, your state tossed Max Cleland out on his ass because he was a "whacko anti-war hippie who supported Osama bin Laden". Ronald Reagan could run as a Democrat and lose Georgia.

See my excerpt from Ed Rollins above. It's all about the electoral college map. It would be insane to walk away from our best candidate in states that add up to 330 electoral college votes in order to lose Georgia by 10 points instead of 20.

by hwc 2007-09-28 12:10PM | 0 recs
Re: Come election time, these GE polls will change


My comment was a reflection of local grassroots sentiment towards Hillary. How prevalent that sentiment is in other states is the question. I wasn't talking about winning Georgia.      

by richochet 2007-09-28 12:18PM | 0 recs
Re: Come election time, these GE polls will change

What I am trying to point out is that "grassroots" support among white voters in Georgia is largely irrelevant to the 2008 Presidential race. It would be like the Republicans fretting over the lack of grassroots support among Massachusetts Republicans. It doesn't matter how fired up or not Republican grassroots activists in Massachusetts might be about Fred Thompson because he ain't winning Massachusetts.

by hwc 2007-09-28 12:34PM | 0 recs
it's okay :-)

Thing is, you live in a different country than the rest of us.  You may not think so :-) but the electoral map simply is that way.

The Deep South, from Charleston to Midland (well, maybe less so at the ends, more so in the middle), is still trending Republican.  You folks are to appearances now going through what happened here in the Northeast during the Eighties, maybe early Nineties.

I don't see popular "excitement" for Hillary here.  It's at core more the kind of determination you see a lot of women around age 60 get, a sense of one course of action being right and a coldish unimpressedness with the alternatives.

For a lot of people their choices were/are pretty easy this go around, I think.  Process of elimination easily disposes of the Republican field and the lesser Democratic set.   The government has degenerated, the country is in a rut, and Republicans/conservative Democrats are the problem rather than the solution.

Then it's between the three major Democratic candidates, who don't have significant differences in their platforms- there's a lot of agreement about what has to be done.  But they're perceived quite differently in ability to deliver and the general thrust of their style.  Hillary is held to be the practical/pragmatic realist relative to the other two, but no one sincerely doubts that she's a 'hard' semi-activist liberal generally in person (and certainly not classical Left).  This beyond but consistent with her WASPy-Dutch type public persona, which a substantial number of people do find unfamiliar, grating, or difficult.

Obama is the most visionary of the three, but he's evidently not quite battle hardened and, well, his campaign has something of a whiny quality.  Edwards is running on fixed up themes and versions of the Gore 2000 and Kerry 2004 campaigns- which assume a weaker Democratic coalition and a more center-right centered country than what we have now.

by killjoy 2007-09-29 02:22AM | 0 recs
Re: Fox Poll: Clinton's Lead Over Republicans Grow

I guess it's all Hillary all the time now, eh? Long way to go yet, of course now that the 'blogosphere' is joining the corporatist media in the 'Hillary is inevitable' narrative true progressives can start planning to move to Canada or France where they actually have universal health-care.

Have I got that right?

by Pericles 2007-09-28 11:59AM | 0 recs
Re: Fox Poll: Clinton's Lead Over Republicans Grow

I suppose the frontrunner for the Democratic nomination and how current poll snapshots show movement particularly with Independents at this point should not be discussed?

by georgep 2007-09-28 01:21PM | 0 recs
Re: Fox Poll:

It is true that it's Hillary "all the time" now but more than half of it is people attacking and bashing her so it's not exactly a "lovefest" for her around here.

by reasonwarrior 2007-09-29 03:21AM | 0 recs
Watch the GOP

Watch the GOP when it comes to whats best for the party. See how they will more or less smile their way into Hillary leading the party and winning the nomination.

And how they screamed to get rid of Dean. Did all they could. So, Now Dean heads up the party - is it any better?

The GOP here in the south are all ready now to fight hillary in the General.

by Trey Rentz 2007-09-28 12:10PM | 0 recs
Re: Watch the GOP

If the Republican Party is focused on beating Hillary in the South, they are in big, big, big trouble.

That's like saying that the Democrats are gearing up to fight the Republican nominee in Massachusetts.

by hwc 2007-09-28 12:15PM | 0 recs
Re: Watch the GOP

Let them.  The GOP is shrinking, we are growing.  Even with their "best foot" forward, we'll likely win.  That way they can't say "Ah, it was a down year for us.  Democrats did not really win, we were just lethargic.  Conservatism is still very much alive."

by georgep 2007-09-28 01:23PM | 0 recs

"Fox Poll: Clinton's Lead Over Republicans Grows, Obama's Fades"

A couple of things.  

1.  Do you really think people are changing how they are voting?  Or are they just polling different people?

2.  Most people get upset over quoting Fox.  So... Goodluck with that.  

by JeremiahTheMessiah 2007-09-28 12:15PM | 0 recs
The cross-tabs reveal

the differince - If you'd post them as well it would be helpful.  

Hillary has a 10-15 point lead over Obama amognst Dem.  Independents are largely (30 %) undecided...and Obama poll 5-10 points better amongst republicans than Hillary.  Assuming that Dems would support Obama at a great number that the 71% this poll shows he is a better general election candidate than Hillary - If her were in the 80's, like she is, amongst Dems (who are reporting to be undecided now about him) his numbers would be higher than hers - due the math it is rather interesting.

by CardBoard 2007-09-28 01:19PM | 0 recs
Re: The cross-tabs reveal

What makes you think Republicans are going to vote for Barack Obama in the general election? That's just silly.

by hwc 2007-09-28 01:24PM | 0 recs
by BlueDiamond 2007-09-28 01:57PM | 0 recs
Re: The cross-tabs reveal

Fred Kagan campaigning for Barack Obama! Be still my heart!

Kagan was the leading spokesman for the Cheney neocon invasion of Iraq, the author of "the surge", and now the leading voice for war against Iran.

I think you should post a diary over at KOSland than Kagan is an admirer of Obama!

by hwc 2007-09-28 03:11PM | 0 recs
Re: The cross-tabs reveal

Uh, Obama is essentially tied with both Giuliani and McCain.  Who is the better GE candidate again?   Your math is way off.

by georgep 2007-09-28 01:24PM | 0 recs
Re: The cross-tabs reveal

Look at the cross-tabs the reason he is tied is his D numbers are in the 70s

by CardBoard 2007-09-29 04:39AM | 0 recs

I can't wait till IOWA!

All this obsession over polls will crumble.

by BlueDiamond 2007-09-28 01:55PM | 0 recs
Re: Fox Poll: Clinton's Lead Over Republicans Grow

As Obama's continues with his message I have to assume that's what he truly believes. But I don't think that's what most people want. If people don't want partisanship why are the politicians so partisan?

by MNPundit 2007-09-28 02:30PM | 0 recs
Re: Fox Poll: Clinton's Lead Over Republicans Grow

Does Fox give a Margin of Error?

by jlars 2007-09-28 03:36PM | 0 recs
Re: Fox Poll: Clinton's Lead Over Republicans Grow

For the head to head matchups, the margin of error is plus/minus 3%.

For the Democratic horserace, it's 5%. For the Republican horserace, it's 6%.

by hwc 2007-09-28 04:04PM | 0 recs
Re: Fox Poll:

More interestingly her lead grows to 9 when Bloomberg is included.  So why again were people happy when he said he wouldn't run?

by Justify My Vote 2007-09-28 07:47PM | 0 recs
Re: Fox Poll:

The polls show Hillary Clinton winning !!!! Hahahaha !!!

Why are you worried that Obama is going to loose?  Obama himself is never worried!! Same for all Obama's folks!

34,000+ PEOPLE SHOWED UP AT A RALLY IN NEW YORK CITY YESTERDAY! A record for a primary - ever.
Bill Clinton is so worried that he says Obama doesn't have experience. Well, your wife Hil-liar Clinton is winning according to the polls!! Remember?!

BTW, "experienced" Bill Clinton said:"I did not have sexual relationship with that woman...". What a class !!! Hillary believed it!

by win 2007-09-28 09:05PM | 0 recs
Re: Fox Poll:

You know, Bill Clinton's sexual escapades are nothing to be proud about but to trash one of the strongest, most popular Democratic figures on the national stage to promote your candidate is disgusting.   Fortunately, I know enough decent Obama supporters not to mistake you for the general trend.

by InigoMontoya 2007-09-28 10:25PM | 0 recs
Re: Fox Poll: Clinton's Lead Over Republicans Grow

a Fox poll for Clinton after Obama's record breaking rally in New York?

'nuff said.

by misscee 2007-09-29 02:48AM | 0 recs
Re: Fox Poll: Clinton's Lead Over Republicans Grow

Uh, Fox polls are conducted by Opinion Dynamics, a perfectly respectable polling organization, whose results are very much in line with other mainline polling outfits such as Gallup.

One problem with working on campaigns is the tendency to project the bubble one is in on the rest of the country generally.  I learned this the hard way while working for John Anderson.

A "record breaking rally" in NYC really doesn't mean much in and of itself.

by InigoMontoya 2007-09-29 08:26AM | 0 recs
Re: Fox Poll: Clinton's Lead Over Republicans Grow

You are wrong, my friend.

A "record breaking rally" in NYC means a lot. It shows strength, discipline, outreach, organization.....

If it was easy, everybody will do it.

by win 2007-09-29 09:36AM | 0 recs


Advertise Blogads