Edwards Drops To Single Digits In Second National Poll

A second national poll this week shows former Sen. John Edwards in single digits. A LA Times/Bloomberg poll which came out yesterday showed Edwards in 4th place with 8% and a new Quinnipiac poll released today shows Edwards in 4th place. Edwards had also polled in 4th place in an earlier ABC News/Wash Post poll.

Sen. Hillary Clinton continues with a solid 1st place in the  Quinnipiac poll followed by Sen. Barack Obama and former Vice Presidential Al Gore who is not a candidate.

http://bluesunbelt.com/showDiary.do?diar yId=695

Tot  Men  Wom

Biden  1%      3%      -
Clinton  35      25      41
Dodd  -       -       -
Edwards  9      10       9
Gore  18      24      13
Gravel  -       1       -
Kucinich  1       1       1
Obama  21      23      19
Richardson  2       3       1
SMONE ELSE(VOL)  1       2   1
WLDN'T VOTE(VOL)  1       1  -
DK/NA  11       9      13

Edwards had hoped that his recent debate performance would boost his chances against Clinton and Obama. Poll trend lines of recent polls show Clinton still has a strong lead followed by Sen. Obama with Clinton having an average lead of 10.4%.

Quinnipiac    06/05 - 06/11    35%    21%    9%    18%    Clinton +14%
LA Times/Bloomberg    06/07 - 06/10    33%    22%    8%    15%    Clinton +11%
Rasmussen    06/04 - 06/07    37%    25%    11%    --    Clinton +12%
FOX News    06/05 - 06/06    36%    23%    12%    14%    Clinton +13%
AP-Ipsos    06/04 - 06/06    33%    21%    12%    20%    Clinton +12%
USA Today/Gallup    06/01 - 06/03    29%    30%    11%    17%    Obama +1%
ABC News/Wash Post    05/29 - 06/01    35%    23%    8%    17%    Clinton +12%

Tags: 2008 elections, Barack Obama, Bill Richardson, bluesunbelt.com, Chris Dodd, Dennis Kucinich, Hillary Clinton, joe biden, John Edwards, Mike Gravel (all tags)



gore won't run

and there's no national primary

by TarHeel 2007-06-13 07:14AM | 0 recs
Re: gore won't run

Gore was always included in the monthly Quinnipiac surveys.   This time around Edwards dropped 5% to get into single-digits.   He now is polling at 10.1% in the aggregate, is about to fall under 10%, a bad development for Edwards.  

by georgep 2007-06-13 07:29AM | 0 recs
Re: gore won't run

And, funny that you would cite findings you gather from national polls to make your hit-diaries.  Which is it?  Do we have a national primary or not?  

by georgep 2007-06-13 07:30AM | 0 recs

national unfavorables and Head to head matchups probably are more important than national numbers.  

In states where candidates visit the most presumably the voters know more about what the candidates actually stand for and those numbers reflect a semi-informed electorate.  States where the candidates have never campaigned the voters are more likely going on name ID.

So the more a candidate visits a state the more the numbers can move and become significant

by TarHeel 2007-06-13 07:51AM | 0 recs
Re: asdf

New Hampshire is probably the most-visited state of all of them.   In New Hampshire Clinton holds her largest lead of the five early states (not counting Nevada, which we have not seen polled for a while.)   If you are right that lots of exposure shows a better picture, then what we have seen develop in New Hampshire bodes very well for Clinton, not so well for Edwards.  

by georgep 2007-06-13 08:40AM | 0 recs
Re: Edwards

The LATimes stated that their poll was unwelcomed news for Edwards and openly questioned whether Edwards should still be included in the top-tier as we move forward.  

No national poll bothers to include Edwards in any head-to-head matchups anymore, because his poll numbers have fallen so dramatically.

by georgep 2007-06-13 07:27AM | 0 recs
Re: Edwards

It appears the debate move of attacking Clinton and Obama was a mistake.

by robliberal 2007-06-13 07:34AM | 0 recs
Re: Edwards

Can either of you two write the latest American Research Poll?

by carolinezhang 2007-06-13 07:35AM | 0 recs
Re: Edwards

I think it is more a reflection of him not connecting with voters in general, rather than any debate stuff.  

by georgep 2007-06-13 07:40AM | 0 recs
Re: Edwards

I think Edwards' WoT-is-a-bumper-sticker position hurt him tremedously. He got rave review from liberal bloggers, but just shows how disconnected some bloggers are from average voters.

I fully expect the upcoming IA polls will reflect Edwards' poor showing in national polls.

by carolinezhang 2007-06-13 07:49AM | 0 recs
Re: Edwards

We are seeing the national effect from the Edwards debate performance. It may have an effect in Iowa as well.

by robliberal 2007-06-13 08:05AM | 0 recs
Re: Edwards

It definitely will. If my recollection of 2004 election is correct, the state polls are always lagging national polls.

by carolinezhang 2007-06-13 08:09AM | 0 recs
Re: Edwards

>>>It appears the debate move of attacking Clinton and Obama was a mistake.

Yes - we wouldn't want Hillary's and Obama's silence about their war vote to be revealed.

by annefrank 2007-06-13 11:26AM | 0 recs
Re: Edwards
Actually some concluded Obama's attack on Edwards AFTER he pointed out Obama's deception on the last war vote - made Obama look like a bully and a punk.
But of course Jerry Springer type Obama supporters made sure the smackdown video was circulated - in their determination to extinquish the only electable Progressive. Hillary and Corporate America send their thanks.
by annefrank 2007-06-13 11:34AM | 0 recs
Re: Edwards

Jerry Springer Type Supporters?

Obama supporters are the highest educated and are following the election the closest so, if you are going to attack Obama supporters, at the very least, be accurate. As far as your "some say" argument, this is the first time I ever heard that. Instead of "some say" try, "I think" because that statement more your likely own opinion than anything else.

by ObamaEdwards2008 2007-06-13 12:10PM | 0 recs
Re: Edwards

Relax.  If Edwards is supremely "electable," voters across the land will find that to be the case.  Why all the pessimism?

by georgep 2007-06-13 12:29PM | 0 recs
Re: Edwards

LA times has used him in their head to heads and rasmussen did today showing him leading Guliani BY 47-43.

by BDM 2007-06-13 07:36AM | 0 recs
by annefrank 2007-06-13 11:36AM | 0 recs
Re: Edwards
Yippee!!  the only electable Progressive candidate is going down! WooHoo!
Party time at Fox News and the RNC!
by annefrank 2007-06-13 11:28AM | 0 recs
His debate performance was not good

I never understood some of the pundits saying he had a good performance in the debate- I thought he was terrible and these numbers are bearing that out.  Attacking Obama and Hillary was a big mistake, especially since Obama's comeback on him was the biggest soundbite out of the entire debate.  It made him look foolish- and I still think that although Americans might admire someone to admtting they were wrong- they don't want to vote on them for President.

by reasonwarrior 2007-06-13 08:11PM | 0 recs


Advertise Blogads