A stunning South Carolina poll

Posted: Friday, July 20, 2007 12:57 PM by Mark Murray
Filed Under: Democrats

From NBC's Chuck Todd and Mark Murray

If its numbers are true, a new CNN/Opinion Research poll of South Carolina voters is a boon to Clinton and a potentially devastating blow to Obama. In it, Clinton leads Obama, 43%-27%, with Edwards at 17%. Yet among African Americans, Clinton's lead over Obama jumps to 52%-33%. Can that be right?

What's more, 15% of black Democratic primary voters say they WOULD NOT vote for Obama under any circumstance, while just 4% of them say the same thing about Clinton. And on key qualities, Clinton wins by a wide margin. By a 72%-19% clip, black Democratic primary voters say she has the right experience over Obama to be president; by 63%-29%, they think she has the better chance of beating the GOP nominee in '08; and by 48%-40%, they think she is most likely to bring change to the country.

What's startling, in fact, is that Obama gets higher marks among white South Carolina Democrats on some of these particular questions than he does with black Democrats.

However, we've already had a few folks chime in to remind us that the owner of Opinion Research is none other than InfoUSA, which is owned by Clinton supporter Vinod Gupta. And the Obama campaign says they're laughing at these results. "Our grassroots effort in South Carolina is moving at a historic pace. We couldn’t feel better about the energy and enthusiasm for Obama in the Palmetto State," a spokesman tells First Read.

EMAIL THIS

Comments

What in the world??? Will the Clinton campaing stop at nothing to win??? Why do ALL other polls show Obama and Clinton neck and neck in South Carolina, with some polls showing Obama with a comfortable lead??? Someone please tell me that this post was completed made up?? This is laughable!!! I guess the saying is true all is fair in love and war. Also, wouldn't the Obama's internal polling show this as well???? I'm growing quite tired of Hillary Clinton by the minute. She's coming dangerously close to losing my vote is she happens to win the nomination!!!

Lewis, Cincinnati, Ohio (Sent Friday, July 20, 2007 1:17 PM)

I think Obama is bright, articualte and has the capacity to become a president like JFK...but not just now. with the state of the world as it is, we need someone with a huge amount of experience who can hit the ground running. I think either Hillary Clinton or Joe Biden has what it takes.

Jeanne, Delaware (Sent Friday, July 20, 2007 1:21 PM)

D-Punjab strikes back

Yiannis, Baltimore, MD (Sent Friday, July 20, 2007 1:26 PM)

NO sweat Lewis.

H P Boston (Sent Friday, July 20, 2007 1:27 PM)

Lewis, please. I don't think Hillary would risk putting out a poll that is not true. She is probably the most scrutinized person in America at the momment. Polls are takin in different areas of different states and will reflect that certain area of the state. The best thing to do is take an average of the polls to see what's truly happening. You automatically assume Clinton is lying and Obama's campaign is telling the the truth. I am an African-American and this poll shows me exactlty what most of the African Americans think of Obama and Hillary. White America seems to think that African-Americans can't form an informed opinion and will blindly vote for Obama. This is simply not true. I tried to explain this last week when I watched Obama get the most cheers when he was introduced at the NAACP forum, but by the end of the forum Hillary was clearly getting the most cheers. I would just say this, if that poll was not true, Obama's camp would be on every news outlet saying that this poll was false. At least that's what I would have done. She clearly won the debate in SC so it's no surprise to me that she has had her poll numbers go up in SC.

Timothy(Rochester, NY) (Sent Friday, July 20, 2007 1:31 PM)

amen, lewis. I've decided that if Obama or Richardson do NOT get the nod, I won't vote. People can gripe to me about getting rid of Republican power and not participating, blah blha blah. however, i've been very active in this primary campaign. I've given money, i've been to meetings. I've fulfilled my civic duty and feel knowledgable enough to know I don't want Hillary to win. If she wins the left will be just like the right has been for the past 8 years. No cooperation. a go at it alone mentality. As much as I know a Clinto presidency would align with my political views, I wouldn't vote for her. Ever. Also, I think this poll is crap. In other SC polls, it shows them close and some Obama is winning. I don't it much credit.

scott (Sent Friday, July 20, 2007 1:31 PM)

Call me naive, but I really don't get how polls are skewed depending on who is giving them (Republican, Democrat, Clinton supporter, campaign pollster, etc.). Voters are voters - they are the same no matter who talks to them. I understand that the way you ask the questions skews things, but isn't the point to actually get the real insights? Shouldn't all the pollsters be asking their questions in ways to eliminate bias, not encourage it?

cms (Sent Friday, July 20, 2007 1:36 PM)

I will vote for any democrat that wins the nomination----I could not stomach one of these lying cowardly republicans that do not give a flying fig about our troops.They would just use them as backdrops same as the evil Bush.

HMT (Sent Friday, July 20, 2007 1:38 PM)

Timothy - Clinton did not win the SC debate, she only won in the eyes of the pundits. After the debate, both a SurveyUSA poll of SC voters and an MSNBC online poll of all voters showed Obama beating Clinton decisively.

Shadow, Hamden, CT (Sent Friday, July 20, 2007 1:42 PM)

CMS,

Read this book: How to Lie with Statistics by Darrell Huff. You may not be so naive after that.

scott (Sent Friday, July 20, 2007 1:44 PM)

I've seen the same poll referenced as a 39-25 Clinton advantage over Obama. Is the reporting on this poll as suspect as the results seem to be?

I also saw the margin of error here is pretty big - 8 percent. I've never seen a margin of error on any published poll so big. So, yeah, I can see where Gupta tweaked things a little.

But even if he hadn't, I'd also add that Obama being 16 points back isn't so bad, given that its June and his opponent has nearly 100 percent name awareness. Of course, with that margin of error it could be as 24 points back, but then again as close as 8 points.

Anyway, the quick reaction by the Obama campaign suggests they are looking at some pretty different internal numbers.

Timothy, I don't share your confidence when you say Clinton wouldn't dare put out fake results when she's under so much scrutiny. Look at this thing with the DoD letter. In a way, Clinton's campaign might be intentionally flooding the news with sorta questionable actions, hoping that its supporters simply get tired of hearing about them and start tuning those kind of stories out all together. Sometimes I think that's what is behind a lot of the irritating things the Bush administration does. Then when people react, the Bush supporters can counter with "y'all just hate Bush, dontcha?"

Paul Miller, Woodbridge, VA (Sent Friday, July 20, 2007 1:44 PM)

Shadow, I should have clarified, that was my opinion and the people I watched it with, of the debate. I haven't seen any polls in SC.

Timothy(Rochester, NY) (Sent Friday, July 20, 2007 1:53 PM)

Paul, the 39-25% score included Gore in the mix; 43-27% out. Until Gore gets in, I prefer using the scores without him in the race.

Mark Murray (Sent Friday, July 20, 2007 1:55 PM)

If the democratic nominee for president were Beetlejuice they would still win. The only republican nominee that has any momentum is Ron Paul but the establishment is trying to bury him.
I almost want Hillary Clinton to win the nomination because it makes republicans crazy.

Mark D Washington DC (Sent Friday, July 20, 2007 1:56 PM)

The lead, 'A Stunning...Poll' and the close, '...poll owned by Clinton supporter...'. What if the close was at the top and the lead at the bottom? Well, Jeanne, Timothy? And what about you First Read?

pservelle (Sent Friday, July 20, 2007 1:56 PM)

Why is it assumed that black voters will automatically vote for the black candidate? Are the black Democrats of South Carolina not allowed to think for themselves and decide they prefer Clinton to Obama? It that really so unthinkable?

Dale, Denver (Sent Friday, July 20, 2007 2:00 PM)

Paul,
I will just say this about the DOD letter. The letter isn't as scathing as the media partrayed it.(Maybe the media should do their homework before reporting it) But the letter does tell Clinton that anyone who talks about withdraw is hurting the troops and the Iraqis. They are telling the American people not to exercise their right to speak out in a democracy. You know, the same thing our troops are fighting for.

By the way, that margin of error in that poll is pretty high. I didn't notice that.

Timothy(Rochester, NY) (Sent Friday, July 20, 2007 2:01 PM)

Once again HRC will stop at nothing to deceive the public? Someone please explain to me what type of "experience" does HRC have to qualify as president? 8 years as First Lady doesn't count, either. I agree with Lewis in that I'm growing sick of Hillary by the second...and I'm getting sick of how the media refuses to ask her the tough questions about her so-called experience.

Ashe, SF, CA (Sent Friday, July 20, 2007 2:05 PM)

This poll is a joke. The sampling error is +/- 8 percent!!! A coin-flip would be a better predictor....

J Varkey, Durham, NC (Sent Friday, July 20, 2007 2:06 PM)

It might also be interesting to note Bill Clinton has been paid $200,000 for a speech at Info USA on 7/27/2001. He is also a paid consultant for that company.

George, Seattle (Sent Friday, July 20, 2007 2:06 PM)

Well Timothy I am also african american and I didn't realize that "white" america and "black" america were exclusively independent of one another??? WTF??? I'm not sure where to even begin because I find your post a little contradictory. You state on one hand that "white" america, whatever that is, thinks that all of "black" america supports Obama because they cannot make informed opinions. What gives you the right to say that "white" america thinks that way??? How in the world do you begin to even know how a group of people even think?? I find that type of thinking old fashioned and just plain wrong!!!

I'm 35 so I remember the 90s quite well. I don't think I'm alone when I say I'm not sure I want the circus known as the Clinton administration back in Washington.

Lastly, I don't put any dirty trick pass any campaign (including Obama's),but especially Hillary Clinton's. What's her famous line..when someone attacks you must deck them out.... ?? I think that speaks volumes of the type of campaign she's running and how she will lead this country. It's very close to our current president's and look where that has gotten us??? You're from New York---I would think that you wouldn't be that naive.

Lewis, Cincinnati, (Sent Friday, July 20, 2007 2:08 PM)

Oh, thanks Mark. Makes sense. Also I glanced at what I wrote... I do realize its July, lol.

Paul Miller, Woodbridge, VA (Sent Friday, July 20, 2007 2:11 PM)

NO sweat Scott.

H P Boston (Sent Friday, July 20, 2007 2:11 PM)

I have a hard time trusting Hillary when her husband rakes in $41 million giving speeches in front of interest groups. He made $300,000 from the "Austrailian Council for the Promotion of the Peaceful Reunification of China" which is of course a front for the Chinese government. He made $1.25 million from real estate lobby groups while Hillary was introducing real-estate related bills. He spoke in front of Chinese export companies while Hillary was introducing bills to reduce tariffs.

This is all in Hillary's Senate disclosure forms, which I presume are more-or-less accurate now. Her first campaign director was indicted for lying about the campaign disclosures, and her campaign had to pay a fine to the Federal Elections commission.

George, Seattle (Sent Friday, July 20, 2007 2:28 PM)

ARG has very very similar numbers (with a larger sample to boot) in their poll, which was the last one taken before the CNN poll.

http://americanresearchgroup.com/pres08/scdem8-705.shtml

Obama camp better stop laughing and giggling like school girls and start playing for real. They are down. They are not leading in a single early state. I am not sure that Obama realizes that he can't win the nomination on a nice suit and a good speech alone. He has to win more votes than the other candidates.

Lastly, anyone who suggests that a major league polling operator working for CNN would cook the books is simply waaay off base.

Dickie Flatts, Charlotte, NC (Sent Friday, July 20, 2007 2:31 PM)

...and the Mrs. Edwards husband is in third, in his home region. This is the guy who is "more electable"!

The Dems are going to so crash and burn next year---the aftermath of their surrender will drag them down. As would the fact that, no matter what they tell pollsters, there are LOTS of americans (a majority?)who wouldn't vote for a woman or a black for president.

Wm. Jeff. Clntn (Sent Friday, July 20, 2007 2:38 PM)

I still think it's too early for polls to be meaningful. As far as not understanding how they can be skewed, it's really simple - the language of the question. You can ask the same thing many different ways, and each way is designed to evoke a specific response. For example, with the Iraq issue, one poll may ask "should the U.S. make plans for withdrawing the troops from Iraq" while another poll may ask "should the U.S. abandon Iraq?" and the results to both may be phrased in terms of the percentage of people who support the war. Pollsters are sophisticated linguists, who know exactly how to word a question to get the answer they want. I'm not saying all polling services do this, but it is something to be aware of when examining results.

Carrie, Eastern Iowa (Sent Friday, July 20, 2007 2:39 PM)

Dick(ie),
Unfortunately, ARG is worse than the aforementioned poll. If you look at all of ARG's polls in all the states, they have Obama way behind, more so than other polls. I'm not exactly how they are polling, but obviously, ARG is not a reliable sourse as compared to others.

I don't mean to discredit any poll that doesn't look good for Obama. I know truth when I see it, but in reality, polls really aren't important for many reasons. first, it's entirely too early to worry about them and second I don't trust their methods. For instance, they can only poll people who have land lines. As speaking as a young professional, I can tell you many young people don't have land lines--only cell phones, therefore, we would never be polled. I think that's the very audience Obama is energizes, but it won't be reflected in the polls. Just some food for thought.

scott (Sent Friday, July 20, 2007 2:42 PM)

That only leaves the question which old Clintonista owns or runs ARG?

Dave, Tn (Sent Friday, July 20, 2007 2:43 PM)

Mark D - As a registered Republican who is actually quite upset and disappointed with his party, I would like nothing more then to have Hillary be the Democratic nominee. Nothing brings the right-wing nutjobs out of the woodwork more then a Clinton and since Bill's unable to run and Chelsea's (sp?) not old enough Hillary is the only option. If Hillary ran, the reaction from the right-wing nutjobs would be similar to the reaction from the moonbats on the left if Cheney was the Republican nominee.

Ryan, Michigan (Sent Friday, July 20, 2007 2:46 PM)

Anyone remember how Kerry was faring in these polls this early? No one would have guessed that he would become the nominee. Eventually though, he consolidated all of the "Anyone-but-Dean" votes and came out on top.

Right now the polls show that there are certainly more people picking "someone other than Clinton" than people picking Clinton. So Dicky Flatts, I think Obama is justified in laughing at the moment.

Asad (Sent Friday, July 20, 2007 2:56 PM)

GOOO HILARRY!!

Aidyn, NY, NY (Sent Friday, July 20, 2007 2:59 PM)

Although I don't like either candidate, I can say (from living in SC) that Obama is THE TALK of the democratic candidates.

Hillary has some appeal, but the most I've heard about her is that she is "electable," but when you bring up Obama you can see the people's eyes light up.

I'd have a hard time believing this report, but then again, the only polls that matter are on election day, and the political primaries.

Darnell Clayton, SC (Sent Friday, July 20, 2007 3:02 PM)

Don't like Opinion Dymanics. Don't like ARG.

Well if you average all the polls guess what? The result is the same. Any way you look at it (unless you cherry one poll out of 10) Obama is down big in SC.

http://www.pollster.com/08-SC-Dem-Pres-Primary.php

Dickie Flatts (Sent Friday, July 20, 2007 3:04 PM)

Here is Mason Dixon from June: Obama %34, Clinton %25. http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/n/a/2007/06/18/politics/p093040D46.DTL&type=politics

This is all rather silly at this point. Forget the percentages and look at the actual numbers. The ARG poll shows that Clinton leads by 96 people. This is in a state with a population of four million! THen they have the gall to try to do crosstabs -- which have an even higher margin of error.

george, seattle (Sent Friday, July 20, 2007 3:04 PM)

RYAN the war can and has changed that as many of the boys killed over there are sons and grandsons of the rural right. They really want the war to end don't ya think?

H P Boston (Sent Friday, July 20, 2007 3:07 PM)

Funny trivia: Bill Clinton made $100,000 from Financial Innovations, inc -- owner of campaignstore.com which supply buttons and bumper stickers to both Edward's (and Hillary's) campaigns!

George,seattle (Sent Friday, July 20, 2007 3:10 PM)

Are people starting to catch on about what all these poll numbers mean now? Hint: Not Much!

Poll Numbers (Sent Friday, July 20, 2007 3:12 PM)

" I don't think Hillary would risk putting out a poll that is not true."

Who would hold her accountable if she did?

The Judge (Sent Friday, July 20, 2007 3:13 PM)

The thing with ARG is that it almost almost contradicts every other primary poll, and gives Hillary Clinton at least a five or ten point bump relative to what every other poll at the time is saying. Whatever the reason for that "Hillary bump", even if it's completely innocent, the ARG primary poll has established itself as a consistent outlier which shouldn't be included in polling averages because it skews the those averages in an unbalanced fashion. Pundits then report stories and establish narratives based on those averages, and it becomes a perpetually self-reinforcing cycle; this was already bothersome enough a trend with the ARG numbers skewing the averages, let alone new numbers by a polling firm owned by someone who has a vested financial inteerst in the winner of the poll.

Shadow, Hamden, CT (Sent Friday, July 20, 2007 3:15 PM)

Timothy,

I highly doubt that you are being forthright. I am not out right calling you a bold faced liar, but , as an African American who is very active in the blogosphere, I have come across and exposed several poster claiming to be African American and speaking on behalf of all African Americans. I have ran their IP Addresses and found their e-mails. Then after running their names and doing some research, I find out that they are the exact opposite of what they were portraying on the Internet. Let me make this clear. I don't suspect you because of your name because I have a very "Anglo/English" name myself, but what I do suspect is your claim that the poll reflects the attitude of African Americans you know. In New York. In New York. In New York. This is not the first time , Clinton supporters have posted comments bashing Barack Obama as an African American and them claiming that this is the common attitude of Blacks. It doesn't work. So, if you are faking it, I will just say this: It's not going to work. If you are not faking it, I would just say that you are one delusional brutha if you think, for a second , that Hillary won that SC debate and you are stuck on the Plantation of you think for a second that 24 percent of African Americans will not vote for Barack Obama under ANY circumstances.

DR (Sent Friday, July 20, 2007 3:21 PM)

ARG is a biassed poll FOR Hilary. Now InfoUSA. Every poll has Edwards leading in Ohio by anywhere from 1-7 pts, yet they have her ahead in Iowa by 5. Please. Now we have the same version of polling in SC where all I've heard is how much they love Obama there. What a joke. It'll all play itself out in another 5-7 months anyhow when the real focus kicks in. All this window dressing is about raising money.

Kristian O (Sent Friday, July 20, 2007 3:27 PM)

What I don't understand is why someone doesn't call CNN to task on this relationship. Where are the Bloggers who have been known to call attention to these things and make an impact on public discourse. As long as they can get away with it they will. It is geared towards people who don't pay close attention and just listen to TV soundbites

Lyn, Silver Spring, MD (Sent Friday, July 20, 2007 3:32 PM)

Jeanne, Delaware: With all their 'experience', Hillary, Biden and Dodd ALL VOTED TO ATTACK AND OCCUPY IRAQ ! Hillary voted AGAINST Sen. Levin's amendment to ask the President to exhaust diplomatic means before invading Iraq.

How did Hillary's, Biden's or Dodd's 'experience' help them make a wise decision ? What makes you think they'll make wise decisions in the future ?

You might want to consider integrity and wisdom, as well as experience, because Hillary and Biden have neither. They both (irresponsibily) voted to send troops to die in order to look 'strong' and 'presidential'.

A majority of Senate Democrats voted AGAINST the Iraq war. It's only the most irresponsible and opportunistic of the Senate Democrats who voted for an unprovoked attack on Iraq.

Hillary can't win the Presidency !! Why hand the 08 election over to the Republicans for a self-serving opportunist ?

Sierra. San Francisco (Sent Friday, July 20, 2007 3:43 PM)

Let's play a math 'what if' game for a few seconds. If you give Senator Obama the eight point spread in this poll, that cuts Senator Clinton's lead to 5%. If Senator Obama closes within this 5% margin, or actually wins the SC primary, then his camp rightfully can claim victory. These number reports are interesting at first, but ultimately must be judges after the primary. We have a long, long way to go before next February and March. Better polls, indeed more accurate polls will be forthcoming. This holds true for the GOP race.

Steve, San Diego (Sent Friday, July 20, 2007 3:47 PM)

I meant Iowa for Edwards, not Ohio. Pardon Me.

Kristian O (Sent Friday, July 20, 2007 3:52 PM)

Not sure what pundit I heard this from (may have been on MSNBC) but they posed the question if Hillary Clinton were not in this race would you wish that she were??? I don't get the impression the answer would be yes for many americans--regardless of their political opinion.

Lewis Cincinnati, Ohio (Sent Friday, July 20, 2007 4:08 PM)

Hillary can't win the Presidency !!

Finally, a voice of reason.

Lenny Squire (Sent Friday, July 20, 2007 4:08 PM)

All this tempest in a teapot: waste of time.

No matter WHO wins the Democrat nomination, you are ALL still going to vote for him/her, no matter WHAT you think of them as politicians. You cannot do otherwise. You are all robots when it comes to the Democrat party. That's how you almost always win Presidential elections, except when your free-thinking wing finds someone like Ralph to vote for, or the Republicans get out of their stupor, and run someone who isn't a blue-nosed country club Republican, and energize the conservative vote.

jtb (Sent Friday, July 20, 2007 4:23 PM)

Next >>

SEND A COMMENT

PLEASE READ: All comments must be approved before appearing in the thread; time and space constraints prevent all comments from appearing. We will only approve comments that are directly related to the blog, use appropriate language and are not attacking the comments of others.

Message (please, no HTML tags. Web addresses will be hyperlinked):

Your name, city and state (John Doe, Seattle, Wash.):

Your e-mail address (jdoe@msnbc.com):

Your website (it's okay if you don't have one):

Remember me? (We'll keep it private) Remember me?

TRACKBACKS

Trackbacks are links to weblogs that reference this post. Like comments, trackbacks do not appear until approved by us. The trackback URL for this post is: http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/trackback.aspx?PostID=280196