ABOUT FIRST READ

First Read is an analysis of the day's political news, from the NBC News political unit. First Read is updated throughout the day, so check back often.

Chuck Todd, NBC Political Director

Mark Murray, NBC Deputy Political Director

Domenico Montanaro, NBC Political Researcher



Clinton campaign touts poll standing

Posted: Monday, August 06, 2007 2:36 PM by Mark Murray
Filed Under:

From NBC's Mark Murray
On the eve of tomorrow's Democratic AFL-CIO forum (moderated by MSNBC's Keith Olbermann), the Clinton campaign has released another memo touting her standing in the recent national polls. "The polls went up for Hillary and the open attacks on her have begun," chief strategist Mark Penn writes. "Related? In politics it usually is."

"This ... is the result of the first six months of campaigning and the voters taking a good hard look at all the candidates and concluding that Hillary has what it takes to be President and what it takes to take on the Republicans. They know that Hillary Clinton has the experience and strength to bring about real change. She is the candidate of experience and change, a combination no other candidate can match. As a result we will likely see more attacks from her Democratic opponents, despite their claims to be practicing a new kind of politics or eschewing intra-party attacks."

Below is the entire memo...

To:    Interested Parties
From:  Mark Penn, Chief Strategist
Date:  August 6, 2007
Re:    Strength and Experience

The polls went up for Hillary and the open attacks on her have begun.  Related?  In politics it usually is.

The latest round of national polls last week - from Newsweek and NBC/Wall Street Journal - have shown Hillary making significant gains on two fronts - consolidating her lead among the Democratic primary electorate nationwide and advancing in the general election against likely Republican nominees.

This two-pronged movement is the result of the first six months of campaigning and the voters taking a good hard look at all the candidates and concluding that Hillary has what it takes to be President and what it takes to take on the Republicans.  They know that Hillary Clinton has the experience and strength to bring about real change. 

She is the candidate of experience and change, a combination no other candidate can match.

As a result we will likely see more attacks from her Democratic opponents, despite their claims to be practicing a new kind of politics or eschewing intra-party attacks.

Hillary Clinton's lead in the NBC/Wall Street Journal Poll - which had been as close as 5 points in the national primary vote a few months ago - has opened up to 21 points (July 27-30).  Hillary also leads Rudy Giuliani by 6 points, more than any other Democrat tested.  This is a reversal from March when she trailed Giuliani by 5 points.

And in the latest Newsweek poll (August 1-2), Hillary's lead in the Democratic primary is up from 16 points in June to 23 points now.

In the latest Diageo Hotline poll (July 19-22), Hillary's national favorability went up from 48 percent to 57 percent, and is now higher than any other candidate, Democrat or Republican.

Similar national polls by Pew and Fox substantiated the same trend: an increased lead in the Democratic primary and advancement against the Republicans.

And there are two bits of conventional wisdom that are challenged by these polls.  One is that Hillary can't win.  She said on day one she was in to win and she is already winning in the match-ups against likely Republican candidates.  Voters understand that this is going to be a tough, hard-fought election and they are looking for someone who can really take on the Republicans.  They know she knows how to win and that is reflected in poll after poll that says Hillary is the candidate most likely to win in November. 

We saw that in the recent NH poll (CNN/WMUR July 9-17: 47 percent say HRC has the best chance of beating the GOP candidate in November 2008, 30 points ahead of her next closest competitor), in the Iowa poll (ABC/Washington Post July 26-31: 35 percent say HRC has the best chance of getting elected president in November 2008, 12 points ahead of her next closest competitor) and in national polls (ABC/Washington Post July 18-21: 43 percent say HRC has the best chance of beating the GOP candidate in November 2008, 16 points ahead of her next closest competitor).

Another bit of conventional wisdom is the argument the voters don't want another Clinton. In the latest NBC/Wall Street Journal Poll, 71 percent of voters are either positive or neutral about the fact that Hillary Clinton's husband is Bill Clinton, compared with only 28 percent who are negative.

Voters have simply come to see this race differently as the serious issues of the day have been raised.  When it comes to negotiating with our enemies and knowing how to create new alliances with our friends, Hillary has been steady and sure-footed, building confidence that she can be a great president during complex and troubled times.

And most importantly as people look at her position on the Iraq War, they realize that this election is not about the past, but the future and who can be the president who can end this war responsibly and yet continue to defend America's security.  She is expanding her vote among anti-war voters, women, Democrats, the middle class and voters who believe that she has the strength and experience to make change happen.

MAIN PAGE

Email this EMAIL THIS

Comments

The one candidate that comes to mind is Harry Truman. His re-election victory is considered to be one of the biggest upsets in history. Dewey was heavily favorerd to win in 1948. Can anyone think of any other election in which the voters went against the conventional wisdom in such a fashion?
"end this war responsibly" - I'd like to know the definition of this.  It is irresponsible to continue the war.
I agree Hillary the best candidate, let's have the election now. Now go to hillaryclinton.com
if cnn posts this on their site...it will be an outrage. obama's campaign sent it out probably to all the media outlets and nobody covered it except for msnbc.
How about Edmund Muskie ?
The Washington insiders choic ???

Why does First Read echo Hillary;s campaign stunts ?
More Clinton talking points
The woman is a charlatan just like her husband.
I still think for Democratic voters HRC..represents the Clinton collective...not her as an individual. That is why most do not see it as a liability. Being enthusiastic about Obama has painted my perspective..but she is tough. Any simple criticism of her positions she'll paint as an 'attack'. Maybe it will take an insider .. to beat insiders(Rudy namely).
ah yes the corporate poll machine churning out more meaningless faux data, looks like hillarys getting her moneys worth, I have a question, what is hillarys stance on anything? I suppose if you don't have a stance on any of the issues no one can question that stance, reckon she’s a champion of the average american in desperate need of affordable healthcare, if she is maybe she should let somebody in on it, or could it be she don't give a damn about anybody but hillary? hillary has always been part of the problem with politics in this country, might as well vote for rudy, her and rudy think a lot alike and neither have any need for anyone outside they're little click
Actually, Gore won in 2000, if that's what you mean. I think Hillary will bring lots of change, starting with the drapes in the East Wing. The reason she is up in the polls is because she is Bush Lite. The corporate wealthy are not going to allow anyone in the White House who will attempt to stop lobbying and tear down the pretty little playhouse Bush built for them. Hillary will probably win, because she's the Democrat's establishment candidate. Edwards and Obama would be equivalent to a non-violent revolution, assuming the Repubs didn't start a war over it like the Dems should have done in 2000.
Will Hillary comment on her husband signing of  NAFTA, Its time for this agreement to go. There is virtually nothing made in America anymore, not even a frickin pair of tennis shoes. Edwards made some good points on Nafta today
This is August of 2007!!!! Is it me or is her campaign bragging a little too early???????
I am not sure that "front runners" need to tout polls numbers, except in a push polling situation. Whatever is causing them to become desperation will become generally available soon.
We had the Rove machine; we now have the Clinton machine. Get used to it. People are sucked in by these numbers. And it's great for raising more $$.

Just look @ how they react to Senator Obama. Reminds me of what the Rove machine did to Senator Kerry.
We love Hillary ! hillaryclinton.com
funny how he didn't mention the most recent state polls from NH, Iowa, and South Carolina. All three have Obama up or at least tied with HRC. Lucky for Obama, national polls don't matter right now. Look out establishment; here we come!
lol everyone who knows politics know that polls do not matter.... Almost all the polls were against Kerry and some how he ended up winning the nomination... Everyone that I Know are not voting for Clinton.... A lot of enthusiam is for Barack.... I dont think 500 people that they poll can represent the whole nation... The Media is shaping the polls.... for their own biased agendas.
Never mind the polls that show Obama surging in primary states and in first place or tied for first place in Iowa, New Hampshire, and South Carolina; don't want to mention those...

Of course, it's understandable that a Clinton memo wants to only talk about national polls given what's happening in the states that decide the nomination, but why does the MSM have to be complicit by covering the national polls two or three times as much as the polls that really matter?  Right now, many in the MSM are treating Romney like the  frontrunner because of his leads in Iowa and New Hamphshire, despite him being dead in South Carolina and fourth in national polls; why not apply the same standards to Democratic candidates that are applied to Republicans?  In terms of the primary states, Clinton is not holding a lead in any of them, and if she loses those contests, we all know her national numbers will change.  
Haha! I love this cherry-picked poll data from the Hillary campaign. On Real Clear Politics, Hillary's national lead has dropped a few points (starting today). Also, everyone knows her number's in IOWA, NEW HAMPSHIRE, and SOUTH CAROLINA are going south. I wondering about her fundraising??

With last week being "all about Obama", DailyKos lobbying beat up by Obama and Edwards, and now the hilarious story about Giuliani's daughter supporting Obama. Tomorrow AFL-CIO forum will be interesting indeed!!
They are getting desperate. They have shown their hand waaaaay too early.

The time to attack Obama on inexperience should have come next December. Now they have burnt their card because Obama has turned to the debate to him vs Bush-Lite

They are panicking because they lost the money race.

They are panicking because the campaign has become about Obama, not her. Their sense of entitlement is disgusting, this is not a coronation it is a vote.
I am sure the republicans are donating to Obama just like they did Lieberman.The way Hannity goes after Hillary and the hag Melanie Morgan shows most rational people that they are frightened that she will win.Who can they talk about?Surely not the republicans and Bush----spinning,spinning,spinning.
Funny how Mark Penn left out the recent poll results from Iowa, New Hampshire and South Carolina. Guess it just slipped his mind - he has a lot to do, push-polling Iowans about the cost the Edwards' haircuts and all.
She voted for the war = she voted for the biggest and most foolish foreign policy mistake since Vietnam = she is not worthy of voting for regardless how 'experienced' and 'smart' she says she is.  She lacks judgement.
I wonder if she also sent those poll results to all the lobbyists on K Street??!!!
Who are these people polling?  I guess one can hire any pollster to get the desired outcome.  Its way to early to tout polling data...especially when a majority of political analysts say that polls are unreliable at this point.  I guess HRC's campaign has nothing else to show.
If the Iraq War and our Foreign Policy are the most important issues to Americans today then Sen. Joe Biden clearly MUST be the best choice for president.
One of the reasons Hillary has maintained a consistent lead since announcing last January is her performance in the four televised debates – she won each one, decisively.  She demonstrated that the has the strength and experience to beat the republicans and to lead our country.  Obama and Edwards do not have Hillary’s stature and that is very clear during these debates.  As for Obama on foreign policy – let’s just say he’s out of his league!  He made a major blunder getting into with Hillary and further damaged himself last week with his stammering and ridiculous statements on Pakistan and nuclear weapons.
The Clinton campaign convienently leaves out the information that her biggest supporter owns CNN's polling company.   Opinion Research is part of Info USA, which is Sanjay Gupta's company.   Info USA has even paid Bill millions in consulting fees.

Remember this, If you elect Hillary as President, you will really be electing her husband. He will run it from behind the scene's, because she can't! This is probably why she hasn't had a stance on anything other than her back peddling on the Iraq War issue. It was polled awhile back that the majority of the people that were on her side were uneducated females. They are simply voting that way because she's a woman, not because she know's how to run a country. If you elect her you will have the same politically corrupt, big business ran White House that there has been since Bush took over. She is trying to act tough about the war because that's what she think's the American people want, not because that's who she is. If she get's in there it will be all about her and not about what she should be doing. Just call Bill the Puppet Master because he will be in the back pullin the string's. Having her in the lead just proves that the majority of the American public still haven't got a clue and just want someone to stand up there and tell them what they want to hear.
the national polls don't matter.  It's the primaries, stupid. Just like Bill's it's the economy, stupid.
Clinton voted for the war = gross incompetence or pandering = the worst foreign policy mistake since Vietnam = she is not to be trusted or voted for
Nuanced,

Good question.  if it is responsible to end the war, than good sence would dictate that it is irresponsible to continue it. Or is it? I mean it could be responsible to continue it for certain reasons and irresponsible to end it for those same reasons. Or vica, versa Or who knows maybe it has nothing to do with responsibility. Maybe it has to do with the chaos created by terrorism and the uncertainty that comes with it, or maybe he who forsooth the truth shall never endeavor. I JUST DON'T KNOW ANYMORE, never mind!
I wonder how many points Hillary gained at the KOS love in.  She sure had a few people hissing and booing her.
Hillary Clinton's standing in the polls is the triumph of image and celebrity politics over reason and substance. Apparently, eight years of this from George W. Bush, preceded by another years from Bill Clinton, were not enough for the American people.
While I'm the last person to defend a blank check, Hillary was much more careful and her support more qualified than that of Edwards. Still a mistake.
Actually, among most people, getting booed by the Kos crowd is a plus.  GO HILLARY!
A lot of national media pundits give Hillary a lot a credit because she comes off presidential.  This is also true for a lot of Hillary's supporters. They love her because she comes across as a presidential woman.  


I readily concede that Hillary sounds and looks presidential.  She is well composed, intelligent, and she communicates well.  That doesn't mean that she makes good decisions.  Being well composed, intelligent, and a good communicator is not enough to be president.  A president has to make good decisions and I don't see Hillary making decisions that I want as a president.


I am firm believer that a woman can do just as good of a job as a man, if not better.  On the same token, I believe that a woman can do just as bad of job, if not worst, as a man.  Hillary's decision making on the most important issue in our lifetime was just as bad as Dick Cheney's.
Obama is leading Hillary in Iowa and South Carolina, and he is tied with Hillary in New Hampshire. Somehow thse polls got left out...that's hilarious.

Also, to csh in Chicago, what was "ridiculous" about Obama's statement that he would not use nuclear weapons to strike at Al Qaeda targets within Pakistan and Afghanistan? Are you in support of using nuclear weapons? If you are then you are really warped.
Additionally, Hillary AGREED with Obama's statement that we would act IF we had actionable intelligence on Bin Laden's location and Musharraf refused to act. So what exactly are you even talking about???
Hillary's lead in the national poll is simply based on name recognition. Look at the early primary states Obama leads in South Carolina, Iowa, and New Hampshire.
'Obama is leading Hillary in Iowa and South Carolina, and he is tied with Hillary in New Hampshire. Somehow thse polls got left out...that's hilarious.'

Sorry, Juanito, that's NOT ENOUGH !!
It's time to take off the kid gloves and start attacking Hillary !!

What's not ot understand ?? Start the TV ads in the early primary states.
She voted for the war, attack her for that
She's a darling of the lobbyists, attack that !

She's for NAFTA and WTO, attack that....
Especially at the AFL-CIO
She's partnering with IT outsourcer Tata.
Time to mention that

Come on, OBAMA
No more Mr. Nice Guy !!!
For all Hillary's whining about being attacked, you'd think she wasn't the one who unilaterally started this war of words, what with calling Obama naive and all.

You can't punch people in the gut and then complain that their stomach made your fist hurt.
I need to say something that I am SHOCKED NO ONE HAS SAID YET:
  Hillary and every other senator who voted for the war voted because they were fooled by an executive branch who made up facts that Iraq had WMD's these senators voted to approve the war because they trusted that this President and his intelligence would not be false. They made a resonable judgement call based on what they were told was a serious threat. At that time no one had reason to beleive that they were a pack of scathing liars. I do not feel she or Edwards were wrong in voting for the war, they acted in the interest of protecting the American people. I commend and forgive them for that. Since we have realized this was a mistake they have both done the right thing and advocated against the war. They both have fine judgement. Obama on the other had was not around to vote for the war. He is so inexperienced in the federal level that he was not elected until after the war. And this is someone we want to run our country. Some one who has yet to complete a single term in the senate? Come one Democrats, this is what the Republicans are waiting for us to do. WAKE UP! Obama is not the answer. In 2016, maybe, but he needs to grow up a bit first.
Experience (Biden, Clinton, Edwards), fear and not reading the NIE got us the Iraq war. Vision hope and common sence will get us out. Go Obama
Clinton says that WSJ is more right wing biased than Fox news.  Could this be because his wife is getting politicl donations from Murdoch?  Can you really trust Bill Clinton anymore when he says stuff like this.  Bill and Hillary are suckups to big business and don't you forget it.  
Bill is the man.
Juanito - I doubt "csh" will answer your question. Clinton supporters don't like to get into specifics.

If they did, they'd be forced into admitting Clinton is ignorant of U.S. nuclear policy. Well, I suppose they could always counter by telling us the website address again.
NBC keeps saying that "Hillary is steady and surefooted" while Barck's image is "muddled".  Who's kidding who here.  How many times has Hillary changed the color of her stripes over the Iraq war while Obama from 2002 has stated clearly that he is in favor of the Afghan war, but not a stupid war like Iraq.  

I guess the establishment represented by GE, the owner of NBC is trying to confuse the voters.  IT WON'T WORK!
"This is August of 2007!!!! Is it me or is her campaign bragging a little too early???????"

This is their campaign strategy.  Perception of inevitability.

Obama's strategy: outperform Hillary in early state primaries to go into Feb 5 with her expectations of inevitability broken.
Matt Jones - you need to keep up with the Clinton website. The "I was fooled by Bush's claims of WMD" isn't the latest line she is taking.

And besides, she still hasn't said whether the invasion of Iraq was a good or bad idea. Every other candidate has; just not her.
When will you idiots get it right?  HRC did not vote for the war, she voted to give Bush leverage so the United Nations could put pressure on Saddam to turn over or dispose of his cache of WMD.  It was Bush who deceived the world and used the votes of Congress to start the war when he and his cronies used every tactic available to convince us that we were in imminent danger from those weapons.  And, while I like Obama, he is simply not ready!  This election is too important to have a President who has to feel his way.  We need a President that will hit the ground running and the only candidate who fills that bill, democrat or republican is HRC.  I look at it like this:  HRC as the President and Obama as her running mate.  Then in 8 years Obama walks right in to the Oval office, because he would definitely have the experience then.  As democrates we need to send our strongest repersentative to defeat the republicans and what would be stronger that a HRC - Obama ticket?

Hillary Clinton 2008 - Give 'em Hill!!!!!!!!!
Of course these polls were taken before Hillary Clinton's bizarre defense of lobbyists (and her habit of taking money from them). More on this at: http://unitedagainsthillary.wordpress.com


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):

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=305724

First Read e-mail alerts


Sign up for First Read alerts
The first place for key political news and analysis

Syndicate This Site

Add First Read to your news reader:
live.com xml
myyahoo msn
bloglines newsgator
google