First Obama Statistically Significant Lead in Gallup

Barack Obama has taken a statistically significant lead in the Gallup poll for the first time.  

Obama now leads by seven points.  

PRINCETON, NJ -- For several days, nationwide Democratic voters' preferences have been shifting toward Barack Obama in Gallup Poll Daily election tracking. Now, the Illinois senator enjoys his first statistically significant lead, 49% to 42%, over Hillary Clinton, according to the Feb. 13-15 results. Additionally, the 49% support for Obama represents the high point for him in the daily tracking program.

Is Obama starting to break away in this race?  

•  tips/propinas

  by gobacktotexas on Sat Feb 16, 2008 at 05:14:36 PM PDT

  •  this also means...

    it's time to lay off the vitriol on Clinton.

    It might have been understandable when we were behind in the polls, but when we're ahead we have to demonstrate our values in action by moving to a more moderate emotional tone about the primary contest.  Neither a sore loser nor a sore winner be.  And set the example, don't get made an example of.  

    Time to start focusing the fight on McCain.  And there's no better way to do that than by pointing out the ways in which he's supported or acceded to the Bush agenda.  

    by G2geek on Sat Feb 16, 2008 at 07:03:57 PM PDT

  •  About that sig...

    "Fired up, ready to go" is a pretty great slogan in English.  That literal translation into Spanish you got there doesn't work too well, though.

    Something like "Entusiasmado, ¡adelante!" or "Con las pilas puestas, ¡vamos!" gets a bit closer.  Then again, I've never been much of a slogan writer, even in English, so don't quote me on either one of those. :)

    by litho on Sat Feb 16, 2008 at 07:19:12 PM PDT

  •  great news

    now let's work like he's 20 points behind...

    by justforkix on Sun Feb 17, 2008 at 01:12:41 AM PDT

•  I saw this earlier. Great news! n/t

  by First Amendment on Sat Feb 16, 2008 at 05:15:27 PM PDT

•  I know national results mean nothing right now

  since we are still at the state-by-state stage, but this may convince some undecideds who like them both but want to vote for a winner...

  by terra on Sat Feb 16, 2008 at 05:17:32 PM PDT

  •  But Ohio and Texas are part of the nation

    If the mood of the nation as a whole is breaking towards Obama, that trend should hold for OH and TX as well.  The trend won't be equally strong in all states, but it should be present.

    So I would say that TX and OH should be at least moving in Obama's direction.

    by Norm in Chicago on Sat Feb 16, 2008 at 05:23:54 PM PDT

    •  and they are states that matter...

      ...after all.  ;-)

      by johnviking on Sat Feb 16, 2008 at 05:41:12 PM PDT

      •  Until they don't

        by journeyman on Sat Feb 16, 2008 at 06:20:34 PM PDT

  •  Super Delegates look at polls too

    by Lefty Coaster on Sat Feb 16, 2008 at 05:30:07 PM PDT

•  nice to see but not meaningfull

  most of the country has already voted.

  by nevadadem on Sat Feb 16, 2008 at 05:18:36 PM PDT

  •  but Wisconsin and Ohio

    do not exist indepently of national trends. I think that if people start to perceive Obama as winning this thing, the polls in those states will likely follow.  Maybe this has something to do with Hillary leaving WI early?

    by gobacktotexas on Sat Feb 16, 2008 at 05:20:23 PM PDT

    •  I meant to say Texas and Ohio

      by gobacktotexas on Sat Feb 16, 2008 at 05:20:57 PM PDT

      •  Take a look at the trend in Texas

        http://www.pollster.com/...

        Barack might be on a trajectory to intercept.  If he does, as James Carville says, "This thing is done."

        by deben on Sat Feb 16, 2008 at 05:45:21 PM PDT

        •  "Trajectory to intercept"--I like that...

          "I've got tone"

          "I've got lock"

          by Azdak on Sat Feb 16, 2008 at 06:06:30 PM PDT

      •  That's OK

        Wisconsin isn't a significant state.

        by ruleoflaw on Sat Feb 16, 2008 at 06:56:37 PM PDT

        •  Don't jump the gun

          Obama hasn't won Wisconsin yet...

          by litho on Sat Feb 16, 2008 at 07:02:04 PM PDT

    •  REPORT- PHONEBANK IN WISCONSIN- NEED HELP

      People we need to call WI- like for real!

      I've been calling tonight and here are some observations:

      - MANY are still undecided!

      - Almost everyone is very down-home friendly and will talk with you (some for a long time)

      -I managed to sway at least one for sure with 3 or 4 more that are probably 90% or better.

      -A lot are not up on the issues and / or have heard Hillary's smears (healthcare doesn't cover everyone, etc).  They also don't know things like Obama beats McCain.  When I told them some said they would may vote on that reason alone....all the more reason we need to reach out ASAP.

      As for the HRC / BHO tally- hard to tell because some declined to state and my suspicion was they were for hillary but it looks very close.

      so it's very important we keep making calls!!!

      We have until tuesday- let's do this!

      by newyorknewyork on Sat Feb 16, 2008 at 07:09:40 PM PDT

  •  meaningful to superdelegates

    and therefore meaningful to the race.

    It's for things like this that I still want Obama to be running national ads. It would energize more volunteers, drive up his national numbers, have widespread ripple effects, prime his candidacy for the general, and have a strong influence on supers. It's worth at least some investment.

    by Jaiwithani on Sat Feb 16, 2008 at 05:20:52 PM PDT

•  Si, Se Peude!

  by Lefty Coaster on Sat Feb 16, 2008 at 05:19:55 PM PDT

•  Obama up in Texas? Misprint?

  See a trend?

  http://tpmelectioncentral.talkingpoi...

  Obama 48%, Clinton 42%  
  according to ARG...

  A total outlier, but this week could see a big swing...

  by Oogachaka on Sat Feb 16, 2008 at 05:21:01 PM PDT

  •  Alas ARG

    Has been shown to one of the worst polling outfits. We'll have to see some later polls to confirm a lead for either side.

    by turneresq on Sat Feb 16, 2008 at 05:28:18 PM PDT

  •  trash, trash, trash

    If ARG said Obama is ahead that means I should be very worried as an Obama supporter.

    by Jr1886 on Sat Feb 16, 2008 at 05:33:21 PM PDT

•  Even before this poll

  the writing was on the wall see

  here

  for a graph of all the polls they could find

  by plf515 on Sat Feb 16, 2008 at 05:21:31 PM PDT

  •  The slope on that curve is amazing

    By my reckoning, Obama should hit 300% support by June...

    -dms

    by dmsilev on Sat Feb 16, 2008 at 05:44:58 PM PDT

    •  Holy Crap. That curve IS amazing . . .

      It's a frickin' rocket! I hadn't seen that before. Just for comparison, I wonder who's that last presidential candidate to have that kind of meteoric rise in polling. Has it ever happened before?

      by chrississippi on Sat Feb 16, 2008 at 05:53:49 PM PDT

      •  Kerry

        In Gallup polls:
        Jan. 9-11 2004: Kerry in distant 3rd place with 9
        Jan. 29-Feb. 1 2004: Kerry in overwhelming 1st place with 49

        by jfern on Sat Feb 16, 2008 at 06:02:29 PM PDT

        •  the difference being that

          Kerry wasn't taking on the Clinton machine

          by gobacktotexas on Sat Feb 16, 2008 at 06:19:22 PM PDT

•  well considering

  how many Obama supporters kept insisting for 6 months that national polls are meaningless, it's a bit funny seeing people go orgasmic over a national poll showing him ahead.

  Bottom line is that all it takes for Obama's momentum to grind to a halt is a victory by Clinton in any of the remaining primaries since after the beating she has taken lately has lowered expectations for her tremendously.

  This is a state by state process and Obama does not yet have it--he's the frontrunner now, we'll have to see if he can close it; if he gets Wisconsin and Texas or Ohio then it's probably over.

  by michael1104 on Sat Feb 16, 2008 at 05:24:04 PM PDT

  •  meaningless

    outside of the context of elections.

    Starts to get meaningful in the midst of elections where one candidate has won eight in a row.

    by kid oakland on Sat Feb 16, 2008 at 05:26:42 PM PDT

    •  yeah except

      that she still led in the national polls while he was winning those 8 in a row.

      That tells me the validity of such polls have proven to be meaningless.

      Tout state polls all you want, national polls have proven to be useless, even at this late stage.

      by michael1104 on Sat Feb 16, 2008 at 05:35:03 PM PDT

      •  you nailed it as I said below. On Super Tuesday

        Obama trailed by 12%. we all know what happened that day?

        by Jr1886 on Sat Feb 16, 2008 at 05:37:09 PM PDT

  •  It's the trend, baby. Then agan, that

    was clear after Iowa but among DEMs, Clinton held on to her national support level of 45+ %.  It's taken several losses in several states for those supporters to begin to have doubts.

    by Marie on Sat Feb 16, 2008 at 05:31:33 PM PDT

  •  As an Obama suppoter and GOTV captain...

    I could not agree more.

    Any further wins or close losses by Clinton will slow Obama down.

    Until Obama's delegate lead is high enough to make Florida and Michigan a moot point, he does not have this thing nailed down.

    When and if he reaches that lead, the super delegates will follow.

    by slw0606 on Sat Feb 16, 2008 at 06:16:31 PM PDT

  •  Yeah, A YEAR OUT! God! The reverse logic is just

    so absurd.

    by Junglered1 on Sat Feb 16, 2008 at 06:28:15 PM PDT

•  It's hard for me to say if he's pulling away

  I have never been a great tea leaf reader, I thought there was no way Bush would win. Oh, wait, he didn't, maybe I am better than I thought!

  by Grant Caesar Peters on Sat Feb 16, 2008 at 05:28:31 PM PDT

  •  Isn't It Amazing How Much Damage...

    the loser of a Presidential election can do to this country?

    by slw0606 on Sat Feb 16, 2008 at 06:18:31 PM PDT

    •  Yep, maybe that's why...

      ...most of us voted for Gore.

      by Grant Caesar Peters on Sat Feb 16, 2008 at 11:35:42 PM PDT

•  Other than showing overall momentum, it

  means nothing for the primary. Fact: On Super Tuesday gallup has Hillary 12% ahead of Obama. What was the result? a tied slightly in favor of Obama.

  by Jr1886 on Sat Feb 16, 2008 at 05:29:44 PM PDT

  •  I think you're referring to the Feb 6 Gallup

    nearly all the polling in it was done before Super Tuesday.  

    by gobacktotexas on Sat Feb 16, 2008 at 05:35:37 PM PDT

    •  nah

      From Pollster.com,

      The 13-point lead were based on interviews conducted from Sunday afternoon (before the Super Bowl started) through Tuesday night

      according to pollster.com. Here's  the link http://www.pollster.com/...

      In response here's what Gallup editor in chief,Frank Newport, had to say:

      We never reported the Daily Tracking results as projective of what would happen on Super Tuesday. Had that been our intention, we would have used a strict likely voter screen. We would have made specific assumptions about what turnout would be in each state and adjusted each state accordingly. This is what we normally do when trying to predict the actual vote in a state or national election. We did not design the tracking survey methods for that purpose. The general patterns of trends among the broad sample of voters we look are extremely important. But the exact numbers are not projections of the vote in any state or combination of states.

      As we reported, candidate support levels in the Super Tuesday states were not dramatically different from the national support levels. This suggests that the momentum and trends observed nationally could be hypothesized to be reflected in the Super Tuesday states.

      But for a reader to take that as a prediction by Gallup about the precise vote outcome in all Super Tuesday states (or certainly any individual state) is incorrect.

      Our data suggested that among all voters across the country and in Super Tuesday states prior to Feb. 5th, Hillary Clinton had a lead over Barack Obama. Of course not all voters went to the polls -- they never do. Initial estimate are that there was only an average 30% turnout - and a turnout which varied widely across states.

      The Gallup Daily election tracking uses a mild screen that filters out just those respondents who say they are not likely to vote in response to a four part question. For Republican voters in February so far that has been 16.9%. For Democratic voters it has been 13.7%. In other words, the screen leaves in more than 80% of national adults, making it functionally similar to the typical registered voter screen.

      It certainly wouldn't be expected that a large sample of 80% + of all adults would mirror the actual vote total in a widely disparate group of states with on average just about 30% turnout - and with different turnout within each state. By way of example, when we retrospectively go back and look at the sample of voters from Super Tuesday States from the last five days before Super Tuesday -- screened only among those who are extremely likely to vote -- we find that the vote totals are near a tie, with Obama at 48% and Clinton at 45%.

      In essence, their turnout screen is too wide for a primary. So, their polls tell us nothing about the dynamic in specific primary states that we political junkies are interested in.

      by Jr1886 on Sat Feb 16, 2008 at 05:45:23 PM PDT

•  hillary doesn`t care

  She will never admit that she has lost. She is a desperate woman who will become dangerous if she has to. She will pull some really negative crap on Obama and it may blow up on her face and she may lose the nomination but take the party down with her.
    She has planned on becoming president in 2008 and this guy comes out of nowhere to screw up her plans.It must be slowly making her come to a breaking point.

  by JOEL1954 on Sat Feb 16, 2008 at 05:29:47 PM PDT

  •  She will have to admitt it if she loses Mar 4th

    by Lefty Coaster on Sat Feb 16, 2008 at 05:31:45 PM PDT

    •  No she wont.

      She intends to push this thing to the brink no matter what the consequences.

      These are people who had no problem at all with being impeached. You think they will let a silly thing like elections stand in the way?

      You really have to understand how truly low, vile, and despicable the Clintons are.

      by brooklynbadboy on Sat Feb 16, 2008 at 06:01:02 PM PDT

      •  she's now saying it won't be decided

        until Puerto Rico....

        The Clinton campaign has counseled patience at least through the April 22 primary in Pennsylvania, where the New York senator is endorsed by Democratic Gov. Ed Rendell.

        Now, Ickes says people should wait through the final nominating contest — the Puerto Rican caucuses on June 7, when the voting part of the nomination process ends.

        "At or about — certainly, shortly after — the 7th of June, Hillary’s going to nail down this nomination," Ickes said. "She’s going to have a majority of the delegates."

        by gobacktotexas on Sat Feb 16, 2008 at 06:21:49 PM PDT

        •  So Puerto Rico is the new firewall?

          They keep moving it back.

          by Lefty Coaster on Sun Feb 17, 2008 at 07:00:50 PM PDT

      •  She may like to stay in 'til the end, but...

        if she loses TX on 3/4 the money dries up and she'll probably have to pull out.

        She's running on a break-even cashflow as it is and if contributions slow down I don't think she can keep it going as she spends ridiculous $$$ on things like valet parking; I don't think that her campaign can run on less than $10 million a month.

        by jeroly on Sat Feb 16, 2008 at 06:38:20 PM PDT

      •  It's the Grants, man

        If she keeps losing she won't have enough green to keep going.

        She's already hurting, probably why she pulled out of WI a day earlier than planned.

        Hillary may be stubborn (generally a good quality in a politician, btw) but she's not stupid.  When the money guys tell her it's time to call it off, she'll call it off.

        by litho on Sat Feb 16, 2008 at 07:07:17 PM PDT

•  Clinton actually polled 1 point higher

  in this Dec. 4-8, 2003 Quinnipiac poll

  Clinton 43
  Dean 14
  Clark 9
  Lieberman 7
  Gephardt 5
  Kerry 5
  Edwards 3
  Sharpton 3
  Moseley Braun 1
  Kucinch 1

  by jfern on Sat Feb 16, 2008 at 06:05:55 PM PDT

•  I'm nervous as hell about...

  Wisconsin and Hawaii February 19.

  I saw a rassmusen national poll that showed a sharp upturn for Obama after the blowouts in the Potomac states and then the gap narrowed again in the next two days.

  I expect the same to happen with Gallop.

  Of course we all know national polls are not that important.

  I only know of one Wisconsin poll where Obama only had a 4 point lead and I know of no Hawaii polls.

  If Clinton either wins Wisconsin or Hawaii or loses by a small margin, Obama's momentum WILL slow down and his struggle for March 4 will grow steeper.

  Folks, for Obama supporters, we are in the most dangerous period. After last weekend and Tuesday, expectations are so high for February 19 for Obama that his momentum could be crushed if he does not equally crush Clinton February 19.

  So the road remains long and the battle is difficult.

  With that said, I was at Obama's Columbus, Ohio headquaters today and it was humming with great activity and people streaming in and out. I am going to a GOTV captain training tomorrow and I have scheduled a day off from work March 4.

  by slw0606 on Sat Feb 16, 2008 at 06:09:37 PM PDT

•  looks like going negative on Obama

  AGAIN, is really workin' out for ya, Hill.

  by AlyoshaKaramazov on Sat Feb 16, 2008 at 06:09:40 PM PDT

•  the polls only indicate consolidation of support

  after a primary the electorate changes attitudes toward both winner and loser.  Thus, this poll does not indicate truly how Obama will do in states to come.

  that said, GO O!

  by Zacapoet on Sat Feb 16, 2008 at 07:10:03 PM PDT

•  A.R.G. --- ARRGH!

  Along with having him UP in texas, they have him DOWN in Wisconsin.

  What's up with ARG?

  Linky here

  by Oogachaka on Sun Feb 17, 2008 at 09:36:33 PM PDT