WASHINGTON (By
Charlie Cook, National Journal) July 25, 2007 — Monday's release marked
the fourth consecutive ABC News/Washington Post poll that found Sen.
Hillary Rodham Clinton, D-N.Y., with a lead of 15 or 16 points over Sen.
Barack Obama, D-Ill., in Democratic presidential nomination matchups
featuring all of the active candidates.
The latest poll, conducted last Wednesday through
Saturday among 606 Democrats and Democratic-leaning independents, showed
Clinton with 45 percent of the vote, Obama with 30 percent, former North
Carolina Sen. John Edwards at 12 percent, New Mexico Gov. Bill
Richardson with 3 percent and others with 2 percent or less.
Sixty-eight percent of Clinton voters said they
strongly supported their candidate, versus 56 percent of Obama backers.
In the February ABC/Post polling, Obama supporters were 4 points more
intensively supportive of their candidate than Clinton backers, but in
the three successive polls, Clinton's support grew more intense. What
started as an edge of 8 points in April was 10 points in June and 12
points in the new poll.
When asked who had the best chance to defeat the
Republican nominee in the general election, Clinton beat out Obama
again, 43 percent to 27 percent.
Finally, when asked if they were satisfied with the
choice of candidates running for the Democratic nomination, 83 percent
said they were, while just 16 percent said they were not.
In Pollster.com's moving average
of all major national polls, Clinton's lead is a bit narrower, at 12.8
points, but has widened over the last three months.
In Pollster.com's Iowa averages, Edwards leads with
27.8 percent to Clinton's 23.8 percent, with both gradually moving up.
Obama is at 17.1 percent, but has been dropping over the last two
months.
In the New Hampshire averages, support for Clinton,
averaging 34 percent, and Obama, at 22.7 percent, is growing.
Obama's numbers are growing faster — and appear to be
coming from a rather precipitous decline by Edwards in the Granite State
— but the Illinois senator still has a lot of ground to cover.
The point of all of this is to note that while Obama
is slightly ahead of Clinton in the fundraising side of the race, he
does not have the momentum that he had back in the first three months of
this year.
Indeed, nationally and in Iowa,
Obama is losing ground, not gaining it. One has to wonder when Obama's
backers will start leaning on him and his campaign organization, the way
anxious investors pressure a company's CEO to improve earnings and stock
price.
Former Massachusetts GOP Gov. Mitt Romney has shown
how a combination of strong organizational efforts and television
advertising in early primary states can jumpstart a little-known
candidate.
Romney's numbers among Republicans are rocketing in
both Iowa and New Hampshire.
Likewise, Richardson has shown how just a healthy dose
of media with a little organization can send numbers shooting up in Iowa
and New Hampshire.
But with significantly greater resources than either
Romney or Richardson, Obama has not replicated their early-state
success.
There was that initial burst of momentum created after
he announced his candidacy, but since then things have been relatively
flat. This isn't to say Obama's situation can't be turned around.
After all, in the last presidential campaign cycle,
Sen. John Kerry, D-Mass., was running low on money late in 2003. But he
mortgaged his house, then capitalized on late reservations about
front-runner Howard Dean to grab the nomination.
As long as he has money, there is
a way out, but there would appear to be a recipe problem with the Obama
campaign: They haven't figured out where Democratic taste buds are this
year.
Conversely, while the Clinton campaign has lacked the
cache and pizzazz of the Obama effort, it has cruised along with
Prussian efficiency, methodically plodding along, making no major
mistakes.
Clinton has gradually and increasingly become more
acceptable, wearing down the resistance in the party and, with general
election polls now generally showing her even or mostly ahead, they are
breaking through outside the party as well.
At some point, we should assume that Clinton or her
campaign will stumble; every candidate and campaign eventually does at
least once or twice. But, when it happens, will anyone else be in
striking distance, and thus able to capitalize?
It's also worth noting that in Iowa and New Hampshire,
Richardson's numbers have been moving. Perhaps it is Astroturf rather
than true grassroots, but the upward pattern in the polls in those
states — but not nationally — should be noticed.
Somebody usually makes a run from behind, and it might
well be the New Mexican, if his early-state numbers are any indication.
There is still six months before balloting begins, but
this race has begun to take shape.
For some, of course, that shape is a lot better and
more promising than for others. As far as Clinton is concerned, she
couldn't ask for things to be working out much better. For Obama,
something needs to happen.
And for
Richardson, one crucial question must be answered: Is this real?