Edwards Holds Iowa Lead; Obama, Vilsack and Clinton in Near-Tie for 2nd

by Jonathan Singer, Tue Jan 23, 2007 at 02:22:12 PM EST

GOP pollster Strategic Vision has conducted a round of polling out of Iowa gauging the positions of likely Democratic and Republican caucus-goers. Both the GOP and Dem samples are 600 voters, yielding a margin of error of plus or minus 4 percentage points, and the survey was in the field from January 19 through 21. For your convenience, I have also tacked on earlier numbers from Zogby (1/15-16/2007; MoE +/- 4.1%), American Research Group (12/19-23/2006; MoE +/- 4.0%), and Research 2000 (12/18-20/2006; MoE +/- 4.0%), bolding the most recent results. (Note, Al Gore was not polled by Strategic Vision but was by other pollsters and that some candidates polled by Strategic Vision were not included in earlier surveys. As a result, not all polls will add up to 100 and some candidates levels of support may appear slightly higher or lower.)

Democrats

CandidateSt. Vis.ZogbyARGR. 2000Edwards25272022Obama17171022Vilsack16161712Clinton15163110Biden4321Kerry3325Clark2-14Richardson1111Dodd1-2-Kucinich1154Undecided1513811

This is a period of great upheaval within the race for the Democratic nomination for the presidency, with three candidates -- Barack Obama, Hillary Rodham Clinton and Bill Richardson -- joining the race (with exploratory committees) in recent days. That said, the Strategic Vision numbers, which come right smack dab in the middle of this growth in the field of announced candidates, perhaps indicate that, at least for the moment, Iowans' intentions are at least somewhat locked in, with John Edwards in the mid-20s and Obama, Clinton and Tom Vilsack duking it out in the mid- to upper-teens. And even if these numbers are not indicative of where the race will be in about a year when Democrats go to their caucuses -- and it's safe to say that they're not -- they do at least offer us a base from which to compare shifts in the coming months to see which, if any, candidates have momentum in the state.

Below the fold, numbers for the Republicans...

(Note, Condi Rice and a few others were not polled by Strategic Vision but was by other pollsters and that some candidates polled by Strategic Vision were not included in earlier surveys. As a result, not all polls will add up to 100 and some candidates levels of support may appear slightly higher or lower.)

Republicans

CandidateSt. Vis.ZogbyARGR. 2000Giuliani25192826McCain21172627Gingrich1313187Romney8569Hagel726-Thompson21--Tancredo22--Brownback2111Huckabee21--Pataki11-1Gilmore1---Hunter1---Undecided1622822

Like with the numbers among Democrats, Strategic Vision's polling of Republicans seems to jibe with other recent polling, as well as reporting from the ground. The great untold story of the race in Iowa -- one that I have tried to reiterate but the establishment media largely overlooks -- is that Mitt Romney's level of support in the first key contest is remarkably low and that Newt Gingrich is much better positioned to play the role of the movement conservative within the race, should he decide in the end to run (though he's making moves that indicate that he won't jump in).

Tags: 2008, Democrats, Iowa, Primaries, Republicans (all tags)

Comments

37 Comments

Sort by

permalink

Re: Edwards Holds Iowa Lead; Obama, Vilsack and Cl

A three way tie for second?

by Bob Brigham 2007-01-23 02:25PM | 0 recs

permalink

Re: Edwards Holds Iowa Lead; Obama, Vilsack and Cl

In which case, which candidate has the Joementum...?

by Jonathan Singer 2007-01-23 02:39PM | 0 recs

permalink

Re: Edwards Holds Iowa Lead; Obama, Vilsack and Cl

If Vilsack comes in fourth I think that is an appropriate headline.

by Bob Brigham 2007-01-23 03:12PM | 0 recs

permalink

Re: Edwards Holds Iowa Lead; Obama, Vilsack and Cl

If Clinton comes in fourth then I think we'll be too busy dissecting the video game vote.

by Bob Brigham 2007-01-23 03:13PM | 0 recs

permalink

Re: Edwards Holds Iowa Lead; Obama, Vilsack and Cl

If Obama comes in fourth, it is cool because it will accent his audacious hope.

by Bob Brigham 2007-01-23 03:15PM | 0 recs

permalink

Iowa

any chance Kerry will sit this one out? Don't get me wrong, I like Kerry and can't stand all the people who bitch about how he threw the election away or whatever, but I really think he'd do better to give up.

by BlueinColorado 2007-01-23 02:28PM | 0 recs

permalink

Re: Iowa

I think Kerry will sit it out. He had poor attendance at one or two events in the state last year. People including myself who volunteered for Kerry last time are looking elsewhere (I'm backing Edwards).

by desmoinesdem 2007-01-23 02:34PM | 0 recs

permalink

Re: Iowa

Kerry said he won't announce his intentions until the spring.

by gunnar 2007-01-23 02:56PM | 0 recs

permalink

the only reason Kerry should run

is if he straps a torpedo and aims it at Hillary, running negative ads against her for repentance for what the 527 did to Dean

by TarHeel 2007-01-23 03:16PM | 0 recs

permalink

Re: Edwards Holds Iowa Lead; Obama, Vilsack and Cl

if 2 years of nonstop campaigning can only get him a quarter of the vote, things may not be as good as I thought for Edwards. With Hillary and Obama set to really begin their own organizing and visits, its difficult to see him holding even the 25% he has.

Vilsack's low numbers have surprised me too.

by alarabi7 2007-01-23 02:34PM | 0 recs

permalink

That is still a lead that has been

gotten with little MSM coverage. So, I think the lead is a bigger indicator of real support, not just fluff from being in the spotlight.

by dk2 2007-01-23 02:53PM | 0 recs

permalink

Hillary looks stronger than I suspected/hoped

this is before her "reintroduction" con game to tell us all of our understandings of her are wrong.

will anyone call out the ridiculousness of the immaculate re-birth?

by TarHeel 2007-01-23 03:18PM | 0 recs

permalink

I disagree--people make up their minds late

I worked my precinct for Kerry in 2003/2004. In October I could hardly find anyone who declared a preference. They may have been leaning in a certain direction, but most of the people who vote in the caucuses take their time and listen to multiple candidates in detail.

I think Edwards is in a very strong position. He's got a lot of activist types (a plurality of county chairs support him), and they will be working their precincts later in the year.

by desmoinesdem 2007-01-23 03:18PM | 0 recs

permalink

Also

there's a native son in the race. You'd know better than I would how Vilsack skews the numbers, but it does change things compared to other ¥ears. What surprises me a lot more is Giuliani's relative strength in Iowa.

by BlueinColorado 2007-01-23 05:54PM | 0 recs

permalink

Re: Edwards Holds Iowa Lead; Obama, Vilsack and Cl

cspan had a special Sunday doing in depth look at Iowa. The people they talked with said no one is set on a candidate much now. they are waiting for everyone to come and they will see then. They are open to changing their candidate if they like someone better.
Edwards, being unemployed for 2 years, has had alot of time on his hands and so, has been out hanging around alot. You'd expect him to be in the lead.
But, now that the others are going to break from their jobs and come and visit, numbers will most likely change.

by vwcat 2007-01-23 02:35PM | 0 recs

permalink

Re: Edwards Holds Iowa Lead; Obama, Vilsack and Cl

Edwards was not unemployed. He was the director of a poverty center that he co-founded, and he's been working hard on a number of progressive initiatives. He's also raised money directly for a lot of Democratic candidates.

by clarkent 2007-01-23 02:40PM | 0 recs

permalink

Re: Edwards Holds Iowa Lead; Obama, Vilsack and Cl

Interestingly Congress is going to have a much longer work week than it previously has and Reid has already made it clear that he's going to expect attendance from presidential hopefuls.

by Quinton 2007-01-23 02:56PM | 0 recs

permalink

Re: Edwards Holds Iowa Lead; Obama, Vilsack and Cl

Actually, one would expect the hometown boy Vilsack to have the lead in Iowa just as Harkin had the overwhelming lead when he ran for President in 92.

by msstaley 2007-01-23 03:14PM | 0 recs

permalink

bull

I'll bet you that John Edwards spent more time on his job at the poverty center and campaigning for other campaigns, than the Congress spent in session.

by Robert P 2007-01-23 06:27PM | 0 recs

permalink

Re: Kerry

If he decides to pass, it will be very interesting to see which candidate he endorses and why. Kerry still carries quite some influence especially in Iowa.

by rosebowl 2007-01-23 02:36PM | 0 recs

permalink

Edwards is very underestimated.

He is doing great in Iowa. He has the issues in front that seem to matter the most.

by dk2 2007-01-23 02:37PM | 0 recs

permalink

That ARG poll is looking worse and worse.

American Research Group needs to get its act together. Nobody else has had Hillary above the mid-teens.

by MeanBoneII 2007-01-23 03:00PM | 0 recs

permalink

The ARG poll is useful because it shows that

dems that don't vote in the past and never caucass support hillary.

ARGs criteria was way weak and it shows that more determined voters go for Edwards or Obama

by TarHeel 2007-01-23 03:22PM | 0 recs

permalink

Right, ARG needs a much tighter screen.

The low-information Democrats who don't participate as much favor Hillary. That's likely to be a common trend across the country, and as the year goes by and more media focus is placed on the early states, she is going to slide.

by MeanBoneII 2007-01-23 03:39PM | 0 recs

permalink

Re: Right, ARG needs a much tighter screen.

I think this will be especially a factor in Iowa. Getting previous non-voters to actually show up and vote is difficult enough, but to get them to show up and be involved in the hours long cacaus and fiddle around with viability and re-grouping and etc in enough precints to make a difference for a canidate is even worse.

I think that will make it difficult for Hillary and others who don't already have an existing operation on the ground or get about building one very quickly. That's going to take committed local activists and county chairs and the like and it seems that they aren't excited about Hillary, but are about Edwards.

by Quinton 2007-01-23 03:47PM | 0 recs

permalink

Re: Edwards Holds Iowa Lead; Obama, Vilsack and Cl

I'm not a fan of polls. I always wonder how a question is asked. But Iowans work hard at this. They do their homework and they go to lots of events. It's natural that they would put JRE at the top since with a few more days in Iowa in 2004, he would probably have placed first. The anti NAFTA feeling was starting to overwhelm the fear factor of tuurists (and tourists). Each day we are greeted with bad news about plants closings. The Omnivore's Dilemma points out the pros and cons of a culture of corn. It takes a long time for the majority of people to turn, but when they do, it's hard to stop that too. Out here we sense the urgency.

by Feral Cat 2007-01-23 03:06PM | 0 recs

permalink

Re: Edwards Holds Iowa Lead; Obama, Vilsack and Cl

I love me some MYDD, but this is really a bad article.

#1 - Comparing these polls in this box format is misleading. It doesn't take into account margins of error, samples, etc. All of these polls could show no change depending on the margins, or they could be completely meaningless if the samples were significantly different.

#2 - A fair question for anyone looking at Iowa polls - what is the methodology to determine a likely caucus goer? I'd love to get an explanation on that.

#3 - Caucuses aren't simple votes. A little bit can happen once the caucus gets rolling.

A few things you could safely extrapolate from these numbers...

#1 - Potentially, not much room up for Edwards. People know him, he didn't win last time, and what on earth will happen in the next year that will sway people to his side?

#2 - Potentially, Edwards is set to drop a few points. People had their shot and once they get to know the other tier 2 candidates, i think the biggest loser will be Edwards

#3 - Points #1 and #2 to a lesser extent, apply to Clinton as well.

My two cents - any thoughts?

by wanderingpolitico 2007-01-23 04:18PM | 0 recs

permalink

you have to look at each poll

ARG for instance had a very low filter _ I think the only cutoff was are you a registered voter and ask the respondent if they would likely vote.

R2000 asked if they had voted in the last statewide election and had caucassed before (I think)..

anyhow hope that helps some.

by TarHeel 2007-01-23 04:44PM | 0 recs

permalink

a lot depends on Clark

If Clark runs I think he might assure a hillary win.

(I'm unclear on the situation between Clark and the Clintons but if you wanted to play dirty pull the Clintons should contribute to Clark's act blue page to get him to run).

potential clark voters would likely go to either obama or edwards I'd think.

so depending on who else runs there may be some room up for Edwards - particularly if Vilsack were to drop out before next year.

by TarHeel 2007-01-23 04:47PM | 0 recs

permalink

Re: Tom-mentum!

Actually, because its a caucus, I bet a lot of Vilsack supporters will move to other candidates when they see he isn't going to win. I expect a lot of them would support John Edwards. Of course Barack and Hillary will get their share, too. What about the supporters of the 2nd and 3rd tier candidates?

by jallen 2007-01-23 06:03PM | 0 recs

permalink

potentially

who are you supporting?

All of your "potential" points happen to spell doom for one candidate.

by Robert P 2007-01-23 06:29PM | 0 recs

permalink

Potentially? Edwards is consistently leading.

Edwards has held about 25% support in Iowa for THREE YEARS now. That's hardened support that isn't likely to go away.

Also, Edwards and Vilsack have the most experience campaigning in Iowa, which is likely to be a big advantage. Vilsack's problem is that he needs to be viewed as a viable candidate outside of Iowa to really build on his current numbers. Edwards doesn't have that problem.

As long as Edwards continues to do so well in head-to-head polling against Republicans, it's quite easy to see him not only maintaining but increasing his lead in Iowa.

by MeanBoneII 2007-01-23 09:45PM | 0 recs

permalink

Re: Potentially? Edwards is consistently leading.

He was the only one exclusively running for president for the last three years. I think that people often pick what they know until other options present themselves.

by wanderingpolitico 2007-01-24 11:17AM | 0 recs

permalink

People are aware of the other options.

The MSM has made quite sure of that.

by MeanBoneII 2007-01-24 12:17PM | 0 recs

permalink

Edwards looks like he's moving down

My personal prediction is that he's gonna go the way of Dick Gephardt (early lead, then crash and burn, in case you forgot). What will be interesting is to see is if like Gephardt (who helped kill the Dean candidacy) is if Edwards (assuming the enormous assumption that my 12 month ahead of schedule prediction pans out the way I think it will atm) takes another candidate with him.

by Terryus 2007-01-23 07:00PM | 0 recs

permalink

Re: Gingrich and Romney

Romney is definitely the conservative front-runner. His numbers are low in Iowa because people have just started paying attention to the race. Gingrich has shown little interest in running, and has put off a decision until September at least. Romney will have 70 or 80 million in the bank by then.

You can probably take 10 of Newt's 13 percentage points and hand them to Romney, then divvy up the other 3 points between the other conservatives. Then take 5 percentage points from Giuliani after Romney and others point out that he is far from conservative on some key issues, and Romney wins.

Unless the second tier conservatives split the Gingrich and Giuliani losses, in which case McCain takes the early headlines.

by Lex 2007-01-24 08:10AM | 0 recs

permalink

Re: Edwards Holds Iowa Lead; Obama, Vilsack and Cl

I'm not sure who I'm supporting yet, but I'm not convinced Edwards is in such strong support.

Terryus made an interesting comment. Not sure if I'm sold, but I wander if Edwards takes Obama down. The two are very, very similar candidates. Edwards, i think, has more substance and is tougher and more tested.

I wouldn't write the Vilsack off yet. I think that caucus goers won't show him a lot of love at this point, but they could very well end up going with the guy that brought them to the dance. They know Vilsack, and trust him.

I think it could come down to Clinton, one of the tier 2's (I would guess Richardson, Vilsack, or Biden)... I think that an Obama/Edwards bloodfest could open the way for one of them to become relevant.

Does anyone else think that Edwards/Obama could end up pulling a Dean/Gephart?

by wanderingpolitico 2007-01-24 11:09AM | 0 recs