Iowa/NH polls

CBS/NYT's has a poll out of Iowa and New Hampshire, here's the story, here's the poll (pdf), thanks to Pollster.com.

Let me first comment on the Republicans:

                 Iowa            New Hampshire
Romney           27              34
Huckabee         21               6
Giuliani         15              16
McCain            4              16
Thompson          9               6
Paul              4               8
Other/undecided  19              14
Huckabee has got the momentum going on in Iowa. Romney has maybe peaked to soon, and Romney's hard support (37%) is softer than Huckabee's (50%) too. I attended the BlogWorldExpo last weekend and got the chance to talk with some conservatives there about how they saw the GOP racing shaking out. One interesting tidbit was this: Given if Romney won Iowa he'd win New Hampshire and be halfway to the nomination, that the other candidates (like Giuliani, McCain, maybe even Thompson) would be encouraging their supporters to vote for Huckabee to derail Romney. This is borne out by the poll showing Huckabee in a tie for the lead of 2nd choice; but it's also interesting to note the fluidity between supporters of Romney and Huckabee. There's also a rumor going around that James Dobson is going to endorse Huckabee.

The other Republican thing to note is that Ron Paul is starting to show traction in New Hampshire. My guess is that if he's polling 8% that he's probably got double that support, or more, in the booth. Wouldn't it be something if, for the Republicans, the story out of Iowa and New Hampshire is Huckabee and Paul, instead of a sweep by Romney? Either way, Giuliani and McCain are left hold an empty bag, and Thompson will have his back to the wall in South Carolina. Well, not entirely, someone will be placing in the top three among those front-runners, and it certainly could be Giuliani.

On to the Dems:

               Iowa             New Hampshire
Clinton        25               37
Edwards        23               9
Obama          22               22
Richardson     12               6
Biden           4               2
Dodd            1               1
Kucinich        1               5
Undecided      12               18
If that's the state of the race in Iowa, then we need to look at the undecideds and second choices. What jumps out with Clinton is her low favorable rating (59%) among Iowa Democrats. It's on par with Richardson (57%) but much lower than Obama (72%) or Edwards (73%)-- that's going to carry over in the caucus rounds.

It's also obvious that Obama is tremendously banking on new voters to win Iowa:

             First-time        Regulars
Obama        29                19
Clinton      28                24
Edwards      16                26
Obama could win if younger voters (below 45) that have Independent leanings show up at the Democratic caucus in percentages greater than 10% of the total voter, but nobody that follows Iowa caucuses believes that will happen, hence the skepticism of his strength in Iowa. Fortunately for us, the Iowa part of the poll looks at the second choices of Richardson/Biden/Dodd. As assumed by the above number showing a low overall favorable rating for Clinton, it's breaking away from Clinton:
Second choice among candidate choices with less than 15% support:

Edwards   30%
Obama     27
Clinton   14
That's not a good sign for Clinton in Iowa. Richardson might hold a lot of sway were he to drop out and endorse someone, or indicate, as Kucinich did in '04 for Edwards, whom his supporters should go to for their second choice.

In New Hampshire, Clinton is on much more solid ground:

Hillary Clinton has a 15 point lead over her closest rival for the Democratic nomination in New Hampshire – Barack Obama – and she is the first choice of both men and women, voters of all income and education levels, both Democrats and Independents voting in the primary, and liberals as well as moderates.The poll finds half of her support is willing to change their minds though. I find it amazing that 68% of those polled say Clinton's chances of winning are the best among the top three candidates. That also points toward the silver bullet. If Clinton loses Iowa to either Obama or Edwards, it will take away her perceived electability.

The favorable ratings are stronger for Clinton (62%)in New Hampshire than Iowa, while weaker for Edwards (46%) and about equally strong for Obama (61%). New Hapnshire is Clinton's to lose, but Iowa is truly deadlocked.

Onto the big picture. It's a sign of strength that Obama's numbers are pretty solid all around; it seems he's been at the 20's pretty much the entire year. Everyone keeps waiting to see if/when he's going to move, and though it's not happened, he's not faded away either. Clinton appears to be in a very strong 'holding pattern' and this is the first poll in a while that seems to shake the perception that she's pulling away. Edwards is on the rebound, probably due to the fact of Gore now being out of the race. His Rasmussen daily numbers have shown momentum of late, and this poll is going to provide him needed momentum. It's at least looking like it might be a close race for the Democratic nomination.

Update [2007-11-13 21:20:1 by Todd Beeton]: Just to add a few thoughts on the Iowa poll, I see a lot of good news for Edwards. This is the place Edwards has spent the most time, obviously, and there's a lot of evidence that he has succeeded in getting his message out.

Among those who support Edwards, the reasons for their support are as follows:

Honesty 17%
Cares about people 12%
Agrees on Issues 12%
Healthcare 9%

And on the question "Who understands the problems of Iowans?" the results are:

Edwards 32%
Clinton 18%
Obama 18%

With the economy tanking and the wrong track numbers as high as they are nationwide, I feel like this question is going to be key in 2008.

Also, among those who want troops out of Iraq in less than a year:

Edwards 28%
Clinton 25%
Obama 17%

In addition, on the crucial second choice question, Edwards leads, albeit ever so slightly, among supporters of those candidates likely to garner less than 15%.

Edwards 30%
Obama 27
Clinton 14

Edwards's strong support among previous caucus goers may also pay dividends for him, as they are far m ore likely to actually attend the caucus than first-time caucus goers, who favor Obama.

The findings indicate that if older and established voters dominate turnout, the caucuses could be a two-way contest between Clinton and Edwards. If the Obama campaign succeeds in its bid to bring young voters and first-time caucus-goers out on Jan. 3, however, it could leave Iowa with a win and a crucial momentum boost headed into later contests. Doing so will be a challenge: Only a third of possible first-time attendees say they will "definitely" attend the caucuses, compared with six in 10 of previous attendees.

Tags: 2008 election, Democratic primaries (all tags)

Comments

63 Comments

Re: Iowa/NH polls

new startegic vision poll out.

Hillary:29%(28%)
Obama:  27%(23%)
Edwards:20%(20%)

http://www.strategicvision.biz/political /iowa_poll_111407.htm

The majority of this poll was taken after the big JJ dinner Obama victory and it clearly shows a huge trend up for Obama.

The JJ dinner occured last saturday 10th...Strategic vision started polling on the 9th...CBS/NYT started polling on the 2rd which is way before the dinner and not enough time to let Hillary bad debate performance effect to marterialize.

by Prodigy 2007-11-13 02:53PM | 0 recs
Re: Iowa/NH polls

Has this poll generally been an outlier?

Yeah, the NYT/CBS NH poll was like 90% before JJ and plant-gate.

by General Sherman 2007-11-13 02:58PM | 0 recs
Re: Iowa/NH polls

In the last polls of the 2002 mid term elections, CBS-NY Times was an outlier giving the GOP a seven point lead in the generic ballot. Guess what? CBS-NY Times was right and SV and Zogby and others including ABC, NBC and Newsweek were dead wrong!!

by Boilermaker 2007-11-14 03:54AM | 0 recs
Re: Iowa/NH polls

i agree that's likely a more valid poll, though it's not wildly different.  bottom-line is, as in previous polls, still a 3 way race, Clinton with a slightly smaller lead, Obama with some momentum, though not huge. Edwards still competitive, albeit in worse shape than he was a while back (and, per the NYTimes poll, maybe closer than that).

with NH looking solidly Clinton, it really does come down to Iowa for both Edwards and Obama. Do they start attacking each other? I think Edwards will stay focused on Hillary as it's in his interest, but Obama may want to make it clear that it's a 2-person race and try to undercut Edwards subtly. I'm guessing Obama's fondest hope is that Hillary returns fire against Edwards, so while they fight it out he can rise between them. But I doubt Hilllary will do that work for him

by CalDem 2007-11-13 03:00PM | 0 recs
Re: Iowa/NH polls

Nice trend.  And Huckabee at 19%?  Whoa.

by Shaun Appleby 2007-11-13 03:02PM | 0 recs
Re: Iowa/NH polls

"The JJ dinner occured last saturday 10th...Strategic vision started polling on the 9th...CBS/NYT started polling on the 2rd which is way before the dinner and not enough time to let Hillary bad debate performance effect to marterialize."

This makes little sense.  The CBS poll shows Clinton with 25%, while this Strategic Vision poll actually shows Clinton adding a point to her previous showing in this poll and is up to 29% with Edwards a full 9% behind now.   So, whatever "bad debate" performance you are talking about, it clearly has not effected the SV poll at all, she actually gained marginally in that poll.    Edwards looks to be in big trouble in Iowa, if the SV poll is any guide.    

by georgep 2007-11-13 03:31PM | 0 recs
Re: Iowa/NH polls

One point isn't marginal, it's well within the margin of error.  

by JeremiahTheMessiah 2007-11-13 03:37PM | 0 recs
Re: Iowa/NH polls

The SV Iowa poll certainly certainly does not show any type of downturn for Clinton whatsoever.  I also like that every single poll we have seen shows Clinton ahead.  If it were a true 3-way race the candidates would alternate the top spot in various polls.  

by georgep 2007-11-13 04:11PM | 0 recs
Re: Iowa/NH polls

If you include the margin of error which is four, she could have really been all the way up to 32% last poll if the poll was errored in that way.  So really, she might be down.  

by JeremiahTheMessiah 2007-11-14 04:23AM | 0 recs
Re: Iowa/NH polls

I don't see the logic in what you are saying.  Given the margin of error, Clinton could be at 33% in this poll and Obama could be at 23% just as well.   What we DO know is that every single poll has shown Clinton in the lead, even if slightly.  That should tell you that indeed she IS in the lead, although not by much.  Otherwise, would Obama not have been in the lead in at least a few of these last 9 polls?  

by georgep 2007-11-14 05:08AM | 0 recs
Yup.

The only way to read that Iowa poll:  Three way tie.  But of course, that doesn't stop people from assessing the merits of each one point rise or drop.

The only time one percentage point means anything....is when you're counting actual votes.

by rashomon 2007-11-13 04:11PM | 0 recs
Re: Yup.

"The only way to read that Iowa poll:  Three way tie.  But of course, that doesn't stop people from assessing the merits of each one point rise or drop."

Are we talking about the SV Iowa poll?  That one looks more like a 2-way race to me, rather than a 3-way tie, with Edwards 9% behind now.  

by georgep 2007-11-13 04:23PM | 0 recs
Re: Iowa/NH polls

interesting--Many New Hampshire primary voters will be watching the Iowa caucuses to help them decide which candidate to support. Nearly four in 10 voters there - especially women - say the results in Iowa will play at least a somewhat important role in their decision. --

anyone that thinks Iowa won't impact nig time on NH and others is delusional. Whether obama becomes president probably comes down to a few thousand teens and twenty somethings in the Hawkeye state.

by nevadadem 2007-11-13 03:42PM | 0 recs
Iowa poll trends

I'm wondering if Hillary is about to hit a plateau and if Edwards can stop his fall.

http://www.pollster.com/08-IA-Dem-Pres-P rimary.php

by ohiomeister 2007-11-13 03:26PM | 0 recs
Re: Iowa/NH polls

After three weeks of brutal attacks from MSM, I'll take these polls any day...

by prisonbreak 2007-11-13 03:30PM | 0 recs
Re: Iowa/NH polls

It's been ugly, hasn't it?  And, yet she unveiled a great energy plan, won tons of endorsements, delivered a great speech, and it's looking less and less likely Bush wants war with Iran, and yet, the media is stuck on a coule of lame non-scandals.

by bookgrl 2007-11-13 03:37PM | 0 recs
Re: Iowa/NH polls

I like the recent trends in NH, though.  Post-debate we had Rasmussen showing a 10% margin, then Marist with a 12% margin, then Boston Globe/UNH with a 14% margin, now it is a 15% margin.  I like where this is headed up to again.   :-)

by georgep 2007-11-13 03:35PM | 0 recs
Re: Iowa/NH polls

They are all different polling groups and the trends were all down for Clinton.  

If you want to compare polls that screen voters differently, that makes a lot of sense.  (Sarcasim)

by JeremiahTheMessiah 2007-11-13 03:38PM | 0 recs
Re: Iowa/NH polls

Any 30% lead in a poll was unrealistic anyway.  You can do cartwheels all you want over "lead cut in half," but that does not make it any more valid, as a 30% lead was never taken seriously in the first place (not here anyway.)     We'll see 17%, 18% leads again soon in NH, IMHO.    

BTW, the SV poll shows Clinton adding a point to her previous Iowa SV poll.  Going up in an Iowa poll over last month (even if slightly) certainly does not fit the theme advanced.

by georgep 2007-11-13 03:53PM | 0 recs
Maybe...

What's really weird about that poll of NH is the really low Edwards support.  He's been typically around 12 or so.

As far as Iowa goes, I'd rather see Clinton tied with Obama or with a marginal lead going into late December.  The most momentum will be if Clinton is "expected" to win Iowa...and then loses.  Obama will need to be within 10-12 points in NH in order to flip that to a win with mo' from Iowa.  20 points is too much.

But an Obama win in both Iowa and NH would pretty much clinch the nomination for him...he's easily win SC in that scenario and have won at least 3 of the 4 early states going into Super Duper Tuesday.

by rashomon 2007-11-13 04:05PM | 0 recs
Re: Iowa/NH polls

Remember that un-decided's are at 12% in these polls.

What hurts Clinton is that 2nd place choices go to Edwards 30, Obama 27 AND CLINTON 14.

This is disastrous for Clinton Iowa

by BDM 2007-11-13 05:56PM | 0 recs
Re: Iowa/NH polls

I wonder if the media will not stop ignoring John.  I doubt it. (sigh)

by santamonicadem 2007-11-13 03:39PM | 0 recs
Just think....they're ignoring him

and he's tied with them in the polls....interesting times a head.

by cosbo 2007-11-13 03:43PM | 0 recs
Re: Just think....they're ignoring him

The Iowa SV poll disagrees with you.  In thart one Edwards is now 9% behind, and that will have a lowering effect on his overall aggregate standings, both in the RCP averages and the pollster.com averages.  

by georgep 2007-11-13 04:19PM | 0 recs
WOW!

Has anyone checked the CBS/NYT internals????!!

I see nothing but bad news for Hillary

1.Her approval rating in Iowa is a full 10% less then Obama and Edwards...the 2 NH polls who were released a few days ago shows a similar trend where her approval rating has dropped badly.

2.Obama has successfully wrestled the "change" label away from her...Remember she had stolen this label from him before...At the start of the year , Obama was wildly seen as the change candidate , then Hillary started parading the same label and polls started showing that she was the change candidate...Then , Obama fought back and came out with the "CHANGE WE CAN BELIEVE IN!'  BOW! , SINCE NO ONE TRUST HILLARY , IT'S VERY HARD FOR HER TO COME UP WITH SOMETHING TO GET THE LABEL BACK FROM OBAMA!.

3.Hillary is seen as less trustworthy and get this , she's seen as a panderer , a person that would say whatever the voter wants to hear...This is bad news for her....

those internals looks terrible for her.

on the flip side , Obama is still not doing good enough amongst the 65 and over demo...

Obama is also seen as very inexperience which is bad news on his part.

Obama has to find a way to get more support from the 65 and over demo and if he can do that , he'll be unstoppable.

by Prodigy 2007-11-13 03:41PM | 0 recs
Re: WOW!

or get an unbelievably large turnout from younger voters that has not been facotred into the polls like Ventura in MINN. After the JJ rally I believe he can do it.

by nevadadem 2007-11-13 03:46PM | 0 recs
Re: WOW!

Now i understand why Obama is going after Edwards...If he can knock Edwards out , you could make a huge case that Hillary will be overwhelmed because Obama has a better approaval rating then her plus he gets more "second choice" voters.

Right now , dont be surprise to see Obama gunning for Edwards to try to knock him out....Edwards is a great attacker so he could also hurt Obama.

My hope is that they would keep on beating on Hillary and take her out , then do battle over Iowa.

by Prodigy 2007-11-13 03:50PM | 0 recs
Re: WOW!

"the 2 NH polls who were released a few days ago shows a similar trend where her approval rating has dropped badly."

This, once again, is a nonsensical comment.  I have diaried the BG New Hampshire poll, and the internals are almost across the board very bad news for both Obama and Edwards.  Please review, as you must be looking at errant polling data or did not really read the internals.  

by georgep 2007-11-13 03:56PM | 0 recs
It's all about perspective, no?

We're kinda at that point in the race where every poll is a HUGE DEAL...when in reality, individual polls mean crap, just like they did a few months ago.

Averages and Trends are the only meaningful elements...and it's too early to tell at this point.

by rashomon 2007-11-13 04:08PM | 0 recs
Re: It's all about perspective, no?

True, but I was addressing that posters errant assertion about the internals in the NH polls, when indeed the opposite of what he claims is true.  

I pointed that out in a diary, and I would like to find out what the poster is talking about, given the type of internals we have actually seen.  He is also very wrong about the internals of the Marist poll, as they reveal a lot of good news for Clinton (i.e. committed support of 64% of clinton's supporters, only 49% for Obama, only 45% for Edwards; also SECOND CHOICE answers are very good news for Clinton.)  

http://mydd.com/story/2007/11/11/12504/6 62#commenttop

by georgep 2007-11-13 04:17PM | 0 recs
honestly Georgegep....

do you work for the Clinton campaign? You're the smoothest analyst and spinner (always for Hillary of course) of Polls on MyDD.

I thank God I can dissect the polls too or I'd think there was no-way Hillary would ever lose Iowa or NH.

But seriously though, I respect your work and tone; It's amazing how these polls drive the narrative though, when not even one vote has been cast.

I do know one thing considering all that I have understood from these polls - Obama is doing pretty well considering that no one is really polling the cell phone youth in either NH or Iowa. I think that if even 10% of his potential youth vote shows up (and I think they will), then all these polls will be rendered useless.

by rapcetera 2007-11-13 05:24PM | 0 recs
Re: honestly Georgegep....

I think Obama is doing well, too.  I think he is neck and neck with Clinton in IA, but I can't help to think that in the end he will be hurt by the experience issue in that state.  It will be close, though.  It could turn out the other way, and even though Edwards appears to have fallen behind further and further in the aggregate (after that SV poll he probably lost another point in the aggregate) he may factor into the mix as well, depending on how the next 35, 40 days go.      I think NH is really Clinton's at this point.

Don't work for Clinton.  It probably would just be volunteer stuff anyway, and that does not bring bread, butter and bacon on the table for my family.  Just having fun with this stuff at night and during the day some while I am waiting for a download or a drive formatting.    

by georgep 2007-11-13 05:57PM | 0 recs
Re: honestly Georgegep....

I think the JJ speech by Obama has turned the corner for him in IA.

I think that his advantage along with Edwards is that they are far ahead of her in 2nd choices selections.

In the final analysis most Iowan's will vote on trustworthiness and transparency and that is why I believe he will win. I believe that in=order for Clinton to win Iowa she will need a 10pt + lead going into the final couple of weeks before the caucuses. So far that has not happened.

I grew up in Minnesota and and received my college education from the Univ. of Minnesota, so I have a little experience about midwest values.

by BDM 2007-11-13 06:34PM | 0 recs
Re: The next time the hidden...

...youth and cell phone vote comes through and upsets a political apple cart will be the first.

by InigoMontoya 2007-11-13 09:48PM | 0 recs
Re: Iowa/NH polls

Looking at polls every day is a little like looking at the stock market every day and trying to time the market.  It doesn't work.  You have to look at trends.  The overall trend for Hillary is up, and when you look at some of the crazy things people were saying about her a year ago, you realize you can't caught up in the moment.  She sure isn't.  Here's a person with 35 years experience.  She's seen Bill win and lose.  She's seen polls go up and down.  She said she runs her campaign as though she is (10,20,50) points behind.  Persistence pays, in politics and in the stock market.

by FarWest 2007-11-13 03:47PM | 0 recs
hey Jerome

but nobody that follows Iowa caucuses believes that will happen-----------did you watch the JJ rally? and his support in the building all the people inside were Iowans! You sure are good at getting that dig in at Obama's chances.

by nevadadem 2007-11-13 04:02PM | 0 recs
Re: hey Jerome

I didn't watch it, but have been to Iowa recently, so that was a reflection of what I've heard there. Do Obama's people believe? Yes.

by Jerome Armstrong 2007-11-14 03:21AM | 0 recs
Re: Guiliani

Guiliani looks like he's toast at this point.  I know that he's looking at the Feb. 5 primaries as his back-up plan, but there's no way that'll work. He's not going to pull the kind of numbers he needs from South Carolina with Thompson in the race.

Instead, we're looking at all Romney all the time.  It's my bet that he's the nominee.

by Jim Treglio 2007-11-13 04:18PM | 0 recs
Fine with me

No better way to make sure a Democrat gets in the White House!

by Major Organ 2007-11-13 08:27PM | 0 recs
Re: Guiliani
I would have agreed that if Rudy loses the first three primaries, its not likely he's going to rally on Super Tuesday to win. BUT, that was all predicated on the fact that Mitt would win IA and NH. If he cant hold of Huckabee in IA (and look for him to start using his huge financial advantage by going negative on Huckabee's conservative financial credentials) he CAN NOT WIN the nomination. Iowa is a must-win for him, and this is a very troubling poll for Romney.
Also, if Huck wins Iowa, I have no idea what happens in New Hampshire. I tend to think Romney's support will start eroding, but who does it go to? Huck wont win NH, but McCain or Rudy could. In this case, if either wins in NH they (yes, even McCain) are likely to also win SC and take the whole thing.
Lets remember one thing: money. Huck doesnt have it, and as this race gets further down the road, that will ultimately start to hurt him. You cant do retail politics in every state.
by AC4508 2007-11-13 08:44PM | 0 recs
Re: Iowa/NH polls

Giuliani is increasingly looking like a non-nominee to me.  You'd think these polls would dissuade people from talking about him like he's the default guy.

Iowa still looks like a 3-way tie to me.  If it's going to come down to a tiebreaker, though, I have to give Edwards the experience edge.  How many of his people on the ground were on his team in 2004 when he vastly outperformed expectations in Iowa?

by Steve M 2007-11-13 04:43PM | 0 recs
GOP insights

Paul's support will continue to grow.

I think Huckabee has a shot at winning Iowa.

Here's a scenario:

Iowa

  1. Huckabee
  2. Romney
  3. Paul

New Hampshire

  1. Paul
  2. Romney
  3. Giuliani

South Carolina

  1. Huckabee
  2. Paul
  3. Giuliani, Romny tied

What's next?

by Carl Nyberg 2007-11-13 05:05PM | 0 recs
Re: GOP insights

I'd love for Paul to win the nomination. Not that I'd vote for him, but he's easily the best hope to get the fascists out of the Republican Party.

by Major Organ 2007-11-13 08:30PM | 0 recs
are you serious?

have you been paying attention? It's a general trend in the last 4 polls pout of Iowa that Obama is either ahead (in one poll where he was up at 28%), tied or nipping Hillary (in the last 3 polls) right in the bud...

maybe Georgegep can confirm, hopefully without a pro-hillary spin ;)

by rapcetera 2007-11-13 05:14PM | 0 recs
Re: are you serious?

It's a general trend in the last 4 polls pout of Iowa that Obama is either ahead (in one poll where he was up at 28%), tied or nipping Hillary

ARG, Rasmussen have Clinton ahead of Obama by about 10-12 pts.

Zogby, UoI, SV: Clinton leads Obama ranging from 2-5 pts

That's the last 5 polls. The 6th most recent is the DMR poll (Clinton +7) -- largely considered one of the better IA pollsters.

The most recent Obama lead was the Newsweek poll, end of Sept, Obama +4 over Clinton.

All the polls are here.

by dblhelix 2007-11-13 05:54PM | 0 recs
Re: are you serious?

I was referring strictly to the Iowa polls. I am not paying that much attention to NH at the moment. Iowa will affect all ensuing polls...

These are the Iowa polls I was referring to. As you can see, all the margins are within their respective MOE's

Strategic Vision (R)    11/09 - 11/12    600 LV        Clinton: 29    Obama: 27   

CBS News/NY Times    11/02 - 11/12    319 LV        Clinton: 25    Obama 22

Zogby    11/06 - 11/06    502 LV   
Clinton: 28    Obama: 25   

Univ. of Iowa    10/17 - 10/24    306 LV   
Clinton: 29    Obama: 27

Newsweek    09/26 - 09/27    LV   
Obama: 28  Clinton: 24

by rapcetera 2007-11-13 07:14PM | 0 recs
Re: are you serious?

I only cited Iowa polls. See link.

by dblhelix 2007-11-13 07:31PM | 0 recs
Re: are you serious?

clinton has lead in the last 9 Iowa polls

by sepulvedaj3 2007-11-14 05:50AM | 0 recs
Re: are you serious?
7 --
not 9
by sepulvedaj3 2007-11-14 05:51AM | 0 recs
Re: are you serious?

Not a single poll out of the last 9 had Obama ahead.  Just hasn't happened yet.  That poll you are referring to was the 10th poll ago  

It is close, no doubt.  But not THAT close.  For it to be truly tied you would have seen the lead change back and forth between Clinton and Obama (perhaps Edwards) in any of the last 10 polls just by virtue of poll noise, and that hasn't happened.  Clinton is ahead, no doubt, and still leads as of today.   Next up is Rasmussen's first Iowa poll, which is in the field now.  
   

by georgep 2007-11-14 01:47AM | 0 recs
This is some spin

Bad news for Hillary? So after a supposed bad debate performance, constant reved up attacks by her oppenents, tipgate, plantgate, she still has a lead in Iowa, albeit a slightly more narrow than her previous lead. I'm just waiting for the first poll that shows any of her opponents beating her in any state.

by Christopher Lib 2007-11-13 06:14PM | 0 recs
Re: Iowa/NH polls

Does every little thing about Hillary have to have a negative slant put on it- it's always 'she's leading in these numbers but..'  The others rarely get the same treatment.  I'd love to see a sentence once and while that just gives her credit for being where she is without the other stuff that comes after to throw water on it and negate where she is.

by reasonwarrior 2007-11-13 06:16PM | 0 recs
Re: Iowa/NH polls

Those 2nd choice figures are bad news for Hillary all right.  They're dynamite.  You would have to believe her internal polling would have been giving her the same results in recent days.  No wonder they're worried.

by Shaun Appleby 2007-11-13 08:37PM | 0 recs
Re: Iowa/NH polls
The Iowa numbers essentially DO have Hillary losing if she's really doing that badly with second-place votes. Thats a huge problem for her, and I also dont think undecideds are going to break for her on election day either.
Obama's big problem is, of course, turnout. But he does have the most field offices of the candidates, so he should do a decent job getting his supporters out and having them all across the state. Still, it would behoove Obama to move into the lead going into the caucus and he has the momentum.
Edwards seems to have arrested his slide and is a major player in Iowa. My question is this. If Edwards wins Iowa followed by Obama and Hillary in third, what then? If Obama wins Iowa he might be a 50+% bet to take the nomination.
by AC4508 2007-11-13 08:48PM | 0 recs
Re: Second choices

Here's a fun question for the upcoming debate: explain the threshold issue for IA caucuses briefly, then ask, "in the case your supporters can't support you, which other candidate would you tell them to get behind?"

Or, in other words, get every candidate to endorse a second choice.  And what would a particular choice for each of them indicate?  And the big one, who would Richardson point to?

It's a whole new parlor game!

by bruorton 2007-11-14 03:43AM | 0 recs
Re: Second choices

I think Bill is too smart to play that game.  If he does, one would expect him to endorse Hillary.  OTOH, that would crush his cances of being Veep or SoS in an Obama or Edwards administration, and it wouldn't buy any esteem that he doesn't already have with Hillary.

I'm a Richardson supporter all the way, but I obviously don't live in IA.  My second choice is Edwards.  I'd vote for Dodd, Obama, or Biden before I voted for Hillary.

by NM Ward Chair 2007-11-14 11:21AM | 0 recs
Re: Iowa/NH polls

Can we cut the "Woe is Hillary" stuff? She's the frontunner; she's tough, she's smart, and she can deal with it. It hasn't even affected her poll numbers. Can her supporters stop acting like she is some victim? It is really ridiculous.

by Airb330 2007-11-14 04:50AM | 0 recs
Re: Iowa/NH polls

There's a new YouTube video out of Mike Huckabee begging the Arkansas legislature to raise taxes.  Whatever momentum he gains in Iowa will disappear in New Hampshire -- if New Hampshire is after Iowa.

by Lex 2007-11-14 08:37AM | 0 recs
Re: Iowa/NH polls

"I'm just waiting for the first poll that shows any of her opponents beating her in any state."

Oh -- so you're waiting for the Iowa caucuses.

by Lex 2007-11-14 08:39AM | 0 recs
Re: Iowa/NH polls

Ha ha ha!

by NM Ward Chair 2007-11-14 11:15AM | 0 recs
Re: Iowa/NH polls

You say Clinton's low favorable rating among Iowa Democrats is on par with Richardson's.

The key difference is Richardson remains unknown still by a sizeable number of Dems.  The Iowa Dems all know Clinton.  What this means is Richardson still has room to grow his favorability rating.

by Stephen Cassidy 2007-11-14 09:18AM | 0 recs
Re: Iowa/NH polls

I agree, but time is running short.  Bill really has to make a move in IA, which IMHO is why he moved more staff there.

by NM Ward Chair 2007-11-14 11:14AM | 0 recs
Re: Iowa/NH polls

I agree with you as well.  It all comes down to Iowa.

by Stephen Cassidy 2007-11-14 03:12PM | 0 recs

Diaries

Advertise Blogads


----------- myDD - skin -----------