This is great. Hillary is sinking, two months in a row. And I thought people here were saying Edwards was supposed to drop, because he was taking on Hillary's record? It looks to me like he gained support actually. This is good news, beause it means Edwards has a group of solid support, which legitimizes his ability to take on Hillary for the next two months. If he's going to have the same amount of support no matter what, he might as well bring Hillary down and make this thing a three-way race. If anything, at least we'll get Obama.

B/c although the numbers are correct above, the analysis is not?

Uhm- Edwards is also slowly ticking up. If I remember  the analysis a few months ago, is that if Edwards can pull his numbers up to the high teens or early 20s in NH, then he could win the state based on a bump from IA?

It is pretty much an iron rule of politics and PR that if you don't like the conversation, you try to change the subject.  The conversation, lately, has been about Clinton's debate performance.  Instead of changing the subject, however, the Clinton Campaign has given new life to the story -- mostly with Bill Clinton's widely covered notion that Hillary has been swiftboated.  Other Clinton surrogates have been loud in thier cries of unfair treatment.  The result is that Clinton's debate soundbytes are being played over and over again and there has been a small but meaningful drop by Hillary in the polls in one of the few places where the public has been paying attention, New Hampshire.

Obama has clearly moved up from september to now in this poll , but did anyone notice he gained only 2 points between oct. and nov. putting the debate in perspective.

I'd say Obama is not being affected because all the attention was on Clinton's "Not for license, now for license!" shift. It was big news that she waffled so everyone now knows her position. Not so much with Obama or Edwards. I'd also say the decline in NH is because it's paying close attention, and as it relates to the licensing, it's 96% white.

Seriously, the driver's license thing is starting to bite--it's going to generate a ton of backlash. Even Civil Unions was less divisive.

It probably has more to do that voters reject Hillary having two positions on the issues. They probably prefer one position, whether right or wrong.

wow -- Now the LW blogosphere is playing into xenophobia because it will hurt the democratic front runner.

GOP parroting much?

Yeah, she is plunging... hehe... Just like Romney's lead evaporated to one point after a 'bad' debate.

Let's talk in 2 weeks...

The license issue is getting far too much attention in the post-debate analysis merely because it came last.  More devastating for Clinton, I think, is the Iran issue which predominated the first half of the debate and marks a clear difference between her and the rest.  Voters may be willing to accept a vote for war is a vote for diplomacy once, but pushing that twice is a little too much.

The debate on the 15th is going to be very interesting.  Gone will be the type of analysis that looks to such narratives as how she modulates her voice or if she looks Presidential.  Finally they'll start looking at does she answer the question and the slightest hesitation will bring a chorus of here we go again.

Ironicaly Obama agrees with Sptzer and clearly said so in the debate.

I think Clinton should clarify that Drivers liscence are a privilege only for legal residents -- but non residents like tourists or anybody driving should have a international license which clearly states not valid for employment and can be obtained also after testing or having a valid international license from abroad.

Once again, the existence of a clear polling consensus on an issue is mistaken for a finding of importance.

Are a lot of people changing their vote because of the driver's license issue?  I have no idea.  But I certainly don't assume it just because the polling is lopsided in one direction.

The same thing comes up with flag burning and every other high-profile wedge issue.  Lots of people may oppose flag burning, but how many of them actually change their vote based upon where the candidates stand on flag burning?  You can't get the answer just by polling the for-against question.

In these troubled and dire time we live in, Joe Biden, to me, encompasses all that we desperately need for our nation:

1) Intelligence

2. Experience in ALL phases of government
   
3. Strength
   
4. Respect from world leaders
   
5. Diplomacy
   
6. Command of issues
   
7. Solutions to problems that face our nation
   
8. Honesty
   
9. Integrity
   
10. Respect and trust from his peers
    
11. Respect and trust from the people who follow him
    
12. an EXPERT in foreign policy

Joe Biden certainly meets ALL of the criteria above.

I pray and hope every day that Mr. & Mrs. America, the people of Iowa, New Hampshire, and South Carolina know in their hearts, that if we lose Joe Biden, we'll have lost one of the best Presidents our nation will ever have.

Please watch a video I produced to show my support for Senator Biden. If you support him, please send the link below to family and friends, and ask them to do the same.

http://youtube.com/watch?v=OtGCaqOdIJ4

More news for all you poll monkeys out there:

The Rasmussen Reports daily Presidential Tracking Poll for Wednesday shows Senator Hillary Clinton's support slipping below 40% for the first time in more than a month. Overall, she has lost ten percentage points from her year-to-date peak reached on October 22. But still remains on top in the race for the Democratic Presidential Nomination.

Clinton now earns 39% of the vote, her lowest total since September 28. That's still good enough, however, to hold an eighteen point advantage over Senator Barack Obama whose support is steady at 21%. Former Senator John Edwards has gained some ground in recent days and now earns the vote from 16% of Likely Democratic Primary Voters.

Looks like Edwards is onto something.

http://rasmussenreports.com/public_conte nt/politics/election_2008__1/2008_presid ential_election/daily_presidential_track ing_poll

The NH poll is a wobbly 1 day poll (in the field only on November 5). Let Obama/Edwards rejoice today - thereby admitting that polls finally really really do matter.

It's interesting that Clinton's supporters try to use the same obfuscation clothed in clarity technique that got her in trouble in the first place.  When Russert asks do you think Spitzer's plan makes sense everyone knows the question is really do you support giving illegals driver licenses.  Dodd understood that, Obama understood that and answered it directly.  The audience understood that.  Clinton though tries to make believe she doesn't understand what is common speech and instead answers the question in a lawyerly fashion relying on the precise meaning of the words - it is the old depends on what the definition of is is.  But she is not running for D.A., she's running for President.  She began her campaign saying she was going to have a conversation with the American people.  If that's the case, she needs to have a conversation and speak conversationally.  If she had, or even modulated the two she would have answered: no I'm not in favor of giving them licenses but I understand why Spitzer is doing what he is doing and then launch into her views about immigration.  

This wasn't her response because her natural inclination is not to have a conversation but try to skirt around it by limiting herself to the precise answer to the precise definition of the words of the question.  It is the reverse of being open.  It is to look at everything as being a possible trick and defend yourself against that.  It reflects a world view, perhaps as a result of her experiences, but it goes to show that not all experience is good, and the rigors she went through as First Lady, far from best preparing her for the job, perhaps have distanced her from what she wants most.  We need change, we need openness, we need transparency.  I can understand why she is not that, and it is unfortunate because she is a talented and committed woman.  But this is not what I want for the next 4 to 8 years.

with lows like a +10, who needs highs?