Post-Debate New Hampshire Poll

permalink

Chris.. Did Obama really lose 9 points in NH?

by TarHeel 2007-06-05 10:58AM | 0 recs

permalink

Re: Chris.. Did Obama really lose 9 points in NH?

According the the averages, he has lost between 6-12 points since the last poll from FP. So, it seems plausible. The early states are probably in real flux right now.

by Chris Bowers 2007-06-05 11:01AM | 0 recs

permalink

If you look at WaPo's site...

Obama hasn't been to NH that much lately. He's been mostly focused on Iowa and nationally. May have something to do with it.

by rashomon 2007-06-05 12:09PM | 0 recs

permalink

Let's just hope that the non-Democratic

voters liked her debate performance too... is there any numbers on this? I don't have much problem with Hillary's policy positions, my biggest concern is her unfavorables and electability problems.

by Populism2008 2007-06-05 11:00AM | 0 recs

permalink

Re: Let's just hope that the non-Democratic

Frankly, if a couple of future polls show Clinton's unfavourability is dropping, she will likely to be crowned as the nominee before the first shot is fired in Iowa. Since many folks like you who care about electability will likely embrace her in no time.

I do believe Clinton will have a blowout victory. I was a supporter of her, but still surprised by how charming she was in the debate. Obama to me was just bland, I can never understand why he could draw big crowd. Sounds to me like a dotcom candidate.

by bryandem 2007-06-05 11:04AM | 0 recs

permalink

I watched the debate and

I found Hillary very knowledgable and professional. But not very likeable and charming. Her jokes seem a bit forced and her manic laughter always makes me cringe. These are not things that I would base my vote on, but unfortunately a lot of other voters do...

by Populism2008 2007-06-05 11:27AM | 0 recs

permalink

the wingers have noticeably

stopped attacking hillary for the time being.

I have zero doubt the second she's the nominee we will see something like the swiftboaters on steroids

by TarHeel 2007-06-05 11:07AM | 0 recs

permalink

Re: the wingers have noticeably

I have zero doubt the second she's the nominee we will see something like the swiftboaters on steroids

Make no mistake about it. That will be true no matter who our candidate is.

by maddogg 2007-06-05 11:18AM | 0 recs

permalink

Swiftboat her with what?

What could they possibly have left in reserve? They have fired everything they have at her in the last 14 years. If they had something left after the Clinton's left office they would have used it on her in her 1st. or 2nd. Senate runs.

by dpANDREWS 2007-06-05 11:27AM | 0 recs

permalink

Re: Swiftboat her with what?

They'll find something. Failing that, they'll just dig up an old line. I don't believe anybody can remember every attack she's been hit with, so a lot of them are probably ripe for re-using.

by Englishlefty 2007-06-05 11:57AM | 0 recs

permalink

America will roll its collective eyes

Its a decade old. People don't care anymore.

by dpANDREWS 2007-06-05 12:18PM | 0 recs

permalink

I agree they'll go after all Dems

but Hillary has a special place in their winger hearts.

Also, Hillary's senate time has been largely ignored..

A lot has happened since 2000.

by TarHeel 2007-06-05 12:34PM | 0 recs

permalink

Re: America will roll its collective eyes

Shout anything loud enough, and you can convince a certain degree of the population that it's true. Especially the punditocracy, who thus disseminate it and make it new.

by Englishlefty 2007-06-05 04:35PM | 0 recs

permalink

Re: Swiftboat her with what?

Do you really think Bill has kept it in his pants over the last few years? That he has in the past month or week? I don't necessarily. If he hasn't it'll likely come out, they'll be looking and paying money for people to talk. If he has behaved well it won't matter, they'll find someone or multiple someone's who will say they've had affairs with him recently and neither Clinton will have any credability to deny it.

by Quinton 2007-06-05 10:27PM | 0 recs

permalink

Re: the wingers have noticeably

You were complaining loudly about the "$400 haircut" issue. Many analysts (including Chris Bowers) believe that it has done tremendous damage to Edwards and has caused his poll decline nationally. Imagine, if you will, what would happen if Edwards were actually the nominee. We would see "Swiftboat EXTREME" on steroids, spinach, meth and sugar. And, the way things seem to be sticking to Edwards and causing him to lose support, they probably would not even need the meth and the sugar to make things stick like glue.

by georgep 2007-06-05 11:30AM | 0 recs

permalink

When people say Bush, Clinton, Bush...

Clinton, I think it will have a negative impact that dwarfs the $400 haircut.

In addition to whatever else may come up.

by citizen53 2007-06-05 12:04PM | 0 recs

permalink

Re: When people say Bush, Clinton, Bush...

Edwards is permanently damaged goods. He's been debased into a cartoon politician. No cartoon politician can win a serious election.

by bryandem 2007-06-05 12:08PM | 0 recs

permalink

Re: When people say Bush, Clinton, Bush...

That is hilarious. You seriously think Hillary is less of a joke than Edwards?

The average American remembers her as the woman who's husband got a blow-job in the Oval Office.
THAT is what most of America thinks of when they think about HRC.

I have nothing against Hillary (aside from that fact that her liberal credentials are very suspect). I think she is an excellent candidate, a smart candidate, and a candidate that can win. But do not forget that people don't equate HRC with healthcare or her Senate record - they equate her with Presidential Infidelity. And they always will. That, to me, is funny.

by LandStander 2007-06-05 03:50PM | 0 recs

permalink

Re: the wingers have noticeably

Well, of course the wingers aren't attacking Hillary since the News Corp OWNER and the PRESIDENT are having HUGE fundraisers for her. Obviously, many media outlets got the memo.

by annefrank 2007-06-05 01:38PM | 0 recs

permalink

Re: the wingers have noticeably

How about the two new attack books out on her? The attacks on her are still plenty. People just stopped caring.

by Ernst 2007-06-06 03:52AM | 0 recs

permalink

Btw

Interesting that Richardson's numbers are improving. He doesn't deserve it after his two awful debate performances.

by Populism2008 2007-06-05 11:02AM | 0 recs

permalink

Re: Btw

I wonder if FP included the indies who usually decide primaries in NH for one of the parties. Any way I posted this in another thread but I think we see why Penn is pushing back so hard on the Usa today poll showing Obama ahead and indies pulling Obama up,the poisen for Penn is the notion that dems that nominate Hillary are commiting political suicide because exept for establishment dem voters Hillary goes over horrably with the general public. If enoough dems start to see that they will switch from Hillary to Obama for that reason alone in my opinion. She may not like it but Obama must and will make Hillary's toxic image with the public overall a big issue, it must be done delicately but i have first hand knowledge that it's the most effective way to take Hillary down.

by nevadadem 2007-06-05 11:07AM | 0 recs

permalink

Re: Btw

Sounds to me a recycled Kerry 'electability' myth. The only difference is that Kerry is replaced by Obama or Edwards this time around depending on whom you're supporting.

It's pathetic and amusing when a candidate can not win on merits but to pull out the debunked 'electability' myth again and again.

by bryandem 2007-06-05 11:10AM | 0 recs

permalink

HIllary's "merits"

are that she's married to Bill Clinton... a former president..

Don't you realize that?

by TarHeel 2007-06-05 11:13AM | 0 recs

permalink

Re: HIllary's "merits"

LOL. I sensed your blood is boiling. Calm down, Hillary hater, it's going to be a long haul.

by bryandem 2007-06-05 11:15AM | 0 recs

permalink

I notice you avoided the content

If it was Hillary Smith instead of HIllary Clinton do you really think she'd be running for president?

by TarHeel 2007-06-05 12:35PM | 0 recs

permalink

Re: I notice you avoided the content

The correct question is 'President Clinton who if he was not married to Hillary?'

LOL.

by bryandem 2007-06-05 02:57PM | 0 recs

permalink

Re: I notice you avoided the content

Agreed. What a sexist canard to say Sen. Clinton's only merit is her husband. As if she didn't graduate Wellesley or Yale; or did not work for years on behalf of women and children; or was part of the team that ran and won gubernatorial, presidential and senatorial campaigns.

by domma 2007-06-05 03:03PM | 0 recs

permalink

Re: I notice you avoided the content

Without Bill who became Gov. and president Hillary may have been a successful lawyer. If she was involved in politics but not with Bill and had big roles in successful cmpaigns for gov., president and senate then she might be a sought after operative, but she'd likely not be the senator from NY and certainly wouldn't be running for president. She is where she is because she's Bill's wife. Much to the same degree that if Barack wasn't african american the media wouldn't have built him up into a super star and if he'd made it to the senate then he'd just be the junior senator from IL. Anyone who doesn't admit these factors is being dishonest.

by Quinton 2007-06-05 10:31PM | 0 recs

permalink

Re: I notice you avoided the content

It's quite true that Bill shaped the direction of Hillary's career. But not the extent. Time and time again Hillary has shown to be an extrordinary talented person. If she hadn't maried Bill she'd simply would have been on everybodies scotus shortlist.

by Ernst 2007-06-06 03:58AM | 0 recs

permalink

Re: I notice you avoided the content

Who knows?

We might have had these long and repetative discussion about the Bush-Smith-Bush-Smith Dynasty.

by Ernst 2007-06-06 04:03AM | 0 recs

permalink

Electability is NOT a myth

Do you seriously believe that Kucinich or Gravel could win a general election?

The problem in 2004 was that low info Dems once again thought that experience and professionalism gets you elected. Electability has nothing to do with these things and everything to do with likeability, folksy manners and charisma. People will vote for a Bush over a Kerry everyday. Reagan over Dukakis. Clinton over Dole. And so on.

by Populism2008 2007-06-05 11:34AM | 0 recs

permalink

Re: Electability is NOT a myth

Do you really believe Edwards is likeable? I'm laughing loudly here.

Obama's personality is okay, but as I said, he's a dotcom candidate, flash in the pan.

by bryandem 2007-06-05 11:46AM | 0 recs

permalink

Rip on other candidates much? n/t

by rashomon 2007-06-05 12:10PM | 0 recs

permalink

Hillary's Internet OUtreach

is expanding..

they've hired a bunch of people in Bangalore to vote for her in online polls... haven't you noticed?

by TarHeel 2007-06-05 12:36PM | 0 recs

permalink

Re: Hillary\'s Internet OUtreach

If either Obama or Edwards supporters are as paranoid as you, neither will even go to IA.

by bryandem 2007-06-05 02:59PM | 0 recs

permalink

Re: Rip on other candidates much?

You should read what gets said about Clinton here. Compared to that this is light stuff.

by Ernst 2007-06-06 04:06AM | 0 recs

permalink

Re: Electability is NOT a myth

Have you met Edwards? I have and he's very likeable. All the video of him at events certainly gives the impression that they find him very likeable too. I hope you don't think Hillary is likeable. She's cold and boring.

by Quinton 2007-06-05 10:32PM | 0 recs

permalink

Re: Electability is NOT a myth

And if 1% more would have shifted you would go on about how inevitable the Kerry win was because he was so much more likable then Bush.

You are reverse enginering. It's long been an established fact that winners get rated more positive as soon as they've shown themselves to be winners

They aren't winners because they were likeable, they're likable because they won!

by Ernst 2007-06-06 04:12AM | 0 recs

permalink

why delicately?

the MSM is openly pushing for HIllary.

they want some knock down drag it out fights between the right wingers and the clintons...

they also know it will be better for business if the republicans nominate some lethargic candidate that doesn't excite conservatives like hillary could.

I think it's open knowledge that either edwards or obama are much better general candidates

by TarHeel 2007-06-05 11:15AM | 0 recs

permalink

Re: why delicately?

Yes - the MSM is pushing Hillary. That in itself is enough reason not to vote for her.
Oh wait - Progressives love a president in bed with corporate media.

by annefrank 2007-06-05 01:42PM | 0 recs

permalink

Re: why delicately?

Is that why the MSM media had two attack books out on her? Bernstein, Gerth, and Van Nattais are as MSM as they come.

as Ron would say: stay classy tarheel.

by Ernst 2007-06-06 04:23AM | 0 recs

permalink

Re: Btw

"Pushing back so hard on the USA Today poll"? Exaggerate much? He made one small comment from what I have seen. Big deal.

Geez.

by georgep 2007-06-05 11:32AM | 0 recs

permalink

the reason richardson is rising

is the same reason HIllary does well.

People have no real tangible idea on the issues..

they can hear Richardson say he won't raise taxes in one ear , and promise every program possible in the other and NOT realize the 2 can not possibly be true.

I would love to see a poll asking questions very basic questions about health care plans between the top 3 candidates

by TarHeel 2007-06-05 11:09AM | 0 recs

permalink

Re: the reason richardson is rising

Just as Hillary told us, we do NOT need another 'pie-in-sky' plan on healthcare, education etc. We need a plan who can pass the congress. That's the real difference between Obama/Edwards and Clinton. Do you need a seasoned politician who can get the job done or do you need another 'pie-in-sky' plan who can never pass the congress?

by bryandem 2007-06-05 11:13AM | 0 recs

permalink

the only thing the clintons got done

were "don't ask don't tell"

NAFTA , and changing welfare

by TarHeel 2007-06-05 11:17AM | 0 recs

permalink

Re: the only thing the clintons got done

Are they bad?
'don't ask don't tell' certainly is a way forward.

Welfare reform certainly was a success.

NAFA is also a boost to economy although there were lots of negative effect.

I support all of these policies.

by bryandem 2007-06-05 11:20AM | 0 recs

permalink

Re: the only thing the clintons got done

Don't forget balanced the budget and The successful Kosovo campaign that helped launch Clark's political career.

by maddogg 2007-06-05 11:21AM | 0 recs

permalink

don't ask don't tell was not a way forward

the most powerful militarys in the world have gays serving openly (Israel and Britain).

Despite the fact that on the human right campaign questionairre NOT A SINGLE candidate was less progressive than her on the questionairre... she'll still get their endorsement

by TarHeel 2007-06-05 12:39PM | 0 recs

permalink

Re: don't ask don't tell was not a way forward

The best we could get at the time was Don't Ask/Don't Tell.

Plus, even as First Lady, Hillary spoke out against the policy.

by domma 2007-06-05 03:07PM | 0 recs

permalink

Re: the only thing the clintons got done

NAFTA screwed over millions of american workers and and mexican workers contributing a large wave of illegal immigration from mexico into america. NAFTA only helped large multinationals and the wealthy who hold a lot of their wealth in shares of those companies, not the average american worker.

by Quinton 2007-06-05 10:34PM | 0 recs

permalink

Re: the only thing the clintons got done

I guess tens of millions in new jobs and a budget surplus, peace and prosperity, etc. don't count.

by robliberal 2007-06-05 04:06PM | 0 recs

permalink

Re: the reason richardson is rising

Frankly, I'd rather have a plaintiffs' attorney in the White House who has successfully battled the insurance and healthcare industries - than a Corporate attorney like Hillary.

by annefrank 2007-06-05 01:44PM | 0 recs

permalink

He is on the air in N.H. I think.

Isn't he? Someone help me out here.

by dpANDREWS 2007-06-05 11:25AM | 0 recs

permalink

Yes...

Richardson was running the "interview" ads, IIRC.

by rashomon 2007-06-05 12:11PM | 0 recs

permalink

Re: Btw

Consider where the trendlines are from. 3 months ago. Since then, Richardson's been putting ads on the air and other polls have showed him hovering around or just below 10%. Very few people seem to think he won the debate, so I don't think there's a correlation between the debate and the rise.

On the other hand, Biden's numbers went up. Granted, it's within the MoE, but if it's a genuine rise then I don't know what could have created it besides the debate. Which is weird, as very few people thought he won it.

by Englishlefty 2007-06-05 12:00PM | 0 recs

permalink

Re: Post-Debate New Hampshire Poll

I don't get it. I live in New Hampshire, talk politics to everyone, and this poll says that every third Dem I talk to is voting for Hillary? No way! Most people are still undecided. Her visibility at the debates was just a bit larger than Richardson's or Dodd's. Dozens of signs were leaning up against the fence with no one to hold them. There isn't any passion going yet, as far as I can see.

by MLinNH 2007-06-05 11:03AM | 0 recs

permalink

Re: Post-Debate New Hampshire Poll

Maybe the only people you talked to are MyDDers or Dailykossers?

by bryandem 2007-06-05 11:06AM | 0 recs

permalink

Re: Post-Debate New Hampshire Poll

I alsowonder who watched the debate, probably most older women, Hillary's base, most men were watching Yankees, Redsox that night, Obama will win New Hampshire because of the indies, ARG had Bush up in NH the night before he got smoked by double didgets, I don't see who the indies would vote for in NH bedsides Obama.

by nevadadem 2007-06-05 11:15AM | 0 recs

permalink

Re: Post-Debate New Hampshire Poll

You sound very desperate. LOL.

by bryandem 2007-06-05 11:21AM | 0 recs

permalink

Re: Post-Debate New Hampshire Poll

That's possible. But unless I see some solid number that support that, I think we have to accept the uncomfortable truth that Hillary's campaign is currently winning. So we all have a lot of work cut out for us.

by maddogg 2007-06-05 11:23AM | 0 recs

permalink

Re: Post-Debate New Hampshire Poll

You are actually COUNTING on an Obama win in New Hampshire with him behind there by 14.7%? I am not counting and solidly predicting a Clinton victory in South Carolina, even though she is ahead there by 6.7%.

Maybe a little realism that Obama has a lot of work to do and won't just coast to easy victories in every single state imaginable would suit you, otherwise your posts don't have much substance. After all, aside from Illinois, Obama does not have the poll lead in a SINGLE state, and we have seen almost 40 states polled so far.

by georgep 2007-06-05 11:23AM | 0 recs

permalink

Re: Post-Debate New Hampshire Poll

Kerry won in New Hampshire and never led Dean in the polls there until after the Iowa caucus.

by vamonticello 2007-06-05 11:30AM | 0 recs

permalink

Re: Post-Debate New Hampshire Poll

And? I am sure responsible Kerry supporters weren't COUNTING on a NH win beforehand. Plus, polls were already going Kerry's way BIG TIME before the Iowa caucus. He had basically erased Dean's lead in NH to a virtual tie a week before the Iowa caucus.

But, what are you trying to claim here? That Obama would use Iowa as the springboard to catapult himself to a win in New Hampshire? All indications are that Iowa is Edwards' to lose, not Obama's.

by georgep 2007-06-05 11:36AM | 0 recs

permalink

Re: Post-Debate New Hampshire Poll

Do we really think one of the big three won't crash before then? I really want to see MSM's reaction to Hill losing the second quarter money race...Is she the Phil Grahm of 08'?

by gb1437a 2007-06-05 11:41AM | 0 recs

permalink

Re: Post-Debate New Hampshire Poll

Barring those money worries - which still won't preclude Iowa and NH campaigns, they'll just lead to institutional weakness in the February 5th states, all three could easily stay in contention. However, it does look to me like we could effectively be down to a two-person race before February 5th.

by Englishlefty 2007-06-05 12:03PM | 0 recs

permalink

Re: Post-Debate New Hampshire Poll

I was more talking about a flaw, be it a failed joke via Kerry, a Dean Scream, etc... Barring that they'll all be there - I think Edwards is most likely to make some mistake, but Obama's newness may hurt.

Although I still want to know how the Hillary folks are going to handle the Q2 numbers, because that is a huge piece of the inevitable armor. The media will not be kind to her, especially if Obama pulls another week long delay in releasing the numbers stunt.

New Hampshire always leans to the upset... Kerry was seen as more as an upset, because the whole race was thrown into limbo when Dean didn't win Iowa. I think Obama, given the charisma factor, is a strong upset candadite. Hillary needs to go into it as a frontrunner, because I just don't see people breaking toward her.

by gb1437a 2007-06-05 12:10PM | 0 recs

permalink

Re: Post-Debate New Hampshire Poll

It might be a dent in the inevitability meme, but it'd have to be combined with a tightening in the polls to really have an effect. When you're routinely shown ten points ahead of your nearest competitor, you can afford to shrug off raising a few million less than them.

by Englishlefty 2007-06-05 12:15PM | 0 recs

permalink

Re: Post-Debate New Hampshire Poll

NO, I am saying that New Hampshire voters DONT make up their minds until AFTER the Iowa caucus and for you to think the results in Iowa and Nevada WONT have an effect on New Hamsphire voters, you are naive.

by vamonticello 2007-06-05 11:46AM | 0 recs

permalink

Re: Post-Debate New Hampshire Poll

So, then, where does that leave Obama? He is way behind Clinton in NH, but even if Iowa is the kingmaker (it really is not, but for argument's sakes) that would favor Edwards quite obviously. Then you have the strong lead Clinton has in Nevada and Florida. Where does Obama fit in there? He does not have a lead in ANY state of the 40 polled so far, aside from his home state.

by georgep 2007-06-05 01:33PM | 0 recs

permalink

Re: Post-Debate New Hampshire Poll

He has a lead in Texas in the last poll I saw

by gb1437a 2007-06-05 11:53AM | 0 recs

permalink

What Texas Poll?

He was close in an ARG poll a couple months ago, but I don't think I've seen him leading one.

by IVR Polls 2007-06-05 12:17PM | 0 recs

permalink

Re: What Texas Poll?

Did some checking he was ahead with ARG initially...in most recent he is behind Clinton by 2.

by gb1437a 2007-06-05 12:40PM | 0 recs

permalink

Re: Post-Debate New Hampshire Poll

Her crowds in NH are quite large, larger than Edwards'. In addition, NH is in her reach, geographically. NH is not far removed from NY. Also, the type of campaigning that is typically done in NH is more up her alley, the retail politics.

by georgep 2007-06-05 11:18AM | 0 recs

permalink

Clinton in New Hampshire

"NH is in her reach, geographically. NH is not far removed from NY." I agree with this. I think Hillary Clinton starts as the candidate favored to win New Hampshire. If she loses New Hampshire, that would be VERY significant.

If Dodd or Biden are to have any chance, they must somehow pull off a surprise first or second in New Hampshire. Stranger things have happened....or have they?

by Demo37 2007-06-05 11:42AM | 0 recs

permalink

Is she getting 8,000 in NH like Obama?

Obama's criticism of Bush prompted ovation after ovation from the nearly 8,000 people gathered in Hampton University's Convocation Center, particularly when he denounced the Iraq war and noted that he had opposed it from the outset.

http://www.forbes.com/feeds/ap/2007/06/0 5/ap3790362.html

by aiko 2007-06-05 11:44AM | 0 recs

permalink

Re: Is she getting 8,000 in NH like Obama?

He is democratic party's dotcom candidate this cycle, on the other hand, thompson is GOP's dotcom candidate.

by bryandem 2007-06-05 11:48AM | 0 recs

permalink

Virginia, not New Hampshire

Hampton University is a black college in southeast Virginia, not New Hampshire.

As a matter of fact, Hillary is getting comparable crowds to Obama in New Hampshire.

http://www.mydd.com/comments/2007/5/14/0 1642/6432/14#14

by gradysdad 2007-06-05 12:29PM | 0 recs

permalink

Re: Virginia, not New Hampshire

my bad

by aiko 2007-06-05 02:26PM | 0 recs

permalink

Re: Is she getting 8,000 in NH like Obama?

Sad - that many of the 8,000 don't know Obama has voted to fund the war and voted against timetables - while claiming he "opposed" the war.
Reminds me that 70% Americans thought Saddam was involved with 911.

by annefrank 2007-06-05 01:47PM | 0 recs

permalink

Re: Is she getting 8,000 in NH like Obama?

Or that as a senator you have to see the world in more colors as black and white.

by Ernst 2007-06-06 04:44AM | 0 recs

permalink

Re: Post-Debate New Hampshire Poll

Maybe the only people you talked to are MyDDers or Dailykossers?

Exactly! IMO, New Hampshire can't be polled accurately because of the indys' that are really true blue partisans posing as indy's. The right-leaning indy's will vote for Mike Gravel if they think they can defeat HRC.

by ND1979 2007-06-05 11:12AM | 0 recs

permalink

New Hampshire Poll

Any polls will undesrserve Obama, because he brings in so many new voters. They registered 10,000 at the Atlanta speech - half the crowd. Even if gets a quarter of his draw it is enough of a push to overcome Hill.

Voters who show high interest in the election favor Obama. We can only assume that more people begin to pay attention as the elction draws near - and no longer will Hill's name rec be enough... Obama is waiting as long as possible before he goes on the attack against Hillary (though he won't go personal) and as distinctions are drawn...as the Turn The Page sentament rises he'll prosper as the man of "Change"

Hill is also in big trouble next month when the MSM bashes her for Obama beating her in Q2 fundraising...which most people say is likely to happen.

by gb1437a 2007-06-05 11:23AM | 0 recs

permalink

Re: New Hampshire Poll

Sounds to me the same 'cell phone polling error' of Dean youth theory in 2004.

by bryandem 2007-06-05 11:30AM | 0 recs

permalink

Re: New Hampshire Poll

Not really the same...because these people are new voters. The Cell Phone generation doesn't really vote yet. How many people have said Hillary makes me interested in politics again? Not many, while this is Obama's main draw...His base is of new voters, which is weak, but even if some show up none are polled, because they don't meet the criteria.

Dean was college only, which is the cell-phone people, who don't really vote because of absentee problems. While Obama is more young professional and dissinfranchised.

by gb1437a 2007-06-05 11:34AM | 0 recs

permalink

Re: New Hampshire Poll

This theory is nothing new, I'm surprised you have had such a short memory. Did we also hear a lot of Trippi's talk about how Dean can win the general election because he'll bring out all those who have never voted in their entire life?

by bryandem 2007-06-05 11:50AM | 0 recs

permalink

Re: New Hampshire Poll

But, Obama's crowds are 4 times that of Dean...he has a much broader base, and remember Dean got close...Obama is a much better canadite than Dean. We can't throw the baby out with the bathwater, so to speak, of the Dean phenomena. Sure, he didn't win, but he did something signifcant - which the Obama team has studied and are improving on.

by gb1437a 2007-06-05 11:56AM | 0 recs

permalink

Re: New Hampshire Poll

This entire theory is very flawed. Do you really believe those who are struggling for food and clothes everyday and have no interest in even voting somehow showed up in Obama's rallies these days?

There is NO such evidence. Most people who do not vote are under privileged.

by bryandem 2007-06-05 11:54AM | 0 recs

permalink

Re: New Hampshire Poll

The evidence from the rallies is that they are new voters

by gb1437a 2007-06-05 11:59AM | 0 recs

permalink

Re: New Hampshire Poll

The evidence is poll, not based on some naked eyewitnesses like you.

We've had enough such 'evidence' in the past. How many times did we hear 'Kerry's signs outnumbered Bush's in a very red area'?

Kerry actually lost to Bush by a wider margin than Gore.

I won't believe those stuff anymore until I see any poll or real votes to back it up.

by bryandem 2007-06-05 12:06PM | 0 recs

permalink

Re: New Hampshire Poll

I wasn't using naked eyewitness... I am saying from his events - people are showing up who are new voters in much larger numbers than Dean...

I am saying that people who are "paying close attention" to the race are breaking toward him... by the polls.

I admit I cannot stand Hillary. I think she would be a right wing conservative if it meant she would get elected, and that is how about half the population views her.

Why would we take the Hillary route as a party? She has the biggest chance to lose. She isn't a liberal. She is a culture warrior, rather than a new voice. The Dems finally have a chance to put up a change, a 'progressive', and were going to give it to Hill? I don't think so, and as people pay more attention they are breaking away from her.

Prediction - She loses "front-runner" status after Q2 numbers are out.

by gb1437a 2007-06-05 12:15PM | 0 recs

permalink

Re: New Hampshire Poll

According to senate voting records, Obama is only 1% more "progressive" then Clinton.

by forecaster15 2007-06-05 01:44PM | 0 recs

permalink

Re: New Hampshire Poll

Simply not true... he is the most liberal person running by voting records:
http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2007/ 03/01/2008-pm-update-ratings-and-appeara nces/

by gb1437a 2007-06-05 02:49PM | 0 recs

permalink

Re: New Hampshire Poll

Kerry was a weak candidate, but he only 'lost' the 2004 election because of republican dirty tricks with their disenfranchising eligble voters via targeting democratic core voters for deletion from voter rolls, challenges at the polls, less and broken machines in solid democratic areas and short lines in republican areas, other longer term disenfranchisment efforts, and the electronic voting machines themselves altering vote totals. A large amount of DNC and independant research has been done on what happened in 2004 (and also 2000) and it's clear that a lot was done to seriously alter the vote counts in several key states.

I'd add that this is why it's vital that we pass a bill into law to get rid of the machines unless there is a voter verified paper trail that would allow for a recount and that there are trained poll watchers in place at least at the most likely to be targeted place to protect the vote. Without that it will be easy enough for the same fraud to occur again and our efforts at gotv and message and policy will be for naught.

by Quinton 2007-06-05 10:39PM | 0 recs

permalink

Re: New Hampshire Poll

Every cycle the same predictions are made. Candidate X will win because he will bring in new voters! Candidate X might be behind right now, but thats only because the polls don't recognize those new voters. Yes, I know that this was also said about candidate Y and candidate Z but this time it'll be different! Really, trust me...

And next cycle the same is said again, and again. It would be nice if you're right. But don't bet any money on it untill after election day.

by Ernst 2007-06-06 05:00AM | 0 recs

permalink

Re: New Hampshire Poll

New voters: I have seen several articles in which many new women voters are being signed up to register to vote by the Clinton team, women who have never in their life voted, but now intend to do so because they are inspired by Clinton.

by georgep 2007-06-05 11:55AM | 0 recs

permalink

Hopefully, these women will vote...

on the basis of who is most qualified, and not just because Clinton is a woman.

by citizen53 2007-06-05 01:14PM | 0 recs

permalink

Re: Hopefully, these women will vote...

If they are being signed up by the Clinton team that is where their loyalty will be. This is an important strategy. Some may change but not that many.

by pioneer111 2007-06-05 01:21PM | 0 recs

permalink

Not just Dean

I've used this same theory used to claim polling was deceptively pessimistic for Kerry in 2004, and to claim that polling was deceptively pessimistic for the Republicans in 2006. I'm beginning to come to the conclusion that if someone finds themselves in the position of having to claim that the polls are being unkind to them because of cell phone voters, this is a sign that they're losing.

And I'm saying this as someone whose only telephone is a cell phone myself.

by Silent sound 2007-06-05 02:27PM | 0 recs

permalink

10,000 Registered?

Do you have a link?

You are saying that 1/2 of the people who attended were unregistered? If so, I would not count on a great many of them in the long run to show at the polls.

by citizen53 2007-06-05 12:10PM | 0 recs

permalink

Re: 10,000 Registered?

You can't backsearch blogs on his site, which is where I read it...but they're asking people to register at the gates of his events...I've forgotten the Oakland numbers, but they were large as well.

by gb1437a 2007-06-05 12:31PM | 0 recs

permalink

In New Hampshire, it's the Women

Hillary has been leading in New Hampshire for a long time so this is not news exactly. However there is no doubt her debate performance has increased her lead there. And she has a helluva team of women in N.H. who are working for her. Last month 500 prominent N.H. women, some of them politically affiliated, formed a coalition of N.H. women for Hillary.

I expect Hillary will not let N.H. get away from her.

Check this link.
http://www.hillaryclinton.com/news/relea se/view/?id=1470

CONCORD, NH -- On the day before Equal Pay Day 2007, State Senator Betsi DeVries, who was the first woman firefighter in Manchester, today announced that she and over 500 New Hampshire women have decided to support Senator Hillary Clinton for President. Citing Clinton's leadership and experience, Devries is the first New Hampshire State Senator to endorse Senator Clinton and will serve as a Co-Chair of "Women for Hillary" in New Hampshire.

Here's the list, and it's growing!
A list of New Hampshire Women for Hillary follows:

Gladys Renoe, Alexandria
Marie Slugaski, Alexandria
Laura Honey, Alstead
Dale Woodruff Kong, Alstead
Andrea Amodeo-Vickery, Amherst
Donna E. Burke, Amherst
Beverly Melle, Amherst
Francine Naidus, Amherst
Tami Shartrand, Amherst
Susan West, Amherst
Kathleen Gualco, Atkinson
Linda Steir, Atkinson
Kathy Curran, Barrington
Ann Dupuis, Barrington
Angela Foote, Barrington
Cheryl A. Huckin, Barrington
Mary Irons, Barrington
Jo MacNair, Barrington
Melissa Rebirds, Bartlett
Tracy Therrien, Bartlett
Alexis Gates, Bedford
Catriona Beck, Bennington
Lise Lemieux, Bennington
Lorraine Bisson, Berlin
Annette Bisson, Berlin
Lillian Colbeth, Berlin
Barbara Demers, Berlin
Betty Fortier, Berlin
Sue Gallant, Berlin
Carole Hockmeyer, Berlin
Velma Lavoie, Berlin
Kris Martin, Berlin
Kathryn McKenna, Berlin
Eleanor McLaughlin, Berlin
Kimberly Williams, Berlin
Arianne Kraft-Lund, Bethlehem
Mary Lou Krambeer, Bethlehem
Karen Bemis, Bow
Barbara Bennett, Bow
Danealle Bittle, Bow
Julia Cotter, Bow
Marilyn Dennison, Bow
Polly Shumaker, Bow
Veronica Vahsen, Bow
Kate Whitegiver, Bow
Jacqueline Pehrson, Bradford
Melanie Levesque, Brookline
Erika Clyons, Campton
Carol Lenahan, Campton
Cynthia Moniz, Canterbury
Marcia Kimball, Center Harbor
Allycia Kimball, Center Harbor
Patricia Jordan, Center Tuftonboro
Sandra C. Harris, Claremont
Genevive Johnson, Claremont
Ruth Joly, Claremont
Valerie Mahar, Claremont
Janet Arvin, Concord
Christy Bartlett, Concord
Monique Cesna, Concord
Monica Ciolfi, Concord
Karen Cox, Concord
Sandy Dagnese, Concord
Karen Davies, Concord
Victoria Disarro, Concord
Nancy Greenwood, Concord
Mary Louis Hancock, Concord
Kelly Holmes, Concord
Dorothy Hunt, Concord
Katrina Kindel, Concord
Mary Ann Lakevicius, Concord
Kristina Levine, Concord
Virginia MacIntosh, Concord
Sara Minette, Concord
Jessica Pickard, Concord
Joanne Poulliot, Concord
Kerry Russell, Concord
Mary Schuh, Concord
Erin Stewart, Concord
Virginia Syvinski, Concord
Jennifer Telesco, Concord
Anna Vlacich, Concord
Mary Jane Wallner, Concord
Amy Wright, Concord
Suzette Murdock, Danville
Josephine Panasci, Danville
Laurie Taylor, Danville
Helena Digiovanni-Hagenau, Derry
Melissa Glassman, Derry
Kimberly Plourde, Derry
Linda Svitak, Derry
Joni Ahlquist, Dover
Marie Bartlett, Dover
Jennifer Blankenship, Dover
Erica Blatt, Dover
Cheri Booth, Dover
Annie Bresnahan, Dover
Maura Byrne, Dover
Lynn Carey, Dover
Michelle Champagne, Dover
Lynda Douglas, Dover
Beth Downs, Dover
Dana Gray, Dover
Betty Hannan, Dover
Ginny Hermann, Dover
Lindsay Humphreys, Dover
Jane Kavanaugh, Dover
Carrie Keech, Dover
Aviva Meyer, Dover
Natalie Moran, Dover
Linda Varney, Dover
Jessica Vassillion, Dover
Valerie Vuk, Dover
Louise White, Dover
Gina Whitehead, Dover
Janet Yusko, Dover
Susan Kilday, Dover
Patricia Davis, Dublin
Maureen Luksza, Dunbarton
Jolanta Sweson-Shea, Dunbarton
Lisa Allison, Durham
Joan Ashwell, Durham
Ally Cheney, Durham
Anne Courtney, Durham
Liza De Angelis, Durham
Melanie Drogseth, Durham
Audrey Drogseth, Durham
Katie Floyd, Durham
Lori Hopkins, Durham
Roni Slavin Pekins, Durham
Alison Sweatt, Durham
Veronica Abbott, East Wakefield
Rachel Clermont, Epsom
Diane Doheny, Exeter
Robin Gorman, Exeter
Stephanie Marshall, Exeter
Sally Martin, Exeter
Karen Noonan, Exeter
Marynia Page, Exeter
Joan Robinson, Exeter
Annette Leel, Fitzwilliam
Lois Ray, Fitzwilliam
Catherine Dowd, Franconia
Martha McLeod, Franconia
Linda Roberts, Franklin
Dawn Alexander, Freedom
June Gordon, Fremont
Lindsey Bickford, Gilford
Ann Swett, Gilford
Christine Spaulding, Gilmanton Iron Works
Nancy Marquis, Glen
Vilma Burnett, Goffstown
Janine Chancey, Goffstown
Ruth Gage, Goffstown
Carolyn Gordon, Goffstown
Kathy Ireland, Goffstown
Teresa Kyriacos, Goffstown
Carol Linehan, Goffstown
Judith Logan, Goffstown
Merrilee Thissell, Goffstown
A. Jean Benner, Gorham
Beverly Barney, Grantham
Kathryn Waterman, Grantham
Sue Kim, Greenfield
Karen Bailey, Greenland
Beverly Hurst, Greenland
Beth Sharp, Greenland
June Casey, Hampton
Virginia A. Collins, Hampton
Ann Connors, Hampton
Brenda Conroy, Hampton
Andrea Cook, Hampton
Jean De Zarn, Hampton
Carol Douglas, Hampton
Carol W. Doyle, Hampton
Michelle Draeger, Hampton
Harriet Goff, Hampton
Michele Haberman, Hampton
Aimee Kent, Hampton
Sylvia Lavallee, Hampton
Lisa Maes, Hampton
Mary Maher, Hampton
Deborah Makowsky, Hampton
Marynia Martin, Hampton
Caitlin McEachern, Hampton
Paula Munch, Hampton
Mary Peterson, Hampton
Wendy Rega, Hampton
Kathleen Richards, Hampton
Ann-Marie Serewicz, Hampton
Brenda Shepard, Hampton
Marie Stefan, Hampton
Sandra Taube, Hampton
Pam Tiberia, Hampton
Jane Gallagher, Hampton
Linda S. Leary, Hampton Beach
Elaine Ahearn, Hampton Falls
Lorraine D. McGlinchey, Hancock
Ruth Subers, Hancock
Victoria Boggiano, Hanover
Ashley Cartagena, Hanover
Marion Copenhaver, Hanover
Hilary Owen, Hanover
Joanna Pucci, Hanover
Nora Wijn, Hanover
Megan Caft, Harrisville
Sara Cawthon, Harrisville
Eleanor Kjellman, Henniker
Frances Boucher, Hinsdale
Robin Shaink, Hinsdale
Gail Koutroubas, Hudson
Lisa Lyon, Hudson
Mary Beth Theisen, Jaffrey
Alison Brodee, Keene
Nancy Brown, Keene
Annie Callaway, Keene
Claire Casey, Keene
Vivica Duffield, Keene
Shannon Feeley, Keene
JoAnn Fenton, Keene
M.J. Forbes, Keene
Joan Freedman, Keene
Rebecca Holland, Keene
Edwina Carr-Jangarathis, Keene
Cheryl Kahn, Keene
Rose LaPalme, Keene
Susan Lucia, Keene
Glenna Mercure, Keene
Pat O'Connell, Keene
Kelly O'Connell, Keene
Miriam Olken, Keene
Marcia Passos Duffy, Keene
Catherine Peterson, Keene
Helen Peterson, Keene
Janet Fuering Russell, Keene
Mary Sherwin, Keene
Cynthia Sieracki, Keene
Pamela Russell Slack, Keene
Linda Stavely, Keene
Michelle Swenson, Keene
Linda Walker, Keene
Barbara Carpenter, Kensington
Cheryl McDonough, Kensington
Sandy Mitchell, Kensington
Catherine Cardillo-Bragg, Kingston
Susan Gobeil, Kingston
Audrey Goyette, Laconia
Tammi Anthony, Lebanon
Deborah Liddy, Lebanon
Bonnie Rivard, Lebanon
Meghan Ricker, Lee
Karen Ricker, Lee
Christa Ricker, Lee
Gwendolyn Howe, Littleton
Tammy Siekman, Londonderry
Katie Wolff, Londonderry
Lisa Crossman, Loudon
Carla Kimball, Loudon
Stacey Bellabona, Madbury
Molly Shaheen, Madbury
Janet G. Wall, Madbury
Madalyn Ahlgren, Manchester
Angelique Amadeo, Manchester
Stavroula Bakolas, Manchester
Margaret Batchelder, Manchester
Denise Bauer, Manchester
Brandy Bergeron, Manchester
Susan Boet, Manchester
Doreen Boutin, Manchester
Rosanne Breault, Manchester
Samantha Calhoun, Manchester
Jessica Chau, Manchester
Doris Cintron, Manchester
Jane Clayton, Manchester
Xiomara Colon, Manchester
Kenisha Colon, Manchester
Susan Colwell, Manchester
Patricia Cornell, Manchester
Daisy Cruz, Manchester
Taina Cruzado, Manchester
Tammy Davis, Manchester
Christina Day, Manchester
Heidi Decato, Manchester
Betsi DeVries, Manchester
Kelleigh Domaingue, Manchester
Sophia Dongas, Manchester
Shari Duclos, Manchester
Tara Fairweather, Manchester
Michelle Farrell, Manchester
Suzanne Felde, Manchester
Joan Flurey, Manchester
Mariana Gasis, Manchester
Gina Gasis, Manchester
Polly Gasis, Manchester
Donna Guillemette, Manchester
Kathleen Howard, Manchester
Roberta Jache, Manchester
Lindsay Johnson, Manchester
Florence Johnston, Manchester
Betty Kacavas, Manchester
Mindy Kacavas, Manchester
Aphrodite Kalampalikis, Manchester
Rika Kalampalikis, Manchester
Peggy Kalampalikis, Manchester
Theohare Kapellakis, Manchester
Katelyn Kerins, Manchester
Robin Kinney, Manchester
Catherine Kowalczyk, Manchester
Melissa Labrie, Manchester
Susan LaBrie, Manchester
Suzanne Lajoie, Manchester
Laura Lawler, Manchester
Christine Mable, Manchester
Helena Malik, Manchester
Kelly Marin, Manchester
Patricia Massey, Manchester
Olivia McQuade, Manchester
Maggie Moore, Manchester
Patricia W. Morris, Manchester
Ann Marie Morse, Manchester
Katherine O'Loughlin, Manchester
Tara O'Neil, Manchester
Celia O'Neil, Manchester
Theresa Petrello, Manchester
Danielle Pixley, Manchester
Vera Prough, Manchester
Vilma Ramos, Manchester
Nildairis Ramos, Manchester
Judy Reardon, Manchester
Wanda Rosario-Caraballo, Manchester
Denise Rudman, Manchester
Frances Shaine, Manchester
Barbara Shaw, Manchester
Maria Spirou, Manchester
Pat Spirou, Manchester
Kelly Spirou, Manchester
Sara Stanton, Manchester
Mary Sysyn, Manchester
Aneta Theodosopoulos, Manchester
Chrysa Tsatsopoulos, Manchester
Melba Velez, Manchester
Luz Velez, Manchester
Emily Walsh, Manchester
Judy Wenners, Manchester
Carol Williams, Manchester
Tammy Winchell, Manchester
Kathleen Brooks, Marlborough
Andi Johnson, Marlborough
Marge Shepardson, Marlborough
Deborah Southwell, Marlborough
Shirley Bickford, Marlow
Gail DiGangi, Merrimack
Mary Moriarty, Merrimack
Mona Movafaghi, Merrimack
Wendy Thomas, Merrimack
Jennifer Webster, Merrimack
Lucia Castonguay, Milan
Kimberly Hockmeyer, Milan
Jessica Burbank, Milford
Karen Clark, Milford
Heather Cox, Milford
Mary Ireland, Milford
Tami Rivas, Milford
Jane Clemons, Nashua
Josephine Clemons, Nashua
Kathleen Drolet, Nashua
Christine Fleet, Nashua
Patricia Gorman, Nashua
Angeline A. Kopka, Nashua
Bette Lasky, Nashua
Lori Movsesian, Nashua
Tina Munroe, Nashua
Debora B. Pignatelli, Nashua
Brenda Quinney, Nashua
Nicoleta Roebling, Nashua
Mary Stamas, Nashua
Jill Stanfield, Nashua
Jodi Sutherland, Nashua
Yvonne Theriault-Wilkinson, Nashua
Amber Wilmot, Nashua
Susan Wright, Nashua
Amethyst Wyldfyre, Nashua
Jane Schofield, New Boston
Pat Schlesinger, New Hampton
Jayne Powers Leary, New London
Polly Spaulding, New London
Jean Donohue, Newfields
Donna Finley, Newfields
Miriam Holmwood, Newfields
Judy Ford, Newmarket
Doreen Howard, Newmarket
Adrian Major, Newmarket
Nicole Belisle-Briggs, Newton
Carolyn Kelly, Newton Junction
Stephanie Roach, North Conway
Gale Rosenberger, North Hampton
Debra Scheyer, North Hampton
Patti Cohen, North Sutton
Ricia McMahon, North Sutton
Diann Ross, Northfield
Deborah Wheeler, Northfield
Susan Harden, Pelham
Marcia Sweezey, Pelham
Leigh Tango, Pelham
Katherine Laplante, Pembroke
Maureen Rogers, Pembroke
Erika Thorsell, Penacook
Margaret Grubbs, Pennacook
Nell Conkright, Peterborough
Christine Howe, Peterborough
Jill Shaffer Hammond, Peterborough
Diane Rivet, Pittsfield
Jody Carson, Plaistow
Nancy Dipirro, Plaistow
Carole J. Estes, Plymouth
Lori Barrett, Portsmouth
Susan Chamberlin, Portsmouth
Linda Conti, Portsmouth
Linda Dibernardo, Portsmouth
Stacey DiSimone, Portsmouth
Kate Eckert, Portsmouth
Susan Everest, Portsmouth
Jane Fithian, Portsmouth
Samantha Fleisher, Portsmouth
Anita Freedman, Portsmouth
Nancy Gentile, Portsmouth
Anna Gentile, Portsmouth
Jody Gittell, Portsmouth
Mary Clifton Horrigan, Portsmouth
Amy Howell, Portsmouth
Ruth Kenick, Portsmouth
Miranda Leveille, Portsmouth
Sara Marchessault, Portsmouth
Shannon Marcus, Portsmouth
Cynthia Mingear, Portsmouth
Virginia Patnaude, Portsmouth
Nancy Pollock, Portsmouth
Stefany Shaheen, Portsmouth
Susan Tober, Portsmouth
Billie Tooley, Portsmouth
Ingeborga Wyman, Portsmouth
Yvonne Jenkins, Randolph
Jamie Aresnaut, Raymond
Rachel Beckhardt, Raymond
Deborah Fernandez, Raymond
Renee Prince, Raymond
Shelia J. Burnham, Rindge
Shannon Force, Rindge
Pauline Gosselin, Rindge
Berta Vasseur, Rindge
Loretta Alty, Rochester
Candy Cable, Rochester
Stephanie Cable, Rochester
Irene Creteau, Rochester
Donna Desjardins, Rochester
Yvette Frost, Rochester
Pamela Heckman, Rochester
Sandra Keans, Rochester
Zulma Saavedra-Franco, Rochester
Lee-Anne Sanfacon, Rochester
Christine Westcott, Rochester
Jane Wright, Rochester
Deanna Rollo, Rollinsford
Deb Crapo, Rye
June Walsh, Rye
Mary Ann Sullivan, Rye Beach
Deb Fauth, Salem
Maina Julian, Salem
LuAnn Speikers, Sanbornton
Katherine Picard, Sandown
Kimberley Rusch, Sandown
Molly Bagley, Seabrook
Joan Chamberlin, Shelburne
Denise Ambrose, Somersworth
Carol Golding, Somersworth
Beatrice Lane, Somersworth
Amy Michaels, Somersworth
Rita Middleton, Somersworth
Ann Symonds, Spofford
Deb Zuber Lyons, Stoddard
June A. Cyr, Strafford
Shelley Shaw, Strafford
Kathleen Trinka Russell, Stratham
Rebecca Brown, Sugar Hill
Veronica Farrington, Sugar Hill
Mary V. Smith, Sunapee
Chelsey Goff, Suncook
Cheryl Kitsis, Suncook
Brenda Rodier, Swanzey
Leola O'Connor, Tilton
Carol Jones, Troy
Marcia Press, Troy
Carla Press, Troy
Doris Goguen, Walpole
Merry Lake, Walpole
Sheila Rabow, Walpole
Amy Wistreich, Walpole
Merry Lake, Walpole
Sheila Rabow, Walpole
Amy Wistreich, Walpole
Donna Chagnon, Warner
Mary Evans, Weare
Carol Friedrich, Wentworth
Sally Caltrider, West Chesterfield
Lynn Rubino, West Lebanon
Jean Etter, Westmoreland
Lisa Allard, Wilton
Sandra Gillis, Winchester
Jodi Germano, Windham
Betsy Walton, Windham

by samueldem 2007-06-05 11:30AM | 0 recs

permalink

Re: Post-Debate New Hampshire Poll

Frank Luntz, at a panel I was covering, said that he did a focus group right after the debate who said that Edwards had won. Seemed unlikely to me--Clinton seemed like the clear winner. But he said the we junkies don't see things the way those dumb voters do.

by jayackroyd 2007-06-05 11:36AM | 0 recs

permalink

Re: Post-Debate New Hampshire Poll

Don't watch those stupid 'focus group' TV shows for long time. Those are not scientific polls. Kerry always converted lots of 'undecided' in those sorts of polls last time around.

by bryandem 2007-06-05 12:03PM | 0 recs

permalink

I saw someone today

who told me a mutual acquaintance of ours and Hillary supporter also thought Edwards did the best in the debate.

I'm sure it helped Hillary that CNN was giving her supporters the most time post-debate to spin, though.

I thought she did ok, but not as well as in the first debate.

by desmoinesdem 2007-06-05 12:28PM | 0 recs

permalink

Re: Post-Debate New Hampshire Poll

I wholeheartedly agree - we see these events, and the election in general, through very different eyes than the average voter.

by LandStander 2007-06-05 03:51PM | 0 recs

permalink

Edwards and Obama supporters should

take off the blinders. It is obvious that Hillary is running away with this, with a lot of help from people attacking Obama and Edwards day in and day out on the blogs.

by Populism2008 2007-06-05 11:39AM | 0 recs

permalink

NO it's the mainstream media

be positive to Hillary.

REad the last part of the new poll...

the pollsters said the media declaring Hillary won reinforced and/or helped create perceptions.

Further it showed the jump in HIllary support is directly correlated with the jump in voters who perceive her as "inevitable"

by TarHeel 2007-06-05 12:45PM | 0 recs

permalink

Re: Edwards and Obama supporters should

I sincerely doubt that any of the debate back and forth between Edwards and Obama supporters on the blogs is being reflected in the national and state polls. An impact will be made by the blogs and larger netroots community on the race, but what you seem to say is blatantly rediculous. A unified netroots behind one candidate would hold value at building grassroots on the ground, rapid response to attacks and other messaging, and also obviously directing our large fundraising ability behind one candidate so they can plow it into other activities to raise their profile in the larger electorate. Dean raised what, $50 million in small donations before he was done? Edwards raised a good amount online, Obama did too, Hillary wasn't bad, but I believe combined it's less than $10 million. That's a far cry from $50 million and frankly I think the right candidate could raise two or three times as much in small donations over the primary. The movement has grown a lot larger since 2004 and is very engaged.

by Quinton 2007-06-05 10:44PM | 0 recs

permalink

Re: Post-Debate New Hampshire Poll

Like I said before Chris deleted my post, Hillary has very strong female support in New Hampshire. 500 women, many of them politicians or politically connected, have formed a women's coalition for Hillary in NH.

I also believe that Hillary's campaign team have been studying Iowa extensively and have no doubt discovered that sexism might be a problem there for Hillary. This might be why Winterhoff was just moved from State Director to Head of Strategy in Iowa.

by samueldem 2007-06-05 11:48AM | 0 recs

permalink

Re: Post-Debate New Hampshire Poll

I don't want Hillary to poll ahead in IA. I want her to lay low there, and just beat the expectations. She will be unbeatable after that.

by bryandem 2007-06-05 11:52AM | 0 recs

permalink

Re: Post-Debate New Hampshire Poll

It's SEXISM if men dont want to vote for Hillary because she is a woman BUT it's not SEXISM if women support Hillary because she is a woman? Hillary is running a campaign that says vote for me because I'm a woman AND if you dont, you are a sexist. That's no reason to vote for Hillary.

by vamonticello 2007-06-05 11:56AM | 0 recs

permalink

a poll

shows HIllary losing white woman voters to BOTH Giuliani and McCain.. on politico

by TarHeel 2007-06-05 12:46PM | 0 recs

permalink

Re: Post-Debate New Hampshire Poll

Do you have link about Winterof's move? I hadn't heard of that; I'd love to read more on it.

by domma 2007-06-05 12:21PM | 0 recs

permalink

Re: Post-Debate New Hampshire Poll

http://www.desmoinesregister.com/apps/pb cs.dll/article?AID=/20070605/NEWS/706050 16

by PhillyGuy 2007-06-05 12:53PM | 0 recs

permalink

domma

You can read about the Winterhof move at this link:

http://www.hillaryclinton.com/news/relea se/view/?id=1933

by samueldem 2007-06-05 01:03PM | 0 recs

permalink

Re: Post-Debate New Hampshire Poll

Thanks PhillyGuy and samueldem!

by domma 2007-06-05 02:58PM | 0 recs

permalink

no, sexism is not her problem

with Democratic primary voters. Iowa Democrats have nominated women for many offices, and several of them have won statewide elections. It is true that Iowa has never elected a woman governor or a woman to Congress, but we have nominated two women for governor, and at least five for U.S. House seats.

Sexism is not Hillary's problem among Iowa Democrats. Her problem is that many Democrats do not like her (the former Wal-Mart board member, the favorite of corporate lobbyists), and many Democrats who do like her think she has too much baggage to win an election.

The baggage doesn't come from being a woman, it comes from being a Clinton. Notice that the right-wing hate machine is holding their fire now, because they are so desperately hoping that she will become the nominee. She is radioactive to independents.

by desmoinesdem 2007-06-05 12:33PM | 0 recs

permalink

Sexism?

http://desmoinesregister.com/apps/pbcs.d ll/article?AID=/20070605/OPINION03/70605 0347/1035/OPINION

I think it's likely that sexism is playing a role in Iowa. It will be interesting to see how Hillary and her brilliant team combat it.

by samueldem 2007-06-05 01:08PM | 0 recs

permalink

Re: Sexism?

Cool

In fact I may even vote for a third party candidate so I can say I did not vote for a Clinton again.

by robliberal 2007-06-05 04:48PM | 0 recs

permalink

Re: Sexism?

As much as it pains me to encourage someone to vote for Hillary... I hope that if she manages to win the nomination that you would vote for her and work to elect progressives to congress and keep a fire lit under them so they can keep her in check. We can't afford another republican. Any of them would be worse than her. That said there are democrats running who would be much better than her on key issues.

by Quinton 2007-06-05 10:46PM | 0 recs

permalink

Re: Sexism?

That the spirit!

After all, Nader has been proved right. Gore and Bush were just the same.

by Ernst 2007-06-06 05:08AM | 0 recs

permalink

Re: Post-Debate New Hampshire Poll

I don't believe Chris deleted your post.

by LandStander 2007-06-05 03:56PM | 0 recs

permalink

Did well in the debate

She did well in the debate and it's as simple as that. It's quite remarkable to see how she has improved tremendously since her debate performances for Senate just last year.

I'd suggest the other candidates find out who is working on her debate prep and try to snag them. She has definitely been working on her pauses and intonation and I bet you she has a coach - a damn good one at that.

by GregNYC 2007-06-05 11:55AM | 0 recs

permalink

Re: Did well in the debate

Exactly. I found this is truly amazing. Just like sports, Hillary clinton learns, practices, improves and then wins. All her opponents are crawling in a cocoon to whine about how 'unfair' the game is.

The end result, she will be the final winner.

by bryandem 2007-06-05 12:02PM | 0 recs

permalink

Bur will we?

by citizen53 2007-06-05 12:13PM | 0 recs

permalink

Re: Did well in the debate

To put things in perspective:

Primary polling in NH by ARG tracking poll ON jan. 11, 2004

Dean 35
Clark 20
Kerry 10

The primary was held on Jan. 27th
The IA caucus was held on Jan. 19th

Kerry won the primary by 10pts +

by BDM 2007-06-05 12:20PM | 0 recs

permalink

Re: Did well in the debate

If Clinton becomes president, the Democrats will become more like the Republicans and we will stay in Iraq indefinitely. I don't trust her. Just my biased opinion. Please read this article by the Nation if you have time: http://www.thenation.com/doc/20070604/be rman

by tomanderson13 2007-06-05 08:14PM | 0 recs

permalink

Hopefully

those coaches can do something about her unnerving laughter. I don't like it when she tries too hard to be relaxed and funny, like when she laughed at a question about her Iraq vote. I think Hillary is best when she is serious, professional and focused. That is when she shines.

by Populism2008 2007-06-05 12:10PM | 0 recs

permalink

Re: Hopefully

I actually like her laughters. I find them endearing.

by PhillyGuy 2007-06-05 12:55PM | 0 recs

permalink

The guy who's really hating this poll...

Chris Dodd. He's been running all those ads in NH about his votes on Iraq, etc...and he's at 1%? Doesn't look like he's going anywhere...

by rashomon 2007-06-05 12:15PM | 0 recs

permalink

Re: The guy who's really hating this poll...

I agree with this. Dodd is every bit the senator, but a president he's really not. The recent debate crystallized this to me--totally unmemorable.

Clinton is going to easily win the nomination if things keep on going in this way. Edwards and Obama will need to pull out something truly miraculous if either wants to overtake Clinton. Contrary to Chris Bowers, at this point I really think the most viable way to beat Clinton is to coalesce around one anti-Clinton candidate. As long as it's a three-way race neither of the two challengers will be able to draw enough oxygen or energy to crush Clinton: hell, they can't even crush each other.

In all likelihood Edwards and Obama are both going to keep trucking through Feb.5, after which the Iron Lady sings (that's Hillary), and the jig is finally up. Of course Obama could end up being VP, and if worst comes to worst he always has his day job and can run for Governor of Illinois in 2010. Edwards is the big loser in all of this.

What are the chances Edwards is going to save himself some time, drop out of the race now, and endorse Obama? :DDD

by Korha 2007-06-05 12:46PM | 0 recs

permalink

Korha

"What are the chances Edwards is going to save himself some time, drop out of the race now, and endorse Obama?"
____

I think Edwards' ego is too big for such a thing.

As far as I can see, Edwards has very little chance at winning the nomination, unless he wins Iowa with a really huge lead, and I doubt he will. The thing is, if he doesn't, his political career may indeed be permanently over.

by samueldem 2007-06-05 01:11PM | 0 recs

permalink

you Hillary supporters talk a good game

But all you really talk about is her alleged inevitability. Why should Democrats support her? She is not as strong on the issues as Edwards or Obama, and she is less electable than either of them.

A lot of Democrats dislike Hillary, and a lot of Democrats like her but think she has too much baggage. Are there really so many Democrats who love her and want to go into the general election with her at the top of the ticket? I don't think so.

by desmoinesdem 2007-06-05 04:21PM | 0 recs

permalink

Re: you Hillary supporters talk a good game

She has a long track record and is strong on the issues. Polls show that voters are attracted to her because of that.

by robliberal 2007-06-05 04:30PM | 0 recs

permalink

Re: you Hillary supporters talk a good game

She is well liked in New York if you would like to bother checking actual facts on that. What have either of the other 2 main candidates down for their states lately?

by robliberal 2007-06-05 04:43PM | 0 recs

permalink

Re: you Hillary supporters talk a good game

Cheap shots like a broom under the bed do nothing but cause your candidate to lose even more votes.

by robliberal 2007-06-05 08:05PM | 0 recs

permalink

Re: you Hillary supporters talk a good game

Lets at least pretend that we can have an civil discussion and not begin with calling names.

by Ernst 2007-06-06 05:28AM | 0 recs

permalink

rssrai

Put your toys away now. It's time for bed. And don't forget to brush your teeth and go peepee.

by samueldem 2007-06-06 08:15AM | 0 recs

permalink

Re: you Hillary supporters talk a good game

Edwards supports believe that Edwards will win and say so loud and clear.
Obama supports believe that Obama will win and say so loud and clear
Clinton supports believe that Clinton will win and say so loud and clear

The only ones talking about "Clinton inevitability" are the people who disagree with her. Every one of us has said multiple times why we believe we think she's best for the job. Of course people will believe their candidate will win. To say that Clinton supporters are acting different then Edwards or Obama supporters is dishonest.

by Ernst 2007-06-06 05:25AM | 0 recs

permalink

Re: The guy who's really hating this poll...

if Hillary is the nominee both the Democratic party as the US will be a winner.

I can see no other candidate running that has the experience and international respect to restore the US to it's rightful place as moral leader of the free world.

by Ernst 2007-06-06 05:32AM | 0 recs

permalink

What Hillary Means for Southern States

I'm from Texas, and would like to see a resurgence of Dems here. But, if Hillary is on top of the ticket in 2008 most everybody here agrees that is not going to happen. Some party members down here may like her, but we would lose every state race - again - with Hillary on the ticket.

I can only imagine this is the case for other Southern States. Earlier there was a discussion of Hillary vs. Obama in Va, where Obama can campaign and Hillary cannot.

For a Democrat to win in Texas he/she needs to spend most of their time turning out the minority vote... and Obama can do that a lot better than Hillary giving us a shot. At least, he could campaign down here and be welcomed.

Hillary would set back the TDP (well you can't really set it back) but she would prevent us from moving forward, back to winning.

by gb1437a 2007-06-05 12:45PM | 0 recs

permalink

Re: What Hillary Means for Southern States

Ok, so here we have another anecdotal reference to how terrible Clinton would be for that person's state based on nothing but a personal feeling or "hunch" while the claim is made that Obama would bring the Democrats into contention in, of all places, Texas.

Why are these types of posts written mostly by Obama fans? Are you REALLY that presumptious to claim that you know BETTER than anyone else what is going on in a huge state like Texas? Is your personal circle of friends and colleagues REALLY representative of state voters in the state of Texas?

by georgep 2007-06-05 03:53PM | 0 recs

permalink

you've got to be kidding me

Georgep, are you really denying that Hillary would hurt us in down-ticket races all over the south and west? Seriously?

Here's a tip for you--get out to some other part of the country and listen to people talk about Hillary. It may not be fair, but it's a fact--she is widely hated, and she will not be able to change impressions formed over a 15-year-period.

Hillary at the top of the ticket puts our House and Senate majorities in danger. We have a lot of representatives and senators elected from red states.

by desmoinesdem 2007-06-05 04:23PM | 0 recs

permalink

Re: you've got to be kidding me

If we are going to deal in anecdotal stuff I am in the Deep South and know people who will vote for Clinton including some who supported Bush. Any potential nominee only has a shot at few states in the South at best. If you look back at past elections there have been few situations where other races were lost as a result of a particular presidential nominee.

It is unfortuante there is so much hate in American society against women, minorities, gays, disabled, etc. and it is unfortunate that some people hate Hillary Clinton. I don't think they are representative of all of American society whether they are far right or far left.

by robliberal 2007-06-05 04:35PM | 0 recs

permalink

Re: What Hillary Means for Southern States

I wish you didn't degrade my comments like this. I was not basing these comments on anecdotal experiences. I was basing them on the statements on a state-wide PBS show which interviews local political columnists. Who all suggested that Hillary would hurt the TDP.

I know the State of Texas...I know and have worked in Texas politics. Hillary could not crack 42% in Texas she would pull down the ticket.

If we could get a State-by-State breakdown of Hillary vs. a generic R in the south she would do significantly worse than either Obama or Edwards.

by gb1437a 2007-06-05 04:32PM | 0 recs

permalink

Re: What Hillary Means for Southern States

I would be surprised if any Democratic nominee would get above 42% in Texas in 2008. Bill Clinton got to 43.8% in 1996 against a weak GOP nominee Bob Dole. Kerry got 38% in 2004. Texas has not voted for a Democrat since 1976.

by robliberal 2007-06-05 04:41PM | 0 recs

permalink

Re: What Hillary Means for Southern States

Ann Richards

by gb1437a 2007-06-05 04:42PM | 0 recs

permalink

Re: What Hillary Means for Southern States

Bush is below 50 in Texas a generic dem is competetive. Hillary is not. We have a chance to take down John Cornyn, but we can't if were counting on people to split their tix with Hillary.

Two ways to get out of it:

Obama- raises minority turnout (like Ron Kirk) and is competative

Edwards - is fairly well liked in Texas because he is a southerner.

by gb1437a 2007-06-05 04:45PM | 0 recs

permalink

Re: What Hillary Means for Southern States

I don't think there is much chance of a Democrat winning against Cornyn myself and I don't see any real chance of a Democrat winning Texas in the presidential election.

by robliberal 2007-06-05 04:52PM | 0 recs

permalink

Re: What Hillary Means for Southern States

Ok so just write us off.

We have an extremely unpopular gov.
We picked up a couple seats in Congress.
We have several mayor races up.

Sure, chances are no Dem will win. Unless it turns out to be a sweep. But, we have a lot of down ticket races that are quite important. And Cornyn is below 50% and may even be a DSCC target.

by gb1437a 2007-06-05 04:58PM | 0 recs

permalink

Re: What Hillary Means for Southern States

I am all for a 50 state strategy even if for no other purpose but to force the GOP to use their resources as well. I do think there are some good Senate targets in 2008 including some longshot ones and things may change at some point where Texas could be in play in the Senate race.

by robliberal 2007-06-05 08:03PM | 0 recs

permalink

Re: Post-Debate New Hampshire Poll

I'm just going to note something. The poll we are comparing this to as a progression is from March 11th. That means there was over a two month gap. The whole "Hillary debate bump." Could have many other factors involved with the big swing from this polling firm.

by JeremiahTheMessiah 2007-06-05 02:22PM | 0 recs

permalink

Either way

The interesting thing to me is, I seem to remember that around March 11 the prevailing narrative on the progressive blogs was that Clinton's lead was superficial and would erode as soon as the voters got a chance to really look at her. I find it interesting that she's if anything only gone up since then, to the point that the question of why she's going up seems like a secondary concern.

by Silent sound 2007-06-05 02:30PM | 0 recs

permalink

Re: Post-Debate New Hampshire Poll

Unless I am mistaken, Mr. Clinton lost NH and managed to get nominated. P.S. I wouldn't vote for Hillary (unless she's the nominee) even if she had balls.

by howieinseattle 2007-06-05 03:15PM | 0 recs

permalink

Re: Post-Debate New Hampshire Poll

It's very hard to buy the fact that you're a woman with a statement like that. I'm not saying you aren't, but I would ask if you are aware that most women don't have the voice of Lorraine Bracco and are somewhat shrill when they laugh and/or say things loudly?

My mom and dad once disliked Hillary, but have said they never expected her to be that likable in a debate. They said that they did judge her without ever hearing her talk at length about the issues.

by jgarcia 2007-06-05 07:32PM | 0 recs

permalink

Re: Post-Debate New Hampshire Poll

I think those of us who follow politics every day read too much into every minor event. The debates were watched by only 1 to 2 percent of voters, so they probably have little to do with the poll shifts.

The biggest impact of the debates was to remind voters that there are more than the three candidates they hear about on the news, that one of them actually has executive-level experience (as a governor), and that some of them are actually against the war (even though they are somehow labeled as kooks and fringe candidates even by those who agree with them on that issue.)

by Lex 2007-06-05 03:34PM | 0 recs

permalink

The Clear Winners of the Debate

Another point that Chris didn't make, is that Bill Richardson and HRC were the clear winners of the debate according those surveyed.

by Ken Camp 2007-06-05 04:15PM | 0 recs

permalink

Re: The Clear Winners of the Debate

I thought Clinton did well, have no idea why anyone thought Richardson won though.

by robliberal 2007-06-05 04:29PM | 0 recs

permalink

Re: Post-Debate New Hampshire Poll

If Clinton becomes president, the Democrats will become more like the Republicans and we will stay in Iraq indefinitely. I don't trust her. Just my biased opinion. Please read this article by the Nation if you have time: http://www.thenation.com/doc/20070604/be rman

by tomanderson13 2007-06-05 08:18PM | 0 recs

permalink

Re: Post-Debate New Hampshire Poll

by ND1979 2007-06-06 05:45AM | 0 recs