Thursday, October 18, 2007
Wednesday, October 17, 2007
The Whole Race Just Blew Up (in Iowa)
Just when the poll numbers were getting boring, Rasmussen drops a couple of bombs on both fields. First, it should be noted that Rasmussen has been the most accurate polling firm over the last two cycles. That is not to say that they have a fix on how to poll those elusive "likely caucus goers", but their reputation does deserve a mention here. Their numbers have been a bit different (usually less Clinton/Giuliani friendly) from other firms so far this cycle, largely because they employ a tighter (and more realistic) response screen. For these polls, they employed the tightest screen I've ever seen. No one knows what the right screen is, but I would venture to guess that it's almost impossible to make the screen too tight. No matter what, a poll will miss the huge number of people who will caucus for the first time (especially on the GOP side, since the last caucus was in 2000 and McCain didn't even participate). Knowing that, it seems like firms ought to make their polls as representative of the veteran caucus-goers as possible.
Anyway, to the numbers (Pollster.com averages prior to this poll in parentheses).
On our side, the nightmare is finally here.
Clinton 33% (27)
Edwards 22% (22)
Obama 21% (23)
Richardson 9% (11)
Biden 4% (4)
Rasmussen also released a few interesting crosstabs. Clinton leads among both women and men. Obama scores his highest ratings among those with incomes over $75,000. Clinton does her best with those under $40,000. Edwards does his best in between the two, winning that group 29% to Clinton's 28% (and 21% for Obama). 59% of Clintonites say they are committed to voting for her, as opposed to only 51% and 48% of Edwardsonians and Obamamaniacs, respectively. As I've mentioned before, if Clinton wins in Iowa, she is the nominee (barring a Dean Scream type blow-up, which seems all too unlikely).
The GOP numbers are just as scary (for us).
Romney 25% (28)
Thompson 19% (15)
Huckabee 18% (12)
Giuliani 13% (15)
McCain 6% (7)
Brownback 3% (2)
Tancredo 2% (3)
Paul 2% (4)
Hunter 1% (1)
That's right. Huckabee is no longer knocking on the door of the top tier in Iowa. He's kicked it down and knocked Giuliani unconscious with it. This is largely because he finally leads among Evangelicals (unfortunately they didn't put the numbers up on their non-subscription story). On this side, 57% to 61% of each of the top 4's supporters say that they could still change their votes. As hard as Huckabee is trying not to raise money, I have a hard time seeing him outside the top 3 here and not enjoying the corresponding fundraising surge going into the rest of the earlies. If he wins, he just might lock up the Evangelicals and southern conservatives and run clear to the nomination, or at least earn himself a one-on-one fight with Rudy on Feb. 5th.
Forgive me if another poll comes out that reestablishes the old pattern and makes this poll look like an outlier. It's hard not to get excited when the numbers shift so drastically, especially when the trends all conform to expectations.
Anyway, to the numbers (Pollster.com averages prior to this poll in parentheses).
On our side, the nightmare is finally here.
Clinton 33% (27)
Edwards 22% (22)
Obama 21% (23)
Richardson 9% (11)
Biden 4% (4)
Rasmussen also released a few interesting crosstabs. Clinton leads among both women and men. Obama scores his highest ratings among those with incomes over $75,000. Clinton does her best with those under $40,000. Edwards does his best in between the two, winning that group 29% to Clinton's 28% (and 21% for Obama). 59% of Clintonites say they are committed to voting for her, as opposed to only 51% and 48% of Edwardsonians and Obamamaniacs, respectively. As I've mentioned before, if Clinton wins in Iowa, she is the nominee (barring a Dean Scream type blow-up, which seems all too unlikely).
The GOP numbers are just as scary (for us).
Romney 25% (28)
Thompson 19% (15)
Huckabee 18% (12)
Giuliani 13% (15)
McCain 6% (7)
Brownback 3% (2)
Tancredo 2% (3)
Paul 2% (4)
Hunter 1% (1)
That's right. Huckabee is no longer knocking on the door of the top tier in Iowa. He's kicked it down and knocked Giuliani unconscious with it. This is largely because he finally leads among Evangelicals (unfortunately they didn't put the numbers up on their non-subscription story). On this side, 57% to 61% of each of the top 4's supporters say that they could still change their votes. As hard as Huckabee is trying not to raise money, I have a hard time seeing him outside the top 3 here and not enjoying the corresponding fundraising surge going into the rest of the earlies. If he wins, he just might lock up the Evangelicals and southern conservatives and run clear to the nomination, or at least earn himself a one-on-one fight with Rudy on Feb. 5th.
Forgive me if another poll comes out that reestablishes the old pattern and makes this poll look like an outlier. It's hard not to get excited when the numbers shift so drastically, especially when the trends all conform to expectations.
Tuesday, October 9, 2007
Monday, October 8, 2007
Top Four Polling Trends in the Earlies
A quick glance at the trend lines from Pollster.com show some of the second tier candidates lines converging and set to intersect before the 2008 mark. Of course, those trend lines are at least partly a product of whatever regression Pollster.com uses (I don't know what it is). The slopes of those trend lines are anything but set in stone.
Given all of that, trend lines do give us an idea of how the state of the race is changing. That allows us to speculate on what the race will look like in January if nothing changes, so that we can see which campaigns need something about the trends to change.
As I noted a couple days ago, Obama has passed Edwards for second in Iowa. He and Hillary appear to be gaining at the same rate. Edwards, on the other hand, is in a relative state of collapse since his peak in April or May of 2007. In fact, Richardson's modest growth rate may put him past Edwards by January.
This is why Hillary cannot be allowed to win Iowa. Not only is her New Hampshire lead substantial, it continues to grow at an absurd rate. I don't know what all the talk is about Obama's huge momentum in New Hampshire, since he's been in the slow decline there all year. As in Iowa, Edwards is falling apart (at least compared to the other candidates), while Richardson appears almost certain to pass him for third.
This is much more a two-way race than either Iowa or New Hampshire, but otherwise it's pretty much the same story.
Given all of that, trend lines do give us an idea of how the state of the race is changing. That allows us to speculate on what the race will look like in January if nothing changes, so that we can see which campaigns need something about the trends to change.
As I noted a couple days ago, Obama has passed Edwards for second in Iowa. He and Hillary appear to be gaining at the same rate. Edwards, on the other hand, is in a relative state of collapse since his peak in April or May of 2007. In fact, Richardson's modest growth rate may put him past Edwards by January.
This is why Hillary cannot be allowed to win Iowa. Not only is her New Hampshire lead substantial, it continues to grow at an absurd rate. I don't know what all the talk is about Obama's huge momentum in New Hampshire, since he's been in the slow decline there all year. As in Iowa, Edwards is falling apart (at least compared to the other candidates), while Richardson appears almost certain to pass him for third.
This is much more a two-way race than either Iowa or New Hampshire, but otherwise it's pretty much the same story.
Wednesday, October 3, 2007
In Case You Haven't Heard
Huckabee only raised $1 million in third quarter, signaling will likely never turn his natural primary voter appeal into a decent budget. Some are speculating that he'll only have money to run a competitive ad program or a competitive field program and only in Iowa.
In contrast, Paul raised $5.1 million in the quarter and has $5.1 million on hand. He'll be able to contend in the smaller early states with ad buys likely similar in spread to those of the top tier candidates.
In contrast, Paul raised $5.1 million in the quarter and has $5.1 million on hand. He'll be able to contend in the smaller early states with ad buys likely similar in spread to those of the top tier candidates.
Will There Be Two Udalls in the 111th Senate Freshman Class?
There are precious few days in an election cycle when the party most likely to win a given Senate seat flips. Today was one of those days.
That puts it at 4 seats: (CO, NH, NM, & VA) that are more likely than to shift into our column. There are no Democratic seats that currently lean the other direction.
That puts it at 4 seats: (CO, NH, NM, & VA) that are more likely than to shift into our column. There are no Democratic seats that currently lean the other direction.
Social Security at the MSNBC Debate
I'm just finally watching the MSNBC debate from Dartmouth as a means of avoiding writing my paper and studying for my test. If you haven't seen it, you can find it here.
Social Security starts at around the 60 1/2 minute mark and the answers are really pretty interesting, because this is one of the few domestic policy issues where there is pretty strong disagreement within the field.
As I watch it, Clinton, Richardson, and, sadly, Dodd, make me want to vomit.
Social Security starts at around the 60 1/2 minute mark and the answers are really pretty interesting, because this is one of the few domestic policy issues where there is pretty strong disagreement within the field.
As I watch it, Clinton, Richardson, and, sadly, Dodd, make me want to vomit.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)