27 Hours to Caucus
Jeff Alworth
You know you're over the edge when you keep refreshing pollster.com and saying "there're just not enough polls, dammit!" The problem, of course, isn't that there aren't enough of them, it's that they don't agree. It was just Monday when I used pretty graphs to demonstrate that Obama was sagging while Clinton bulked up and Edwards rallied. But that was so two days ago. In the most recent batch--including the Des Moines Register poll--Obama looks to have his mojo back: he leads in the five-poll average and the sensitive trend. And, in that sensitive trend, Edwards is in tripping distance of HRC. Everything's fluid!
So, without further palavering, here's a round-up of the all-Iowa news.
Des Moines Register poll
Politicos invest in the Register poll a Nostradamus-like sagacity. In '04, it was the only poll to correctly predict the place of all four of the top delegate-getters (Edwards' surprise second fooled everyone else). The Register's Delphic rep stems from what the national press believe is rare insight into the profile of the actual caucus-goer. Given that only a tiny fraction of Iowans will actually turn up to caucus in a little over a day, finding them and polling them isn't easy. This year's poll, if correct, will only heighten the DMR's street cred--they used a much-pilloried methodology to put Obama at 32%, Clinton at 25%, and Edwards at 24%.
In Iowa, independents can register as Democrats at the polls, and the DMR thinks a whole lot will, as well as a few Republicans. It also predicts a lot of first-timers. If these factors (which everyone not wearing an Obama pin disputed) are overstated, Hillary, the strongest among Dems, still holds the edge. All of which points to one truth--polls are only as good as whom they survey. Except, and now we're getting into real speculative minutiae here, when causality runs in reverse, as some suspect: does the DMR poll correctly identify the caucus-goers or influence them? Did the DMR correctly perceive a move away from Dean and toward Edwards in '04, or did they create the movement? Obamaniacs don't care.
Kucinich to the Rescue
On the off chance he doesn't get his requisite 15% in some caucus locations, Dennis Kucinich is asking supporters to throw their weight behind Obama. "Senator Obama and I have one thing in common: Change." But how likely is it that DK doesn't get 15%? Come on. Never mind Dennis, though, is there a...
Second-Choice Advantage for Edwards?
Four recent polls have looked into the second-choice candidates for those supporting Biden, Richardson, Dodd and Kucinich (those most likely to get less than the 15% threshold for delegates), and three of them say Edwards has the advantage, followed by Clinton and Obama:
Once again, the Des Moines Register poll tells a different story. The other three all show the reallocation working in Edwards's favor -- and by a net six and eight points by respectively, Mason-Dixon and InsiderAdvantage. Zogby's first numbers from Sunday show small single digit benefit to Edwards and their report today implies the same. The Register reports, however, "that the results would change little if the votes for the lower-rated candidates were redistributed among the front-runners." So here is yet another unresolved conflict that only the actual results will resolve.
Republicans
Romney's smears campaign against Huckabee appears to be providing less bang for Mitt's buck. Huckabee is leading in four of the five most recent polls (29.2% to 26.8%). Wait a second--who cares about the Republicans?
Iowa Power Rankings
Based on the recent poll activity, I'm putting a new leader atop the Democratic board. It's a squeaker, and I'm susceptible to charges of favoritism. Still, I'm hanging my hat on the polls and the credibility of the Des Moines Register. My objectivity surely can't be questioned.
Democrats
- Obama. Massive crowds, surging polls; now only two people can stop him. Oh wait. (Plus, with Kucinich behind him....)
- Clinton. Her resiliency in the Iowa polls is somewhat disconcerting for those who hope for a longer election season.
- Edwards. How do you go from first to third in the rankings? Well, you continue to poll third and you make it look like you're the weaker of the two anti-Hillary candidates. Unless the polls are wrong. (Polls are never wrong, right?)
Republicans
- Huckabee. He doesn't know where Pakistan is, but never mind, neither do Iowa Republicans, apparently. A good batch of surveys suggest the preacher's beaten back the smears.
- Romney. Come on, you didn't really believe we'd have a Mormon named Mitt in the White House, did you?
- McCain. McCain's numbers are steadily rising, but here's something interesting: so are Fred Thompson's. Whether McCain finishes third or fourth could have a profound effect on his chances. Oh, and Ron Paul: don't buy the hype. The midwest is no place for a libertarian.
 |
More Recent Posts | |
Albert Kaufman |
|
Guest Column |
|
Kari Chisholm |
|
Kari Chisholm |
Final pre-census estimate: Oregon's getting a sixth congressional seat |
Albert Kaufman |
Polluted by Money - How corporate cash corrupted one of the greenest states in America |
Guest Column |
|
Albert Kaufman |
Our Democrat Representatives in Action - What's on your wish list? |
Kari Chisholm |
|
Guest Column |
|
Kari Chisholm |
|
connect with blueoregon
4:11 p.m.
Jan 2, '08
Terrible reporting by Judy Woodruf last night on the Des Moines Register Poll.
Judy: "There have been six polls conducted since Dec 25. Most show a close race. The most recent poll, released today, shows Obama with a lead."
Ray Suarez: "So, Judy, the Iowa Poll is the only one that shows Obama with a lead. Is it an outlier?"
Judy: "Ray, the Iowa Poll shows Obama with a 12 point lead." Etc. etc. commentary on how important this poll is and stock quotations from Hickman (Edwards) and Penn (Clinton) challenging the poll.
DOES SHE EVEN KNOW WHAT AN OUTLIER MEANS??
4:12 p.m.
Jan 2, '08
Obama will win because polls currently say he's ahead.
Edwards will win because he has the only ground game with '04 experience. Also some polls suggest he's a top second choice.
Hillary will win because she's ahead of Edwards and Obama is relying too heavily on young caucus-goers.
This thing is a total crap-shoot.
4:16 p.m.
Jan 2, '08
One more response to Jeff: he has the race backwards. The race is Clinton vs. someone else. All the polls show Edwards and Obama fighting over the "Not Hillary Clinton" mantle in this race. This is why Obama has begun anti-Edwards ads in the state.
This is not a smack against either candidate, just an observation that Clinton's support among strongly identifying Democrats remains strong and solid. Weak identifiers, new caucus attendees, and Independents are moving toward Edwards and Obama.
This is precisely how you'd figure this race would end up: the party mantle candidate (Clinton) and the "new" candidate. Clinton/someone, just like Carter/Udall-Brown, Ford/Reagan, Reagan/Bush, Mondale/Hart, etc etc etc.
Jan 2, '08
Jeff- I think you may be mistaken about Ron Paul. Your article is too mainstream. What you're forgetting is that Ron Paul supporters, every single one of them, will show up to the Iowa caucuses. You can't say that about any other candidate. Wait and see brother. Wait and see.
Jan 2, '08
"Oh, and Ron Paul: don't buy the hype. The midwest is no place for a libertarian."
You know some people want a true conservative. Not the tax and spend version that the big media is trying ohh so hard to push on us.
Like Huckabee - his son tortures dogs, he raised spending in his state more than Bill Clinton and wants to BAN smoking everywhere in the US
Yeah sounds real conservative to me. Actually he sounds more like a sugar coated liberal. Which is fine if you are into that sort of thing. That is not really what most old-school republicans want. You know old-school, like Regan, or Goldwater?
4:36 p.m.
Jan 2, '08
Paul, did I mistype, or do I misunderstand you:
One more response to Jeff: he has the race backwards. The race is Clinton vs. someone else. All the polls show Edwards and Obama fighting over the "Not Hillary Clinton" mantle in this race. This is why Obama has begun anti-Edwards ads in the state.
This is exactly what I think, too. It's why I bobbled Obama/Edwards between 1 and 3. I don't think Hillary will win Iowa because collectively the "someone else" pot is larger and people will break to the leading "else." In my previous ranking, I thought that would be Edwards, but now I lean (however precariously) toward Obama.
4:41 p.m.
Jan 2, '08
Oh, and for all the Paulies who will descend to comment: don't bother. This is a progressive blog and we don't care about Ron Paul. Good luck to you, but peddle your Paulanalia elsewhere.
Jan 2, '08
"The midwest is no place for a libertarian."
Perhaps Mr. Alworth is correct. The ideas of limited government, individual responsibility, humble foreign policy, and fiscal responsibility just do not resonate in the Midwest. Maybe it's time for me to move.
4:54 p.m.
Jan 2, '08
Need a hand packing your shit and waving as you drive east?
Jan 2, '08
"The midwest is no place for a libertarian."
Perhaps Mr. Alworth is correct. The ideas of limited government, individual responsibility, humble foreign policy, and fiscal responsibility just do not resonate in the Midwest. Maybe it's time for me to move.
Jan 2, '08
It's already been decided, by The Bilderbergers. Your time is better spent figuring out what we here in Oregon will do after it all falls apart.
Ain't nothin' east of The Rockies we need.
7:25 p.m.
Jan 2, '08
jeff, no I read too quickly.
BUT WAIT! ANOTHER JUDY WOODRUFF BONER!
Gwen Ifil: "How much is all this costing the candidates, Judy?"
Judy: "Our best estimate is that they have spent 100 million in Iowa. most of this is Democratic money. We think they spent 78 to 80 million in Iowa, compared to 18 million in 2004. So they are spending magnitudes and magnitudes more."
A single magnitude increase = 10x. Magnitudes = 100, 1000, 10000 times.
I know, picky point, but this is the day after she showed she had no idea what an "outlier" was. And she's one of the better political reporters out there!
I am a big advocate for numeracy among journalists and the public, so here's another plea.
Jan 2, '08
Paul, Maybe you should try talking Reed into setting up a “statistics for reporters” summer class, there must be at least one big media outlet that would like to have at least one political reporter who can read a poll (and would pay for it).
Jan 2, '08
"This is a progressive blog and we don't care about Ron Paul."
So, by "progressive," you mean, "going back to the days when the state had total control."
Jan 3, '08
Here are a few tidbits I picked up that indicate Barack Obama may do very well tonight.
There are reports (Iowa Independent website) that Richard is throwing his second choice support to Obama.
Many college students are back, specifically to caucus. Luther College for example has many students back from out of State and they are ready to caucus.
Another huge turnout for Barack last night in Des Moines, check out all the buzz at barackobama.com.
New Cspan poll out this a.m. showing Barack with a 4 point lead, and Hillary dropping to third. This may be the same poll as Zogby who also has the same result. If I recall correctly, Zogby has always shown Clinton in the lead until this one.
In her closing 2 minute broadcast, I have read that Hillary used Barack's "fired up, read to go" slogan as her own. This is unbelievable, except for the fact that this is about the 4th time that her campaign has adopted one of his unique phrases from his speeches.
Well, this is probably my last "report" before the big event. I hope you all enjoy the excitement! I am off to Nevada, and maybe I can find a computer out there to check back in this weekend.
Hope everyone can get together with TA for the Iowa Caucus watch party tonight per the other thread. We also have one down in Southern Oregon you can find on the Obama site if you are interested.
Jan 3, '08
So, by "progressive," you mean, "going back to the days when the state had total control."
progressive
Promoting or favoring progress toward better conditions or new policies, ideas, or methods
Of or relating to a Progressive Party
libertarian
libertarian (plural libertarians)
specific issue, e.g. "civil libertarian" (in favor of civil liberties).
Ron Paul certainly fits definition 5 of the later and none of the former.
12:04 p.m.
Jan 3, '08
Ron Paul is a reactionary dope who favors destructive 19th century economics and social policies.
He is not a progressive, but a regressive, and a proud and open one at that.
He is to be commended for his anti-imperialism and defense of civil liberties, but he still is a reactionary.
He is favored particularly by people like one up list who can't tell the difference between reasonable and necessary government regulation & social advancement policies, and "total government control."
Here's what would happen in the kind of "free market" economy Paul calls for: exactly what happened in the 19th century (arguably up to the Great Depression):
Extreme market volatility in which the gains of boom periods would largely be offset by massive destructions of wealth in protracted down cycles constituting deep depressions with massive unemployment on the order of 20%. Concommitant well-deserved social unrest.
Widespread vicious exploitation of workers, including child labor. Massive driving of lower middle class people into poverty and middle class people into lower middle class marginality.
Acceleration of monopolistic tendencies at the highest level of capital.
Acceleration of pollution on a massive scale & of the externalization of waste costs onto the environmental commons.
Expansion of the sale of shoddy, unsafe and fraudulent products of all sorts.
Decay of infrastructure including housing stock.
Expansion of racial and ethnic segregation and discrimination and sex discrimination with the repeal of anti-discrimination laws to make private discrimination legal again.
Anyone who is progressive and thinking about Ron Paul is either looking only at the imperialism & civil liberties piece in ignorance of everything he stands for, or is seriously deluded. There is a range of liberatarianisms -- Ron Paul is firmly at the social darwinist end of the spectrum.
Jan 5, '08
intrade.com's prediction markets react quicker than traditional polls - if you're foaming at the bit to get your hands on the pulse of the election, that's the easy second site to visit after pollster