Des Moines Register: It's Obama and Huckabee

[MSUfan]

also, clinton and edwards split the 55 and above, 30-30% each. That could let obama slip through and win.

[So the Heroes Fall]

Hillary in third, she loses NH, oh what a wonderful thought.

[Politico]

The youth bloc that is backing Obama were relatively fickle four years ago when they were backing Dean. It's hard to count on youth in elections. Also, the poll shows that a third of voters may change their mind over the next couple of days. That is the silver lining that leads me to believe we are seeing the "Bradley Effect" in action. We will know Thursday night.

[Keystone Phil]

Comfortable leads by Obama and Huckabee. Interesting. I don't know if I buy that or the fact that Paul is tied with Thompson and beating Rudy.

[Speed of Sound]

Oh snap. I really needed a little boost before Iowa, as it was gettin a little dark there for a while. Its good stuff. Its good good stuff. You just dont have primaries like this all the time.

[Lief]

So, it'll all come down to turnout. If there's heavy turnout with many independents, like the DMR thinks, Obama wins. If there's lower turnout and the youth vote is disappointing once again, then either Clinton or Edwards takes it.

[Verily]

Comfortable leads by Obama and Huckabee. Interesting. I don't know if I buy that or the fact that Paul is tied with Thompson and beating Rudy.

The Giuliani numbers are consistent with most of the polls of Iowa lately; they reflect the fact that he abandoned the state back in August and hasn't run a single ad or made a single appearance since.

The Paul numbers are a little high but not that surprising. He has built up quite a following, although generally pollsters register a small segment of the population with extremely enthusiastic support for Paul, but every other voter rules him out uncategorically (and therefore I think it reasonably likely for him to manage 6-10% in Iowa, but definitely not above 10% in any early state while turnout is still high because the nomination is still up for grabs).

The Thompson numbers are also consistent with other polls. He's uninspiring and a wretched campaigner.

[Erc]

The youth bloc that is backing Obama were relatively fickle four years ago when they were backing Dean. It's hard to count on youth in elections. Also, the poll shows that a third of voters may change their mind over the next couple of days. That is the silver lining that leads me to believe we are seeing the "Bradley Effect" in action. We will know Thursday night.

The Bradley effect is pretty small in the first place, even smaller amongst Democrats, and even smaller than that amongst Democrats committed enough to go to the caucus.  It won't be an issue.

[MarkWarner08]

I just got back from a New Year's party-- from great times to an even greater time! Let's hope Obama closes well.

[Aizen]

Who knows what shall transpire on Thursday. It's anyone's game.

[Meeker]

Edwards responds:

MEMORANDUM
TO: Edwards for President
FROM: Harrison Hickman
RE: Des Moines Register Poll Results
Date December 31, 2007

In response to questions, here are some observations about the Register poll released this evening.

Is the poll accurate? There are good reasons to think it is NOT.
The poll was conducted during the holiday season AND over the weekend. (One column says interviewing ended on Sunday while the article says interviewing was conducted Thursday, Friday, and Saturday.) Numerous professional studies indicate that either of these would make it more difficult to obtain a representative sample. The combination makes the problem of obtaining a valid sample geometrically worse.

The poll is at odds with history.
The poll says 60% of Democratic caucus participants will be first timers who have never before participated in a caucus. This matters in the horserace because the poll finds that about three-quarters of Obama's supporters are first-timers. The poll is at odds with known tenets of partisan caucus participation. The poll says 45% of those at Democratic caucuses will be Independents or Republicans. This matters because the entirety of Obama's "lead" is due to his advantage among non-Democrats.

The poll is at odds with other polls.
Several other polls show a closer race with other candidates leading. Others seem suspicious of the horserace numbers. David Yepsen's column highlights the fluidity of the results rather than the horserace.

What does the poll say? The race is close.
The race is yet to be decided. 34% say they could change their minds, and 6% do not express a preference. This means 40% have not made a final decision. As Yepsen points out, 21% of those in the 2004 entrance poll said they had made their decisions in the last 3 days -- something this poll cannot capture.

The trend is moving toward Edwards. The nightly results show Obama's support flat over the last two nights, Clinton's declining each night, and Edwards' support increasing each night.

[Verily]

Given that all of the polls showing Edwards even in contention were holiday-period polls, I don't see how Edwards can explain away third place as it being the holidays...

[All life is a blur of Republicans and meat.]

Edwards is back on the defensive I see.

[Boris]

I still say that Hillary's middle-aged women are more likely to turnout than Barack's college students, but what the hell. I'll take it.

For the sake of interest, I'll even take an Edwards win over Clinton. The Democratic race becomes really boring really fast if Hilldawg wins Iowa.

[Grad Students are the Worst]

I actually agree with Edwards' people.  Too many first-time voters, too any young voters.  Kind of chronic during caucus polling.  I think Clinton is probably in the best position coming into IA (relative to the results here), but we'll see.

[MarkWarner08]

I actually agree with Edwards' people.  Too many first-time voters, too any young voters.  Kind of chronic during caucus polling.  I think Clinton is probably in the best position coming into IA (relative to the results here), but we'll see.

Hillary leads by 6% among Democrats. If those indys don't show up for Obama...

[Lief]

I wouldn't go so far as to call the polling inaccurate (though if the poll did run Thursday, Friday, Saturday, Sunday, isn't four days normally a little long for a poll?). It's just a matter of what turnout model you want to use. There's a good chance we'll see heavy turnout, with many new voters: the weather's going to be good (well, for Iowa: this Texas boy doesn't understand how anyone can call 28 degree, windy weather "nice"), the Democratic base is more energized than ever and young people really like Obama. It's just that new voters and young voters have proven over and over again to be disappointing when it actually comes time to vote.

[Grad Students are the Worst]

I actually agree with Edwards' people.  Too many first-time voters, too any young voters.  Kind of chronic during caucus polling.  I think Clinton is probably in the best position coming into IA (relative to the results here), but we'll see.

Hillary leads by 6% among Democrats. If those indys don't show up for Obama...

Yeah.  Hillary has Democrats and the most likely caucusgoing demographics.  Edwards has...well, I'm not quite sure what he has, and I think he's biggest wildcard.  I haven't seen internals on whether his supporters tend to be liberal anti-war Democrats, or independents who think he's moderate.  The more it's the former, the better for him.

Then again, Vorlon seems to disagree, and he's the Last Word.

[Cubby]

Two pieces of good news! This has cheered me up, since I've been worried about Obama for the past few days. I agree that Hillary's supporters are more likely to vote. I was a Dean supporter in 2004 and his big loss in Iowa was a huge shock to me. Obama seems to have inherited his demographic (liberals, people under 30, etc.) Hopefully, history won't repeat itself.

I support Obama but if he loses big then I'll switch to Edwards, who I agree with on the issues (especially his healthcare plan) I just don't like his personality. The important thing is that Hillary doesn't get the nomination.

A Hillary-Romney race is what we should try to avoid. An Obama-Huckabee race would be awesome.

[Ben.]

Edwards responds:

MEMORANDUM
TO: Edwards for President
FROM: Harrison Hickman
RE: Des Moines Register Poll Results
Date December 31, 2007

In response to questions, here are some observations about the Register poll released this evening.

Is the poll accurate? There are good reasons to think it is NOT.
The poll was conducted during the holiday season AND over the weekend. (One column says interviewing ended on Sunday while the article says interviewing was conducted Thursday, Friday, and Saturday.) Numerous professional studies indicate that either of these would make it more difficult to obtain a representative sample. The combination makes the problem of obtaining a valid sample geometrically worse.

The poll is at odds with history.
The poll says 60% of Democratic caucus participants will be first timers who have never before participated in a caucus. This matters in the horserace because the poll finds that about three-quarters of Obama's supporters are first-timers. The poll is at odds with known tenets of partisan caucus participation. The poll says 45% of those at Democratic caucuses will be Independents or Republicans. This matters because the entirety of Obama's "lead" is due to his advantage among non-Democrats.

The poll is at odds with other polls.
Several other polls show a closer race with other candidates leading. Others seem suspicious of the horserace numbers. David Yepsen's column highlights the fluidity of the results rather than the horserace.

What does the poll say? The race is close.
The race is yet to be decided. 34% say they could change their minds, and 6% do not express a preference. This means 40% have not made a final decision. As Yepsen points out, 21% of those in the 2004 entrance poll said they had made their decisions in the last 3 days -- something this poll cannot capture.

The trend is moving toward Edwards. The nightly results show Obama's support flat over the last two nights, Clinton's declining each night, and Edwards' support increasing each night.

One word.... "spooked".

Very odd response IMHO, you simply shouldnt get distracted by a single poll... if they are responding in this way then it strikes me as very defensive and suggesting the Edwards campaign is feelin shaky (which is strange to say the least).

[Lief]

Okay, on further examination of these internals, this poll seems way, way off. Even if you're being liberal with turnout numbers, I don't think that there's anyway that 45% of voters in Iowa Democratic caucus will be non-Democrats (40% Ind, 5% Rep). In 2004, only 20% were non-Democrats (19% Ind, 1% Rep). Also, 60%, according to DMR, will be first time voters. In 2004, about 45% were first time voters (but this large number was understandable, as there hadn't been a competitive Democratic caucus since 1988). Lastly, this poll is predicting a huge, record turnout of 180,000.

I don't know. On Thursday, these DMR pollers are either going to look like prophets or hacks.

[Tender Branson]

Interesting fact:

Iowans who say they are likely to take part in the Jan. 3 presidential caucuses would rather grab a seat in the political arena than sit at home on caucus night watching the Orange Bowl.

The latest Iowa Poll shows that just 5 percent of likely Republican caucus participants and 4 percent of likely Democratic caucusgoers are very tempted to instead stay home on the night of Jan. 3 to watch the prime-time football game.

An additional 17 percent in the Republican camp and 13 percent on the Democratic side are tempted to a lesser degree to opt for football instead of presidential politics.

The caucuses normally are held after the last bowl game, but Iowa party leaders decided to move up the date of the 2008 caucuses from Jan. 14 to ensure other states wouldn’t leapfrog Iowa on the nominating calendar. They landed on Jan. 3, a date shared with the Orange Bowl.

The date change brought the caucuses close to the New Year’s holiday. But the poll shows less than 10 percent of likely caucus participants for each party changed travel or vacation plans in order to be able too take part in the political competition.

http://www.desmoinesregister.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20071202/NEWS09/312020007/-1/iowapoll07

[Politico]

The Bradley effect is pretty small in the first place, even smaller amongst Democrats, and even smaller than that amongst Democrats committed enough to go to the caucus.  It won't be an issue.

While I agree that the Bradley effect is small in Democrat primaries and caucuses compared to in general elections, I disagree that the Bradley effect is completely negligible among Democratic voters. I believe it may very well be relatively significant, particularly in predominantly caucasian states such as Iowa and New Hampshire, for example. Go read up on the polls that pitted Jesse Jackson against Michael Dukakis in 1988, especially in places like Wisconsin, and compare them to the actual results. There is no doubt the Bradly effect was significant in 1988 in a number of Democratic primaries and caucuses.

As for 2008, this is merely a suspicion on my part. I may be wrong, and I actually hope that I am. We will find out Thursday.

[Politico]

One word.... "spooked".

Very odd response IMHO, you simply shouldnt get distracted by a single poll... if they are responding in this way then it strikes me as very defensive and suggesting the Edwards campaign is feelin shaky (which is strange to say the least).

The campaign is obviously not distracted by a single poll. That does not mean some within the campaign are not analyzing every single poll.

The polls that really matter are the tracking polls for today and tomorrow. With the holidays out of the way, caucus goers are going to get real serious now.

[All life is a blur of Republicans and meat.]

One word.... "spooked".

Very odd response IMHO, you simply shouldnt get distracted by a single poll... if they are responding in this way then it strikes me as very defensive and suggesting the Edwards campaign is feelin shaky (which is strange to say the least).

The campaign is obviously not distracted by a single poll. That does not mean some within the campaign are not analyzing every single poll.

The polls that really matter are the tracking polls for today and tomorrow. With the holidays out of the way, caucus goers are going to get real serious now.

Since they are Zogby, I'm inclined to disagree. We shall see though.