Polling means nothing in Iowa, but.....
Because of the crazy caucus system, with turnout issues and the reallocation of minor candidate voters on the Dem side (19% in this poll), polling in Iowa is highly inaccurate. However, the Des Moines Register poll is something of a conventional wisdom setter.
If this is the accepted CW, Obama is now in a win or die.
Clips from the Des Moines Register piece.
45% of the caucus goers will be non-Democrat?
Reading this, I am more convinced that the key will be the Obama field operation. How good are the local captains? Can they manage turnout? Will they be able to convince the 19% of minor candidate supporters to reallocate and come and stand with the independents, youth, and Republicans?
What's the spin if Obama wins based on non-Democrats?
It's really all up in the air.
Later: It should be noted that this poll stands in contrast to the majority of polls which have showed a slight but growing Clinton lead. I'm mentioning this one because it carries more weight and sets the media's CW.
That doesn't mean it's more right. It just carries more impact.
The Clinton camp attacks this poll for adopting "an unprecedented new turnout model."
(Repub side, Huckabee 32, Romney 26, McCain 13.)
If this is the accepted CW, Obama is now in a win or die.
The Des Moines Register poll of people likely to attend caucuses on Thursday, put Obama on 32 percent, with the former first lady on 25 percent, a point ahead of former Democratic vice presidential nominee John Edwards.....
One third of those surveyed said they were open to changing their minds before Thursday.
Clips from the Des Moines Register piece.
Sixty percent would be attending for the first time, reflecting the emphasis the campaigns have put on expanding the pool of participants....
A majority of caucusgoers under 35 support Obama, more than three times the support Edwards receives from them and five times Clinton's.....
Clinton remains the favorite of the party faithful, with support from a third of self-described Democrats. However, Obama is the clear choice of caucusgoers who affiliate with neither the Democrat or Republican parties, with roughly 40 percent of them backing him in the survey.
The support from non-Democrats is significant because a whopping 40 percent of those planning to attend described themselves as independent and another 5 percent as Republican.
45% of the caucus goers will be non-Democrat?
Reading this, I am more convinced that the key will be the Obama field operation. How good are the local captains? Can they manage turnout? Will they be able to convince the 19% of minor candidate supporters to reallocate and come and stand with the independents, youth, and Republicans?
What's the spin if Obama wins based on non-Democrats?
It's really all up in the air.
Later: It should be noted that this poll stands in contrast to the majority of polls which have showed a slight but growing Clinton lead. I'm mentioning this one because it carries more weight and sets the media's CW.
That doesn't mean it's more right. It just carries more impact.
The Clinton camp attacks this poll for adopting "an unprecedented new turnout model."
(Repub side, Huckabee 32, Romney 26, McCain 13.)
posted by mikevotes at
7:28 AM
10 Comments:
When I caucused in '04 the Dem turnout was higher than the old-timers had ever experienced. My precinct was crammed into what had been it's home for several elections. This year we're in a very large space at a CC. I have a feeling it's going to be packed.
At least one thing the Bush Regime has done is polarize the electorate to the point that more and more are energized to come out and vote.
By
matt, at 8:54 AM
I tend to agree with both. We're going to see big turnout and it's all coming from anti-Bush sentiment.
How big was your caucus? A couple hundred, a thousand?
The reason I ask is that the whole affair sounds so public. I would think that in big caucuses it's not that big a deal, but as you get out into the rural areas staring across the room at people you know, the thing is very different.
By
mikevotes, at 10:13 AM
Here in NH, the electorate tends to be more independent conservative. But I wouldn't say Republican necessarily, though in the binary world of American party politics there are more Rs than Ds.
That said, I find that most of my Republican-leaning neighbors, when asked about the Dem field, seem to like Obama. I don't know why this is exactly, but he doesn't seem to illicit the negative reactions that Clinton and Edwards do among these folks.
Because independents are allowed to vote in primaries, I think this could have some affect on the primaries here.
The GOP field seems far too strident for what I see as traditional NH conservatives. There's a very strong anti-tax vein in NH politics, and the brown immigrant boogeyman also has some traction, but that whole social conservatism and legislating "Christian" values is not really our bag. In fact, as of 12:00AM today, civil unions are now part of the live free or die tradition. Not bad for a "red" state.
By
-epm, at 11:05 AM
There are a dozens of precincts and in '04 we had about 80 people total. 5 of them left when Kucinich wasn't viable. This year we'll be well over 100. On a cold night in Iowa that's a pretty good turnout.
It's not too contentious. There are some people that are spaz's or just dramatic and most of us let that slide. Being across the room from them is no big deal.
By
matt, at 11:07 AM
EPM, I think Obama will pull massively from independents if he gets out of Iowa in one piece, and I think they'd rather vote the excitement of Obama rather than McCain.
If he wins Iowa are we going to see Rockstar the sequel?
And, the south has taken over the Repubs. That got them votes in the short term, but it alienated alot of people.
....
Matt, thanks. Not having been through one of those, all I have is my imagination. I just imagine looking across the room at my boss or a client and wondering if that ould have an impact.
By
mikevotes, at 12:30 PM
This comment has been removed by the author.
By
-epm, at 6:37 PM
Here's another observation regarding NH's brand of conservatism. Here, Romney isn't running ads against Huckabee. He's running ads against McCain.... and Hillary! Methinks he's getting a bit ahead of himself.
By
-epm, at 8:03 PM
He has to, though. There's not enough time to wait and see about Iowa before runing in NH, and if he loses Iowa he might as well have spent his extra campaign funds on NH.
He can always write himself a check for more if he needs it, but going out of the race after Iowa with money in his pocket would be foolish, so he might as well spend in NH.
By
mikevotes, at 9:48 PM
I understand the need for Romney to hit the airwaves in NH. I just thought it was interesting that he's been running an attack ad on Hillary. I don't see how this helps him in NH, since the Hillary-as-Satan's-whore doesn't really play here in the mainstream.
I can only assume he's trying to get the core, vile, underbelly voters of the GOP base... Racists, bigots, conspiracy theorists, angry and mean-spirited white men. It's Richard Melon Scaife redux.
Of the other Repubs, only McCain comes close to TV ad plays, promoting his independence. He does this little sidestep where he talks about opposing the Bush war strategy while talking up his support for the Bush "surge." Weird. Giuliani had a couple of Orwellian "security" ads. (Really scary stuff. Really.) And Huck had his sappy, floating cross, I answer to Jesus, Christmas ad.
It's the Dems that have been airing so many ads, collectively, that it's hard to tell if you're watching a TV show or an infomercial. All ads have been positive and forward looking. Edwards talks about greedy corporations and the need to change how Washington works. Obama: change, hope unity. Clinton: steely-eyed, ramrod straight leadership with a dollop of caring for the little people.
Kind of a ramble here... just trying to give you a civilian's eye view of the NH political landscape.
By
-epm, at 8:07 AM
In NH he's trying to get the Republicans because McCain polls the centrists and independents. If he pulls republicans and independents go to Obama, McCain's toast.
Of course, it could just be a miscalculation.
And broadly, I would assume the experience is pretty much a mush by now, kind of like being forced up to a buffet over and over by the chefs.
"Oh, I know you're full, but you have to try my truffles."
"Oh, no, no, you need something more substantial, try my shrimp etouffe...."
I would assume by now it's all a mash of mixed flavors on top of a feeling of nausea.
By
mikevotes, at 10:52 AM
Post a Comment
<< Home