The Iowa caucuses are polling too close to call between Clinton, Edwards, and Obama. However, there are some hints. The Southern Political Report tells us that ‘InsiderAdvantage/Majority Opinion Research has been conducting a daily tracking poll among likely voters in the Jan. 3 Iowa Democratic Caucus. Here’s their most significant finding:
Critically, Edwards was the second choice of 62% of those who supported other candidates that did not receive the required 15% of the vote. Clinton was the second choice of 21% and Obama of 17%.
Using the reallocation methodology InsiderAdvantage used in 2004 – which correctly indicated a fairly comfortable win for John Kerry – our new poll reveals that, if the caucuses were held today, the reallocated final outcome would be:
Edwards: 41%
Clinton: 34%
Obama: 25%
I’m going on kind of gut feel for this right now, but those results seem right to me. Actually, I don’t see Edwards topping 40% and I don’t see Obama necessarily coming in third, but I do think it is close enough that second choices and strength in rural areas will be enough to push Edwards over the top. Whether Edwards scores a rather large 7% margin or a more narrow 1-3% margin will depend on how well he does among first choices.
And, of course, I could be completely wrong. There are polls out that show Clinton pulling away and Obama with a strong lead. Those numbers could hold up.
For the sake of a long primary season, I hope Edwards wins. I don’t want the nominee to lock things up on February 5th when 21 states have their primaries. I’d like to see the battle take in the opinions of as many voters in as many different states as possible. Hell, I’d love a brokered convention, if at all possible.
If we see an Edwards/Clinton/Obama finish, I wonder what effect it will have on Obama’s campaign. Regardless, the Clinton’s will try to spin defeat as victory. I don’t think Edwards has that option.
The Politico
So, second choices will not count for publicity purposes and the loser could be reported the winner and get all the attendent momentum and contributions.
Hmm…Edwards is only at 15% at Intrade…seems like a good time to buy.
I too would like a long primary season but I suspect it will be over after Super Tuesday.
I have no prognostication on Iowa but I’d like to see Obama come in second behind Edwards, with Hillary third.
In my fantasy Edwards wins, Dodd second and Richardson third. Dream on.
I am prepared for a long primary season. There is very little incentive this time around for people to drop out until they run out of money or their support in the next few contests is less that around 10%.
I still think that Obama will win Iowa on Thursday, but Edwards, Obama, Clinton would be a very interesting result.
I’m sure that’s why I like it – because it is the most interesting result. And I’m easily bored 🙂
Third place doesn’t kill Hillary but it does maybe set her back enough that it can stop her momentum in in NH. It doesn’t give Obama enough of a bounce to automatically defeat Hillary in NH but if he spins it right it could still help him squeeze by her in NH. It will never (imo) give Edwards enough of a bounce to win NH but it keeps him and his message alive and maybe forces Obama to re-think parts of his message for Super Tuesday.
Of course – what do I know? Nothing.
are atuned. I think that we should take a lesson from 2004. When they get in a room together, Iowa Dems want a win, and Edwards is the second choice of a bunch of them who like hearing Biden, Dodd, and even Kucinich and Gravel.
I’d believe Obama second. I wonder how nasty the Clintonistas would get after that? I personally like Senator Clinton a lot, but feel she’s dragged down by “remoras” from the past. (Yeah, I’m a biologist by training.)
Can we share virtual drinks afterward, and see who’s gut was most atuned?
I am going to bed Thursday night. The Iowa caucuses don’t commence until something like 7 PM Central time. Some of them will drag on, so we won’t know the result until 10 or even 11 PM Central time.
On the other hand the networks plan to report the entrance polls and not even try to report the actual winner. That will distort this process even more than it is already.
.
Quite some differences between polls, however the trendlines do indicate an increase in support for Clinton and Edwards.
“We removed from the results the percentages allocated for ‘other candidates’ and ‘undecided’, and then reallocated the support of those who are supporting candidates without the required 15% level of support,” said Jeff Shusterman of InsiderAdvantage’s research partner, Majority Opinion Research. “We then merged these totals with the percentages of support the top candidates received on the first ‘ballot’. This is the same methodology we used in 2004.”
“What many who look at the Iowa Democratic Caucus may miss is that its delegates are apportioned much like the old county unit system once used in Southern states. This gives rural areas, where Edwards is running strong, the opportunity to have a disproportionately significant impact on the ultimate outcome. Regardless of geographic areas of support, the Edwards ‘second choice’ percentage has remained well over 50% …”
"But I will not let myself be reduced to silence."The main stream idiots like Joe Klein say that Edwards’ new anger is hurting him.
I don’t think so.
I like the anger. i want someone who shows some passion about the corporatist crap that’s being handed out now. We need someone who wants to STICK IT to the corporate interests.
i feel more and more that this is Edwards.
While I like Dodd the most, Edwards is sounding better and better.
I agree with you re. Edwards, also just watched Dodd this morning and thought I could get behind him, (then there’s Biden too,)Edwards, I like the fire, Obama, I like the hope, Clinton I like the calmness, well that settles it we need a candidate that’s a mix of all them wrapped up in one.
On Clinton’s spinning defeat:
“Storm Lake, Ia. — John Edwards’ most colorful adviser let fly today with complaints that Hillary Clinton’s campaign is already trying to spin its way out of a possible loss in Iowa.
Dave “Mudcat” Saunders told a van full of reporters that he’d just been sitting in his motel room, watching a Clinton official downplay the importance of the Iowa caucuses.
Saunders expressed outrage.” I threw a cup of tea at my TV, I was so mad,” he said. He pleaded with national reporters not to let Clinton get away with saying Iowa is unimportant if she loses the caucuses. “She’s from New York. She ought to know – if you can make it here, you can make it anywhere.”
Man, the final Des Moines Register poll has to figure in this conversation somewhere, is everyone ignoring it? Of course the Edwards and Clinton camps are downplaying it, but this is the one I’ve looked at the last couple of primaries.
and I’m serious here. It’s all turnout, turnout, turnout. Edwards has a very good organization. Plus, his supporters are motivated. Obama is doing well, but his supporters are often new to the process.
The polls are less related to what happens in IA than to any other place in any other political issue, since the process is so different.
What dataguy said, you can’t poll for a caucus, they are completely different from a primary.
OK, just askin’.
suggests that in 2004 and 2000 the polls separated the top group from the also-rans effectively. So, we can say that Dodd, Biden, Gravel and Kucinich are very unlikely to do well.
For the top 4 (I include Richardson), I just don’t see any effective way to poll. The two-step process is really really difficult to model with a telephone interview. Plus, the inherent random factor is the threshold value at each polling site – if you are under 15%, you must choose a second. Even if your candidate is huge somewhere else, your vote for that candidate is lost at your site if you do not get 15% there (1 in 6).