October 1: Clinton extends lead in national polling. Also leads comfortably in Iowa, NH, SC, FL...

[calteacherguy]

National average:

Clinton
41.2%
Obama
23.0%
Edwards
14.0%
Richardson
3.2%
Clinton +18.2%

National Giuliani + 5.4 Clinton + 18.2
Iowa Romney + 9.2 Clinton + 3.5
New Hampshire Romney + 4.0 Clinton + 20.8
South Carolina Giuliani + 1.2 Clinton + 13.0
Florida Giuliani + 6.7 Clinton + 24.4

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/

[Mike Nelson]

1. I think Clinton's got it....

...despite the talking heads talking her down all the time.

[bigdarryl]

4. What talking heads have you been listening to they all want her including FOX NEWS

[Mike Nelson]

18. Presently, "The Clinton Cackle" on MSNBC

I usually do not watch FOX "News".

[bigdarryl]

2. Dean exstends his LEAD in national polls and state polls I remember that

[calteacherguy]

5. True. But Dean was an insurgent.

Hillary has the support of the Party leaders as well as most of the grassroots.

[SaveElmer]

7. Actually the point BD makes is not even true...

Dean never had a national lead of this magnitude for this length of time...

But your point is valid...Hillary's support is much deeper and more committed than Dean's was

[bigdarryl]

12. He was no fucking insurgent he was the Governor of a state and he was leading most of the time

[calteacherguy]

21. I was using the term figuratively.

He did not have the support of the Party establishment. Quite the opposite.

[OrangeCountyDemocrat]

3. Heil Clinton!!

Say hello to Queen Clinton. The next leader of our MONARCHY.

I'm DISGUSTED with this country. With it's Present, and it's potential Future.

I hope we get EXACTLY what we deserve.

[BootinUp]

9. Too much caffeine perhaps? n/t

[Cameron27]

34. lol

[ccpup]

15. geez

if you're THAT disgusted, perhaps you should leave. No sense living in a place that makes you that unhappy, right? Or you could get off your ass, stop your bitchin' and run for Office yourself. Everyday people are doing it all the time (Hackett, Sheehan, anyone with ActBlue). Be the change you want instead of being disgusted with the "Monarchy" ... although how a woman raised middle class in the heartland with 30 years as a successful lawyer focusing on the rights of children could be considered part of a Monarchy is beyond my obviously limited powers of reasoning.

Just a thought.

[Yukari Yakumo]

28. Then leave. DU and the country. {nt}

uguu

[OrangeCountyDemocrat]

32. Don't Worry, It Has Crossed My Mind

I still think that there are plenty of people on DU who think like I do, and could never support Ms. Clinton, without holding their noses, and their breath to prevent from gagging or vomitting. I just can't bring myself to do it, just because she's our "Appointed Heir Apparent."

I guess I'm lucky that I have some money saved up in Euros & Pounds, as the U.S. $$$$$ may be worth much less if I go overseas to live in 2009, when our First Queen will be installed.

[SaveElmer]

6. I like what I see...but there can be no let up...

Gotta keep pushing...

[calteacherguy]

8. Unlike you, I am not completely enthralled with Clinton.

I see pluses as well as minuses with her. In any case, it appears her nomination is inevitable unless Obama, Edwards, or one of the others does a better job of convincing voters why they are the better choice than Clinton.

I try when I can to focus on her positives, as it does seem inevitable. Sometimes though she makes that difficult.

[Joe the Revelator]

13. Inevitable? Hardly...

I think the fact that there are other polls showing Obama leading among actual likely caucus goers in Iowa show that this thing is FAR from over. National polls mean ABSOLUTELY nothing.

[calteacherguy]

17. The question is, would that be enough?

Were Obama to win Iowa, would that be enough in such a short time frame to enable him to win the other key states? Of course, the magnitude of the win would be important. If someone merely squeaks by Hillary in Iowa, I don't think it would be likely to make much of a difference in the final outcome.

[Joe the Revelator]

19. If history has taught us anything....

it's that all it takes to unseat a frontrunner in a primary is to win an early contest and break people out of their "inevitable" spell.

[calteacherguy]

25. True, perhaps. But the schedule is much tighter this year.

Will winning Iowa help a candiate if they are still 20+ points behind in other key states that have their primaries so soon after Iowa?

[Joe the Revelator]

26. Once again, leaning on History...

The early states are notoriously picky about who they select, no matter how early or condensed the primary season is. If Iowa and NH offer Edwards or Obama a strong showing, they become the new inevitables, and we're off to the races. Everyone says it, but nobody listens, polls in October don't matter for January primaries.

When was the last time a non-incumbent led wire to wire through primary season? There is always a first time for everything, but I'd rather rely on past results.

[SaveElmer]

16. I don't think anything in inevitable in politics...

Hillary is simply running a far superior campaign than the other candidates right now...so it may seem that way...

I have to take exception at the term "enthralled" It implies that my support for her is unthinking, borne of factors other than a careful assessment of her qualifications...I assure you that is not the case...

[Windy]

20. The media doesn't allow it

They don't play fair in the debates and don't give the other candidates equal time, either in the debates or in weekly coverage.

Just like they didn't give Kerry equal time and exposure...what did we get for that? 4 more years of bush.

You have to give it to Clinton, she has the political machine behind her. Trouble is, I wanted a LEADER, not another triangulating, whatever way the wind blows politician holding the highest seat of power.

I hope that Mrs. Clinton and the pundits are surprised in the primaries.

[ccpup]

24. I've never quite understood

Americans' insistence, it seems, that their Leaders be somehow "lovable". One would think after 8 beyond disastrous years of the "affable, he's-just-like-us" fratboy in Chief that qualities like intelligence, preparedness, a strong sense of what to do to help the Country move away from certain disaster and back toward better days would be more important than whether or not someone gets the "warm and fuzzies" from them.

I, personally, don't want the "warm and fuzzies" from my President. I want someone who's HYPER-aware of how dishonest the Republicans are, won't be caught flat-footed in lala-land when the daggers come out and who has concrete-thick skin from his or her earlier scraps with them. I also want someone who knows the ins-and-outs of how things REALLY get done in DC ... not the "gee, I wish it were really this way" unrealistic (right now, anyway) version, but the REAL version. That kind of knowledge is indispensable.

Anyway, your Post made me think of this and it seemed appropriate to respond. I, for one, am happy you're keeping yourself open to the Candidate's positives. Once you slam a door, whatever's behind it is lost. And who knows what great things might be down the hall and around the corner? Best to keep it open. :-)

[emilyg]

27. Good post.

[ccpup]

29. oh wow

1,000+ posts and that's the first time someone has given me a "good post" post. Aw geeze, now I got those damn warm and fuzzies!

[Cameron27]

35. Hey, I'm giving you another,

don't go too warm and fuzzie lol.:thumbsup:

[ccpup]

36. oh man

I'm gonna have to lie down with a cool washcloth on my head before too long. Just when I'm ready to give up on DU, it left-hooks me with unexpected acts of kindness.

Somehow, the words "I wish I could quit you" come to mind. :evilgrin:

[Ninja Jordan]

10. + 3.5 is within the margin of error in Iowa--hardly a "comfortable" lead.

[calteacherguy]

14. Let me explain.

Clinton can very much afford to "lose" Iowa, as long as she does not lose it by a large margin. Other states will quickly follow, and unless a candidate completely blows by her in Iowa, it proably won't make a difference in the end.

Other candidates must win Iowa. Clinton must simply keep it close there.

[Joe the Revelator]

22. Is this the new talking point?

That Clinton can afford to lose? I thought a candidate with her campaign prowess was expected to breeze through ALL primaries. No, you can't get off that easy.

[calteacherguy]

23. It's just my opinion. nt

[Yukari Yakumo]

30. And a fact.

Edwards absolutely cannot lose Iowa by any margin. He's practically a resident there. A defeat there will be the end of his campaign.

Neither can Obama. He needs momentum from Iowa if he is to have any hope of winning NH, SC, and/or Nevada.

[Ethelk2044]

31. She can not afford to lose Iowa to Obama. To Edwards yes, but not Obama

The way Obama's campaign is working in SC and Iowa he may just take both. If indy's turn out big time in NH he may take that one as well.

[NC_Nurse]

11. Meh.

She doesn't do it for me. I hope things change.

[jenmito]

33. She's peaking too soon...

Keep posting the polls...'til the truth and reality start hitting voters and they turn to Obama! :hi: