Gallup -Hillary -48% Obama 21% Edwards 12%

[DemocratSinceBirth]

PRINCETON , NJ -- In the national standings of the Democratic presidential candidates seeking their party's nomination next year, New York Sen. Hillary Clinton continues to hold a strong 27-point lead over second-place rival Illinois Sen. Barack Obama, according to a new Gallup Poll. Former North Carolina Sen. John Edwards remains further behind in third place.

According to the Nov. 11-14, 2007, poll, 48% of Democrats say they are most likely to support Clinton for the party’s presidential nomination in 2008, followed by Obama at 21% and Edwards at 12%. No other candidate garners more than 4% support.

http://www.gallup.com/poll/102799/Clinton-Sustains-Huge-Lead-Democratic-Nomination-Race.aspx

[rfranklin]

1. Until Obama wins in Iowa...

This is so meaningless.

[rinsd]

2. Handy charts and more info from Gallup

This chart refers to your OP



This deals with "extremely likely" voters

There is little difference in the dynamics of the Democratic race among the 58% of Democrats and Democratic leaners who say they are "extremely likely" to vote in next year's Democratic primaries or caucuses -- 48% support Clinton, while 23% support Obama and 11% Edwards. None of the other candidates garner double-digit support.



This is for Indies planning to vote Dem

Clinton 's support is slightly lower among Democratic-leaning independents than it is among core Democrats, but she still commands a strong lead among both groups. Across the two surveys conducted this month, 52% of Democrats support Clinton for the nomination, compared with 45% of Democratic-leaning independents. None of Clinton’s competitors fares better among Democratic-leaning independents than among Democrats; rather, several candidates -- Obama, Edwards, Biden, and Kucinich -- are at most four points higher among the former group.



And this is if Al Gore decided to enter the race (looks like he hurts Obama & Edwards)



And last but not least methodology!

Results are based on telephone interviews with 485 Democrats or Democratic leaners, aged 18 and older, conducted Nov. 11-14, 2007. For results based on the total sample of national adults, one can say with 95% confidence that the maximum margin of sampling error is ±5 percentage points. In addition to sampling error, question wording and practical difficulties in conducting surveys can introduce error or bias into the findings of public opinion polls.

[durrrty libby]

12. Ooooh I love charts

[THUNDER HANDS]

3. well, let's check around this time in 2003....

from CBS...

Dean 23%
Clark 10%
Lieberman 10%
Gephardt 6%
Sharpton 5%
Kerry 4%
Edwards 2%
Moseley-Braun 1%


funny how that turned out, eh?

[rucky]

5. Biden is the Kerry of 2008

watch

[tekisui]

7. I would be more than alright with that.

I think he'd do great challenging the pukes and talking some since into middle-America conservatives. What kind of person do you think he'd choose as a running mate?

[rucky]

20. Obama or Richardson are my guesses.

off the top of my head. I think he'll be under alot of pressure to pick a woman or minority, and there's no shortage of talent in those departments. Probably Obama because he has more fundraising power, and because he's a rockstar. Talk about a dynamic ticket!

[IA_Seth]

27. I think that is definitely a possibility.

The polls in Iowa aren't really indicating a big surge for him, but I've seemed to notice a lot more people with positive reactions to him, in addition to some on-the-ground support. He may be peaking at the right time for Iowa.

I predict Biden 3rd or 4th if all stays the same, but if he can get to some one-on-one events, make some press, and get some ads... he'll be sittin pretty.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

6. These Are The Numbers From 11/18 -11./20/03

Howard Dean 18
Wesley Clark 14
Richard Gephardt 14
John Kerry 13
Joe Lieberman 10
John Edwards 6
Al Sharpton 4
Carol Moseley Braun 4
Dennis Kucinich 2
Other/None/Not sure 15

http://www.pollingreport.com/wh04dem.htm

[rinsd]

9. And who was winning then? Why it was Don't Know @ 28% with Other chiming in @ 10%

I have no idea why you left that number out :eyes:

[avrdream]

21. More were undecided back then, it appears.

I'm not sure if you are comparing the same group as these Gallup pollees were "extremely likely" to vote.

FWIW

[depakid]

4. Yet another absolutely meaningless poll from Gallup

Impressive how people never learn. Can't deal with positions on the issues- cite a bogus poll to try to influence opinion.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

8. What Do You Want To Discuss?

I'm right here...

[depakid]

13. How many times does one have to discuss

Either the likes of Gallup and their bogus methodology- or the meaninglessness of national polls in general.

As I mentioned, some people never learn.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

17. Gallup Has Been Within The MOE For Every Presidential Election Since Ike

Next...

[depakid]

23. Whatever- you go on believing that

There was a guy back in 2004 who did some very sophisticated modeling based on cheap media polls. My recollection is that his nae was truth is all. Unfortunately, his predications didn't bear out- and it wasn't because of the modeling!

GIGO.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

24. He Cherry Picked The Polls

Garbage in, garbage out...

Here's the final 04 polls:


http://www.pollingreport.com/2004.htm#Pollster

[depakid]

28. No not from what I could tell

He used a pretty broad and representative mix- though they were largely cheap media polls- there's your garbage in.

And I would note that he also made another mistake that some others do- basing longer range predictions on data of questionable merit with respect to people's actual voting preferences and habits.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

30. If He Would Have Used Those Polls He Would Have Came Darn Close

He failed because he used deductive reasoning as opposed to inductive reasoning to build his model...

[rinsd]

10. Or some of us actually understand polling and post polls when they come out.

Now please regale us with tales of how your single statistics class has rendered you an expert and how all polling is bullshit.

[depakid]

15. I may have had more than a single class.....

;)

Though my bet is that you may not have.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

19. So Have I At The Graduate Level

And to dismiss the knowledge we get from looking at all kinds of social science surveys is Luddism writ large...

[depakid]

25. It's precisely these principles

and the misapplication of them in a give context that belies the problem here.

I don't know what you may have done with quantitative methods, but I can tell you from experience, that Gallup is literally laughed at.

So many spurious results, so little time!

[DemocratSinceBirth]

26. We Didn't Look At Gallup

It was SPSS stuff and mostly political research from the University Of Michigan...This is twenty years ago...

But Gallup does a decent job...They have picked every presidential winner since Ike and considering the closeness of the Kennedy, Carter, and Bush* wins that's admirable...

[jimshoes]

11. I'll just throw this out there

for the heck of it. A good friend who ran for council in a Cleveland suburb, would casually ask while campaigning, how these residents felt about the Presidential hopefulls. An overwhelming majority in that heavily Democratic city did not want Hillary as the nominee. Probably in the 80% range. I'm not putting this up as flame material, just what his experience was regarding Democratic hopefulls. So I'm not sure at all I believe any of these polls right now.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

14. Then Why Do The Final Pre-Election Polls Closely Approximate The Final Results?

DSB

[jimshoes]

29. I don't know, I'm just relating real

face to face answers to the same questions and HRC just did not have that kind of support here. Nothing more nothing less.

[MethuenProgressive]

16. "Clinton continues to hold a strong 27-point lead" More evidence DU is is an alternate Universe.

But that's OK. We know us here.
:hide:

[Cameron27]

18. Thanks DSB

[asdjrocky]

22. I thought most people here were smart enough not to trust national polls.

Funny.

Learn the truth behind the Clinton Machine:

http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Burson-Marsteller

It's important.

[robcon]

31. This poll is surprising.

Her more than 2 to 1 lead is surprising this late in the pre-primary period.

[emilyg]

32. K

[jenmito]

33. And Rasmussen has Hillary at 41%, Obama at 24%, and Edwards at 14%

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/election_2008__1/daily_presidential_tracking_polling_history