****** Hillary Clinton Regains Iowa Lead-27% Obama 24% Edwards 21%*****

[DemocratSinceBirth]

http://zogby.com/news/ReadNews.dbm?ID=1395

Zomby must choke when he has to report these results!!!


*****

[MNDemNY]

1. This poll is obviously wrong/outdated/bias/a lie.

:sarcasm:

[DemocratSinceBirth]

2. Will The MSM Avoid This Poll Like Croup?

DSB

[MNDemNY]

Yes, they want a "race"

[Cameron27]

3. Thanks DSB

[wyldwolf]

4. eh! Zogby. Suspicious. However, I'll be curious to see if Obama supporters...

..defend this one as passionately as they defended the last Zogby poll.

[wyldwolf]

5. on the other hand, this one was a telephone poll, not an online poll like the last one

[Kurt_and_Hunter]

13. No one questions the legitimacy of Zogby's conventional phone polls.

[wyldwolf]

20. someone will, though. Waiting...

[Beacool]

32. Exactly!! I never trust ANY online poll, no matter who they favor.

Too many people, particularly older more reliable voters, do not have computers. The online polls tend to have a higher response from young males than any other demographics. Telephone polls have consistently been more reliable. Obviously, the race in these early states is still too fluid to call and it will eventually depend on who can get more people out on January 3, than on their actual support in the state.

[MNDemNY]

7. Oh, I'm sure they will.

[MADem]

31. Yeah, he seems to be all over the place lately. Is this another one of those stupid internet polls

or did he use old fashioned methodology....

[Renew Deal]

6. She never lost the lead in that poll

She went down 1. Obama went down 1. Edwards stayed the same.

[bvar22]

29. Hillary continues her tailspin, yet the the Hillbots spin it as good news.

:silly:

[youthere]

8. Biden and Kucinich are the only two with a gain!

I know, I know...it's only 2 points but I'm looking for the positive!

[hedgehog]

9. If after all this, Senator Clinton pulls less than half the Iowa vote,

don't we have a situation like that following the 1968 New Hampshire Primary? Gene McCarthy lost the New Hampshire primary, but his vote share was high enough to show that support for LBJ wasn't as solid as people had thought. I believe that the entire premise of Senator Clinton's campaign is that she is the overwhelming winner. That's why we kept seeing stories about what a seasoned campaigner and professional politician she is. The assumption is that she would sweep the primaries, then beat the Republicans in the general. But if she doesn't sweep Iowa, why should people vote for her?

[DemocratSinceBirth]

18. Nobody Ever Expected Her To Skate In Homogeneous Iowa

HRC's base is African American, Hispanic, Asian, high school educated, working class Americans;group that are notoriously underrepresented in Iowa and New Hampshire...

[Sancho]

10. Recommended: number 5

:dem:

[Kurt_and_Hunter]

11. Zogby polls are worthless when they have results like this!

[DemocratSinceBirth]

14. I Look At All The Polls

This is interesting...

[Kurt_and_Hunter]

17. DSB, you know I'm kidding!

[Az_lefty]

12. "Polls proven meaningless...Biden wins Iowa"

just saying...

[wyldwolf]

15. a scenario I could live with

[rinsd]

16. More polling goodies

Last month, Obama and Edwards were much more preferred as a second choice among those candidates who appear to be unviable under Democratic caucus rules. Clinton appears to be gaining ground among those who might consider experience to be an important factor in choosing a nominee – she wins the lion’s share of support among those who make Biden their first choice, and she does well among those who would first choose New Mexico Gov. Bill Richardson.

Among those who make Obama their first choice, Edwards is their second choice, and vice versa. Among those who make Clinton their first choice, Obama is the favorite second choice.

Among independents who said they would caucus with the Democrats, Obama leads with 31%, followed by Edwards at 26% and Clinton at 19%.

Among Iowa women, Clinton leads with 33%, followed by Obama and Edwards, both at 23%. Among men, Obama leads with 26%, followed by Clinton at 20% and Edwards at 19%. Richardson wins 10% and Biden 9% among men.

[MadBadger]

19. New Poll has Obama up 7 points!

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x3796345

[jefferson_dem]

21. Not "regains lead"...

She was ahead by the same "within MoE" three points his last poll, on Nov. 6. Both Hill and Obama have lost one point since then, while Edwards remains the same. Basically...it's a wash.

[Kurt_and_Hunter]

24. You are correct. With the differing "likely" models apples-to-apples is important in Iowa polls

[DemocratSinceBirth]

26. Be Afraid

"she wins the lion’s share of support among those who make Biden their first choice, and she does well among those who would first choose New Mexico Gov. Bill Richardson."

Since neither get will get the necessary fifteen percent at most caucus site those voters can go to the Hill...

25% + 5% + 8% =38%!!!

The poll does suggest that Obama and Edwards supporters are the second choice of one another but that doesn't matter because they both will have the requisite fifteen percent...

[William769]

22. Looks like another sleepless night for some.

:rofl:

K&R!

[Kurt_and_Hunter]

23. General observation: Clinton is tied to Romney and Obama to Huckabee

Clinton does well in Iowa polls where Romney does well.

Obama does well in Iowa polls where Huckabee does well.

This makes sense because it matches something about the campaigns... establishment versus insurgent and/or momentum.

Every Iowa poll has a different model of likely caucus goers, and it seems that the different screens reflect enthusiasm differently.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

28. What Do You Think About My Observation In Post 26?

DSB

[Kurt_and_Hunter]

30. Agreed. I have been struck by the reliance on second place polling in Iowa without

recognizing that it is kind of irrelevant who Clinton and Obama (and probably Edwards) voters chose second, because they are likely to pull 15% in the great majority of caucus sites. But the great majority of Kucinich voters will cast a meaningful second-place vote.

There will be exceptions, of course, individual sites where one top-tier or another doesn't get 15%. But in general, if Clinton or Obama ends up pulling under 15% in a lot of sites that would be a bigger story in itself than anything about second choices.

[mikelgb]

25. ugh

people in Iowa like to vote apparently

now if the would just let them Caucus

[HughMoran]

27. We have a horserace folks!

I love seeing the jockeying down the stretch - this is fun. :)

[CyberPieHole]

33. Lies! RW talking points! Fixed poll! Planted poll numbers! Clinton in TAILSPIN!

And all the rest of it.:sarcasm:

The race is close. That much we know. But I prefer to see poll numbers that show Obama NOT in the lead. If Obama wins the primary we will lose in the General. That's my prediction.

[Heywood J]

34. Statistically, that poll is meaningless.

Every national or regional poll I've ever seen has a margin of error of about three percent, certainly no lower than 2.5%. To obtain a lower margin of error would require a sample size about an order of magnitude larger, and most pollsters won't pay for that on a poll thrown out a week later for the next one.



Such a three percent lead is statistically insignificant. Any lead must climb beyond double the margin of error to be truly worthwhile in reporting, because it is equally possible for the result to be three percent too high on the leading candidate and three percent too low on the trailing candidate.

Most polls usually settle for a difference beyond the margin for error, since that's usually accurate enough for a disposable poll. Even by those looser standards, no candidate here is leading. The only statistically valid conclusion that can be drawn here is that Edwards is trailing Clinton.

Then again, the only poll that really matters won't be for a month or so.