The polls at this stage in 2003 (Holy Joe led, Kerry 3rd, Edwards tied for 6th with Sharpton)

[draft_mario_cuomo]

Kos included these polls in a post:

6/12-18/2003

1) Lieberman 21
2) Gephardt 17
3) Kerry 13
4) Graham 7
4) Dean 7
6) Edwards 6
6) Sharpton 6
8) Moseley Braun 5

In August Holy Joe expanded his lead to a commanding 10 points. Kerry was 4th and Edwards at 5%, tied for 5th with Mosley Braun.

8/4-6/2003

1) Lieberman 23
2) Gephardt 13
3) Dean 12
4) Kerry 10
5) Edwards 5
5) Moseley Braun 5
7) Sharpton 4

Kos: But then Labor Day happened, and people started "paying attention". Then look at what happened:

9/8-10/2003

Gephardt 16
Dean 14
Lieberman 13
Kerry 12
Edwards 5
Moseley Braun 4
Sharpton 2

One month later Holy Joe went from a 10 point lead to a 3 point deficit.

After Iowa (January 19) and New Hampshire (January 27):

1/9-11 1/29-2/1

Dean 26 14
Clark 20 9
Kerry 9 49
Lieberman 9 5
Edwards 7 13
Gephardt 7 n/a

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2007/6/19/13213/3838

CBS News Poll. Feb. 24-27, 2004. N=546 likely Democratic primary voters nationwide. MoE ± 4.


.

"Who would you like to see the Democratic Party nominate as its presidential candidate in 2004: , or someone else?" Names rotated


.
2/24-27/04 2/12-15/04

.
% %

.
Kerry 57 53

.
Edwards 18 7

.
Sharpton 4 4

.
Kucinich 1 1

.
Other (vol.) 8 12

.
Don't know 12 15

.
Dean n/a 8

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

[Tarheel_Dem]

1. Thanks to you & Kos for putting things into perspective for us...

I know people can be quite passionate about his/her candidate of choice, but polls this far away from an election are gonna change from month to month, depending on who jumps into the race, and who drops out. Just ask Rudy Ghouliani & John McCain, with all the media speculation by the pundits that Fred Thompson is going to announce just pushes those two closer & closer to the back of the pack.

Thanks again.

[draft_mario_cuomo]

10. You're welcome. Did you see the latest polls? McCain is down to 5th (tie) in IA and 4th in SC

:hi:

Iowa

Romney 25 (no trend available)
F. Thompson 17
Giuliani 15
Huckabee 7
McCain 6
Brownback 6
T. Thompson 2
Undecided 21

In SC he is a distant 4th at 7%. McCain was the front-runner not too long ago!

[Tarheel_Dem]

13. Couldn't happen to a "nicer" guy....

All that ass-kissing and cozying up to the religious right zealots hasn't worked out as planned, has it?

[Catch22Dem]

2. I expect the same results w/ Hillary once people start "paying attention" n/t

[journalist3072]

8. I think it's an insult to the American people, to say they aren't "paying attention" now

I, for one, am very tuned in b/c I want to ensure I vote for my own best interests. And that means listening to the candidates and where they stand on the issues that matter to me.

People are hungry for bold leadership, so I think they are "paying attention" right now.

[Catch22Dem]

19. I say it because they're not

There may be more people paying attention right now than in June of 03, but the majority of Americans are not political junkies like we here at DU are. They'll start paying attention after labor day just like every election year. When the news starts leading it's political stories with, "With the election less than a year away..." people typically decide it's time to start getting to know the candidates.

[sandnsea]

3. Except

Hillary is not Joe Lieberman. Edwards should have the same name recognition as Lieberman did, but he still doesn't have any traction. And Obama is getting new people interested in elections, which is what Clinton did in 1992. So this isn't 2004 and it isn't going to play out like 2004 either.

[illinoisprogressive]

6. I , too, support Obama but, I disagree with your assessment because

the old polls put things in perspective for us now but, ever election is different.
I do expect in the fall, when people begin to pay attention, ms. Inevitable will be sinking fast.
but, they all end up different. Only the front runner ends the same way in the end. Losing the primary.

[sandnsea]

7. It can all end up different

I agree with that. I think Hillary's female support being working women is quite a problem for her because they definitely aren't paying attention now. I don't think you can take Lieberman's name recognition and compare it to Hillary and not compare it to Edwards though. What will be interesting in this race will be what the anti-Hillary contingent decide when up against the wall, so to speak. Will there be a banding together to stop her, or will they decide she's got such a great machine and election experience and BILL, that at least we'd have a Democrat and maybe we should go with that.

I'm for Obama, but he makes me nervous sometimes. I like what Richardson has to say, but I'm not sure I trust him. Edwards has shifted around on a few in a way that has bothered me. Hillary, just makes me sad. Dodd is even a nice old guy, but I think we're at a sort of 'Kennedy pass the mantle' point in time. I'm still watching, at this point.

[draft_mario_cuomo]

9. Sure. The point was that we should not hold the current polls sacred

They can--and will--change. Ask John McCain!

[sandnsea]

11. They have to by February

People will have dropped out and their supporters will go somewhere. Kerry was in good shape in 2004 because he was almost everybody's #2. Who has that this time around? I'm just saying you can't compare it exactly because the dynamics of the candidates aren't the same. You just can't say Hillary will lose her lead because Lieberman did. Lieberman was BORING and was way out of touch with the base. Hillary isn't, she has pulled people from the blogosphere in, etc. She does have a solid backing. She's going to be tough, right down to the wire. Not like Lieberman and 2004 at all.

[draft_mario_cuomo]

12. See post 10

You make valid points. I am definitely not saying this is 2004 redux. My point was simply that the polls will change over the next 6 months and that things will be much more different after Iowa and NH. John McCain is exhibit A for this. Look at where the former front-runner has fallen to now! If the polls were sacred he would be well on his way to the nomination. Instead he is 4th in SC and tied with Brownback for 5th in Iowa.

==People will have dropped out and their supporters will go somewhere.==

Everyone was still in the race after Iowa and NH last time except Gephardt. Kerry's initial surge (9% to 49% in two weeks) wasn't because people dropped out.

[sandnsea]

14. Lieberman, Gephardt, Braun - fading fast

They were all seriously slumping after NH & IA, most of their voters had already gone to Kerry. Half of Dean's people had gone to Kerry, before IA actually. Kerry's surge was because, when people came right down to the wire, they decided "to send a President". Will that happen again, or will people decide to go for change. Hard to say. I can't see any particular candidate as everybody's #2, the way Kerry was. He was even the #2 for many of the Kucinich people. He had broad Dem support, because despite the IWR, most people knew JK was not a warmonger and would bring change. We don't have that this time, that's why the election seems more open to me. The polls may change, or they may not. People like me will never vote for Hillary in the primary. How does that play out with the rest of the party. Will it be Hillary, Obama, Edwards, right down to the wire. Don't know. It's not 2004.

[illinoisprogressive]

4. I was going to dig the 04 polling up myself.

[TeamJordan23]

5. I agree the polls are pointless right now. This race will really start in Fall. nt.

[Stop Cornyn]

15. Thanks for posting this.

[snowbear]

16. Great thread mario!

Thanks for reminding us of where we were this time last election!

~~~~

[Awsi Dooger]

17. Kos doesn't know what he's looking at

Lieberman was never a strong favorite to win the Democratic nomination. In the futures markets he was always a big price. Contrast that to Hillary, who is trading in the 50% range.

Trying to pretend you can use a poll with a leader at 21% or 23% and then liken it to someone who has consistently polled in the mid-to-upper 30s is frankly incompetent. I realize he's trying to make a point that things can change, but this is a horrible example. It's like trying to pretend a lukewarm 4/1 favorite is the same as a solid even money favorite.

Much better would be to use the late 2003 numbers for Dean. At that point he was trading as high as 76 on the Iowa Futures Market, theoretically meaning a 76% chance at the nomination. Hell, a separate Edwards contract in the Iowa market wasn't offered until January 26, 2004. That's not a misprint. Before then, Edwards was lumped into the Field like also-rans in a parimutuel horse race.

Besides, Kos is conveniently overlooking one major aspect. When Hillary was included in the 2003 polling she swamped everyone on the Democratic side. Even when Dean was at his apex, Hillary polled far ahead of him. Here is a link in that regard. Scroll down to the Quinnipiac poll of December 4-8, 2003 and the two Ipsos polls immediately below it. In November and December 2003, even while Dean was gathering momentum and was a solid odds-on favorite for the nomination, Hillary clobbered him when she was included in a hypothetical poll. It's obvious Hillary has significant long term strength:

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

[Apollo11]

18. So Hillary already has it in the bag?

My own view is: Futures Smoochers! :P

I bet if you asked Rudy Giuliani - he probably wants us to pick Hillary.

Let's wait until Wes Clark (and maybe also Al Gore) enters the race.

Then we will see how many people really like Hillary the most.

Until then, please try to keep a lid on the inevitability BS.

:kick:

[MGKrebs]

20. So this puts to rest your constant assertions that Clinton can't win

(based on current poll numbers).