Open Left: Is Obama's Surging to Victory?

[flpoljunkie]

Is Obama Surging to Victory?
by: Mike Lux

Wed Nov 21, 2007 at 11:36:41 AM EST

Well, not yet, but the endgame will be fascinating.

Here's where I think things are right now:

1. Obama is making a move right now. Last week, I wrote that if he was going to win, now was the time for Obama to make his move, and the clear trendline in the polling I have seen, both public and private, is that he has picked up several points, and is now at least tied with Clinton, and maybe even up a little. I'm guessing that now settles down, and that Clinton and Obama spend most of the final month in a dead heat, but Obama has established himself as a clear contender for an Iowa victory.

2. Edwards is on the edge. A few weeks back I noted that if Edwards stays in third a few points behind, that he could be in trouble. I said this because his matching funds decision limits his spending options, and because Iowans know he has to win Iowa to have a chance to win the nomination, and may start drifting away if they think he has no chance.

The polling is a little contradictory at this point, but Obama appears to be the one making a move at Clinton's expense, leaving Edwards stuck in 3rd, several points down and stagnant. I think that puts him in danger for more slippage.

The thing that was supposed to put Edwards over the top was his popularity as a 2nd choice, but I think he now has as problem there, too. The 2nd-tier candidates, if Edwards remains stuck in third, will all be trying to sneak by him for a surprise 3rd-place finish. That means they will tell their people to go to Obama as a 2nd choice rather than Edwards. Adding to those problems is that his tougher rhetoric in recent weeks, while rallying his troops, is making it less likely that people will gravitate toward him as their 2nd choice.

3. Clinton in for a fight. Clinton will stabilize her position after slipping a little in recent weeks, and will remain solidly in the hunt for first place. Her biggest problem is that I don't think any of the other candidates will tell their people to go to her as their 2nd choice (in case they aren't viable). Being the national frontrunner means everyone else needs her to lose. I think that gives the edge to Obama.

more...

http://www.openleft.com/showDiary.do?diaryId=2465

[JDPriestly]

1. A Clinton candidacy could split the Democratic Party.

It would certainly dampen the enthusiasm of many of the most reliable volunteers.

[FreeState]

3. Obama could do the same as well n/t

[NewYorkerfromMass]

8. Obama is weaker than Edwards

He simply won't have a chance in the GE. However, I am sure primary voters will wake up to that fact.

[FreeState]

9. Im not to sure about that...

but I always find the primaries fascinating. You never know who will get the nod - right now I still think the odds down favorite is CLinton - but in the next two months anyone in the pack could really come out on top. The big difference between this race and the previous primaries IMO is that Feb 5th has 22 states - thats huge and early, Im hoping that does not screw the party over in the end - I like them spread out more so that each candidate gets vetted by the voters via real life campaigning.

[ClarkUSA]

10. What basis do you have for your opinion "Obama ...simply won't have a chance in the GE"?

Or that he is "weaker than Edwards"?

Because according to the recently released ABC News/Washington Post poll, Obama doubled Clinton's support among Independent voters
(Obama 35% to Clinton 18%)-- another indicator that he will be the strongest candidate going into the general election:
http://abcnews.go.com/images/PollingUnit/1051a1IowaDems.pdf


For more on Obama's general election strength, check out this recent poll, which shows Obama leading among Iowa voters when matched up to
Republican opponents. Obama easily beats all of his Republican opponents (with 50% or more against each of them), while Clinton's margin is
significantly slimmer against Giuliani, Romney, and Huckabee, and she even loses to McCain:
http://www.surveyusa.com/client/PollReportEmail.aspx?g=2d211d2a-ee13-40ab-8455-5a70b9b55bfe

[BringBigDogBack]

7. You got it.

[surfermaw]

15. The democrat party and the nation will fall behind any one that wins the nomination

Oh Yes They Will!

[1corona4u]

19. Uhm....not all of us will...

There are 2 I absolutely will NOT vote for. I'll just skip it totally. By the way, I was/am an Independent, and just recently re-registered as a Dem, so I could vote in the primary.

[Kurt_and_Hunter]

36. What is this "democrat party" you speak of?

[Kurt_and_Hunter]

16. re: splitting the party

CNN/WMUR New Hampshire poll from yesterday. (Likely Democratic voters)

Which candidate would you NEVER vote for?

Clinton - 22%

Obama - 22%

Edwards - 22%

[suston96]

2. Surging? In the opposite direction......

I'll see your poll and raise you one:

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

Rasmussen:

Obama drops 9 points in 3 days.

[ClarkUSA]

11. Oy. Another national poll from Hillaryworld campaign manager Mark Penn's buddy at Rasmussen

That's really relevant.

lol

[BeyondGeography]

4. Change you can believe in

Laugh away, you soon-to-be-steamrolled Obama doubters, but Barack & Co. are executing a brilliant campaign. The narrative, organized around the theme of "change you can believe in," hangs together beautifully, both with his personal traits (honesty and credibility), the choices he has made as a politician (an unbeatable record in the area of ethics and reform), and, most importantly, with what voters actually want. If Iowa is an indicator, 55% of voters prefer an ability to "change" the way Washington works to experience (33%). Bad news for the lobbyists-are-people-too candidate.

Result: Obama looks like he's headed downfield in the midst of a well-executed play with blockers in front of him and Clinton is scrambling, wondering which receiver she should try throwing to today.

[1corona4u]

5. LOL....right...

My prediction- he blows it-big time, right after the Iowa caucuses...

[ClarkUSA]

12. Have another Corona.

On second thought, maybe you should stop. It's clearly affecting your judgment.

[1corona4u]

20. LOL...

you're the one drinking the Obama swill...and apparently, liking it.

[ClarkUSA]

23. Stop burping.

You've been blowing enough Hillaryworld hot air since you showed up at GDP to worship at her altar.
Your knees must hurt by now.

[1corona4u]

26. I'm not voting for Hillary....

I don't know who you're thinking about, but I am a Bidenite. I'll vote for her if I have to, but only then.

[ClarkUSA]

29. We have something in common, then.

Sorry for maligning you as a Hillaryworlder. No one deserves that.

lol

[ClarkUSA]

17. Iowans certainly believe in the change Obama is offering.

And a growing number of New Hampshire voters are moving into his column, too.

It's a beautiful thing to watch.

[Bitwit1234]

6. Ha ha ha ha ha

Obama IS NOT going to win. Take that to the bank.

[surfermaw]

13. Don't worry too much about Edward

He is going to win in Iowa, and then there will be a snow ball going in S.C. and probably N.H.

[Kurt_and_Hunter]

14. Obama is not surging. Clinton is declining.

It is good to look at the polls for what they literally are, not as wht the media wants to spin them into as shifting horse-race margins. (The margin is the "wind chill" of political journalism.)

In most of the recent "Obama surging!" polls Obama shows tiny gains, while Clinton shows much larger losses. The point is, Obama is not getting that Clinton support.

The zogby poll was published with a headline "Obama gains Big" because that's a better story than "Clinton sagging," but when you look at the poll, Clinton dropped 8 while Obama gained 2. How is gaining two points "Big"? The recent New Hampshire poll was the same... "Obama gaining on Clinton!" Except Obama wasn't "gaining" except in relative terms. Clinton dropped 7-8 points and Obama gained 2.

[ClarkUSA]

18. Obama gained 4 points in the recent ABC/Washington Post poll of likely Iowa caucus goers.

Link to poll charts: http://abcnews.go.com/images/PollingUnit/1051a1IowaDems.pdf

Depends on what you mean by "surge" but Obama certainly is "moving up fast" to quote NBC's David Schuster.

You're right on Clinton declining, though - in both Iowa and NH.

[Kurt_and_Hunter]

21. That poll is excellent for Obama, but doesn't really show an obama gain

Apples to apples.

The last Washington Post poll had Obama at 29. This one has him at 30.

30 is a lot higher than the last non Washington Post poll, but the Post poll is an odd one.... when it showed Obama at 29 last time it was way out of line with the other polls, so we'll see how this one holds up.

The Post series may be the most accurate... they seem to have a different likely caucus-goer model that might be better than others. It's a tight screen they use... 33% of the people in their sample have shaken hands or spoken with a candidate personally.

If the Post methodology is correct than Obama has always been higher in Iowa than the other polls showed, but if that's the case he has not surged... just remained at a high level.

[ClarkUSA]

22. Obama gained 4 points since July, the last time ABC/Washington Post similarly polled Iowa.

What WaPo poll are you referring to that had Obama at 29%? A link would be helpful.

[Kurt_and_Hunter]

24. My bad... 27, not 29. Here it is:

All around, Obama is doing well, and better than last month, but I don't see a surge. But did did misremember the Post poll as 9, not 7, so three points is good.

Obama - 27
Clinton - 26
Edwards - 26

http://abcnews.go.com/images/US/1042a1IADemCaucus.pdf



While looking for it, I saw the Zogby series with the poll out today with the "Obama Gains Big" headline, and To my surprise, Clinton hadn't gone down at all! That's almost counter-intuitive. She was unchanged from the last Reuters/Zogby Poll, while Obama is up three.

All around, Obama has gained some, but in absolute terms (rather than margin terms) it is modest so far. (I am thinking of Huckabee as a example of a Surge, as oppossed to a positive trend.) The next few weeks will be interesting.

11/14-17/07

Obama - 27
Clinton - 38
Edwards - 13

10/24-27/07

Obama - 24
Clinton - 38
Edwards - 12

http://pollingreport.com/wh08dem.htm

[ClarkUSA]

27. Pollsters seem to think Obama is surging, even if you don't.

Depends on who's defining "surge", I guess. Thanks for the links.

I agree that the next few weeks will be interesting. Huckabee must be on cloud nine.
Like Obama, he's moving up fast.

[BeyondGeography]

28. The top-line numbers aren't the biggest part of the story here

The very bad news for Clinton in the latest WaPo-ABC poll is that Iowans don't value the one attribute where she still has a decided adge against Obama, experience (33% say it's their top priority), nearly as much as the ability to deliver meaningful change (55%), which is what Obama's whole campaign is based on. If these numbers are accurate, she's got more catching up to do than just overcoming a four-point differential.

[DrFunkenstein]

33. That's Not What I Read Here:

Clinton led Obama 38 percent to 27 percent in the new poll, a 10-point fall from her 46 percent to 25 percent lead last month.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21914217 /

[Kurt_and_Hunter]

35. It's hard to keep up... the 46% is 10/10-14/07 and the first 38% is 10/24-27/07

Zogby works with several different entities, so maybe the 10/24 was probably done for someone other than reuters/WSJ. (or maybe polling report.com has something transposed or mis-entered)

Beats me.

Anyway, the polls to come will be more and more accurate.

The very last Zogby poll before Iowa in 2004 had Kerry in the lead. I was surprised to see that... I remember Kerry winning as kind of a big surprise at the time.

[illinoisprogressive]

25. I have to agree with JD. clinton will split this party if nominated.

[Phunktified]

30. This post reflects quite well the conventional wisdom

Which, if past caucuses are any example, will change. In 2003, is was early December when Al Gore and Bill Bradley flew to Iowa to endorse Dean. 5 weeks from the caucuses he was far and away the frontrunner. All of this is a bunch of speculative noise. Only one public poll (ABCs out last Monday) has shown Obama ahead in Iowa. Many public polls taken at the same time (last week) showed Hillary maintaing a narrow lead, about where she's been for the last two months.

This is all just medai hype/political narrative. Whats going on in Iowa is whats been going on for the last month or more and none of it matters until a week or two before the caucus.

[Colobo]

31. Obama won't be denied- He's Our Next President.

[Imagevision]

32. Is Obama Surging to Victory? Yes Mike he is, the closer we get in the final stretch in Iowa and

New Hampshire, Oprah will have begun schtumping for

[BenDavid]

34. One poll from the Washington Post/ABC and our saviour has

arrived. NOT! My goodness if Obama were a basketball player and he shot 1 for 12 I would bench his ass. If he played baseball and he batted 1 for 12 I would send him to the minors. If he were in management and he only met 1 out of 12 goals set for him I would fire him. 1 for 12 is not good folks....What is 12? 12 is the number of polls. 1 poll says Obama is ahead by 4 points and the other 11 say HRC is ahead from 2 to 8 points.....enough common sense for anyone to grasp.....

I do thank you
Ben David