Tuesday, November 27, 2007

Hillary Is Out, Obama Is In

No longer is Hillary the woman to beat. The latest Zogby poll suggests that Obama is now the favorite. According to the poll, all of the top five Republican contenders defeat Hillary while Obama polls over all Republican leaders. Edwards, likewise, polls over Republicans, but not as strongly as Obama.

Of course, as I've said before, the race isn't a national popularity contest; it's a state-by-state competition. And only state-level polls are really relevant. But it is interesting to see how things can shift substantially as the only polls that matter draw near.


Sirocco said...

Fine by me ... although I suspect, in the end, Clinton is still going to win.

Really, Obama _should_ win in Iowa. It's closer to his home turf, and his personality should be a better match for the more personal style of campaigning than Clinton's.

Matthew said...

An intersting thing happened a few weeks ago, the Coconino County Dems hosted a "Mock Convention" and about 180 rank and file showed up with some from neighboring Counties.

The folks present pretty much represented the demographic of the state.

Obama won! With Richardson placing second and Clinton placing third. If this is at all reflective of the Democratic base in AZ, Clinton is in serious trouble.

Sirocco said...

I realized after reading this yesterday this was an interactive poll, not a regular one. It's far less credible.

Liza said...

I think this is interesting. We are so accustomed to the "polls" predicting the winners that one wonders if the polls are just self-fulfilling. Some polls have more integrity than others, of course.

But I still wonder how many people enter the voting booth more or less neutral to most of the candidates and end up just picking the "winner" or the recognizable name.

Next year's presidential primaries could be very different. We may be on the verge of finding out the depth and breadth of the nation's collective anger and how much they want to see fundamental changes in government. The candidates who are perceived to represent change (Obama, Edwards, Paul) may do much better in the primaries than the "polls" have been predicting.

Hillary is still the likely Democratic candidate, in my opinion, but not by much and she's far from "inevitable." There's still hope.

roger said...

Yeh, Liza, I agree...and I agree with Ace. The polls in Iowa are most important. I think that if Obama beats her there it will be a big big deal and there is a reason why she intends to spend every waking moment there for the next six weeks...she knows that what I say is true (not to sound arrogant).

As I said long ago, Edwards and Obama split the "other than Hillary vote". It appears that those who like Edwards have Obama as 2nd choice and vice versa.

What all this means is that if Obama wins he will get a LOT of momentum and some Edwards supporters. When Edwards leaves, Obama benefits big (or if he leaves).

Hillary knows that a win by Obama will be earthshattering...just like when Kerry won there. He will get momentum and everyone will ask why the inevitible, unstoppable Clinton campaign could not win Iowa...it will extend to Nevada, then NH.

The difference also with Obama is that he can resist any firewall Clinton might have because he has organization and he has the money to stay in the race.

I, too, would bet on Hillary if forced to do so, but I am seeing a big door open for Obama now.

Sirocco said...

Regarding polls I suspect there is some element of "well, I'll vote for the leader". Don't know how much, though. I suspect people who know enough to know about the poll status at least have some kind of opinion on the matter.

Of course, there is a known bias in favor of whichever candidate is listed first on the ballot.

Liza said...

I think the traditional advantages such as first on the ballot, first in the polls, and the most TV ads will have less of an impact in the upcoming primaries. More people know something about the candidates. For one thing, the campaigning started earlier and more people have been paying attention because of Iraq, the economy, healthcare, immigration, etc...

Liza said...

I've always agreed with you about the Edwards/Obama supporters. At this point, we have to believe that Obama is probably going to do better than Edwards in the first primaries, but will Edwards take his cue and drop out so that Obama can "surge?" I say he won't.

If Edwards waits until after the second round of primaries to drop out, I think it will be too late. But I kind of doubt that Edwards will quit no matter what, and that alone changes everything because you are absolutely right that he and Obama draw from the same voter populations.

Too bad, huh? But, I guess we'll see.

Roger said...

I think you are absolutely right. If he stays around, it will mean Hillary all the way. No chance for Obama or anyone else.

The reason I think he won't stay, at least past Nevada, is that he has little money and has bet almost everything on Iowa. He HAS to win or come in 2nd. If he doesn't it is over and frankly, I think that any supporters would drift toward Obama if he wins. If he comes in 2nd and Edwards is a very very close third then Hillary will be happy as a lark.

Good stuff Liza.


Liza said...

Well, that's true, Roger. Edwards may be out early whether he wants to or not because of money. What I would hope for is an official and graceful exit (like Gephardt in 2004) and an endorsement for Obama.

Yeah, a close third for Edwards in Iowa is bad for Obama, really bad.

Edwards needs to "examine his conscience" (like Catholics do before "confession") and decide if he wants Bush to get a third term by letting Hillary get the nomination.

roger said...

"Edwards needs to "examine his conscience" (like Catholics do before "confession") and decide if he wants Bush to get a third term by letting Hillary get the nomination."

Big Smile!!!!!!