New Iowa Poll : Clinton leads

The first Rasmussen Reports poll of the Iowa Democratic Caucus for 2008 finds Senator Hillary Clinton on top with support from 33% of Likely Caucus Participants. Former North Carolina Senator John Edwards is supported by 22% and Illinois Senator Barack Obama attracts 21%. New Mexico Governor Bill Richardson is at 7% in the poll followed by Delaware Senator Joe Biden at 4% (see crosstabs).

Clinton has a substantial lead among women, attracting 39% of the female vote. She has a much smaller advantage among men, leading Edwards just 28% to 24%.

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_c ontent/politics/democratic_iowa_caucus



Display:


Re: New Iowa Poll : Clinton leads (none / 0)

Wow!  You're fast Lori!  ;)


by BigBoyBlue on Wed Oct 17, 2007 at 11:58:13 AM EST

Re: New Iowa Poll : Clinton leads (2.00 / 3)

Yeah it popped up in my mailbox in a newsletter. It shows she is moving up  in Iowa , not really far off from the dmr poll.

This is the interesting part , they polled for those that will absolutely vote and she still leads , she has come a long way in Iowa.

" All polling for caucus events presents challenges in determining who is likely to show up and participate. In conducting and analyzing this survey, Rasmussen Reports reviewed results for many possible levels of turnout. While the results varied modestly depending upon the turnout model, the overall dynamic was the same in all cases--Clinton in the lead with Edwards and Obama close to each other in second. For example, our overall sample shows Clinton with 33% of the vote and an eleven point lead. When only those who were absolutely certain they would vote, Clinton attracts 31% support and leads by eight."


Educated in a small town Taught to fear Jesus in a small town Used to daydream in that small town Another born romantic that's me.
by lori on Wed Oct 17, 2007 at 12:02:01 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: New Iowa Poll : Clinton leads (2.00 / 2)

Wow!  11% lead is very impressive considering the intensive disinformation and negative campaigns  being relentlessly waged by her opponents in Iowa.

Thanks for the great news!  :)


by Hurdy Gurdy on Wed Oct 17, 2007 at 12:11:58 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: New Iowa Poll : Clinton leads (2.00 / 1)

You know she hasn't even being in Iowa that much , the 2 other candidates have about 2 or more dozen trips or slightly more than she has made to Iowa , they have basically camped out that because they know they have to beat her there yet they are still trailing.

Her strategy is working out fine , She is building a real firewall in New Hampshire , thats her strategy and I think she has built it enough that a stumble in Iowa will not affect her enough in NH.

At this stage is too early to say she can win Iowa but the results are going to be very close either way.


Educated in a small town Taught to fear Jesus in a small town Used to daydream in that small town Another born romantic that's me.
by lori on Wed Oct 17, 2007 at 12:18:45 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: New Iowa Poll : Clinton leads (none / 0)

I don't think Iowa is going to be that close. The only real difference in the Iowa polling compared to nationally is that Edwards polls in the low 20s versus low teens nationally. Obama does about the same in Iowa and nationally -- except that his demographics work against him in the screwy Iowa caucus format.

The big difference is that Iowa is lily-white (like the South without any black folk), thus they tend to support the old white dude a little more heavily over the black guy or that damned woman.


by hwc on Wed Oct 17, 2007 at 12:29:06 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: New Iowa Poll : Clinton leads (none / 0)

I am more and more convinced that Clinton will take Iowa.  Not by a huge margin, but just win.  There is a lot of strong, committed support for her (more committed than for either Obama or Edwards,)  she has a strong lead in the all-important 50+ age group, she wins every important internal we have seen in any of the Iowa polls (most likely to beat the GOPer in Nov. 2008, best on Iraq, most experienced, best for health care, economy, education, etc.  

You lead in the (by far) most important age group, you have the most committed group of supporters, you lead all important internals, you have your support spread out across the state (rather than concentrated in a few caucuses) and a lead is rock-solid.    There is still some time to go, and yet-to-happen unknown events could play into this, but Hillary Clinton has more things going for her to make for a win in Iowa than the other candidates at this point, IMHO.    


by georgep on Wed Oct 17, 2007 at 03:07:21 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: New Iowa Poll : Clinton leads (none / 0)

She leads among the youth vote too according to the cross tabs although it is only 8% of the sample.

40% of 18-29 year old respondents expressed support for Senator Clinton in the upcoming caucus, compared to 23% for Senator Obama , and 15% for Senator Edwards.


Educated in a small town Taught to fear Jesus in a small town Used to daydream in that small town Another born romantic that's me.
by lori on Wed Oct 17, 2007 at 03:09:31 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: New Iowa Poll : Clinton leads (2.00 / 1)

Indeed Quick! This is very very good news!


by American1989 on Wed Oct 17, 2007 at 12:10:28 PM EST

A big deal (2.00 / 2)

One the things that I have been tracking is the relationship between Hillary's National, NH and Iowa numbers.

For most of the year Hillary's national number is 10 points higher than her NH number, and 20 points higher than her Iowa number.

With Hillary moving near 50 nationally, her NH numbers have reached 40, and her Iowa number has reached 30.  This suggests to me we are seeing a NATIONAL trend impacting both NH and Iowa.  

Hillary's lead in Iowa is still the lowest for any National Front runner with a significant National Lead in Iowa since 1980 - so this race is far from over - but there is no way to read this as anything other than positive for her.  


by fladem on Wed Oct 17, 2007 at 12:25:01 PM EST

Re: A big deal (2.00 / 1)

Yeah but it is tough to really know what is going on in Iowa , its favorable for her but I still think it is not hard to see Edwards pulling it off.

But yeah positive news for her.


Educated in a small town Taught to fear Jesus in a small town Used to daydream in that small town Another born romantic that's me.
by lori on Wed Oct 17, 2007 at 12:27:23 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Nowhere near over (none / 0)

I agree.  

In fact, from a historical perspective her Iowa numbers are still weak.  Comparable front runners (Reagan in '80, Mondale, Dole in '96, Bush in 2000) who had 20 plus point national leads lead by 20 or more in Iowa at this point.


by fladem on Wed Oct 17, 2007 at 12:49:41 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: A big deal (2.00 / 1)

For most of the year Hillary's national number is 10 points higher than her NH number, and 20 points higher than her Iowa number.

There are two reasons:

1. Iowa and NH have easy access to all the candidates, tend to support the fringe candidates (like Richardsona and Biden) more strongly, and decide late.

2. Iowa and NH are nearly 100% white. A big part of Clinton's base includes African Americans and Latino/a and Asian American voters. This is offset in the positive direction by support for women in politics in New Hampshire and in a negative direction by the fact that Iowans traditionally wouldn't elect a woman to be head of the woman's auxilliary.


by hwc on Wed Oct 17, 2007 at 12:34:04 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: A big deal (none / 0)

And a third reason: Iowa is a caucus state rather than a primary state.  This works against her in the polling, but it remains to be seen how it plays out at the actual caucuses.


by markjay on Wed Oct 17, 2007 at 04:35:09 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: A big deal (none / 0)

You're partly true. But based on my observations, it will take a few weeks for state polls to reflect national trend. I saw it happening in IA and NH. When she polled 40s nationally, it took a while for NH poll to completely catch up. So it will be interesting to see how the next batch of NH polls in a few weeks.

IA is much tough. But if she polls consistently above 50 nationally, she'll probably crack 35 points in IA.


Hillary: We will finally have a president who doesn't mind pulling over and asking for directions. Am I right, ladies?
by areyouready on Wed Oct 17, 2007 at 12:34:55 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: A big deal (2.00 / 1)

A lot of that is just due to the fact that state polling is done so infrequently. You are likely to have a month of national polling in between state polling, at least until this point in the race.

Also, you've got the influence of massive Hillary support in California and NY on the national polling.


by hwc on Wed Oct 17, 2007 at 12:38:13 PM EST
[ Parent ]

True (none / 0)

national polls are much more frequent (and less relevant I would argue) than polls in Iowa and NH.  That is why I was curious to see if the national jump from 40 to 50 was accompanied by similar increases in Iowa and NH.

This will change.  In 2004 5 pollsters did daily tracking of NH, for example.  


by fladem on Wed Oct 17, 2007 at 12:52:50 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Look at the # who Think Dems will win (2.00 / 1)

Among Democratic caucus voters, 89% believe Democrats will win the White House, while 5% diasagree. Among Republicans, 51% believe Republicans will win while 25% think Democrats will and 24% are uncertain.

Hot damn, very encouraging. Nevertheless, we need to keep working, esp. for large margins in Congress to stop Republican obstructionism.


by John Campanelli on Wed Oct 17, 2007 at 01:54:20 PM EST

Re: Look at the # who Think Dems will win (none / 0)

Those are amazing numbers and very important because the mainstream media loves to pick a winner. The perception that a Democrat will win will affect their reporting.


by LakersFan on Wed Oct 17, 2007 at 02:37:30 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: New Iowa Poll : Clinton leads (none / 0)

Now this is the kind of poll the Edwards and Obama campaign should take very seriously.
Everyone's been campaigning and running ads in Iowa so if the polls say Hillary is ahead other campaigns better pay attention.

The national polls mean nothing since no one has run ads and campaigned in Texas, California, Florida and all the other big national states that would determine national polls.


by joachim on Wed Oct 17, 2007 at 01:59:16 PM EST

Re: New Iowa Poll : Clinton leads (none / 0)


You're assuming somehow that people aren't exposed to the race at all.  Actually, it's been going on for most of the year and average people do have an impression of the major candidates.  They are well known people at this point, and people have a sense of what they stand for.

The way people lean is a pretty good predictor of who they'll support eventually.    It's not an accident that the numbers in early primary states (NH, SC, FL) match up quite closely to those in national polling.

Only Iowa is a bit aberrant- and that mostly because the caucus system is a rigging that favors activists and 'bosses'.  Edwards has spent two or three years trying to get it to favor him on some magical theory about how Kerry won the nomination there.  

Despite all his time and effort, he only runs 10% better with Iowa caucusgoers than in national polling, and is keeping Clinton down 10%...and yet she's that same margin ahead and might be able to pull away.


by killjoy on Wed Oct 17, 2007 at 05:09:11 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: New Iowa Poll : Clinton leads (none / 0)

Kerry won because he was the closest thing the Democrats had to a candidate who could cross the "commander-in-chief" threshold during a time when the country was at war. It certainly didn't have anything to do with his effectiveness as a campaigner. He's one of the worst candidates, in that regard, in modern history...not only unimpressive on the stump, but unable to put together a coherent campaign narrative beyond the fact that he fought in VietNam and was a US Senator who nobody had ever heard of.


by hwc on Wed Oct 17, 2007 at 05:16:52 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: New Iowa Poll : Clinton leads (none / 0)

Actually only Hillary and Obama have run ads in Iowa. Edwards has not. Hill and Obama have spent upwards of 5 million so far on TV ads.


by adamterando on Wed Oct 17, 2007 at 10:54:04 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: New Iowa Poll : Clinton leads (none / 0)

Yes people are exposed to the race but with the media narrative. Its like in a legal case the prosecution makes its case and the jury is ready to convict, then the defense lawyers make their case and the jury all over sudden is not so sure.

Name recognition and media narrative gives Hillary those national poll numbers. Those voters will eventually hear from the other candidates and no scientific poll can predict what will happen then.

Thats why i respect the Iowa polls a lot more than the national ones.


by joachim on Wed Oct 17, 2007 at 05:35:41 PM EST

Re: New Iowa Poll : Clinton leads (none / 0)

How do you explain NH poll then? To believe voters are living in vacuum is just ridiculous.

One-state strategy won't help Edwards/Obama win this thing.


Hillary: We will finally have a president who doesn't mind pulling over and asking for directions. Am I right, ladies?
by areyouready on Wed Oct 17, 2007 at 05:59:55 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: New Iowa Poll : Clinton leads (none / 0)

I wonder what the other supporters excuses will be this time.


by reasonwarrior on Wed Oct 17, 2007 at 05:49:06 PM EST

Re: New Iowa Poll : Clinton leads (none / 0)

We'll see who has what Jan. 3rd.  


by reasonwarrior on Wed Oct 17, 2007 at 10:08:02 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: New Iowa Poll : Clinton leads (none / 0)

Why don't you step outside the "twi'light zone" and take a look around to see what is happening in this reality?


by reasonwarrior on Fri Oct 19, 2007 at 01:53:40 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: New Iowa Poll : Clinton leads (none / 0)

What happens in Iowa will affect NH.
The last thing the Hillary campaign needs is an Obama win in Iowa followed by millions of dollars worth of ads in NH talking about the future and the real possibility of change.

Is there a scientific poll that could tell me what would happen in NH then.


by joachim on Wed Oct 17, 2007 at 06:55:12 PM EST

Re: New Iowa Poll : Clinton leads (none / 0)

The average bounce out of Iowa is 15%.  That includes a lot of instances where most candidates are largely unknowns and cycles in which Democrats were very unhappy with their choices, could not decide between "bad" and "worse."   Even if someone other than Clinton wins Iowa, the bounce should be limited.   These candidates are very well known, the preferences have hardened and solidified by January.  I don't see a strong case for Obama here, unless he can "clean up," win by a surprisingly huge margin (say, 12%.)


by georgep on Wed Oct 17, 2007 at 10:12:07 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Peaking to early? (none / 0)

Clinton has really had a spectacular late summer. Everything is going right for her, and the polls are showing it.

I am amazed really. She was such a known quantity, I didn't expect her to be able to move much up or move much down, during the pre-December primary season. Obviously I was wrong about her being able to move up, maybe I am wrong about her not moving down as well.

For a less known candidate this would not be a good thing to be so far ahead. The press will soon become much more critical to her and much more kind to Edwards. II would say the press would become more kind to Obama, but I am not sure if that is possible! If this were any other candidate I would say they peaked too early, but how do you say that about such a public figure for so many years?


by alarabi7 on Wed Oct 17, 2007 at 08:28:05 PM EST

Re: New Iowa Poll : Clinton leads (none / 0)

If the Democrats move the caucus to January 3rd, I beleive this will kill Obama's chances in Iowa, for the one reason that the students will not be back from winter break.

I beleive that Obama finishes 3rd if the date is moved.


by CVDem on Wed Oct 17, 2007 at 09:37:00 PM EST


You are not logged in.

In order to post a comment, you must be logged in. If you have a member account, please log in to comment.

If not, you can make an account right here. It's quick and free.