MyDD Feburary Straw Poll Results

Despite the stuffing, I was still able to rescue a lot of data and produce results for the February straw poll. It only includes 811 votes, but this has not been stuffed in any way. Considering the size of most polls, 811 is actually a decent sample:

MyDD February Reader Straw Poll
Candidate 1st Choice 2nd Choice 1st + 2nd Choices Last Choice Announced Candidates Only
Obama 34.0 23.8 57.8 0.6 41.3
Edwards 28.6 27.1 55.7 2.2 37.0
Richardson 5.9 15.6 21.5 0.4 8.8
Clark 9.0 11.6 20.6 1.1 --
Clinton 4.1 7.0 11.1 13.8 5.4
Kucinich 2.7 3.5 6.2 17.9 3.5
Vilsack 0.6 1.6 2.2 2.0 0.9
Gravel 0.9 1.2 2.1 29.8 1.4
Dodd 0.7 1.1 1.8 0.9 1.4
Biden 0.1 0.9 1.0 31.3 0.5
Other 10.0 4.2 14.2 -- --
Unsure 3.3 2.5 5.8 -- --
Clearly, Edwards and Obama tower above the rest, currently with a slight edge going to Obama. In fact, they are so consistently more popular than all other candidates, that there are no interesting cross-tabs to report. Differences between the MyDD and Dailykos straw polls include a much weaker showing for Clark, a much better showing for Obama, a slightly weaker showing for Kucinich, and a slightly better showing for Edwards. How much of that is due to random error, taking the poll one week later, or the differences in our readerships is difficult to tell.

Four candidates have more last place votes than they have first and second place votes combined: Biden (-30.3), Gravel (-27.7), Kucinich (-11.7) and Clinton (-2.7). Two other candidates, Vilsack (+0.2) and Dodd (+0.9), are just barely positive. Clark comes in at a healthy +19.5, and Richardson is slightly better at +21.1. Edwards finishes in second at +53.2, while Obama places first with +57.2.

Edwards and Obama have such large leads in both first place and second place votes, that it appears either would become the clear netroots frontrunner if the other were to drop out. This certainly makes one wonder if the so-called "anti-Hillary" vote is being split, both online and offline.



Display:


Re: MyDD Feburary Straw Poll Results (none / 0)

Do us the biggest favor.  Email the results to CNN and to MSNBC, especially Tweety.  I am so sick of the Hillary is inevitable thing and never are the way we feel, here in the blogs, are used.  Maybe if some of the idiots in the msm punditry class got copies of this they would see that it is not Hillary that gets our vote but, Obama and Edwards.  Hillary consistently lags in the bottom of the blogs polling.  
The msm need to start taking our feeling into concideration and stop ignoring us, the one who actually vote, and are politically active, and see where the real action is and end the spin of enivitable Hillary.
Please
by vwcat on Sat Feb 17, 2007 at 07:42:23 PM EST

Re: MyDD Feburary Straw Poll Results (none / 0)

True but don't forget the Kerry was as similar basement-levels of support in 2003, as the netroots went primarily for Howard Dean, with some for Wesley Clark.  And we all know how that turned out.

We're still a small minority of primary voters.


Get a Vegetarian Starter Kit and a Dem. Party Mastercard
by Go Vegetarian on Sun Feb 18, 2007 at 01:29:02 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Yes. (none / 0)

and outside the netroots Obama dropping out actually helps Hillary in the poll I've seen on this..

the anti-hillary vote does not really seem to exist outside the netroots.

 e.g. if Edwards dropped out no big change in numbers for Obama vs.  Hillary in the real world, but the net is a different story.


Call it "Medicare Option" not public option
by TarHeel on Sun Feb 18, 2007 at 08:05:10 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: MyDD Feburary Straw Poll Results (none / 0)

I agree with you.  MSM pays attention to the dirt (Mort on Beltway Boys considers the netroots the "dirty pool players") but not polls or positive messages.


by benny06 on Sat Feb 17, 2007 at 07:49:27 PM EST

Re: MyDD Feburary Straw Poll Results (none / 0)

Online, I don't think it matters if the vote is split or not - clearly, Clinton has no traction within the netroots.

Similarly, if one combines the Edwards/Obama supporters offline, they do sum up to be double-digits ahead of Clinton alone. There may be an offline effect in the grassroots. I'm more interested to know just who Clinton's grassroots supporters are, though. For example, I'm hearing an awful lot about the individual meetups that are being organized via Obama's website and elsewhere. Clinton has an organizational tool as well, but it pales in comparison. I typed in my home zip code in Westchester County, NY for a 50-mile radius (covering essentially the entire tri-state area, plus some), and there are only 3 meetings - none of which seem really serious when it comes to the kind of organization-building that Obama's meetups (and probably Edwards' meetups) are about. That's why I'm befuddled by Clinton's lead right now...to me, I think her support is very soft.


by PsiFighter37 on Sat Feb 17, 2007 at 07:50:22 PM EST

Re: MyDD Feburary Straw Poll Results (none / 0)

i'm not beating you up here, but why can't the polls be fixed so we can vote only once? sometimes i get about 2 or 3 million emails a day asking me to sign stuff. they will not let me sign more than once, i know i try. hell i would sign up everyone in the phone book if i could stop the war in iraq. i don't stuff the ballot box here, but i did when i was i college. we actually out did ourselves we put in to many ballots. there was over 100% participation. so i can understand why it's being done. why can't it be stopped?


by bob reid on Sat Feb 17, 2007 at 07:57:40 PM EST

Re: MyDD Feburary Straw Poll Results (3.00 / 1)

Online I think the "anti-Hillary" vote is being split.  I have no real evidence for this, but my sense is that in the party as a whole, a lot of Obama's support might otherwise go to Hillary were he to drop out.  I don't think that is true of Edwards's support, though.  Maybe I'm just way off base here, but if we took preference rankings for "typical" supporters of the top 3, my guess is they'd come out looking like:

Clinton: 1) Clinton 2) Obama 3) Edwards

Obama: 1) Obama 2) Clinton 3) Edwards

Edwards: 1) Edwards 2) Obama 3) Clinton

Were you to throw Richardson into the mix, he might even into third place for all three if he becomes better known.


by LPMandrake on Sat Feb 17, 2007 at 08:24:54 PM EST

Re: MyDD Feburary Straw Poll Results (none / 0)

Assuming that the population here represents high-information voters it is gratifying to note that Hillary's support is so low.  As for the split of the 'anti-Hillary' vote I doubt she would get many of the Obama supporters based on the 2nd choice figures.

It seems the only viable candidates in this population are Edwards and Obama.

Go on.  Email it.


by Shaun Appleby on Sat Feb 17, 2007 at 08:46:54 PM EST

In the real world poll (3.00 / 1)

I've seen where they drop out a single candidate at a time, the only big change is up for Hillary when Obama drops out.

The real world democrats think Hillary and Obama are the most liberal,  with Edwards and his southern accent must be conservative.

The net is high information voters;  the real world hardly knows that Kucinich is the most liberal, or that Hillary is not the most liberal of the fields


Call it "Medicare Option" not public option
by TarHeel on Sun Feb 18, 2007 at 08:08:42 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: MyDD Feburary Straw Poll Results (none / 0)

I'm not so sure about the "anti-Hillary" idea. Hillary just doesn't make an impact online in any positive sense. I don't get the feeling that the Edwards folks have a "my guy is better than Hillary" attitude, nor the Obama folks. If anything, there seems to be developing a Clark-Dean sort of battle between those two camps. And I'm not in either camp this time! Yay! Much more fun this way.

How that plays out in the offline world I think is tough to tell. But I do think that too many people are getting too firm an idea of how the dynamic will play out. As a Richardson guy, I think Richardson is being vastly misunderestimated, but that's just me.

But no matter what, there's a lot of time to go and a lot of events to play out. For example, if the Senate keeps dithering over Iraq, any Senator is going to have a drag on their efforts, a little taint to their name. And the candidate forums (all 276 of them) will have an effect as well, including things like Obama skipping this first one having an impact.


by BriVT on Sat Feb 17, 2007 at 08:59:31 PM EST

Re: MyDD Feburary Straw Poll Results (none / 0)

My guy is much better than Hillary.  Obama is better, too.


"And so in the place of the palace of privilege, we seek to build a temple out of faith and hope and charity."-FDR
by jallen on Sun Feb 18, 2007 at 03:16:37 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: MyDD Feburary Straw Poll Results (none / 0)

Well ...yeah. But it's not what's driving the choice, is it?


by BriVT on Sun Feb 18, 2007 at 03:53:09 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: MyDD Feburary Straw Poll Results (none / 0)

I have a question about Richardson.  If Hillary is the scourge of the net roots for the war and her DLC leanings, why does Richardson play so well here.  He came to be under the Clinton Administration.  Doesn't it follow that Bill Clinton had those who were of the third way mold in his administration?  Is it the war that gives him a pass?  I am truly curious, no snark or innuendo should be assumed beyond what's presented in the question.


by Kingstongirl on Sat Feb 17, 2007 at 11:25:16 PM EST

Re: MyDD Feburary Straw Poll Results (none / 0)

Nobody will go after Richardson until he is in the top tier.


by howardpark on Sun Feb 18, 2007 at 12:02:50 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: MyDD Feburary Straw Poll Results (none / 0)

while i think obama's statements before the iraq war are more prescient than richardson's pre-war statements, if you look at richardson now, he is saying we should get out of iraq this year and he doesn't have the iraq war vote on his record.

richardson also supported lamont and said lieberman should step aside during their race.  

i am leaning toward richardson but in the anybody but hillary camp.  


by tpiddy on Sun Feb 18, 2007 at 12:39:57 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: MyDD Feburary Straw Poll Results (none / 0)

Isn't this the poll where Kucinich (and Clark?) was (were) removed from the choices midway through the poll? (under the allegation of stuffing). If so, why include Kucinich in the results? I didn't vote in this straw poll since by the time I saw the poll the only candidate worth voting for (Kucinich) was not present in the list.

Of course when I say "worth voting for" I am just using my personal, subjective criteria of honesty, logical positions, lack of BS, support for liberal/progressive/left issues, etc. I realise that other criteria are available, such as slavish centrism, "electability", vapid populist rhetoric, the ability to forego a necktie, and so on. So please don't read me the wrong way ;-).


by ravi on Sat Feb 17, 2007 at 11:43:04 PM EST

Re: MyDD Feburary Straw Poll Results (3.00 / 1)

No. These results are not tainted in any way. I didn't count any votes after I tarted removing options.
by Chris Bowers on Sun Feb 18, 2007 at 12:13:23 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: MyDD Feburary Straw Poll Results (none / 0)

Based on nothing but my gut I'm detecting a shift away from Clark, who is not a candidate and not not a candidate (not a typo), sort of in the Twilight Zone somewhere, toward Obama.  It's still pretty early.  We are two full baseball seasons away from having a new decider.


by howardpark on Sun Feb 18, 2007 at 12:01:36 AM EST

Re: MyDD Feburary Straw Poll Results (none / 0)

i voted for clark in 04 primary and i think he was the best candidate then, a 4 star general against the war.  

today though i think he is in a position where he has no chance of gaining enough momentum to be a serious contender.  i know its early but this is my gut feeling.  

in my view, richardson has a lot of the international experience and characteristics that i liked in clark.  


by tpiddy on Sun Feb 18, 2007 at 12:46:12 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: MyDD Feburary Straw Poll Results (none / 0)

yeah, i think that Edwards and Obama do draw from the same base of support, but it would be foolish for either of them to attack one another. Both should focus on Clinton, bringing her down from two different attackers and growing the base of anti-Hillary votes. Once Obama's and Edwards' support combined is significantly larger than Clinton's, then they should go after one another to become the winner.


by ahf8 on Sun Feb 18, 2007 at 12:07:20 AM EST

Re: MyDD Feburary Straw Poll Results (none / 0)

Whereas she only has to target one or the other to defeat the survivor at her leisure.  I think she will go after Obama first.


by Shaun Appleby on Sun Feb 18, 2007 at 12:36:38 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: MyDD Feburary Straw Poll Results (none / 0)

So far, though, her campaign has shown more of a willingness to go hard after Edwards than Obama.  I don't know what they're thinking is, but if I were them, I'd be concerned about alienating black voters with intense attacks on Obama.  Or maybe they are just waiting for his favorable media to crest and will jump on him once it looks like his campaign is flagging a little.  Either way, I think it's smart.  Attacking Obama now will probably reflect worse on Hillary than on him.


by LPMandrake on Sun Feb 18, 2007 at 02:00:36 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: MyDD Feburary Straw Poll Results (3.00 / 1)

Perhaps so.  I haven't seen her land any blows on either of them yet.  She certainly is trying hard to stay in touch with Obama.  He jumps in the race, she does.  He has a bill on withdrawal from Iraq, she has one too.  I think like any good fighter she is trying to keep him in range.


by Shaun Appleby on Sun Feb 18, 2007 at 03:54:18 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: MyDD Feburary Straw Poll Results (none / 0)

I think it will be a while before she attacks either directly. What we will see more and more is her surrogates/ representatives making veiled attacks on both Edwards and Obama


by okamichan13 on Sun Feb 18, 2007 at 12:34:58 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Alienating black voters (none / 0)

Yes, I'd say HRC might want to think about what black voters think when one of her supporters makes the ridiculous claim that if Obama is the nominee "Every Democratic candidate running on that ticket would lose because he's black and he's at the top of the ticket -- we'd lose the House, the Senate and the governors and everything."


DC Drinking LiberallyDC for Democracy

by KCinDC on Sun Feb 18, 2007 at 09:59:10 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Couldn't Resist Jackass Poll Stuffin' (none / 0)

With apologies to Chris, I had to chose as one of my favorites the "JPS" option.

Anyway I find it interesting that "Other" is still beating every candidate but Edwards and Obama. I only voted once...but I did pick "Other" first for one reason. Edwards and Obama want to run to the left of Hillary in the primaries. That's not particularly hard to do but Edwards and Obama are actually bad salesmen for the non Blue Dog Democrats/DLC types.

Yeah Obama is anti-war and half-black but this is only because he can still be ADM's coporate stooge doing so. Only in Illinois.

Edwards is a trial-laywer, pretty, and full of syrupy words. But he tried running to the right of Kerry and Dean in 2004 so the Swiftboaties had all the material they need to sink him ... already.

Meanwhile, Obama-Edwards-Clinton triumvirate all point to the same resume: Less than two terms experience in the US Senate, most of which was in the minority party. Hey now policy-niks don't get too excited.

More ominously though, the Democratic gubernatorial alumni who are declared are getting laughed out of the CNN studio too. And that's not good because you want a mix of voices and perspectives in the primary to keep the public intrigued and invested. At least the GOP field looks just as doomed.
 


by risenmessiah on Sun Feb 18, 2007 at 04:13:59 AM EST

Are yout talking about richardson or vilsack? (none / 0)

Richardson was involved in the Wen Ho Lee thing, which is a lot worse then being a "trial lawyer" to me. Vilsack has as much charisma as potato.

I think anyone can see the problems with Biden and Dodd. So who does that leave? Mike Gravel and Kucinich?

I wish Dean or someone like him was running, but he's not. Edwards, Obama, and Clinton are the only reasonable choices.


by delmoi on Sun Feb 18, 2007 at 05:58:11 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Both (none / 0)

I was stunned recently about this for two reasons.

One, CNN is more than willing to have Richardson on about North Korea. But then when you figure there might be obligatory questions about his campaign, they stay away from it. Now perhaps you are more informed than I about just what complicity Richardson and others share in Wen Ho Lee's removal at Los Alamos. But the fact is, as a very successful governor of a swing state, he has plenty to add to the debate about effective policy both domestically and with arms control. I don't think he would win the nomination because he's fat (or looks fat on TV) but he's Veep material and could be as good as an executive as Obama.

As for Vilsack: Yes, the man has a true Midwestern personality. But people are overlooking the fact that Tom Harkin made Iowa a non-contest. With the calendar front loaded Vilsack could win the Caucus and hang on another month and add insight again on things like Medicaid. If he dies quick, then Hillary, Obama, and Edwards don't have to clarify themselves and will get beat up against the GOP attack machine.

A disclaimer: I was hoping for Feingold and Warner to run. I like Feingold's positiions almost in toto and Warner while not ideologically similar has the management skills to make George W. Bush look like a legacy admit for Harvard's Business School (oh wait....) Moreover, I think Dean is doing a good job running the DNC and helping to build our farm system at the state and local levels.

Also, I think the 2008 die is already cast. The GOP is undergoing a massive transformation right now and the fact is, it's easier for them to run on an Iraq-critic position than the Democrats. The only way the Dems win in 2008 is if the GOP sticks with a guy like McCain or Giuliani who won't moderate their positions on the war. Chuck Hagel and Mitt Romney meanwhile, can, and if the situation presents itself, will.


by risenmessiah on Sun Feb 18, 2007 at 06:05:10 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: MyDD Feburary Straw Poll Results (none / 0)

I don't understand how the poll works.  I put Clark in first place, but when I pressed vote, it said that my vote counted for my second choice, Obama.  Why is this?


by JAmbro on Sun Feb 18, 2007 at 09:45:08 AM EST

Runoff Voting (none / 0)

Instant Runoff Voting uses the ranked list to create a number of "rounds." If, in any particular round, no candidate is listed as first choice on 50%+1 of the ballots, the candidate with the lowest total of first place votes is eliminated. All of the votes for that candidate are reassigned to the next candidate on the voter's list, and then the results are checked again.

When the poll tells you who your vote counted for, it refers to the final round. Clark was eliminated at some point before the final round, so once that happened, your vote counted for Obama in all subsequent rounds.


by Dave Thomer on Sun Feb 18, 2007 at 11:03:03 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Here's PrairieStateBlue's Approval voting (none / 0)

With about 15 to 17 voters (sorry, I've complained to "Soapy" that we need the voter total as well as the votes total) here are our results. I'm continually amazed at the quality of information we get with approval (multi-vote or checkbox voting). Being Illinois we may lean a bit stronger to Obama. Since we are using approval voting I was able to throw in the kitchen sink without hurting the results.

Vote for as many as you want.
  • Obama - 14 votes (20.9%)
  • Gore - 12 votes (17.91%)
  • Edwards - 11 votes (16.42%)
  • Kucinich - 6 votes (8.96%)
  • Richardson - 6 votes (8.96%)
  • Dean - 5 votes (7.46%)
  • Clark - 4 votes (5.97%)
  • Nader - 4 votes (5.97%)
  • Gravel - 3 votes (4.48%)
  • Clinton - 2 votes (2.99%)
  • Dodd - 0 votes (0%)
  • Giuliani - 0 votes (0%)
  • McCain - 0 votes (0%)
  • Vilsack - 0 votes (0%)
  • Biden - 0 votes (0%)
  • None - 0 votes (0%)

Total votes: 67

I've been urging Chris to run one of these here sometime and he gave my comment a 3 rating, so lets cross our fingers.


Jeff Wegerson - PrairieStateBlue
by wegerje on Sun Feb 18, 2007 at 01:29:25 PM EST

Oh and... (none / 0)

We leave this poll up for a month and the quality stays high. In fact it becomes a great snapshot of where the blog's politics lie for someone who is seeing us for the first time.


Jeff Wegerson - PrairieStateBlue
by wegerje on Sun Feb 18, 2007 at 01:34:07 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: MyDD Feburary Straw Poll Results (3.00 / 1)

Still it's interesting to see Richardson slowly pull away from the second tier.  He has more than enough time to catch the back of the lead pack.


by Working Class in Oregon on Sun Feb 18, 2007 at 04:22:48 PM EST

Re: MyDD Feburary Straw Poll Results (none / 0)

This is a little off topic and maybe seems a little ridiculous, but -- I still don't understand why the netroots can't field it's own presidential candidate, as a third party.

As a very fun research project I'm still trying to work out more of the actual pragmatic barriers to this, but the very first step, just getting on the ballot in all 50 states, seems completely doable; raise the application fees and get the signatures in each state, etc...  


...paging Dr. Sweet-touch...
by Christopher Klonecke on Sun Feb 18, 2007 at 08:59:05 PM EST

Please clarify on "stuffing" issue- - - (none / 0)

I participated in your poll near the tail end of it I believe (maybe I was 700th out of 811) and tried to post a link to it for others to join in, but then you posted something to the effect of the whole thing being bogus and you were calling it off due to "stuffing" --- now you are parading the poll as if the results are legit and you make no mention of your poll-in-progress comments in which you pooh poohed the poll and diminished its "findings" other than to imply you "saved it" and brought it back from the dead.  What gives?  Please clarify.  My suggestion for you next time you conduct a poll is: #1 - - promote it ahead of time with a clear start and end point; #2 - - only declared candidates (no Gore, Clark or Sharpton or other non-declareds included); #3 - - - enable people to enter "UNDECIDED" as an option;  Finally, here is a novel idea - - - why not have an against the grain "DEFECTORS" poll and measure each of these candidates on their "DRAG" potential - - - I'll let you phrase the question, but it could be something to the effect of, "If this candidate were the nominee of the Democratic Party, how likely would you be to crossover and vote for a Republican candidate or vote for a third-party candidate such as Ralph Nader or someone else?"


by Progressive Populist on Wed Feb 21, 2007 at 01:03:06 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.