MyDD :: Edwards Within 4

Edwards Within 4

by Todd Beeton, Fri Jan 25, 2008 at 09:44:17 AM EST

The latest Reuters/CSPAN/Zogby tracking poll shows a still tightening race with John Edwards moving to within 4 points of Hillary Clinton in South Carolina, an upward trend we've seen play out consistently since his stellar debate performance on Monday night.

Candidate	1/22-24	1/21-23	1/20-22	RCP 5-poll Ave.
Obama	38	39	43	38.2
Clinton	25	24	24	26.4
Edwards	21	19	15	19.2

But while the Edwards surge is impressive, hidden within these three-day rolling averages may be the real story once the votes are counted Saturday night: a potential New Hampshire-like late surge of voters coming home to Clinton. From John Zogby:

Thursday's polling alone had Obama leading with 36%, but Clinton was just five points back at 31% (a good day for her). Edwards came in with 19% yesterday alone. The one-day sample was not enough to draw sweeping conclusions, but it is an indicator that this race continues to change.

Update [2008-1-25 10:3:58 by Todd Beeton]:Marc Ambinder has the results of the new McClatchy/MSNBC poll out of South Carolina, which confirms a tightening between Clinton and Obama, not so much between Clinton and Edwards though:

Their survey of Democrats in South Carolina:
Obama 38
Clinton: 30
Edwards 19

Tags: 2008 presidential election, democratic nomination, south carolina primary, john edwards, barack obama, hillary clinton (all tags)

Permalink :: 46 Comments :: Post a Comment

Zogby is a charlatan (2.00 / 2)

Sorry, he is. He now has 3 scenarios that allow him to claim "prescience." Obama has a big lead in his ACTUAL poll. Edwards is trending upward in his poll. And NOW Clinton has a "late surge." The man is icorrigible.

by Big Tent Democrat on Fri Jan 25, 2008 at 09:48:36 AM EST

Re: Zogby is a charlatan (none / 0)

I agree with you. He is a horrible and dishonest pollster. Nobody knows what his secret sauce is when he makes it on the fly...

by prisonbreak on Fri Jan 25, 2008 at 09:53:47 AM EST
[ Parent ]

He is not a pollster (none / 0)

He is simply a pundit who preteds to be a pollster.

by Big Tent Democrat on Fri Jan 25, 2008 at 09:56:06 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Only ARG (none / 0)

is worse.

Why anybody actually listens to either one is beyond me.

by fladem on Fri Jan 25, 2008 at 11:14:14 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Edwards Within 4 (none / 0)

Edwards at this point seems to be acting like the spoiler in this race, like a third party candidate with no chance of getting elected, yet continues to battle for votes.

Can one get a breakdown of the racial voting in these polls, because it would seem that it is all about "white" votes and where they are going, since a previous poll suggested that Obama's support is only 10% from the white community.

Backlash?

Click on Peace, Propaganda, & The Promised Land and learn the truth about the I/P conflict.

by shergald on Fri Jan 25, 2008 at 09:54:29 AM EST

Re: Edwards Within 4 (none / 0)

Wow!

Next you'll call him a Nader and us Naderites. I'm proud to fight for real change and John Edwards.

We are fighting for a real cause. And Edwards actually helps your hero, Obama, by staying in the race.

Interesting to see you in thrall to corporate power and their candidates.

by TomP on Fri Jan 25, 2008 at 10:23:03 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Edwards Within 4 (none / 0)

You know how I hate to agree with you, but that comment was just so right.

by TomP on Fri Jan 25, 2008 at 10:24:06 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Edwards Within 4 (none / 0)

Good news for Edwards. Just think what it would be like if he had $100 M to get out his message like Clinton and Obama each do.

Of course, if he had gone down that road, the road of amking one self a safe candidate for the waealthy and powerful, the message would be different, wouldn't it? Like Clinton and Obama's messages of go slow and don't offend the wealthy and powerful You don't make yourself palatable to corporate America and still fight for working people.

Clinton and Obama have the money and will bring no real change. Looks like many South Carolinians are realizing it.

by TomP on Fri Jan 25, 2008 at 09:57:35 AM EST

Re: Edwards Within 4 (none / 0)

This is Zogby's finding for yesterday (Thursday):

Obama 36%
Clinton 31%
Edwards 19%

This is the Mason-Dixon poll:

Obama 38%
Clinton 30%
Edwards 19%

I don't see the "good news" for Edwards in those numbers. Instead it looks as if the late-breakers and late-deciders are going for Hillary.

by georgep on Fri Jan 25, 2008 at 10:08:55 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Edwards Within 4 (none / 0)

Good to see you George.

It's polls.

We will know tomorrow.

Either way, Edwards is fighting all the way.

by TomP on Fri Jan 25, 2008 at 10:19:07 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Edwards Within 4 (2.00 / 1)

As he should. He is a good man, as is Obama.

I personally believe that Edwards will bow out of the race after Feb. 5 (unless some very big surprises come in,) but if he decided to go on until all states are tallied, that would be fine. He has added much to this race.

Whoever wins needs to find a way to do so with all candidates who want to be involved factored in. I don't subscribe to the hope/beg that one candidate should bow out so the other has a better chance at the nomination. Edwards may be hurting Clinton in some ways, but so what? If she is to win the nomination, she must do so by standing out as the one candidate who has the most convincing case to make, no matter how many other candidates are in the running.

by georgep on Fri Jan 25, 2008 at 10:28:58 AM EST
[ Parent ]

seriously... (none / 0)

Edwards is "within 17"... not "within 4"... let's be honest. A 3rd place showing in the place of his birth is the final nail.

Invest in nature

by NCDem on Fri Jan 25, 2008 at 10:33:49 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Edwards Within 4 but Obama win's (none / 0)

He has the best ground game in SC of any of the candidates.

I believe you are looking at ZOgby's one day polling.

Remember that is why they do 3 day rolling averages because you have these spikes. Edwards had a spike on Wed to 27 pts but his polling on Thursday was 19 pts. All of the poll's have still shown Obama IN 1ST PLACE.

This is not NH and Clinton does not have the establishment State party behind her. Obama HAS HIS NATURAL CONSTITUENCY AA WHO ARE NOT GOING TO SUDDENLY SWITCH TO cLINTON.

eDWARDS WILL GET A SIGNIFICANT NUMBER OF WHITE VOTER'S WHICH WILL KEEP HER ABILITY TO CSURGE AHEAD OF OBAMA LIMITED.

by BDM on Fri Jan 25, 2008 at 11:43:03 AM EST
[ Parent ]

What I am sensing in MA is that (2.00 / 1)

Obama's earliest supporters were the same progressives who were scheduling meetings with State Reps and Senators over the gay marriage (being pro gay marriage)issue, progressives through and through, firm advocates of campaign finance reform, organizers for Moveon, willing to do upteen candlelight vigils - and they choose Obama before they had really "checked him out", they had been the worker bees on Deval Patrick's campaign( as I was) but they cannot reconcile Obama's move to the right;he isn't the progressive they thought him to be.

Whenever Obama signals that he isn't as progressive as they all thought - Reagan interview,Rezko affiliation,McClurkin, they sit silent or they lash out that these things are even being discussed. These are people I have worked on campaigns with. They really think that Edwards supporters should just get on board because "he has no chance". I'm not budging.

Edwards has set the progressive tone for this debate/primary.

There is a lesson here and that is there is no point in jumping on anyone's bandwagon until proper research has been done about the candidate you support, or to watch as some early appearances before voters and reporters shows you what type of a candidate they will be on the long haul.

My rant for the day.

Oh, and I'm hearing that MA still, despite the polls has a large undecided factor and however SC plays out plus with another debate and this Rezko thing ( now with Clinton) being brought to light, Edwards still could surprise people with a decent finish in MA.

by merbex on Fri Jan 25, 2008 at 10:20:13 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: What I am sensing in MA is that (2.00 / 1)

Had this precise discussion w/ someone in a diary I wrote who kept asking me to "prove" that Obama's advisors are right of center leaning with regard to economic issues. He or she kept asking me to prove it- and all I kept thinking is- whether this person had researched the advisors at all? I actually tried to get the person to google the subject because I didn't want to be accused of cherry picking, bu there is one jsut without trying

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/article s/2007/10/obamas_curious_economic_advise .html

His advisors are coming from the Chicago School of Economics- one of the most conservative in the country, and yet- they don't seem to know this. THe poster just responded- prove your case. As if, this is something I had to prove rather than he should already know supporting a candidate.

by bruh21 on Fri Jan 25, 2008 at 11:28:41 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: What I am sensing in MA is that (none / 0)

by the way here's another on the subject

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/04/18/busine ss/18leonhardt.html?ex=1334548800&en =7eb5e2553d92a9f4&ei=5090&partne r=rssuserland&emc=rss

by bruh21 on Fri Jan 25, 2008 at 11:30:08 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Very important link (none / 0)

I'm bookmarking it

by merbex on Fri Jan 25, 2008 at 12:00:05 PM EST
[ Parent ]

NV has to be on Edwards mind (none / 0)

When he was within striking distance there as well only to grab 4%.

What if voters like Edwards and express that to pollsters but don't bother to show because they figure why bother or they got to the caucus site and said basically the same thing and chose between Clinton or Obama.

by dpANDREWS on Fri Jan 25, 2008 at 10:01:22 AM EST

Re: NV has to be on Edwards mind (none / 0)

The last few polls coming out of Nevada all showed Edwards fading. I think the union endorsements Obama picked up late in the running hurt Edwards by siphoning off some of the support Edwards would have otherwise picked up.

Follow the 2010 election cycle in Georgia at the 2010 Georgia Race Tracker.

by TheUnknown285 on Fri Jan 25, 2008 at 10:13:37 AM EST
[ Parent ]

He was still in the mid to high 20s (none / 0)

He grabbed 4 friggin %.

by dpANDREWS on Fri Jan 25, 2008 at 12:15:05 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: He was still in the mid to high 20s (2.00 / 1)

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/ 2008/president/nv/nevada_democratic_cauc us-236.html#polls

The last few polls showed him polling well below 20%. Clearly, something happened between the 20%+ polls and the 6-14% polls. Like I said, I think it was due in large part to the union endorsement.

Follow the 2010 election cycle in Georgia at the 2010 Georgia Race Tracker.

by TheUnknown285 on Fri Jan 25, 2008 at 01:41:12 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Edwards Within 4 (none / 0)

Amazing that this appears to be playing out like NH and NV again. Obama is said to be surging ahead and unstoppable, the Obama campaign issues boasts that their shiny victory would show the world how strong the campaign really is, we are told how superior Obama's ground operation is in all states, and then, come voting day, it is a different matter.

To be fair to Zogby, all polls showed Obama ahead by mid-double-digits a few days ago. But, as these things go, the race has apparently tightened considerably with 3 polls yesterday showing a race within the MoE in single-digits (Clemson University, Mason-Dixon and ARG.) Now we are seeing Zogby's polling data for Thursday with a tiny 5% Obama edge over Clinton,which is consistent with the tightening trend shown in those 3 other polls.

by georgep on Fri Jan 25, 2008 at 10:04:14 AM EST

Re: Edwards Within 4 (none / 0)

We have learned from NH that looking at 3 or 4-day rolling averages is deceiving and does not give a true picture. One must look ONLY at the last day of tracking for a clue where the late deciders are breaking. When one does, this is the picture:

Obama 36%
Clinton 31%
Edwards 19%

Don't be surprised to see an even closer race between Obama and Clinton tomorrow morning.

by georgep on Fri Jan 25, 2008 at 10:13:37 AM EST

Re: Edwards Within 4 (none / 0)

When there is so much movement day to day, and a 6% MoE, I wouldn't draw conclusions yet. Zogby's numbers on Obama are certainly showing a downward trend, but the numbers start with his big speech, and were probably a little inflated. Edwards is generally up, with yesterday's sample either at the high end of the margin or the peak. Clinton was trending down, then boom, five points better than her best previous day. Really need to see tomorrow's numbers before I infer anything from that. I don't think Edwards catches Clinton, but they could both rise to put all three within ten points.

Texas Economics

by IVR Polls on Fri Jan 25, 2008 at 10:44:57 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Edwards Within 4 (none / 0)

I guess I mean 'tonight's numbers' as Zogby doesn't count 'tomorrow's numbers.'

Texas Economics

by IVR Polls on Fri Jan 25, 2008 at 10:49:41 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Edwards Within 4 (none / 0)

Are tonight's numbers published tonight or in the morning?

I agree that we can't surmise much from this one-day sample, but I think the trends are towards a tightening, if yesterday's release of 3 polls all in single-digits is any guide. The strange thing is that this is almost shaping up like NH all over again, and you recall that when the pollsters with egg on their faces tried to come up with answers, Zogby claimed that the very last tracking poll told the tale of what was to come.

by georgep on Fri Jan 25, 2008 at 11:38:46 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Edwards Within 4 (none / 0)

I think in the morning, so they are 'tomorrow's numbers' but that looked goofy since saying I needed to see tomorrow's numbers could be interpreted as saying I needed to see the actual voting results to verify a trend. Not much point in that.

The Mason Dixon numbers sort of confirm Zogby's one day Clinton number, in an apples-to-oranges fashion since they each have their own special sauce. Certainly doesn't look like the blowout of the magnitude that was assumed a few days ago.

Texas Economics

by IVR Polls on Fri Jan 25, 2008 at 12:22:44 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Edwards Within 4 Obama win's (none / 0)

Wishful thinking

He has the best ground game in SC of any of the candidates.

I believe you are looking at ZOgby's one day polling.

This is not NH and Clinton does not have the establishment State party behind her. Obama HAS HIS NATURAL CONSTITUENCY AA WHO ARE NOT GOING TO SUDDENLY SWITCH TO cLINTON.

eDWARDS WILL GET A SIGNIFICANT NUMBER OF WHITE VOTER'S WHICH WILL KEEP HER ABILITY TO CSURGE AHEAD OF OBAMA LIMITED.

Zogby's narrative focused entirely on Edwards surge.

by BDM on Fri Jan 25, 2008 at 11:45:06 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Edwards Within 4 (none / 0)

If Clinton finishes second, it's a loss.

If Edwards finishes a strong third, it's a win.

Expectations.

by TomP on Fri Jan 25, 2008 at 10:20:18 AM EST

Re: Edwards Within 4 (none / 0)

in what world is an edwards third and Clinton second a win for Edwards and loss for Clinton. Maybe if Obama wins in a blow out

by world dictator on Fri Jan 25, 2008 at 10:38:35 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Edwards Within 4 (none / 0)

An Obama loss is the end of the game.

An Obama win will less than 30% of the white vote will be a written off as race bias and will hurt rather than help Obama.

A Clinton second place loss will have little impact on the nomination, and is greatly dependent on Obama's white vote.

A Clinton third place will give momentum to Obama but, again, it will depend on the white vote.

Having said all that, remember that SC has just 2 days in the MSM (1 day in the news cycle) before FL, so really, it will have little impact on momentum no matter what happens although I still think if Obama looses it will be over for him.

by kristoph on Fri Jan 25, 2008 at 11:09:09 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Edwards Within 4 (none / 0)

I don't really know what to expect, but I fear this is all setting up a "Clinton Beats Expectations" meme when she comes in a very close 2nd.

It would be good if "not Clinton" continues to garner a majority of delegates through ST. But I'm not sure it's really possible.

As of today, I think Clinton has 95/5 odds over Obama for the nomination. Not happy about it, but that's the reality.

by NC State Dem on Fri Jan 25, 2008 at 10:21:54 AM EST

Obama (none / 0)

let her set that up.

Invest in nature

by NCDem on Fri Jan 25, 2008 at 10:35:07 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Congrats NC some intellectual honesty. (none / 0)

It's clear something is going on in SC. Whether it's enough to carry Clinton to victory who knows. What is does suggest though is it's going to be much tighter than anyone thought and there's no doubt Obama is being set up to win by a landslide. If it's only two or three points and he gets less than 20% of the white vote. It's really over on any sane judgement. I've looked at all the Super Tuesday states and in just about every scenario she wins more than 16 of them. In some of my scenarios she wins 20 of them. This is the reality and it's why she back to about 67 in Intrade and Obama has slid to around 31. He's had a bad two weeks no matter how most of the MSM try to spin it. I'd say they are getting the backlash for stirring up racial issues and not Bubba. We'll see, but I really do applaud this dose of realism from NC.

by ottovbvs on Fri Jan 25, 2008 at 10:39:22 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Edwards Within 4 (2.00 / 1)

Looking at the crosstabs of the McClatchy poll and the SurveyUSA poll, Edwards is benefiting from a attracting a huge chunk of the white vote. SurveyUSA has him within 3pts of Clinton among whites; McClatchy has him beating Clinton by 4pts among whites.

The key for Edwards is turnout. Right now, most surveys assume that Black voters will make up 55% of the primary day electorate. If that drops down to closer to 50%, which would be due to white independents participating in greater than expected rates, Edwards' numbers could spike upward on Election Day.

by blueflorida on Fri Jan 25, 2008 at 10:24:58 AM EST

Re: Edwards Within 4 (none / 0)

Good point. Since indies can't vote in both the Republican and Democratic primaries, do we have any data on indie turnout from the Repub side?

give me a wall! check out one of the best indie bands out of england in a while, ¡Forward, Russia!

by Sean Fitzpatrick on Fri Jan 25, 2008 at 10:41:35 AM EST
[ Parent ]

I will be happy with more than 15 percent (none / 0)

for Edwards. I don't want to get my hopes up. It does seem that Clinton has improved her standing relative to Obama.

Join the Iowa progressive community at Bleeding Heartland.

by desmoinesdem on Fri Jan 25, 2008 at 10:41:30 AM EST

Re: I will be happy with more than 15 percent (2.00 / 2)

I would like to see him at least be a factor among African-American voters. While I understand how tough the competition is, it's been really disappointing to see him polling at numbers like 1-2% among that community given the campaign he has run.

"Another problem we have...is that in election years we behave somewhat as primitive peoples do at the time of the full moon." --Harry Truman

by Steve M on Fri Jan 25, 2008 at 11:07:17 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: I will be happy with more than 15 percent (2.00 / 2)

I am also disappointed. Frankly, as I have said, what bothers me most is that it affirms the idea that identity counts for more than what the candidates are actually saying. That's really frustrating. I know I shouldn't have this expectation because my community like any other has the exact same voter behavioral patterns involved- ie, low info voters, misinformed, well educated etc. THe idea that we would see a different dynamic than any other shouldn't, i guess, surprise me. but it does.

by bruh21 on Fri Jan 25, 2008 at 11:21:32 AM EST
[ Parent ]

I think Clinton is going to win (none / 0)

as well.

Looking at the numbers I sense Obama's support is declining faster than Hillary's.

The wild card here is Edwards, who may take enough votes from Clinton to let Obama win.

by fladem on Fri Jan 25, 2008 at 11:15:22 AM EST

Re: I think Clinton is going to win dis-agree (none / 0)

He has the best ground game in SC of any of the candidates.

I believe you are looking at ZOgby's one day polling.

This is not NH and Clinton does not have the establishment State party behind her. Obama HAS HIS NATURAL CONSTITUENCY AA WHO ARE NOT GOING TO SUDDENLY SWITCH TO cLINTON.

eDWARDS WILL GET A SIGNIFICANT NUMBER OF WHITE VOTER'S WHICH WILL KEEP HER ABILITY TO CSURGE AHEAD OF OBAMA LIMITED.

by BDM on Fri Jan 25, 2008 at 11:41:53 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Edwards Within 4 (none / 0)

I think Edwards is pretty much stuck in third in SC. He could have what's concidered a strong third, maybe as high as 25%, and that may be enough of an excuse for him to stay in without looking like just a spoiler of some sort. His black support is still too weak I think for a 2ed place finish.

by Christopher Lib on Fri Jan 25, 2008 at 11:20:40 AM EST

Re: Edwards Within 4 (2.00 / 2)

I think comments such as yours are a reason why I am going to continue to donate to him. i am doing it because I want to support the issues he brings up, but also just to piss peo like you off.

by bruh21 on Fri Jan 25, 2008 at 11:22:38 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Edwards Within 4 (none / 0)

South Carolina is Edwards' strongest state, other than maybe what Iowa was supposed to be. If Edwards can't win in South Carolina...and if in fact he finishes third in South Carolina, where does he go for a victory? Not a moral victory, but a victory.

If Edwards loses in South Carolina, he can still campaign. But winning the nomination is no longer the goal. I've been of this mind since Iowa and South Carolina will only provide the final ratification and validation.

by InigoMontoya on Fri Jan 25, 2008 at 01:29:29 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Edwards Within 4 (2.00 / 1)

Edwards has a lot of support in Oklahoma, Georgia, Alabama, Tennessee, Ohio, Texas, Kansas, and California. I'm not saying he's going to win any of these, but he may be competitive enough to garner a significant amount of delegates and keep his candidacy in play up until the convention. That would amount to more than just a "moral victory" because he would earn some sort of recognition from the winner. If you're an Edwards supporter (I am), this isn't ideal. But it's worth working for if you believe (I do) that his voice and platform are essential to a Democratic party that truly represents an alternative to corporate-run politics.

Speak out for the education our children deserve!

by jeffbinnc on Fri Jan 25, 2008 at 02:39:53 PM EST
[ Parent ]

RE the McClatchy (mason-dixon) poll (2.00 / 1)

Singer posted it last night, and also did not report the trend lines:
Obama 38 (40)

Clinton 30 (31)

Edwards 19 (13)

Undecided 13 (15)

(Jan. 22-23; +- 5)(Jan. 14-16; +- 5)

Obviously there is tightening in this race, but this poll only BARELY shows it between Obama and Clinton, with a net 1% tightening.

But the reporting of this poll in both front-page posts makes it sound as if the poll shows serious movement. Edwards did gain 6 points, but that's really all it says.

Let's all please avoid what we've criticized the traditional media of for years: constructing a narrative.

We need to pay serious attention to all the reported facts, no matter how incomplete or contradictory they are.

by along on Fri Jan 25, 2008 at 11:54:19 AM 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.