http://news-releases.uiowa.edu/2007/octo ber/102907poll-topline.pdf

                  Oct (Aug)
Clinton           29 (25)
Obama             27 (19)
Edwards           20 (26)
Richardson        7  (9)
Biden             5

The poll of 285 likely Republican caucus goers and 306 likely Democratic caucus goers was conducted October 17 to 24. It has a margin of error of plus or minus 5.8 percentage points on the Republican side and 5.5 percentage points on the Democratic side.

Pollster's critism on this poll:
http://www.pollster.com/blogs/new_ia_pol l_tomorrowbut_a_caut.php

The methodology of the previous U. of I. poll was unusual in a few respects: they asked an open-ended vote question (that asks respondents to volunteer their choice without prompting), they sampled from a directory of listed telephone households (rather than from registered voter lists or via random digit dial or voting list) and used a screen that was wider than other polls. More details in my post on their August poll.

We have not included the previous Hawkeye polls in our Iowa chart because of the use of the open-ended question. This is not a statement about the quality of the survey. As I wrote back in August:

This [open-ended question] undoubtedly provides a tougher test of voter commitment, but also produces a much bigger undecided and renders the results incomparable to other Iowa polls.

Of course, we do not know what methodology the Hawkeye poll used this time, but the news advisory does promises that the new results will show how candidate support "has changed since August." So presumably the methodology has been held constant.

More coverage on this poll:
http://thepage.time.com/

Huckabee Surges, Edwards Fades
http://www.time.com/time/politics/articl e/0,8599,1677221,00.html

For Edwards, who has basically been living in Iowa (and who parlayed a second place finish there in 2004 into a spot on the Democratic ticket), the results have to be disconcerting. Unlike Obama and Clinton, he has few other strongholds, and a poor showing in Iowa could place his candidacy in serious jeopardy.
...
Another bad omen for Edwards: only 7.9% of Democrats polled said they are "very likely" to change their minds between now and January 3, when both parties caucus in Iowa.  

It looks like Edwards has decided to jump in, 'First Read' is reporting Edwards made the following comment this morning:

"If you're looking, if you're looking for what's wrong in Washington, why the system is broken, why the system doesn't work, one perfect example is what's been happening over the last four days. We've had two good people, Democratic candidates for president, who've spent their time attacking each other, instead of attacking the problems that this country's faced."

My brief analysis:
This is exactly why it's extremely silly for Obama to launch that 'Bush-Cheney lite' attack and continue this path. He simply has no control on the message and its aftermath anymore. Every player and every pundit will jump in. It will only drag him down the mud and will be devasting to his 'change' and 'hope' theme in the long run.

It really does not matter to Clinton's campaign even some pundits or ultra-liberals believe she is also wrong in this skirmish because she is not running based on a platform of empty 'hope' and 'change', she's running a platform of a 'real change' to 'competence'.