Our Latest From Iowa
Email(Updated)
We’ve now posted both analyses of our new ABC/Post poll in Iowa, reporting results among likely Republican and Democratic caucus-goers alike, with fascinating results on both sides.
We report the surprising surge for Mike Huckabee in the state, remarkable for its intensity as well as its breadth. A Baptist minister, he's now leading longtime front-runner Mitt Romney by 2-1 among evangelicals, who account for nearly four in 10 likely participants in the Republican caucuses.
Among Democrats, the overall race has hardly changed, albeit with just enough movement to give Barack Obama a statistically significant lead over John Edwards – surely not welcome news for Edwards, who's run what’s been described as a make-or-break effort in Iowa.
The Obama-Hillary Clinton race remains quite close, among likely caucus-goers overall and also among the subset who say they’re "absolutely certain" to attend a Democratic caucus. But there’s more going on just under the surface – a shift toward Obama on his “new direction” theme, some significant blowback for Clinton on the issue of saying what she really thinks. It’s also worth a read.
I blogged in August, at the time of our last Iowa poll, about our methodology there, and we followed the same random digit-dialing procedures this time. Again there’s a lot of winnowing involved in getting down to likely voters: to get 500 likely Democratic caucus-goers we had to interview more than 4,800 adults in Iowa. That’s a lot of calls.
Sampling methodology is a critical point of differentiation among surveys. Another difference is in the number of undecideds – just 3 percent in our survey of Democrats, 4 percent on the Republican side, vs. anywhere from 10 to 16 percent in other recently released Iowa polls.
Undecideds in fact are pretty much of a misnomer, given the construct of the question all these polls ask – in essence, "If the election were today, for whom would you vote?" If the election were today, and you truly were voting (which is what all that “likely voter” winnowing is meant to approximate), then “undecided” would not be an option. Indeed we find that likely voters do have preferences, and with very little encouragement are perfectly willing to share them with us. Thus low undecideds, in our view, represents better pre-election polling.
For sure some people have lightly held preferences, and that’s well worth knowing and analyzing. But those aren’t undecided voters, they’re movable ones. We measure them in this Iowa poll, as elsewhere, by asking people if they might change their minds, and if so, how likely that might be. It’s an important element of the story, underscoring the substantial room to move that still exists in the contest.
The bottom line, as I’ve suggested in a previous blog on election polls, is that we’re certainly not trying today to predict who’ll win the Iowa caucuses in six weeks, nor even to focus singly on the horse race. Our intent is to try to understand the election as it unfolds – in Iowa as elsewhere, the issues and candidate attributes that people care about, the judgments about the candidates they reach, the various groups and competing interests involved. I hope you find it informative.
Sen. DeMint: GOP Race Could Go Until Convention 
Obama Avoids Questions on Contraception Rule
Now that the Clinton News Network has surrendered entirely. The rest of MSM will submit in turn. Biden, Dodd, and Richardson are position for the VP slot. The Clinton machine is full steam. Normal questions are “Gottcha” “Right-wing Conspiracy” “Republican Play-book” “Mud-Slinging” “Gangin-Up” “Left-wing Conspiracy” or just plain jealousy by Her opponents. The big Power players are betting on Co-presidency part 2. Undecided usually goes with the facts. Smart voters go with truth. It’s the dimwitted, uneducated, illegal and notorious and dead (body and mind) that will go with the queen of lies. This group still thinks George Bush is the Republican candidate.
Posted by: Mike | November 19, 2007, 7:15 pm 7:15 pm
I want change, but I also want to feel secure. At this crucial time in America, I feel that we need MORE experience than Obama can bring to the nation. Life during the “Clinton” years was much better than what we have experienced in the “Bush” years. We had a balanced budget, the middle class did not take hits at every turn, profits for small businesses were up and life in general was great. Many small businesses have gone bankrupt, home owners are losing their homes, we will most likely have no social security for the baby boomers and we are not SAFE! This man has made being an American a bad thing across the world. We need someone that has the ability to balance our budget, get us out of Iraq, and make America’s problems first and foremost. We have to many people without homes, without healthcare and no jobs. Please rethink your decision. She is the answer and if she were to pick Obama as the VP, it would be to his advantage for the 2012 election.
Vickie/Steve November 19, 2007
Posted by: Vickie | November 19, 2007, 8:14 pm 8:14 pm
The Clinton years were better than Bush?
The small company I work for has doubled in size under the tax cuts Bush has given our country. Clinton did not protect us, he tunred a blind eye to the worlds problems and just wanted everyone to like him. Bush had the right ideas about the war but went about it the wrong way. We need a strong leader, not a political insider in the White House. Lets stop saving the world and save America first. It is time for real change look at what Ron Paul has to say and brings to the table.
We as American must make the right choice.
Posted by: mike | November 19, 2007, 8:55 pm 8:55 pm
I am amused at all the Clinton supporters. I mean, can’t we as a country get beyond the Bush/Clinton era?
Let’s at least have a new family in charge. Besides, Hillary is very devisive, she will not be able to bring the country together. I am an Independant moderate and would never vote for her.
Posted by: Robert | November 20, 2007, 12:08 am 12:08 am
I am disappointed that the reporting on Iowa polls is understated. The fact that Obama is leading should be the opening line, not hidden paragraphs later. Obama is ahead of Clinton at present and that IS big news. He has been behind Clinton in the polls for a long while, and Iowa is very important. So, why not amp this up as done with Clinton’s meager performance in Nevada with a favorable audience? What is the goal in reporting these days? Is the same-old-same-old better news than change?
Posted by: jennifer | November 20, 2007, 2:48 am 2:48 am
We need honesty in Washington, someone willing to say what needs to be said, even if it isn’t popular. Pandering to different interest groups will not get you elected this time. Americans are paying attention. The Iowa polls reflect that real change needs to happen. Hillary is just not what this country needs right now, she is going to tear this country further apart if she is elected.
If you haven’t yet get “The Audacity of Hope” and/or “Dreams of My Father”. You will see the passion and dedication an Obama Presidency will bring to America.
Obama ’08
Posted by: Theresa | November 20, 2007, 7:09 am 7:09 am
[quote] We need honesty in Washington [/quote]
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!!!!
Good luck buddy!
We need rain in the outback too, but a flooded Simpson desert is more likely, as. for that matter, is a herd of porcine aviators!
When I see Kucinich with 40% I’ll believe America can really change. The inaction of a compliant congress this year shows beyond doubt that all mainstream politicians are well beyond redemption
Posted by: Michael | November 20, 2007, 8:44 am 8:44 am
I am a loyal democrat but I am really dissapointed in obama! he actually took novak’s word over hillary! I mean really he trusts NOVAK over HILLARY?. what is hapenning to this brilliant man.
1st he takes advise from chris mathews -”hit her hard” then advise from carl rove and now from Novak. who is next Dick Morris or Kenneth Starr?
Posted by: k david | November 20, 2007, 10:06 am 10:06 am
Finally it seems something good happening for America. We need to separate ourselves from the doings of Bush and Clinton. Hillary give one the opinion that this election is for her and not the people. Her past and Bill Clinton´s past will be real problems in the future.
Posted by: Coatesmoe | November 20, 2007, 5:25 pm 5:25 pm
What experience does HRoboClinton really have as an ELECTED representative?
She talks about not using the gender card than uses a “get out of the kitchen” catch phrase. “Boys Club”, “Diamonds AND Pearls” puke. More of the same double talk that we’ve heard for the past 28 years when either Bush or Clinton has been on the ticket. Real change is’nt a cutesy togue in check slogan with zero nutritional value. Stop the Drama! Vote Obama!My cutesy catch phrase has real protein in it. Who wants to hear about Filegate, Whitewater, PJones, MLewinsky and all the other trash in the Clinton Closet for the general election, and worse, four years on? No More Drama, Vote Obama.
Posted by: ben | November 20, 2007, 5:27 pm 5:27 pm
It’s nice to see some detail about the polling and I agree polls have a lot to teach us.
But I think that Gary’s statement that about his/ABC’s intent is aspirational and not yet real. “Our intent is to try to understand the election as it unfolds – in Iowa as elsewhere, the issues and candidate attributes that people care about, the judgments about the candidates they reach, the various groups and competing interests involved.”
It’s very smart to want the polls to speak to these things. But that just isn’t happening. Frankly I doubt it will given the too strong habit of covering the horse race. Certainly not in the major coverage of the race (web news and on air) and probably not sure in the blog outside of the ocassional piece that digs deeper.
I hope I’m wrong but we will see.
Jon
Posted by: Jon Rainwater | November 20, 2007, 6:16 pm 6:16 pm
Are these polls still restricted to households with landlines only? I am curious to see how many people are no longer polled by telephone because they consider and only have their mobile phone as a home phone.
If only people with landlines are being surveyed, I think that Hillary and even the pollsters may be in for a big surprise in the near future.
Posted by: Christopher Burgis | November 20, 2007, 6:22 pm 6:22 pm
America ? Are you not tire of Clinton/Bush,Clinton/Bush ? we don’t need to remind ourselves the need for need the to change, First the white house belongs to all of us and not this two families,the people of Iowan had shown us what we really must do,let us do follow them. Obama academic resume alone is just more than a pass to the white house. We know our immediate issues America. Tell Dr Obama, he know our political problems,ask senator Obama he knows our economic needs, you knows your family needs, ask president Obama. Listen God works in a miraculous way and HE has filtered and send us this man .Fellow American vote you conscience, look at what he believes in family values, woman right, human, economy,social security,immigration and most importantly our national security. Please i urge each one of you out there, to vote for obama the for real change we all need . this he is to come, we should all embrace him and for about the unpredictable candidate America.
Posted by: Nwiogoni L Akponi | November 20, 2007, 6:23 pm 6:23 pm
Enough of Sr Bush/Clinton/Clinton/Jr Bush/Jr Bush era. We dont want any more corrupt political dynasties who support Health Insurance companies.
Choose BARACK OBAMA.
Posted by: jkojs | November 20, 2007, 9:35 pm 9:35 pm
Iowa does not even count! Who cares about Iowa, a back woods farm state? Who does it represent in terms of the population of this country? If you haven’t been there go visit it – then decide. I think most of the midwest (exception Illinois and Madison, WI) is so totally out of touch with reality and the greater population of the country – they opinions matter only to them. Oh – I grew up in the midwest – and visit it annually – I get to see these backwoods Republicans in the small rural areas who think the terrorists are ready to jump out of planes and attack them. Their idea of the ideal vacation is to go back to the Wisconsin Dells hoping maybe a new bar or Pizza joint opened up since last year!!!
Posted by: Jim | November 21, 2007, 9:32 am 9:32 am
I am heartened to hear people are looking at Obama. I am disheartened to hear that people still equate Hilary’s experience with her husband being President or even think that is the most relevant issue.
Look at the candidates personality. Look at their willingness to work with others. Look at consensus building. Both Hilary and Barack have histories in these areas, what does it tell you about how they will act as President? Who would use Presidential power to push their agenda, and who would use their power to encourage constructive change. Once a person is President it is too late to change your mind about them. Let’s get it right this time.
Posted by: PJW | November 21, 2007, 10:32 am 10:32 am
I also was surprised that the news of Obama’s lead wasn’t splashed across front pages. It is huge!!
Posted by: Kristin | November 21, 2007, 11:00 am 11:00 am
It is very unfortunate that Senator Obama used America’s space agency as a whipping boy to profess support for extra monies for education. As China, Japan, India, Europe, Russia, and even South Korea plan to explore the moon and use it resources — Obama sounds a retreat and seeks to delay and kill America’s human space program.
Democrats must stop him in his tracks now unless you want America to be second rate in its technology and in its quest for new knowledge. It really is as simple as that. STOP OBAMA NOW!
Posted by: Jack Kennedy | November 22, 2007, 12:10 pm 12:10 pm
If Hilary is the candidate, the Republicans will take office again. She is far too divisive and will move moderate voters (like myself) away from the Democratic party. I want Barrack. He is my candidate and I will be at the primaries attempting to make him our new candidate. Hilary is going to make health care like car insurance… let’s get socialized medicine and move on…
Posted by: Jason Lamoreaux | November 22, 2007, 2:36 pm 2:36 pm
I live in Budapest, Hungary.
A Korean-American friend first posted me about looking carefully at Obama. Initially I was taken about the possibility of Richardson, then Biden and Dodd too impressed.
Recent articles about what “the face” of America with Barack as Pres would be. The diversity and differences of his “experiences” vs Hillary’s same old/same old sameness were telling.
Now I wonder who he would select as his running-mate? Will he balance the ticket with Bayh or someother nonentity?
No I think he would select Richardson firstly because the pundits see the SouthWest states as crucial and then because of the Latino votes.
Barack and Bill Richardson will be a true paradigm-shift. May it be so!
Posted by: John Warren Gotsch | November 23, 2007, 4:05 am 4:05 am
At a time like this, America needs a change born out of pragmatic necessity. Corporate-insurance induced “Universal HealthCare” is another poison that the public should not be allowed to fall into again. And again I dont think we need another experience Washington candidates, an honest and morally sound candidate is better than the unexamined ‘experience’candidates that the media are busy promoting.
Posted by: Justice Uche | November 26, 2007, 4:39 pm 4:39 pm
Who said the small state of Iowa was that important. Its too small to be important and if Obama wins it so what. There are 49 states left for him to win and he will not win them. He may win a few but that’s as far as it goes. Edwards should hang it up. Clinton doesn’t need Iowa to win the nomination. Where have you been? She is ahead of Obama in New Hampshire by a large margin and will be leading in the larger states as well. Get use to it. As much as some people would like to see Obama in the white house you will but not as president he will be a visitor only. That’s as far as he is going to get.
Posted by: Mariann Pepitone | November 29, 2007, 4:12 pm 4:12 pm
Until America looks at the real problem of spending and education we are doomed to fail. Governmant schools churn out idiots. We are tops in spending and our kids rank only 17th in education. Worse they rank 24th in the world for problem solving abilities. Everywhere you look money is wasted. Parasitic governmental Unions cry for more despite nonperformance. Cut spending and reduce goverment – Stop punishing success than perhaps we will be great again.
Posted by: Bill | November 30, 2007, 9:53 am 9:53 am
Why does everybody say, Clinton is more experienced than Obama? Do you count eight years of preparing state banquets, smiling and waving as significant experience?
Posted by: Julian | December 1, 2007, 10:14 am 10:14 am
Another example of the continued dishonestly and manipulation by Obama.
Barack Obama is drawing Hugh skepticism RECRUITING NON-IOWANS TO THE IOWAN caucus. NO OTHER CANDIDATES are systematically trying to manipulate the Iowa caucuses like Obama
“Barack Obama” brochure “If you are not from Iowa, you can come back for the Iowa caucus and caucus in your neighborhood. The brochure gives instructions about where to call or go online for information about where to caucus”
David Yepsen of the Des Moines Register, the state’s leading political commentator, wrote “The Illinois Caucus” that the effort to increase participation by out-of-staters “risks offending long-time Iowa residents.” And he’s correct! “Given that students in Iowa’s colleges and universities are from Obama’s neighboring home state of Illinois, the effort could net him thousands of additional votes on caucus night,” Yespen wrote. The Iowa caucus ought to be for Iowans. NO OTHER POLITICAN Democrat or Republican is sending bogus literature recruiting out-of-state voters to manipulate IOWA Caucuses,
Chris Dodd for President Iowa State Director Julie Andreeff Jensen said in a statement on Saturday:
“I was deeply disappointed to read today about the Obama campaign’s attempt to recruit thousands of out-of-state residents to come to Iowa for the caucuses. … ‘New Politics’ shouldn’t be about scheming to evade either the spirit or the letter of the rules that guide the process. That may be the way politics is played in Chicago, but not in Iowa.”
As an IOWAN who was on the fence between Sen Clinton and obama, this seals my vote for CLINTON! This guy is showing he will cheat, lie and steal to win; we already have that in a President. CLINTON IS THE TRUE CHANGE IN 2008
Posted by: Iowa for Clinton | December 2, 2007, 8:32 am 8:32 am
SEriously people, Ron Paul is the only person who isn’t owned by the media, and he’s the only one that knows how to save this downhill country of ours. Time to wise up or we will definately hit the point where nuclear weapons kill us all off.
Posted by: David | December 5, 2007, 3:29 pm 3:29 pm
Why is there so much Clinton bashing? I think Hillary is smart, capable and experienced.She will make a great president!
Posted by: Dr Maung | December 13, 2007, 2:51 am 2:51 am
I think supporter of Ron Paul have a point.
Posted by: Cynthia Joffrion | December 15, 2007, 12:23 am 12:23 am
A vote for anyone other than Ron Paul is a vote for “give me more of the same”. Wake up third party members, this is the same Ron Paul that ran last time.
Posted by: Bill Gorisek | December 16, 2007, 6:19 am 6:19 am
Americans must be sleep walking. It looks like If Donald Duck was the Democratic nominee and Mickey Mouse was the Republican nominee we would have a duck or a mouse for our next President. This is not a sporting event where we have to stick with the home team. Its our country, which these same “Democrates” and “Republicans” that we blindly fall behind, have managed to, Spend us into an obscene debt, make us the bad guy in the world and create an out of control government whose members spend most of their time in office campaigning for the next election while big business runs the country. If Vagas will take the bet I’ll lay down 100 to one that if any of the now front running nominees from either party wins, NOTHING WILL CHANGE FOR THE BETTER.
Posted by: Bill Gorisek | December 16, 2007, 7:04 am 7:04 am
If the evangelicals continue the takeover of the Republican Party, even I will vote Democrat of for a Third Party. And if an untested Obama becomes the nominee we will be in for another Bay of Pigs or the equivalent (Remember Jack and Bobby), I will be looking for a Third Party.
The only solid candidate, with honesty and integrity: McCain.
Posted by: Herb Phillipson | December 31, 2007, 8:22 am 8:22 am