Is Barack Obama panicking? Some progressive bloggers certainly think he is. The idea some have is that his campaign is preparing the troops for a disappointing DMR poll, which will be released later today. This poll (published so shortly before the caucuses) is relatively accurate (history has shown). If the new poll has Clinton in the lead by more than 3% followed by Edwards and Obama (or Edwards in the lead, followed by Clinton and then Obama) it’ll spell great trouble for the Senator from Illinois. If Hillary wins Iowa she’ll have the momentum going and, chances are, she’ll go on to win in New Hampshire. If Edwards wins in Iowa with Hillary finishing in second place, she’ll still have a better shot at winning in the Granite state than Obama. If Obama wins neither Iowa nor New Hampshire, well, I don’t see how he can still win the nomination considering the fact that Clinton is doing way better nationally and especially in the big states.
This website uses IntenseDebate comments, but they are not currently loaded because either your browser doesn't support JavaScript, or they didn't load fast enough.
Comments are closed.
PoliGazette Comments Policy
PoliGazette encourages comments from all viewpoints, especially those that disagree.
Comments submitted must, however, adhere to the following standards. Comments that violate
these standards may be edited or deleted without notice at the sole discretion of the editors.
Commenters who repeatedly or egregiously violate these standards or who attempt to argue
publicly with editors regarding the comments policy may be banned from commenting further.
(1) Comments should address the substantive content of the post. Comments that repeatedly
or blatantly misrepresent the content of the post or of others' comments are not welcome. Comments that
respond to something other than which the contributor or commenter may have said are irrelevant and should
not be posted.
(2) Comments should avoid vulgarity as well as racial, ethnic, religious, or sexual bigotry.
(3) Comments should not personally attack the character, personal integrity, or professional
reputation of any PoliGazette contributor or of other commenters.
(4) Comments should reflect the contributions of the commenters themselves and should not
include extensive cut-and-paste reproductions of others' words except insofar as necessary to supplement
the commenter's own arguments. Link spam, trackback spam, and propaganda spam will be instantly deleted.
(5) Public figures are considered open to all substantive criticism of their policies and statements.
Comments that present objectively false factual information about public figures (i.e. "Obama is a Muslim") or
that attack public figures by attacking their families are not welcome. Comments that merely repeat
slogans for or against a candidate without engaging in substantive comment are not welcome.
Questions or challenges to these policies or their application should be directed to the editors
by email only.
I beg to disagree with Michael van der Galien?s observations. Even if DMR poll shows Senator Obama 10% behind Senator Clinton, it is not going to cause panic in Obama?s top campaign management camp. Here is why. There is no way to accurately poll caucus election with certainty due to many indeterminate variables. It is not election where you tally votes and declare winners. It is winning delegates at the precinct levels. For instance, there are 1780 precincts and if you poll 1,000 people, you are polling less than one person per precinct. Based on 2004 Democratic caucus, 124,000 people participated at 70-persons per precinct. Winning a precinct depends on the effectiveness and dynamism of a given Precinct Captain. A Precinct Captain who has good public relation touch to convince over 50-people to participate in his or her Precinct would more than likely to win first or second place for candidate. Senator Obama has serious and accomplished caucus veterans working for him in Iowa. For instance, Paul Tewes, Obama?s Iowa campaign director, was Caucus Manager for Al Gore?s Iowa campaign in 2000; Steve Hildebrand, the man who designed Obama?s Iowa field organization, was Al Gore?s Iowa campaign manager in 2000; John Norris, Obama?s Iowa advisor, was Senator John Kerry?s Iowa campaign manager in 2004; Emily Parcell, Obama?s Iowa political director, was credited with helping Democrats strip Republicans of the majority in both houses last year and a native of Iowa. Currently, Obama?s campaign is no more accepting out of state?s volunteers to come to Iowa. All these do not point to any sign of desperation. These aforementioned people are all winners in Iowa caucus elections in 2000 and 2004.
Michael, like your blog and most of the articles, and am extremely impressed with your deep knowledge and interest in all things American, especially the political process. (Some day you will have to tell us how a Dutch guy developed both). But I am telling you, you are putting way too much time, effort & credence into these polls – they are proven inaccurate by far election after election (unless as you stated once there is a large diparity – then they are at least directionally right, just not magnitudinally). And too much time in Iowa- the governor of Ohio was correct today – these caucuses are undemocratic, give way too much weight to party insiders, no weight to independents, and as I posted a few days ago – have been pretty much wrong as a bell-cow.
It seems the Obama coverage has dwindled somewhat, as Hillary the anointed candidate by the media still gets the better coverage.
32-25-24. Guess we can put this one to bed.