DMR: Obama Expands Lead

January 1st, 2008 By: Michael van der Galien | Tags:

According to the latest Des Moines Register poll, Barack Obama has expanded his lead in Iowa. Most other polls show that Obama has lost the lead to Clinton and Edwards and is in third position. DRM, surprisingly, disagrees: 32% of those polled said they intend to vote for Obama, against 25% who say Clinton and 24% who support Edwards.

As the Big Tent Democrat points out over at TalkLeft, “the DMR Poll nailed the order of the 2004 Iowa Caucus and is easily the most respected Iowa poll.” This means that “Obama will now be the odds on favorite to win the Iowa Caucuses.”

The question is of course whether poll is accurate. Frankly I have my doubts. As BTD remarks, Obama’s campaign seemed to be panicking lately. They’ve gone after both Clinton and especially Edwards in a very aggressive manner. If internal polling showed the same results as the Des Moines Register poll, Obama would’ve taken the high road. Instead, however, he has become the typical politician who has no problem throwing mud at his opponents.

Not only that, but every other poll out there contradicts DMR. The trend is that Edwards is surging while support for Obama is decreasing. As I said a while ago, I don’t think that polls are per definition great at predicting the exact amount of support for candidates, but I do think that they’re great at showing trends. This polls is completely in breach with the trend which is why I don’t believe it’s correct.

On the other hand, if it’s correct Obama will most certainly win Iowa. And if he wins Iowa it would be very difficult indeed for Clinton to stop him. He’ll have the momentum going, he’ll probably win New Hampshire and then his stock will rise significantly.

Again though, I find it hard to believe that this poll is accurate.

Share and Enjoy:
  • Digg
  • del.icio.us
  • Technorati
  • SphereIt
  • NewsVine
  • TailRank
  • Reddit
  • StumbleUpon
  1. daveinboca
    January 1st, 2008 at 14:12
    Reply | Quote | #1

    <a href="http://www.opinionjournal.com/diary/?id=110011061&mod=RSS_Opinion_Journal&ojrss=frontpage">The Wall Street Journal</a> has an interesting opinion piece on how insanely complex the Democratic caucus rules are and if you link to my <a href="www.daveinboca.blogspot.com">site</a>, there are additional comments made by Democratic politicians about how much latitude for chicanery is inserted into the caucus rules.

    John Edwards surged in ‘04 as did Kerry and Edwards could pull off a squeaker as the rural precincts are over-represented in the caucus rules and JE has been LIVING in Iowa for most of the last two years.

    The DRM poll might be off-base if it discounts the ginormous investments that Edwards & Clinton Inc have made compared to Obama’s merely populist activities.  This may also be the reason that Romney pulls off a final victory, although the Republicans’ rules are only a simple anonymous ballot procedure rather than the multi-step Dem process open to manipulation at each step.

    Finally, if the weather is amenable, Obama might win.  If it is stormy or hyper-frigid, then the well-organized Clinton & Edwards limo-busing activities kick in, especially in the frozen countryside.

    Remember the Dems  over-represent rural farm & county seat voters & Edwards has been to each Iowa county TWICE in the last two years.

  2. Lynx
    January 1st, 2008 at 15:49
    Reply | Quote | #2

    That tears it, I’m going to ignore these polls until the primary. It’s too much of a see-saw of hope and disappointment. What’s clear is that it’s a close race. Beyond that, I’m going to wait for the ultimate opinion poll; the elections themselves.

  3. Lynx
    January 1st, 2008 at 16:03
    Reply | Quote | #3

    Wait, I just realized that this is the same poll you talked about several posts ago as predicting Hillary was ahead and Obama behind! The idea was that Obama was "panicking" because the poll was accurate and would show him behind. This apparent means that that last post is bunk.

    Geez, I’m sluggish, but at least I’m not hung-over.

  4. Michael van der Galien
    January 1st, 2008 at 16:13
    Reply | Quote | #4

    This apparent means that that last post is bunk.

    Actually not. In fact, the blogosphere believes that Obama et al thought that the DMR poll would be very bad for them. So that still stands. The only thing that I, Obama, and everybody else were wrong about is what the poll actually shows. Most people agree (go to Memeorandum for a round-up) that Obama was panicking the last couple of days and that they expected a bad result from DMR.

    We’ll have to wait until the caucuses though. Only two days left. If both Clinton and Edwards finish in front of Obama in Iowa, the latter has a big problem.

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.


Warning: is_writable() [function.is-writable]: open_basedir restriction in effect. File(error_log) is not within the allowed path(s): (/home/p6525pol:/usr/lib/php:/usr/local/lib/php:/tmp) in /home/p6525pol/public_html/wp-includes/wp-db.php on line 500