CBS/NY Times poll, Dec. 5-9
Dems:
Clinton  44% (was 51% 10/7)
Obama  27 (was 23)
Edwards  11 (was 13)

I am not sure I understand this poll.  Senator Clinton went from 51 to 44% which is a drop of 7%, right?  Senator Edwards also dropped 2%.  But if Senator Obama gained 4% what happened to the remaining 3% than Senator Clinton dropped?

WTF is up with these polls. I swear we have one poll saying the race is close or Obama is ahead and then we have other polls saying that things are static.

how does clinton still hold a double digit lead?! are the american people in states other than the early ones even paying attention?!

so frustrating!

Is Domenico Montanero trying to save space by only mentioning only 3 Democratic candidates? Or is he trying to influence the election?

Confused, its the result of different polls looking at different things with different polling techniques.

Any polls you heard that showed Obama ahead were state polls, in either Iowa or South Carolina. Other polls in those states by other people show differing results. And of course the national polls have all had Clinton leading, though by different amounts.

The only thing you can do to make sense of anything is carefully watch who is putting out the poll, and then use it to determine trends by comparing it earlier polls by the same group.

Most people think the state polls are more meaningful than national polls at this stage, because wins in specific states will provide momentum to go forward. This is why Edwards is hanging around. If he wins Iowa, its a brand new game. Same for Obama in Iowa and now in New Hampshire and/or South Carolina.

In fact, I'm more impressed with the New Hampshire numbers for Obama. Iowa is a strange beast, and caucus math can frustrate the best pollster. I don't think anyone knows what is happening there right now. But Obama is moving in New Hampshire at a great time.

In a way, it makes sense, because I would intuitively figure that New Hampshire was a better state for him. I also believe that New Hampshire loves to go another direction than Iowa, just out of pure renegade joy. In fact, here's an unconventional theory for you:

If Clinton wins Iowa, New Hampshire may more be inclined to back Obama, making that state Obama's firewall. The two results neutralize one another, and then South Carolina becomes the new "must win."

Then again, it could happen completely differently, too, lol.

I see in this one they find certain single-digit candidates worth showing.

Why only 3 Democratic candidates? Lack of Space? Or are you trying to influence the elections?

Funny thing is democrats wanted to throw out the last two elections based on polls like these or exit polls. ppppsssst I always lie to anyone outside a voting station asking how I voted ;-) I'm sure a lot of conservatives do the same. Nosey freaking media types

Mr. Clean isn't so clean....

DOUBLE SPEAK -

http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalpunch/2007/12/dropping-oppo.html

Add this poll to the AP and Pew national polls last week - all show Hillary with a 17-22% lead over Obama.  Hillary is still strong - look at the internals of these polls and they note that she is extremely popular amongst the Democtraic base who will vote in the primaries.

Love this number from the NY Times Poll:

Would Bill Clinton's involvement in the campaign make you more likely to vote for Hillary:  YES: 43%

Would Oprah Winfrey's involvement in the campaign make you more likely to vote for Obama :  YES: 1%

The Clinton campaign is apparently digging as hard as they can for dirt on Obama.  Those slicksters got caught with some more emails spying for dirt to sling.  

http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2007/12/10/barackemail/

As an Obama-supporter, I must say that I almost feel sorry for the Clinton campaign.  It must be a shock to their system to all of a sudden realize they may not be moving on to the general election in a few months.  The desperation is seething and foaming out of their ears and eyes and mouths...  

Not to mention the absolute disgusting spelling and grammatical mistakes haha

In relation to this poll, let me quote Mark Penn, Hillary's chief strategist/spinster "Because predicting primaries is extremely difficult and everyone has their own methodologies, you have to look at polls from the same pollsters to see if there have been changes."

So this poll: Hillary is down 10%.  The CNN poll, Hillary is down 10%.  I wonder how he's going to spin it now?

To all those who like how Huckabee scares "the establishment" (meaning, people who actually have experience in and know about fields from economics to foreign policy), remember this - not all change is good, and there's an equal chance that change will mean bad things as good things. I want things to change, but you're propping up an inexperienced governor with a "chosen by God" view of himself and a Biblical view of bringing on Armageddon. Sound familiar? Something about the definition of insanity and trying to get different results after applying the same means might be appropriate here.

Finally people are looking at Giuliani.
I'm glad to see his poll numbers finally going down.
I think huckabee might actually be able to pull it off.

I'm pretty sure this First Read publishes what they like to hear

This is the NY Times. I take anything they say with a grain of salt.  I can rememeber is Judy Miller.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION, GO TO.. hillaryclinton.com

The CBS poll is only of registered voters, translate those for which name recognition bias was always built in to the results.  That even these pre-biased polls are also trending toward Senator Obama confirms the same trend shown by polls of likely voters.  The difference being that polls of likely voters are less influenced by name recognition bias and show the race to be even tighter into the single digits(given that the voters in question are likely to vote they have generally paid more attention to the election itself and looked at the candidates).  

A new South Carolina poll released earlier has Obama passing Clinton for the first time in quite a while, while Huckabee has now a massive lead in the Southern state. Check both set of numbers: http://www.campaigndiaries.com/2007/12/huckabee-keeps-rising-as-attacks.html

Huckabee raised taxes by 505 MILLION Dollars in his State.
He advocated for the release of a rapist who after his release raped another young woman.
He supports the legalization and college tuition breaks for illegal immigrants. In 1992
Huckabee proposed that the federal government should quarantine all individuals who are HIV positive.

If you have HIV positive, are you going to support and vote for Huckabee??

If you are a working person and need every cent of your hard earned money, are you going to vote for Huckabee who has a history of raising taxes that takes money from your wallet and family??

Definitely, criminals will vote for Huckabee and they will surely receive a "get out of jail" card free.  As he did before, Huckabee will release or pardon sex offenders and then schools and shopping centers will not be safe.  America will not be safe anymore.

If you are a women will you be safe if sex offenders are wondering the streets day and night??
Are you going to vote for Huckabee?  
Think about it seriously before throwing your support behind Huckabee..

Dot:

My guess is the other 3% probably filtered down the line to Dems like Richardson, etc.  (GOP poll figures in 5 candidates, Dem poll only 3)

Justin:

Too many Dems actually believe (Bill) Clinton was a good president, and know he will play a role in a Hillary administration...that's why she maintains a following.

Dot to enlighten you on the polls there were other democrats being considered also Joe Biden for one.

Dot.....don't you understand?
The purpose of this post, isn't to inform you about the polling numbers.
But, ratrher to make you believe that Oprah's given Obama such a big bounce that it's going to carry him all the way to the White House! My god, it's a tidal wave of support! People are switching to Obama in droves! That mean nasty, Mrs. Clinton is eating his dust he's so far ahead!!!!!!
Uh, what's that you say.....she's STILL 17 points ahead even after all the name calling, the rumors, the all out LIES, and the NEO-CON rhetoric that the Obama people have been spewing?
Well, isn't THAT interesting.

".....how does clinton still hold a double digit lead?! are the american people in states other than the early ones even paying attention?!
so frustrating!....."
justin, new york (Sent Monday, December 10, 2007 7:44 PM)

Excellent propaganda, justin.
But, apparently the lies aren't working as well as you might have hoped.

HILLARY FOR PRESIDENT 2008! ***experience counts***

There is no such thing as an honest poll, the 2004 race pretty much proved that.  Hillary is a heap of trouble and sinking fast.  Obama seems to have timed this perfectly.  Edwards is being Edwards, keeping out of their fight and banging away on the issues.

This poll is statistically meaningless.  Sample size was only 417 likely Democratic primary voters. That's 8 per state!

They don't even state the margin of error because it's so huge.

We will be seeing 'national' polls like this to continue to push Hillary, even though the more significant polling in the early states shows her faltering and Obama gaining.

Hey Dot they switched to Huckabee, which many democrats, blacks, and hispanics will do.  This election is over, Huckabee will run away with it, which is wonderful for America.  He can bring people together.Clintons voter will always be around 30%, but she will never get Obamba or Edwards people, so they will unite so one can get 60%.  Huckabee will get Rommeny,s, McCains, and Thompson people, plus evangecial democrats, which leaves Gulliani out unless Huck picks him for vp.

Dot, the remaining percentage may be going to other candidates or back in the undecided.  I was once a strident Hillary supporter, and if one were to ask me today, now, who I'd vote for in NY's primary, I would have to say undecided.

As for the republicans, Huckabee would be disasterous for this country.  He's poorly educated, a bible beater, an evolution denier, and makes stupid comments like we should have quarantined all AIDS infected people as of 1992!  He refuses to say he was wrong.  Some people say that's sticking to one's convictions, but when your convictions are so off the wall like that, you get another President GW Bush!  And we dont' need that again!

The polls are for people with no lives...some of you seem to live and breath polls...are you going to vote based upon a sampling poll? Are you a POLL-lock?

No Justin, you've got it right.  If they're not in the early states they're not engaged.  That's why it's all about Iowa.  That's why the Iowa primary voter has 20x the voting power of the average primary voter.  Don't be frustrated, as goes Iowa and then NH, so goes the nation.
Obama '08

HEy Dot, SHOCKER, I know, but there are other candidates in the race. I am guessing Biden, Richardson and the others picked up that other 3%.

Amazed, Atlanta

That was sort of my point.  

Message (please, no HTML tags. Web addresses will be hyperlinked):