First thoughts: Polling fans beware

Posted: Wednesday, December 19, 2007 9:18 AM by Domenico Montanaro
Filed Under: First Thoughts

From Chuck Todd, Mark Murray and Domenico Montanaro
*** Polling aficionados beware: With a mere 15 days until the first contest, there are now so many pollsters surveying voters in Iowa and New Hampshire, it's hard to know what's right or wrong. In the last 12 hours, two Iowa polls showed two dramatically different results. One (Washington Post/ABC) had Obama in first and another (Insider Advantage) had him in third. Edwards was in third in one (Washington Post/ABC) and first in the other (Insider Advantage). What gives? Many things: turnout, the makeup of the electorate the pollster used, and the history of that pollster surveying the state. Our advice: Look at the trends of the pollsters who have surveyed the state for multiple cycles, and be careful of pollsters who haven't polled Iowa before. Speaking of polls, don't miss the latest CNN-WMUR poll showing Clinton back to having a double-digit lead after showing her up just one a week or so ago. What does that poll tell us? There's a chance that good pollsters get quirky results. Looking at that poll’s trend line, it appears the one-point poll was the outlier.

*** The holiday spirit: The weather outside may be frightful, but most of the messages on Iowa TVs appear to be remaining delightful -- with Obama joining Huckabee with a holiday spot (his daughter even says "Christmas"!). Giuliani apparently will be up with a holiday spot soon as well. But there is one candidate who isn't letting the holidays stop his negative messaging. Mitt Romney is staying aggressive against Huckabee. When asked whether he thought the voters would be turned off by negatives during the holidays, Romney said he thought voters would respect the importance of the election. We'll see... Let the grand holiday experiment begin...

*** What is Ted Kennedy thinking? The timing of the Huffington Post’s unearthing of Obama's Ted Kennedy criticism is intriguing. Is Kennedy's endorsement of one of the Big Three imminent? There are cases for him to go with any of them: He no doubt likes Edwards' populism, Obama's charisma, and he certainly respects a political dynasty. Of course, Kennedy may not endorse anyone until his closest friend in the race, Chris Dodd, either surges or drops out. And speaking of big endorsements, when is that John Kerry nod we keep hearing is ready to go going to come out? And if there are no endorsements today or tomorrow, does that mean we won't see any major endorsements pre-Iowa for fear that they won't get the attention of Iowa voters? Or will we see a slew of big announcements on the 27th and 28th going into the final weekend?

*** Bias alert! The Washington Post’s Howie Kurtz asks a question that will likely drive a lot of discussion today: Has the press been nicer to Obama than Clinton? Kurtz quotes a couple of journalists who certainly think so. While it’s pretty obvious that Clinton, her husband, and her campaign have received much more scrutiny in the past couple of months after the Philadelphia debate, couldn’t it also be argued that in the spring and summer -- when Clinton was soaring in the polls, when she was receiving little scrutiny on the shift in her Iraq views, and when the media praised her debate performances -- the press focused squarely on Obama (his experience, Rezko, Michelle Obama’s comments, donations from state lobbyists, D-Punjab) and Edwards (the hedge fund, the haircut, his Chapel Hill home)? Also, don’t front-runners always get more scrutiny? After all, look at the attention Huckabee is now receiving. And just asking: Is it fair for a couple of reporters to speak for the entire press corps?

*** On the trail: On the Democratic side, Biden, Clinton, and Dodd spend their day campaigning in Iowa, while Edwards, Obama, and Richardson are in New Hampshire. On the GOP side, Giuliani stumps in the February 5 state of Missouri; Huckabee is in Iowa; Hunter is in Michigan; McCain appears in Boston with Henry Kissinger and James Woolsey before heading to New Hampshire; and Romney and Thompson campaign in Iowa. Also, Michelle Obama and Ann Romney are in Iowa.

Countdown to Iowa: 15 days
Countdown to New Hampshire: 20 days
Countdown to Michigan: 27 days
Countdown to Nevada and SC GOP primary: 31 days
Countdown to SC Dem primary: 38 days
Countdown to Florida: 41 days
Countdown to Tsunami Tuesday: 48 days
Countdown to Election Day 2008: 321 days
Countdown to Inauguration Day 2009: 398 days

Click here to sign up for First Read emails.

EMAIL THIS

Comments

It's time to come take a looksie. hillaryclinton.com

C.B. (Sent Wednesday, December 19, 2007 9:23 AM)

When was the last time Obama had a drug test, for "cocaine" ?

Peter T. (Sent Wednesday, December 19, 2007 9:26 AM)

when was the last time bush had a drug test for cocaine? when was the last time bush had an intellegence test?

mikeeg,abdn,wa (Sent Wednesday, December 19, 2007 9:38 AM)

Huckabee would be a disaster for the GOP if nominated and a bigger disaster for the nation if somehow elected, but I've seen the Romney ads and they're just ugly. Mitt is clearly willing to do whatever it takes, no matter how distatesful to win. Of course that was obvious last Summer when he spent massively on the Ames straw poll.

John B, Des Moines, IA (Sent Wednesday, December 19, 2007 9:43 AM)

Come on Peter T that's spin garbage coming from pure candidate specific bias. Unless, you are part of one of those strategy groups, you need to get a life.

On the issue of all of those polls. STOP! They are really becoming meaningless? I know people in New Hampshire and though they put up with the primary crazyness once every four years, but some of them are unplugging their phones just to stop the ongoing interruption in their lives. I'm in a February 5 state, and working on a campaign (won't say who) and I'm getting calls already to help in N.H., to register as a democrat, to register as a republican, etc. etc.
ENOUGH ALREADY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!11

Original Bob, Middletown, CT (Sent Wednesday, December 19, 2007 9:45 AM)

Is MSNBC going to ignore the story about John Edwards mistress being pregnant? Its all over the blogosphere and its not like this site hasn't treaded into rumor before.

Sue Kelly, Manchester, New Hampshire (Sent Wednesday, December 19, 2007 9:48 AM)

Polls schmolls. I can't wait to see what the real polls say that matter!

That Howie Kurtz Clinton-lip-service piece is so biased its funny. I almost thought it was satirical at first...

Ron, TX (Sent Wednesday, December 19, 2007 9:56 AM)

Daily First Read Truth-Pak-

Trust no one...
The following sites devote as much time and space to Denis Kucinich and Joe Biden as they do to the big three. Whether you are a dem or republican, liberal, moderate or conservative, your candidate is represented equally at these sites. Forget about Big Media and the MSM, create your own narrative.

We don't need anyone to spoon-feed information to us about the candidates or the election, it's right there for everyone if you know where to go. Campaign money, donors expenses, go here

http://www.opensecrets.org/ Opensecrets.org is "Your guide to money in U.S elections."

Just about every poll from every pollster, averaged out, with a link to the source
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/ Is THE source for political junkies, with links to every major political site on the right, left and center.

What the candidates actually have said about the issues.
http://www.ontheissues.org/default.htm This is a Great site! Every candidate on every issue!

How the candidates have voted and their LIberal/Conservative ratings
http://nationaljournal.com/voteratings/sen/lib.htm?o1=lib_composite&o2=asc#vr Has the voting records for all members of congress, and their Liberal/Conservative ratings.

http://votesmart.org/index.htm Here's what they say at the site;
Thousands of candidates and elected officials. Who works for you? Who is seeking your vote? Project Vote Smart, a citizen's organization, has developed a Voter's Self-Defense System to provide you with the necessary tools to self-govern effectively: abundant, accurate, unbiased and relevant information. As a national library of factual information, Project Vote Smart covers your candidates and elected officials in five basic categories: biographical information, issue positions, voting records, campaign finances and interest group ratings.

http://www.govtrack.us/ Do you take transparency seriously? Consider how important to you an open and transparent government is to a healthy society. More work needs to be done to make Congress open. Make a statement to your elected officials by joining now 200 others in signing a pledge for transparency.

Van

vanreuter, NY NY (Sent Wednesday, December 19, 2007 9:57 AM)

The Iowa polling is again conclusively inconclusive...
How on earth do you poll a caucus where only about 6- 15% of the eligible voters actually show up in a process that is public and absolutely the opposite of voting as we think of it? While I am sure that the race is close, I have come to the conclusion that Iowa defies traditional polling models as to render them useless; And I am, in the opinion of many pro and con, the poll guy here.
When I read that;

"The big challenge for polling this contest, of course, is that turnout for the Democratic caucuses is typically a small percentage of eligible voters. Iowa had roughly 2.2 million voting eligible adults in 2004, of whom (as of last month) approximately 1.9 million are considered "active" registered voters by the Iowa Secretary of State. But only 124,331 participated in the 2004 Democratic Caucuses for President (according to the subscription only Hotline). That number amounts to roughly 6% of all registered voters, so selecting "likely caucus goers" is no easy task."

SIX PERCENT? SIX PERCENT! All of this time and money, all of this media madness, and SIX PERCENT of the Iowa electorate will be providing a springboard and momentum for the potential next C&C?
Why the hell doesn't anyone write about this?

Van

http://www.mysterypollster.com/main/2006/06/the_first_iowa_.html

vanreuter, NY NY (Sent Wednesday, December 19, 2007 9:57 AM)

when any poll shows edwards doing well, 'the polls can't be trusted' and the corrupt political machine continues rumbling along, edwards still gets my vote, sorry

MK,MO (Sent Wednesday, December 19, 2007 9:59 AM)

"Has the press been nicer to Obama than Clinton?"
--------------------------------------------------

That is difficult to say--some of the stories that were not flattering to Senator Clinton were the results of mess-ups by her staff, so that can't be held against the press. I think First Read has done a good job of not being "pro" one side or the other. Sometimes when FR stacks stories about one candidate one after another without interspersing them with stories about other candidates, it may look like they favor one over the others, but in reality, I don't think that is the case. I'm sure that candidate accessibility plays a major part in what stories are posted. Or, perhaps some reporters are more selective about what is newsworthy about the candidates.

The Tim Russert thing though, to me, showed some anti-Clinton bias. Russert seemed almost geeful when he used President Clinton's statement against Senator Clinton. One could almost here him say Gottcha." I do get a sense that the media as a whole LIKES Senator Obama better than Senator Clinton.

If we were to expand that question and ask if press coverage has been fair to ALL the candidates, I think I would have to say no. The lower tier candidates have not received adequate coverage from any of the media.

Dot, Illinois (Sent Wednesday, December 19, 2007 9:59 AM)

BTW guys you know that you are reading the IA poll incorrectly. Poll avergers are using the "Highly Likely" number which has obama and edwards virtually tied with clinton in third. Dxon't believe me check for yourself. The only people using the likely number are people who won't to show Obama in third. How about a little journalistic honesty:

Democrats
Obama 26.6
Edwards 26.0
Clinton 23.8
Other candidates 14.0
Undecided 9.5

http://www.time-blog.com/real_clear_politics/

Grace (Sent Wednesday, December 19, 2007 9:59 AM)

John B WHERE IS YOUR MIND HUCKABEE WILL BE THE NOMINEE AND WILL WIN LIKE REGAN DEMOCRATS ONLY HAVE 1 CANDIDATE WHO COULD WIN BUT WONT GET NOMINATION, PEOPLE WONT VOTE FOR A WOMAN THAT STOLE THE WHITEHOUSE FURNITURE, TOOK DRUG MONEY FROM BILLS PARDONS ECT. THEY WONT VOTE FOR A MUSLIM WHICH IS WHAT CLINTON BACKERS ARE CALLING OBAMA, NOR ANYONE SPENDING 400 DOLLARS FOR A HAIRCUT EDWARDS. THIS ELECTION IS OVER LIKE IT OR NOT, HUCK IS THE MAN.

David Anders Pharr, Tx. (Sent Wednesday, December 19, 2007 10:00 AM)

Unnamed sources claim the GOP contenders will temporarily put their differences aside for the sake of the Party, and appear in a Group Nativity Scene.

Steve Turner Cedar Falls Iowa (Sent Wednesday, December 19, 2007 10:00 AM)

"Well, the first thing she intends to do, because you can do this without passing a bill, the first thing she intends to do is to send me and former President Bush and a number of other people around the world to tell them that America is open for business and cooperation again," Clinton said in response to a question from a supporter about what his wife's "number one priority" would be as president.
http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2007/12/18/bill-clinton-george-hw-bush-will-help-president-hillary/
Former President George H.W. Bush has shot down his successor Bill Clinton’s idea of a diplomatic mission under a Hillary Clinton presidency that would send him and other notables abroad to assure other nations that “America is open for business and cooperation again.”
http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2007/12/18/elder-bush-nixes-clinton-trip-idea/

So basically, Hillary isn't even in the White House yet, and she ALREADY FAILED to accomplish not only the -first thing- she plans to do, but also her number one priority...

Ron, TX (Sent Wednesday, December 19, 2007 10:03 AM)

I think all of these polls mean that it is too close to call - can't wait for January 3rd! May the best man (or woman) win - I'm tired of arguing the same points over and over again - bring on the voting! :)

The only thing that will make me happier than Senator Obama doing well is for it all to be OVAH! lol

Nashville_fan (Sent Wednesday, December 19, 2007 10:03 AM)

What is the book title name, where Obama talks about his past drug use of "cocaine" ?

Peter T. (Sent Wednesday, December 19, 2007 10:03 AM)

Sue Kelly, if you're going to spread smears how about providing enough information to at least judge whether there is any chance of truth? Otherwise forgive us if we just assume them to be lies, the proper response to any unsubstantiated smear.

John B, Des Moines, IA (Sent Wednesday, December 19, 2007 10:05 AM)

Barack Obama for President of the United States of America.

Say no to nepotism.
Say no to triangulated Iraq vote disasters.
Say no to mud-sling machine politics.

It's time for America to Rise and Shine again.

PulSamsara (Sent Wednesday, December 19, 2007 10:05 AM)

The media, with its focus on - and even debate evaluations based on - national horse race numbers, was propping up Hillary's campaign for most of the year; if they didn't get critical of her in the last couple of months to balance it out, that would have been intolerably biased.

The Iowa numbers Insider Advantage actually released to the RCP polling average were the most likely voters numbers, where Obama was first by a point over Edwards - so it actually backs up the numbers from the ABC poll.

All in all, thanks in part to both polls, Obama now leads the RCP Average for Iowa by 3.5 points, his biggest lead yet.

Shadow, Hamden, CT (Sent Wednesday, December 19, 2007 10:07 AM)

I can't wait to caucus for Obama on Jan 3. Edwards will likely be my second choice.

BARACK THE VOTE!!!!

Kate, Waterloo IA (Sent Wednesday, December 19, 2007 10:10 AM)

i don't think anyone can trust the polls. their are those candidates that have strong frienships with media moguls. rupert murdoch owns cnn. you can check who is a close friend of his. like wise there are papers that have an agenda to see obama win. the same with edwards, giuliani and more. it is becoming the time that we have to wait and see.

we also have to remember that if media outlets don't keep interest and spin going they don't sell as many papers. they have their motivation as well.

in some states i would suggest that voting maybe suspect. not talking about iowa, n.h. or s.c.

ace p washington, d.c (Sent Wednesday, December 19, 2007 10:10 AM)

[Unnamed sources claim the GOP contenders will temporarily put their differences aside for the sake of the Party, and appear in a Group Nativity Scene.]

The Democrats will try to follow suit, but the whole thing will fall apart for the lack of any wisemen.

Phil R. (Sent Wednesday, December 19, 2007 10:14 AM)

I can't wait to caucus for Obama on Jan 3. Edwards will likely be my second choice.

BARACK THE VOTE!!!!

Kate, Waterloo IA (Sent Wednesday, December 19, 2007 10:10 AM)

Thanks Kate, Be sure to take ALL of your friends and family along!!! Make a difference, Barack the vote!!

Yolanda (Sent Wednesday, December 19, 2007 10:16 AM)

The polls cannot be trusted at this point in time because they are so volatile. Too many polls coming out every 2 days; this is ridiculous...

I am going to stick with who has the best organization on the ground. I know Clinton will be in for a shocker in NH. The independent will decide who win NH and not the democrats.

Bee, NH (Sent Wednesday, December 19, 2007 10:17 AM)

That Howie Kurtz Clinton-lip-service piece is so biased its funny. I almost thought it was satirical at first...

Ron, TX (Sent Wednesday, December 19, 2007 9:56 AM)

That's because unless something is biased against Clinton, it's unfair to you.

Did you have the same reaction to this study that CONFIRMED the media bias that your own bias prevents you from even acknowledging?

http://www.journalism.org./node/8187

Most observers without your bias and a Paul Bunyan sized ax to grind see the Kurtz's (Kurtz is a media critic and host of Reliable Sources on CNN) article as
an analysis of media coverage of the campaign.

As you claim the article is biased, please point out the inaccuracies in the article that led you to that considered conclusion. As you claim that you thought at first that the article was satire, expand on the reason(s) why you felt that way.

Van

vanreuter, NY NY (Sent Wednesday, December 19, 2007 10:18 AM)

Thanks for the report on Howie Kurtz's biases. I know he is biased but it is not for or against any Democratic candidate but for conservatives. When he pumps up or down a democratic candidate it is more to make mischief for the benefit of the Republicans.

A recent Media Matters column about Howie Kurtz says
"more and more prominent players on the left no longer consider Kurtz to be an honest broker -- because he remains chronically oblivious to breaking stories that have a strong progressive media angle. Yet simultaneously, Kurtz shows a chronic over-eagerness to amplify any minor media story being advanced by conservatives."

nuanced (Sent Wednesday, December 19, 2007 10:19 AM)

I realized Hillary's blogger are attacking Obama because of upcoming Ted Kennedy endorsement. This party is dead if Hillary becomes your nominee.

Bee (Sent Wednesday, December 19, 2007 10:21 AM)

He talks about it in both books but discusses it more in Dreams from My Father: A story of Race and Inheritance

Anonymous (Sent Wednesday, December 19, 2007 10:23 AM)

he timing of the Huffington Post’s unearthing of Obama's Ted Kennedy criticism is intriguing. Is Kennedy's endorsement of one of the Big Three imminent?

Depends on who gives him the most whiskey.....

While it’s pretty obvious that Clinton, her husband, and her campaign have received much more scrutiny in the past couple of months after the Philadelphia debate.....

Duh???????
The Clinton's receive the most press because they are the most corrupt of all of them.....

jerry/corpus christi texas (Sent Wednesday, December 19, 2007 10:24 AM)

LOL... Ron,TX. How true!

RAH (Sent Wednesday, December 19, 2007 10:24 AM)

I like a lot of the things Edwards has to say, but what has this guy done to deserve to be president? I can say I believe in what he says, but am I qualified to be president? No. Edwards was a one term Senator with no landmark legislation he can cite to. He didn't event get re-elected nor could he carry his own home state when he was running as Kerry's running mate in 2004. Nor did he bring in any southern states as was hoped by naming him on the ticket. So again, would the Edwards supporters please make the case for him with concrete examples of what he's done to make me enthusiastic about him should he be our party's nominee. It's no real secret I'm supporting Hillary as of now.

Pat Huntington Station NY (Sent Wednesday, December 19, 2007 10:28 AM)

Bad news for Hillary in California !!
Her lead is rapidly shrinking

From the SF Chronicle:

'...Clinton's lead over Obama shrinks in new state poll
Carla Marinucci, Chronicle Political Writer

Wednesday, December 19, 2007

Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton's robust 25-point lead over Sen. Barack Obama in California has shrunk by nearly half since October - but state Democratic voters by a 3-1 ratio still believe the New York senator has the best chance of winning the presidency, a new Field Poll shows.

With just seven weeks until the state's Feb. 5 presidential primary, the latest statewide poll shows that Clinton leads by 36 percent to 22 percent and that one in 5 Democrats is undecided - a number that has nearly doubled since early last year.

Among the poll's key findings:

Both Clinton and Obama enjoy high favorable ratings among Democrats, but Clinton leads 2-1 among women and Latinos while Obama has a far more positive image among independent and African American voters.

"There's no significant surge for Obama, it's just greater hesitancy amongst those who were formerly supporting Clinton," said Field Poll director Mark DiCamillo. But California Democrats are "not really moving to any one candidate, mainly going into the undecided column." ...'

Californians are turning off to Hillary Clinton
The 'inevitable' scam is over
What about cross over support ?
Which Democratic candidate can pull in Republicans and Independents ?

'...Obama gets more crossover support from Republicans - 47 percent say they would consider supporting him, versus just 20 percent who would support Clinton.

That suggests that in the general election, "Obama might stand a better chance," said DiCamillo. But he cautioned that "Republicans in this state generally get behind the Republican nominee" and that expressed support "might not hold" in a general election....'

Republicans would consider Obama over Clinton by over 2 to 1 !
That's HUGE !
California is dominated by independents

'...Obama has a far more positive image among independent and African American voters...'

Hillary's support is continuing to shrivel
What if she LOSES IN IOWA ?

'...While former North Carolina Sen. John Edwards' support has remained stable in California, there is speculation about how Democratic voters in California would be swayed if he doesn't do well in the first crucial states of Iowa and New Hampshire. Second choice preferences among his supporters show Edwards' voters "would be more inclined to support Obama than Clinton, which could make the race in California closer," the survey shows....'

Surprise !!
Edwards supporters are more inclined to support Obama
Obama's supporters are probably more inclined to support Edwards, too !!

Looks grim for Hillary in California
She's SHRINKING !!

Hillary Clinton is like Paris Hilton
She's famous for being famous (or infamous)
At least Brittney Spears puts out albusm...

Obama/Edwards
Honesty, Integrity, Reform

Sierra, SF (Sent Wednesday, December 19, 2007 10:29 AM)

Polls? They mean less than nothing. At best they were made for people who are unable to read or think for them selves. I personally know a whole lot of people who know a whole lot of people and no one I have ever posed the question. Has any one ever been polled or know anyone who has been polled? responded that they had. If it don't make instant sense it is probably a ripoff. People are like that. Think and decide for your self.

Pacheck, Huntington Beach, Ca. (Sent Wednesday, December 19, 2007 10:31 AM)

John,
I hope the story is not true, but remember the Enquirer got the Gennifer Flowers story right, the Bill Cosby love-child right, etc. Also, Roger Altman, a Clinton crony, is an owner of the Enquirer. Would Altman want to damage the democratic party just to help Clinton? Does he want to get sued for millions?

These are facts. The alleged mistress was paid over $100k for "campaign videos" that no one has seen and then she disappeared. Isn't it a little coincidental that she is now pregnant?

This is terribly unfair to Edwards if its false, but unfair to voters if its true and Edwards lied about it.

Sue Kelly, Manchester, NH (Sent Wednesday, December 19, 2007 10:31 AM)

Meanwhile, over at the GOP nativity scene, everyone will be fighting over the gold.

Van: Six percent, huh? Atrocious. I really hope they do significantly better than that this year. America needs to start caring again. Anyway, polls are worthless, it's anyone's race, can't wait for 1/3/08.

Steve, Hartford, CT (Sent Wednesday, December 19, 2007 10:32 AM)

[Unnamed sources claim the GOP contenders will temporarily put their differences aside for the sake of the Party, and appear in a Group Nativity Scene.]
Phil R

-- They will arrest the wise men for illegally crossing the border, close the homeless shelter, dock the shepards pay for leaving their jobsite, send Joseph to the war in Mesopotamia, lecture Mary on the evils of adultery, and call the angel gay.

nuanced (Sent Wednesday, December 19, 2007 10:35 AM)

Thank you for pointing out that the others received alot of negative press for months while Clinton got the coronation treatment.
Alot of the bad press Clinton has gotten recently is her own fault for the boneheaded moves made by her and her surrogates and the slime attacks they indulged in.
The Obama video is so cute. His girls are just so adorable.

diane (Sent Wednesday, December 19, 2007 10:35 AM)

I'm sheeding the nonsense of some of my prior posts here, so I'm getting real here with my fellow Democratic posters.

On our side, the top three candidates are either current US Senators or Former Senators, with no executive experience. On the other side, the top three candidates are 2 former governors and a former mayor of the biggest city in our country with an economy that rivals most other countries. Regardless of who the Dem nominee is, it's going to be very difficult for us to make the case for him or her if its either Edwards, Obama, or Clinton when compared to either Romney, Huckabee, or Guiliani. Of course we can say a lot of bad stuff about the republicans [flip flopper, tax hiker, and bush clone, respectively - of course this list is by no means exhaustive]. But, you can't win an election by just bad mouthing the other side.

Oh, and what about Florida! The wedge issue of gay marriage is once again being resurrected for 2008 as a referendum to amend that state's constitution to ban gay marriage will be on the 2008 ballot in November, obviously, a Rove-type tactic to galvanize the evangelicals of that state once again.

So, 2008 is not in the bag for the Dems. We've got lots of work ahead of us. So, the inner fighting and nasty comments between those supporting differnt candidates is only going to hurt us, not help.

Pat, Huntington, NY (Sent Wednesday, December 19, 2007 10:35 AM)

BIAS ALERT -

I am glad the boys on FIRST READ wrote this section, because I also felt the same way. And I really like that they use Huck as an example because I actually agree that Huck has come under more view because of his front runner status -

BUT isn't the media everyday saying that Obama is now the front runner - but is the media looking at him in the same fashion as HUCK? I don't think so...

I think my main opinion is that the media is really not touching on the experiance issue with Obama (Perhaps they are waiting until the general when it will be the major theme of any republican nominee should Obama get the nod...)

But yes the media loves to hate the clintons - and that has been the case for awhile but again (and the reason why I am voting for her) - They still win! And in 2008 (after 2000 and 2004) THE DEMS NEED A WINNER!!!

Michael, Los Angeles CA (Sent Wednesday, December 19, 2007 10:40 AM)

Ron, TX : '...So basically, Hillary isn't even in the White House yet, and she ALREADY FAILED to accomplish not only the -first thing- she plans to do, but also her number one priority...'

ron, that was just a publicity stunt by the Clintons to get on the news
Notice how yesterday, First Read had 4 stories in a row about the Clintons ?
About NOTHING !
First Read is doing its' part to puff the Clintons...

Peter T.: '...When was the last time Obama had a drug test, for "cocaine" ?...'

Van, why don't you have the guts to post this under YOUR OWN NAME ?
If you're gonna smear Obama, do it under you own name

Sue Kelly, Manchester, New Hampshire: '...Is MSNBC going to ignore the story about John Edwards... '

van, that's you, too
Post this crap under your OWN NAME !!
What happened to Susan, Miami and Tofun,Disney ?

The Clinton camp is posting this racist crap and garbage !!
What a sweet heart she is ....

Hillary Clinton, cold, calculating, dishonest, unethical, divisive

Sierra, SF (Sent Wednesday, December 19, 2007 10:42 AM)

Is Sarah and Bee the same person?

Michael, Los Angeles CA (Sent Wednesday, December 19, 2007 10:45 AM)

Ted Kennedy is a good man
He's a real Democrat
But, his endorsement will only have an impact BEFORE Iowa
After Iowa, it doesn't matter that much

John Kerry, who cares ?

Sierra, SF (Sent Wednesday, December 19, 2007 10:45 AM)

Breaking News

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/election_20082/2008_presidential_election/new_hampshire/election_2008_new_hampshire_democratic_primary

Real Poll (Sent Wednesday, December 19, 2007 10:48 AM)

So, 2008 is not in the bag for the Dems. We've got lots of work ahead of us. So, the inner fighting and nasty comments between those supporting differnt candidates is only going to hurt us, not help.
Pat, Huntington, NY (Sent Wednesday, December 19, 2007 10:35 AM)

True. Also, remember Ohio in 2004. They still haven't fixed the voting machines. I heard yesterday on Sirius Left about voting machine problems out West. Why haven't these issues been given greater coverage?

James G., Oak Park, MI (Sent Wednesday, December 19, 2007 10:48 AM)

www.barackobama.com

Barack the vote!!! Barack the vote!!! Barack the vote!!! Barack the vote!!! Barack the vote!!!Barack the vote!!!

Eric (Sent Wednesday, December 19, 2007 10:48 AM)

LOL DOES HILLARY REALLY THINK GEORGE BUSH SENIOR WOULD WORK FOR HER, AFTER EVERY SPEECH SHE RUNS DOWN HIS SON, AND SHE THINKS THE AMERICAN PEOPLE ARE SO GULLIBLE WE WOULD BELIEVE THAT GARBAGE. WE DONT NEED ANY OF BILL S FOREIGN POLICY. hE S THE ONE THAT LET THE TERROSISTS RUN OVER US TIME AND TIME AGAIN, TILL THEY HIT US BIG. aND NAME ME ONE SOLDIER THAT WOULD WORK FOR HILLARY, OR ANY DEMOCRAT.

David Anders Pharr, Tx. (Sent Wednesday, December 19, 2007 10:51 AM)

Wouldn't ya know it ?

From Salon.com:

'...Administration lawyers were in on discussion of CIA tapes' destruction
The White House has been doing its best to distance itself from the potentially illegal destruction of videotapes of CIA interrogations of al-Qaida suspects, but it looks like the New York Times threw a wrench in those works on Wednesday. The Times reports that more Bush administration lawyers were involved in discussions about whether the tapes should be destroyed than previously acknowledged, and that administration officials may even have actively lobbied in favor of the plan.

Before Wednesday, only former White House counsel Harriet Miers had been reported to have taken part in discussions about the tapes, but the Times says the circle was wider. It includes former Attorney General Alberto Gonzales -- who participated when he was White House counsel -- David Addington, now Vice President Dick Cheney's chief of staff, and John Bellinger, formerly the senior lawyer at the National Security Council.

The Times also contradicts previous reporting in asserting that administration officials may not have opposed the destruction of the tapes, and that others may even have advocated their destruction. "It was previously reported that some administration officials had advised against destroying the tapes, but the emerging picture of White House involvement is more complex," Times reporters Mark Mazzetti and Scott Shane write. "One former senior intelligence official with direct knowledge of the matter said there had been 'vigorous sentiment' among some top White House officials to destroy the tapes ... "Some other officials assert that no one at the White House advocated destroying the tapes. Those officials acknowledged, however, that no White House lawyer gave a direct order to preserve the tapes or advised that destroying them would be illegal."

― Alex Koppe...'

Even they're embarrased about their torture
It's a violation of the Geneva Convention
As per Alberto, the Geneva Convention is 'quaint'

PS
GREAT WORK Chris Dodd
Chris Dodd defeated the 'immunity for phone companies' that Harry Reid and Diane Feinstein were trying to push through Congress

Let the courts decide if the phone companies violated American's civil liberties by allowing illegal wire tapping by Bush!!

Even the Republican Supreme Court will make a better decision that lick spittle Harry Reid and his politician 'friends' !
Thank you, Chris Dodd
(the Democrats do have a good pool of candidates)

Sierra, SF (Sent Wednesday, December 19, 2007 10:53 AM)

don't be fooled Ron Pauls's name wasn't even offered in IA rep. polls. The revolution is brewing!!

pam, clear lake IA (Sent Wednesday, December 19, 2007 10:53 AM)

Here's why First Read is discounting the polls ....

'...Iowa Poll Spotlights Importance Of Turnout
Obama and Clinton Lead the Democrats

By Dan Balz and Jon Cohen
Washington Post Staff Writers
Wednesday, December 19, 2007; Page A01

Sens. Barack Obama of Illinois and Hillary Rodham Clinton of New York remain deadlocked in Iowa, with former senator John Edwards of North Carolina trailing, according to a new Washington Post-ABC News poll that underscores the importance of the massive efforts the Democratic candidates have set in motion to turn out supporters on Jan. 3.

In a race that could hinge on a campaign's ability to motivate voters to brave wintry conditions and spend hours attending caucuses, each of the leading contenders appears to enjoy distinct advantages. More of Obama's backers said they are certain to participate than did those who have gotten behind Clinton. But Clinton's supporters are the most committed and enthusiastic, and Edwards counts among his supporters experienced caucus attendees who are more likely to turn out again.

Enthusiasm for a candidate and familiarity with the process are critical components in the caucuses, in which voting takes place in public after speeches on behalf of each of the candidates, and complex rules dictate the allocation of delegates.

The three front-runners are pouring resources into the state, viewing the caucuses as potentially decisive in the battle for the Democratic nomination.

Obama has gained ground on Clinton on the question of which Democrat is seen as most electable in November 2008, which had been one of her early calling cards in wooing voters. Clinton retains a significant advantage as the candidate with the best experience to be president.

Overall, 33 percent of likely caucusgoers support Obama, 29 percent Clinton and 20 percent Edwards. A month ago, four percentage points also separated Obama and Clinton at the top (30 percent to 26 percent).

The other Democrats campaigning actively in Iowa remain far behind. New Mexico Gov. Bill Richardson registered 8 percent in the new poll, Sen. Joseph R. Biden Jr. of Delaware 4 percent and Sen. Christopher J. Dodd of Connecticut 1 percent.

Iowa's caucuses put a premium on organization, and all the campaigns are engaged in unprecedented efforts to identify supporters and get them to one of the 1,781 precinct caucuses.

Here the poll offers good news for each of the leading candidates. More than seven in 10 of Obama's supporters said they are certain to participate in the caucuses, compared with 59 percent of Clinton's backers....'

Sierra, SF (Sent Wednesday, December 19, 2007 11:01 AM)

Next >>

SEND A COMMENT

PLEASE READ: All comments must be approved before appearing in the thread; time and space constraints prevent all comments from appearing. We will only approve comments that are directly related to the blog, use appropriate language and are not attacking the comments of others.

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

Your name, city and state (John Doe, Seattle, Wash.):

Your e-mail address (jdoe@msnbc.com):

Your website (it's okay if you don't have one):

Remember me? (We'll keep it private) Remember me?

TRACKBACKS

Trackbacks are links to weblogs that reference this post. Like comments, trackbacks do not appear until approved by us. The trackback URL for this post is: http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/trackback.aspx?PostID=525187