hillary clinton is an unattractive candidate that america does not want to see age. There was a picture where face looked like rotting cottage cheese. Her personality suggests that she is a witch. Obama on the other hand is a beautiful black man who reminds us of a tasty chocolate bar. in an age where everyone is getting breast implants and nose jobs, democrats should nominate someone with obama's perfection to take advantage of the changing electorate. Obama's beauty will guarantee more seats.

Very Likely Caucus-Goers-Only Model:

Candidate ARG LAT
Clinton 31% 31%
Edwards 24% 25%
Obama 24% 22%

Quite close. Being this close to the election and Clinton clearly picking up momentum, are these polls picking up something that other polls are missing? I wonder...

obama4eva:

Ever see someone dying of lung cancer?

Way worse than looking older in the face, in the face of aging that is.

Also, if you're serious (and my snark detector is on serious alert) - you have a serious problem.

These ARG polls are laughable. I can understand them under-counting Obama's supporters due to his reaching out to parts of the Iowa electorate that will be new to caucusing this time around.

But for Clinton to be almost 8 points up on both Edwards, who's spent the last 7 years of his life and almost all of his limited political capitol in Iowa and Obama, who's bringing new faces and new enthusiasm into the game just feel wrong.

If Clinton wins, I wouldn't be shocked. But I wouldn't be shocked if any of the big 3 win in Iowa. Right now, all numbers coming out of Iowa at this point should be viewed with real care as there's no way to know what's truly going on until the day of the caucus, but it feels like ARG is making more of an attempt to nudge support than making true poling predictions at this point.

www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/12/28/AR2007122802445_pf.html

Check out this editorial about responses to Bhutto assassination. By the way, if you go to other discussion forums, you will see a much more balanced discussion. if you only visit this site, you thought you are totally outnumbered if you are not an obama supporter. Not the case in most other places.

Obama is a risk we cannot take at this juncture. He has tremendous upside but not now. If he is not so annoyingly against Clinton, he may make a good VP.

i will not vote for hillary clinton, or if i do so, it will be another depressing election, regardless of the outcome.

and ni daye, if obama becomes hilary's vp, that will be even more depressing

erik wrote on December 29, 2007 6:15 PM:

i will not vote for hillary clinton, or if i do so, it will be another depressing election, regardless of the outcome.
erik wrote on December 29, 2007 6:16 PM:

and ni daye, if obama becomes hilary's vp, that will be even more depressing

LOL. It sounds to me like your problem is Major Depressive Disorder (MDD) and not Hillary Clinton!

awrbb wrote on December 29, 2007 6:16 PM:

So, Hillary's lead has been cut in half since the last ARG poll. And her supporters are happy about this?

I have no idea if this so-called "lead" is real or not, but to be shown to be ahead in IA with just one week to go is encouraging, wouldn't you say? I am sure that Clinton's detractors would be going on ad nauseam about how she's collapsed if she had been shown to be "trailing" by 7 points...

DemAC wrote on December 29, 2007 6:24 PM:

The Concord Monitor in NH will endorse Hillary Clinton.

Oh, my! That is a biggie that is likely to do for HRC what the DMR endorsement has apparently done for her in IA!

awrbb wrote on December 29, 2007 6:31 PM:

Since the last ARG poll, that's minus 3 for Clinton, plus 4 for Edwards, and plus 5 for Obama.

Conceding all of that and realizing that most of these polls out of IA might not even be that meaningful, I still say that Clinton has cause to cheer because this at least keeps the all-important "narrative" in her favor...

I gotta go folks, but before you get apoplectic about any poll coming out of IA, go to pollster.com and read Mark Blumenthal' piece on just how reliable polls of the IA caucuses in 2000 and 2004 turned out to be.... not very, and I have been saying this all along. The only poll that would be reliable would be the one taken on Jan 3. In the mean time, I like the fact that Hillary's "lead" in IA would keep the "narrative" on her side, just like it did for Obama when screaming headlines had announced that he'd taken the lead there although it was almost always well within the MOE.

Cheers!

Has anyone noticed that this ARG poll is the only one from the last week that has her even in second place? Both of the more recent polls from more reputable companies have her in third. And yet the Clintonistas rejoice as if this is the only one. Keep dreaming guys....with negatives like that she is going down hard (just like some bimbo on Bill somewhere at just about any time).

Sarah Fischer wrote on December 29, 2007 6:56 PM:
Yup...even the outlier poll shows where the momentum is. Go Obama go.

Just wait until Obama kills it tomorrow on Meet the Press. She is a goner. Good riddance you phony calculating witch.

Re: Meet the Press: Obama can be a pretty rousing speaker when he's giving a prepared speech, but he's surprisingly boring in interviews. Tends towards the monotone and vacuous. I doubt he'll kill tomorrow.

Anonymous wrote on December 29, 2007 6:53 PM:
Isn't this the same outlier poll from last week that looks nothing like an of the others?

Yes, but what if their numbers are the ones that are correct? Most of us agreed that due to the dates (2 days before Christmas) of the last (ARG 14 point lead poll,) the numbers could have been off some. In any case, I agree with the majority here so far tonight. It is good news for Hillary and it would be making for huge headlines if Edwards or Obama were showing the lead instead of Hillary.

I second the CHEERS!

Stymie-

You couldn't be more right. They are trying to put lipstick on a pig and they know it.

Is that all you gout Tara? An outlier ARG poll and Intrade? Hillary's numbers across the board continue to drop precipitously. Look what has happened in NH her supposedly "bedrock" state in just the last month - 20+! Whatever you're smoking I want some.

Dear Hillary supporters,

I am a lifelong Democrat and I voted for Clinton both times, Gore and then Kerry but I will never ever vote for Hillary Clinton!

she voted for the War and the Patriot Act. She cynically assumed the country would still be supporting our glorious effort in Iraq or that we'd even be in Iran by now. Human nature proved her wrong but the country pays the price.

Hundreds of thousands of men, women and children died to serve her ambition.

Go ahead and vote for her and have your 4 years of 51% of getting nothing done and then another Republican.

You get the president you deserve you cattle.

HILLARY SUPPORTERS - do me a favor. Pick up a few books that detail Bill's various accomplishments (e.g. Fiscal Policy, Welfare Reform, etc.). Not the sensationalized bio stuff but real policy retrospectives. Scan the indices of these books for Hillary's name...nowhere to be found. Those that tout her experience are being snowed. Open your eyes.

The last three ARG polls really just seem to be confirming the holiday effect suggested by Blumenthal over at pollster (the closer the ARG polls were taken to Christmas, the greater the relative advantage for Clinton and the relative disadvantage for Obama). And that in turn suggests that insofar as the Times/Bloomberg poll taken immediately before and after Christmas is broadly consistent with these ARG polls, it is also just confirming that holiday effect.

Which does in fact mean that as far as Iowa polling is concerned, it recently passed over to the "dark side of the moon" (to use Blumenthal's phrase), since there is no real way to know how to correct for this effect even once it has been identified. So to me the more interesting question is whether we will get any useful polling before the caucus (and plausibly we will not).

No...if Shrillary gets the nomination, John McCain will be President.

Hmmmm. I notice there are alot of angry frustrated BO supporters that have shown up. You can scream and spew all you like, Hillary can lose the first 3 states and still win the nomination. Get used to her. She ain't goin nowhere.

Sounds like Tara is doing some expectations lowering. Will be interesting to see if Hillary does something with her staff the day before Iowa as Mickey Kaus has posited in light of her dropping support.

obama4eva states:

"... Her personality suggests that she is a witch. ...Good riddance you phony calculating witch."

this is really getting tiresome, obabma4eva. Hillary Clinton may be many things but she is not Wiccan. If you mean the term for a female dog, say so, if not, then leave the Wiccans alone!

They disparage ARG and then ARG turns out to have been right all along...I wonder whether they would email ARG to apologize...
Listen, no one has got a clue about the situation in IA, so stop hyperventilating. It is clear from every indication out there that Obama might have peaked just a tad too soon. Either Edwards or HRC looks poised to take this thing, but that is just a guess. The polls are not that helpful at all...Chill out!

Just to make something a little more explicit:

It is true that if you compare this ARG poll to the last ARG poll, it looks like Obama and Edwards have momentum, and Clinton is falling. Of course, if you compare the last ARG poll to the one before that, you would reach the opposite conclusion. But if in fact this is all just a holiday effect along the lines of what Blumenthal suggested, we should be seeing precisely that: movement in favor of Clinton as Christmas approaches, then movement back away from Clinton as Christmas recedes.

Now, of course some people are going to be inclined to suggest that whatever part of that cycle they prefer is more likely to be a true reflection of the dynamics of voter preference. But personally, I really don't see how an unbiased person can get much of significance out of all this.

When is she finally going to come out? Enough already Hillary. Tell us what you really are.

Obamas supporters arguing about this poll is nuts, while it doesn't look to be an acurate snapshot is the least of his problems. First, if he thinks all these college kids are gonna go caucus for him, then he is as crazy as the rest who have said this (gov. dean). Second, the comeback of sen. mccain in N.H. may be a fatal blow to his hopes of winning there with the independants, if mccain remains close the indie's will in my opinion break with him like in 2000, they wouldn't want to be responsible for another bush (romney). If obama can not win one of the first 2 or if worse comes in third in the first 2, it will be a trouncing in nevada where he will be not even close, at that point he is done in S.C. and out.

If only Kucinich had the money to buy some polls. Then he'd be just like the 'frontrunners'

Hey Bill F-no screaming coming from here
(obviously in your imagination just like your fascination for Monica-can't you anti Clinton's come up with something new after all these years)
Just to educate you-Obama has peaked-his #'s are not going up they are going down over the past 2 weeks(just read the polls with open eyes if you can)Nobody is going to pick an inexperienced hypocritical senator who has done nothing in his 2 years in the senate other than one stupid speech at the convention-he is an empty suit who talks up a big storm about how positive a campaign he's going to run-then trashes his opponents-people see through this bs and he will not win any primaries other than his homestate of Illinois. but seriously dude get a life and give up this hatred of Clintons-she is going to win-she does not have 50% negatives(another thing made up in your imagination-the # is closer to 40% and last I checked that's lower than 50%.

Please, please, please, please, please let Hillary win in Iowa.

Peggy Noonan wrote about Hillary Clinton:

My central problem (with Hillary Clinton) is that the next American president will very likely face another big bad thing, a terrible day, or days, and in that time it will be crucial--crucial--that our nation be led by a man or woman who can be, at least for the moment and at least in general, trusted. Mrs. Clinton is the most dramatically polarizing, the most instinctively distrusted, political figure of my lifetime. Yes, I include Nixon. Would she be able to speak the nation through the trauma? I do not think so. And if I am right, that simple fact would do as much damage to America as the terrible thing itself.

A lot of people, Democrats and Republicans, share Ms Noonan's view.

Oh Madjayhawk give me a break!! peggy noonan was Ronald Regan's speechwriter
asking her opinion on Hillary is like asking George Steinbrenner's opinion on the Yankees. You think any democrat gives a hoot about that right wing elitist??

obama4eva: "hillary clinton is an unattractive candidate that america does not want to see age."

That is a really ugly, disgusting comment. If you think sharing such rancid opinions helps your candidate, then you're driving on three wheels and still missing a couple lugnuts. I would like to believe that you should be ashamed of yourself, but you're obviously someone who doesn't embarrass easily.

Bill F...class is in session

The reason the negs are so high is because
...get this....the other side hates her. So frickin what??? I want them to hate her. it means she or Bill are doing something right. Thats why they hate the Clintons. Got it. Good

Class dismissed.

One more poll HRC is up on

http://www.reuters.com/article/domesticNews/idUSN2948587520071230?feedType=RSS&feedName=domesticNews&rpc=22&sp=true

bbln -
Albright: "Hillary has been in refugee camps, clinics, orphanages, and villages all around the world". That's what first lady's do. Give me some true foreign POLICY accomplishments. She didn't have National Security access during Bill's tenure. How are people falling for this?

"In April 1985 Nancy Reagan expanded her drug awareness campaign to an international level by inviting the wives of world leaders to attend a White House conference she hosted on youth drug abuse. In October of that year, during the U.N.'s 40th anniversary, she hosted thirty international First Ladies for a second such gathering."

Nancy Reagan for President!!!"

and she WAS president, remember? Ol Ron was napping or have you forgotten?

Reality Check:

Senator Obama treats his wife with respect, as an equal marriage partner.

President Bill Clinton treated his wife to a steady diet of Bimbo eruptions. How does that qualify her as a strong leader? Her own husband treated her with the utmost disrespect through out their marriage, and what is worse, she accepted it, and continued to enable and cover for him.

If she did not respect herself, then how is she supposed to regain respect for America.

Liam:

Reality check. You know how the Clinton's marriage operates in accordance with your positively biddy-like standards?

How biblically provincial your take is. You should maybe take another look at Huckabee. There's someone who knows how to form judgements.

Ever been to Europe? Just wondering. Do you know for a fact that the Clinton's don't have a more non-traditional "open marriage" arrangement, but that Bill just wasn't able to stay discreet?

Then shutup, Ken Starr . . . uh . . . I mean . . . Liam.

Hillary is a shrill, calculating opportunistic bitch with very little real experience and no ability to lead or bring people together. People hate her (on the right and left) because of her phoniness. If she got the nomination, she would instantly galvanize a disorganized right wing and lose faithful Dems like me to Bloomberg, Paul and/or McCain. Them's the facts.

CalD,

First, please note I was responding to colonpowwow's own anecdotal argument.

Second, many of the things you are implying on Hillary Clinton's behalf we do not know to be true, or in fact know to be false (for example, we know she did not attend NSC meetings). But It would in fact be interesting for the Clintons to elaborate upon and document her role as First Lady, but unfortunately they have chosen not to do so.

On a page this long, why is there only room for 3 Democratic candidates on the poll tracker? Is TPM trying to suppress some candidates?