Research 2000 Has Obama And Hillary Tied, McCain Ahead

Comments (12)

Wordie wrote on January 5, 2008 8:51 PM:

The thing that first jumps out in these results is that Edwards had the biggest bounce. Since the margin of error for this poll is +/- 5 points, it could conceivably even be a tie.

US Voter wrote on January 5, 2008 9:22 PM:

Given the results in Iowa, I am REALLY looking forward to seeing JOHN EDWARDS move up in the polls in NH.
I truly believe that EDWARDS and Obama are the better candidates for Democrats.

Greg DeLassus wrote on January 5, 2008 9:54 PM:

As a(n insufferably snarky) service to my Clinton-supporter friends on this blog, I present a list of talking points you can use to mitigate the embarrassment of your loss in three days. Feel free to copy and paste these as necessary in your response to my ilk.

1) New Hampshire is completely unrepresentative of the nation as a whole.

2a) NH has only 30 delegates.
b) He only got ___ more delegates than Clinton.

3) He just bussed in votes from IL.

4) Who cares about NH, just wait until NV.

I hope those help in formulating the response to the drubbing Sen Clinton is about to get. ;-)

kucinich for prez wrote on January 5, 2008 10:10 PM:

Perfect record, Eric. Another Kucinichless poll.

Richard L. Adlof wrote on January 6, 2008 12:01 AM:

To know Clinton is to hate Clinton, so I look forward to Clinton's numbers shifting to the expectable . . . AND if anybody starts paying attention to Obama's P.O.V., they will forget that the great and grand godess OPRAH commanded them to vote for him unquestionly . . .

Tuesday will be interesting.

AJ wrote on January 6, 2008 12:09 AM:

Edwards is closing. And this is before the debate, nice.

DTM wrote on January 6, 2008 12:11 AM:

Edwards does appear to have made up some ground on Clinton in the first round of entirely post-Iowa NH polls. So I am definitely watching to see if it appears he is getting into striking distance for second.

Mike timmons wrote on January 6, 2008 1:45 AM:

Hillary actually think she is the agent of change in this primary, when she has been running on Bill's record all this time?

Who is writing her talking points, the ghost of L. Frank Baum?

BruceMcF wrote on January 6, 2008 2:55 AM:

When could Edwards have gained the media access to get a post-Iowa bump? Weren't all the media ignoring his second place ... a surprise second place considering the conventional wisdom that he needed a small turnout to do well ...

Answer: people in New Hampshire were watching the caucus results. And so they saw his speech where he claimed the second place victory for himself, and then delivered his stump speech.

It was obvious by that time that Senator Obama was going to get the 11pm speech and the coveted live breakaway in the local evening news. And so Edwards took the initiative while Senator Clinton still had the cable news networks hanging on waiting for her speech.

He was not talking for the assembled punditry, he was talking straight to anyone watching in New Hampshire. ARG shows him with a similar post IA bounce.

And from the debate, Edwards and Obama should both rise, both at the expense of Clinton.

Organizer wrote on January 6, 2008 4:39 AM:

Tim Russert and some pundits did a roundtable on MSNBC tonight after the debates. Andrea Mitchell said that within moments after Edwards hit Hillary for attacking Obama (again pairing with him as a fellow change-agent) and her angry rant in response, that his people text messaged the press saying something like "the Clinton era ended at 9:31 PM EST tonight".

They very well may have been right. The blogs are already full of replays of her meltdown. Edwards' ploy was brilliant; he totally pushed her buttons. Obama won the debate because he didn't lose (he was very strong on national security), although I think Edwards was at his best. Richardson got in the night's best line ("I've been in hostage negotiations that were more civil.") And I think Clinton, with all her money, fame and organization, is toast.

When Edwards began spinning Iowa as having winnowed the race down to the two change agents (him and Obama) I thought it was just, well ... spin. But tonight I think he may have made made it reality.

Tonight was filled with the kinds of moments that political junkies dream about. Two substantive debates. Two of my least favorite candidates (Mitt and Hill) getting smoked. Candidates having the chance to really engage each other. Media assholes pretty much staying out of the way. Charlie Gibson was outstanding. Go figure.

I even liked his stunt between the 2 debates - he had all the candidates - Dem and Reep - come out and make nice with each other before the break. The body language was fascinating. Hillary and Guiliani actually had a conversation (I wonder if she said, "Remember when we were front runners?")

Even the Reep debate was good, although their policies and bullshit were so nauseating that I was constantly switching channels. But is was fun watching them all gang up on Mitt.

Thompson was surprisingly engaged; he almost justified his existence. Guiliani seemed (briefly) relevant again. Huckabee was cool, funny, humane and only intermittently crazy. McCain was Presidential - and looked older than dirt.

And they were all trying to measure themselves against Obama - they clearly have no fucking clue how to run against him. Their whole rationale - running against Hillary - is gone, and the stink of fear on them was palpable.

Okay, I know all this is subjective. But I bet the chat shows tomorrow morning will be all about Mitt getting crushed, Hillary's temper tantrum, Edwards' success, and Obama's cool. Also I bet the polls tomorrow and Monday will show both Obama and McCain well ahead. I think there's even a chance that Edwards could place second again.

This thing (for the Dems) could be over as quickly as the Clintons always predicted - but with a different presumptive nominee.

The governing principle of history is irony.

Candideinnc wrote on January 6, 2008 9:24 AM:

Senators "More-of-the-same" McCain and Obama had best enjoy their moment in the sun. This seldom lasts.

Peggy McGilligan wrote on January 6, 2008 9:47 PM:

I think everybody's doin' great, holding-up under pressure. The Republicans all looked calm, comfortable, and rested - fired-up on the 08:00 PM. Fox Debate. Everyone looked good today, except Hillary. I can't fault her for being tired. But then, I think she is tired and so is her message. Obama! Whoever said, "The governing principle of history is irony," couldn't have been more succinct. I hadn't heard that before, but the brief aphorism fits like a glove: http://theseedsof9-11.com

Post a comment

Name:
Email Address:
URL:
	Remember personal info?
Comments: (you may use HTML tags for style)