Zogby: Obama's Got The Momentum In New Hampshire
The new Zogby tracking poll in New Hampshire, with about half the data from before Iowa and half from after, shows a close race on the Democratic side with the momentum clearly in Barack Obama's favor.
Here are the numbers, as compared to yesterday's tracking poll:
Democrats:
Clinton 31% (-1)
Obama 30% (+2)
Edwards 20% (+0)
Richardson 7% (+0)
Key pieces of info from Zogby:
Only 50% of this sample is after the Iowa caucus results were known and there has been a 5-point swing on the Democratic side. Clinton started out leading 32% to 26% over Obama and now she is in a dead heat at 31% to 30%. Obama has won in that part of the sample taken since Iowa – and just this past one day alone Obama led by 8 points....
Obama gets the lion’s share of leaners, with Edwards receiving a smaller share. Clinton is shut out among leaners.
Comments (18)
kucinich for prez wrote on January 6, 2008 10:46 AM:What does Eric do with all the space he saves not printing the name 'Kucinich'?
Zeke wrote on January 6, 2008 10:50 AM:"Kucinich still dead last among active candidates at 3%" isn't exactly earth-shattering news.
brm wrote on January 6, 2008 10:56 AM:Celebrate the end of the Bush-Clinton era.
Hillary lost it for good last night.
She will making change somewhere else
Eric Kleefeld wrote on January 6, 2008 10:57 AM:I shall explain my policy now. The threshold for inclusion in these posts is 5%, or else having been above 5% in the last poll but now falling below it.
calvin wrote on January 6, 2008 11:00 AM:My guess is that Kleefeld and Kurtz, like much of the msm (and the Huffingtonpost) are personally more fond of Obama than Clinton, and it is glaringly obvious in their horse-race reporting.
I come to TPM and its related sites to get a dose of something other than msm noxiousness. Kleefeld and Kurtz, cut it out!!!
My guess is that Kleefeld and Kurtz, like much of the msm (and the Huffingtonpost) are personally more fond of Obama than Clinton, and it is glaringly obvious in their horse-race reporting.
I come to TPM and its related sites to get a dose of something other than msm noxiousness. Kleefeld and Kurtz, cut it out!!!
Eric, "I shall explain my policy now. The threshold for inclusion in these posts is 5%, or else having been above 5% in the last poll but now falling below it." Thanks for the reply, but why do you do this? It seems to be trying to create momentum, and make readers limit their options.
M wrote on January 6, 2008 11:14 AM:Enough of accusing the press of bias! Bias is an essentially human trait, and, since humanity (and humans as individuals) is imperfect, everyone should be expected to have a view of the world as they see it.
Just because someone doesn't agree with you doesn't mean their point of view is completely invalid. It only means that you think their point of view is invalid. That is not an absolute truth, only your version of the truth.
My suggestion? Find the news you like and stop trying to tell me what news I should like.
Calvin wrote on January 6, 2008 11:37 AM:M,
How wrong can you be? Am I just supposed to accept bias in the press? There is such a thing as proofreading yourself so that you check whether your biases are showing through. Marshall shows how it can be done, Kleefeld and Kurtz should learn.
Bias in the press allowed the 2000 narrative to be about "likeable" Bush versus "calculating" Gore. Look where that got us. I see eerie similarities in the present -- I expect it out of Tweetie, but expect more from TPM.
David wrote on January 6, 2008 1:01 PM:Anyone catch the "Matthews Meter" poll this morning on the Chris Matthews Show? All 12 of Matthews regulars said Obama will get the Dem nomination (12-0!).
More interestingly, Pat Healy said there is some thinking in Hillaryland that she better not go too far in attacking Obama so as to make her too toxic and ruin her eventual shot at Senate Majority leader. Amazing what a difference a week makes.
kucinich for prez wrote on January 6, 2008 1:24 PM:I don't expect more from TPM. It's boycott of Kucinich from day one is digraceful.
DTM wrote on January 6, 2008 2:17 PM:It is looking like once all the pre-Iowa data is out of the polls, it will shape up to be about a 5-10 point average lead for Obama.
Nickal wrote on January 6, 2008 2:27 PM:To David and M:
Bias does matter. I am an undecided voter but honestly, TPM and MSM are no different in not challenging Obama or dissecting his words in the same way they do HRC. Look above: 2 of the 3 pools listed have HRC winning. The headline is about Obama's momentum. How about just once the lead says, " HRC holds the lead in NH"? Words matter. When I listened to the debate last night, the HRC was the only one who clearly and in detail laid out any plan. Obama puts me in mind of the Talking Heads line from "Psycho Killer" in which the singer laments, "You're taliking a lot, but you're not saying anything."
kucinich for prez: It's the candidate's responsibility to make him/herself viable. Kucinich simply hasn't done his job. Nothing personal.
roo_P wrote on January 6, 2008 4:27 PM:Mark F,
I disagree to an extent. I do think the media has a good degree of responsibility to ensure that everyone is allowed to present their views so that they can be considered for viability to begin with.
kucinich for prez wrote on January 6, 2008 7:13 PM:Of course it's the candidates' responsibility to get votes. Viable? Let the voters decide.
EvilPoet wrote on January 6, 2008 7:49 PM:R. C. Gallagher's Law: Change is inevitable -- except from a vending machine.
Post's Managerial Observation: The inefficiency and stupidity of the staff corresponds to the inefficiency and stupidity of the management.
kucinich for prez wrote on January 7, 2008 9:29 AM:I don't see Obama as a change candidate. He's said nothing about our crazy 'defense' budget, investigating 9/11, or taking the CEOs out of our healthcare. He wants to invade Pakistan and sanction Iran more heavily. Where's the change?
