Iowa all tied up, but should Clinton start worrying about second-choice preferences?
Clinton is starting to be hit in the state for her overly negative campaign against Obama. Take a look at this new cartoon published on the front page of the Des Moines Register. It appears to sum up what Iowa's Democratic voters are starting to think:
Now, the main danger for Clinton is that this makes her look desperate and vulnerable and lowers her favorable ratings even more. A key factor to consider in Iowa is the second-choice number: Caucus-goers have to realign with a new candidate if their first choice fails to get 15% in their caucus-place. Most polls have shown that Clinton laggs behind Obama and Edwards in this, which could create some big distance on caucus night and get Clinton stuck at third. This is what happened to Dean in 2004 and what explains Kerry's stunning victory 20% above Dean.
If Clinton is perceived as mounting too negative a campaign, that will likely lower her second-choice preference more than anything else; but that is enough to doom any campaign in Iowa. Clinton coming in third would be terrible enough; but coming in third, as I noted above, probably means lagging far behind, not just a few percentage points.
However, we have to note that the new Zogby poll released today has a major caveat to this analysis (see below for Zogby's horse race numbers). Zogby writes, Clinton "wins the lion’s share of support among those who make Biden their first choice, and she does well among those who would first choose New Mexico Gov. Bill Richardson." Zogby also says that Edwards and Obama voters choose the other as their second choice.
If true, this would explain why Obama and Edwards beat Clinton in second-choice totals -- and it would make that totally useless. Obama and Edwards are both likely to meet the 15% threshold pretty much everywhere, so they have nothing to gain from being the second choice of the other candidate. What they want is to be the second choice of Richardson, Biden, Dodd and Kucinich voters. And here is where Clinton can have some hope: People voting for Biden and Dodd are presumably less swayed by the "change" or "anti-establishment" argument made by Obama and Edwards, and thus perhaps more likely to go for Clinton as a second-choice. That could give Hillary a much needed boost and perhaps save her in Iowa.
This requires her, naturally, to do a good December campaign and erase the impression that she is going too far. That DMR cartoon is truly devastating.
Now let's go to the two new polls:
Now, the main danger for Clinton is that this makes her look desperate and vulnerable and lowers her favorable ratings even more. A key factor to consider in Iowa is the second-choice number: Caucus-goers have to realign with a new candidate if their first choice fails to get 15% in their caucus-place. Most polls have shown that Clinton laggs behind Obama and Edwards in this, which could create some big distance on caucus night and get Clinton stuck at third. This is what happened to Dean in 2004 and what explains Kerry's stunning victory 20% above Dean.
If Clinton is perceived as mounting too negative a campaign, that will likely lower her second-choice preference more than anything else; but that is enough to doom any campaign in Iowa. Clinton coming in third would be terrible enough; but coming in third, as I noted above, probably means lagging far behind, not just a few percentage points.
However, we have to note that the new Zogby poll released today has a major caveat to this analysis (see below for Zogby's horse race numbers). Zogby writes, Clinton "wins the lion’s share of support among those who make Biden their first choice, and she does well among those who would first choose New Mexico Gov. Bill Richardson." Zogby also says that Edwards and Obama voters choose the other as their second choice.
If true, this would explain why Obama and Edwards beat Clinton in second-choice totals -- and it would make that totally useless. Obama and Edwards are both likely to meet the 15% threshold pretty much everywhere, so they have nothing to gain from being the second choice of the other candidate. What they want is to be the second choice of Richardson, Biden, Dodd and Kucinich voters. And here is where Clinton can have some hope: People voting for Biden and Dodd are presumably less swayed by the "change" or "anti-establishment" argument made by Obama and Edwards, and thus perhaps more likely to go for Clinton as a second-choice. That could give Hillary a much needed boost and perhaps save her in Iowa.
This requires her, naturally, to do a good December campaign and erase the impression that she is going too far. That DMR cartoon is truly devastating.
Now let's go to the two new polls:
- Strategic Vision: Obama, Huckabee expand leads in Iowa
- Obama gets 32%, followed by Edwards and Clinton at 25%.
- Among Republicans, Huckabee now has 27% followed by Romney at 24%, Giuliani at 13% and Thompson at 11%.
- Zogby: Iowa is tied, New Hampshire is getting there
- In Iowa, Clinton is up 27% to 24%, with Edwards at 21%. These are pretty much the same numbers as November.
- Republicans confirm what we have seen. Three weeks ago, Romney was up 31% to 15%. Today, it's 26% to 25% on Huckabee only,with Giuliani at 8%.
- In New Hampshire, Clinton comes in at 32%, followed by Obama at 21% and Edwards at 16%. This is on the small end of Clinton margins in New Hampshire -- 11 points is not enough to Clinton to survive an Iowa stumble.
- Meanwhile, Romney is stronger than ever here: He gets 35% to McCain's 17% and Giuliani's 15%, followed by Huckabee at 10%.
2 Comments:
Clinton & Edwards tied. Hmm, will she attack Edwards now, to hang on to second place?
By Anonymous, At 05 December, 2007 16:03
The fake outrage against the Hillary campaign has been ridiculous. Obama made a statement, and was called on it. Now everyone's whining around because some dirt was found on poor lil Obama. Please..
Vote For Hillary Online
By Vote For Hillary Online, At 06 December, 2007 04:59
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home