Clinton, McCain Top National Poll

As the campaigns start to fan out, national polls start to become more relevant. A new CNN/Opinion poll, shows a seismic shift on the Republican side, Clinton leading, with some caveats, on the Democratic side

Dems:

Clinton is at 49 percent in the new poll, up nine points from the December survey, with Obama at 36 percent, which is a six-point gain from his December standing.

Obama finished first in Iowa's Democratic caucuses. Clinton won in New Hampshire.

"Clinton has re-established herself as the Democratic front-runner, especially among Democratic women," Schneider said.

Former Sen. John Edwards of North Carolina is a distant third, at 12 percent, with Rep. Dennis Kucinich at 1 percent. The sampling error for the Democratic results is plus or minus 4.5 percentage points.

A national poll is more telling on the Democratic side, because we already know that Super Tuesday will be the focus, the "national primary". Interesting, that both Clinton and Obama have gained support, as the other candidates drop out. In the poll internals, we have this tidbit:

Suppose the only Democratic candidates were Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama. Which of those
two would you support?

Clinton 53%
Obama 44%
Neither (vol.) 3%
No opinion 1%

With Edwards eliminated, Obama picks up 2/3rds of his support.

On the Republican side, McCain's rise is staggering, a combination of momentum and Guiliani fading badly:

McCain has the support of 34 percent of registered Republicans in a CNN/Opinion Research Corp. survey out Friday. That's a 21-point jump from the last CNN/Opinion Research poll, taken in December, well before the Iowa caucuses and New Hampshire primary earlier this month.

Former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee, who won the Iowa Republican caucuses, is in second place in the new survey, with 21 percent of those registered Republicans polled supporting him for the GOP nomination.

Rudy Giuliani follows with 18 percent, a drop of six points from the December poll, when the former New York City mayor was the front-runner.

"Only McCain gained support among Republicans nationally. McCain's now the clear Republican front-runner," said Bill Schneider, CNN senior political analyst.

Former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney is in fourth place, with the backing of 14 percent of registered Republicans, with former Sen. Fred Thompson of Tennessee at 6 percent, Rep. Ron Paul of Texas at 5 percent, and Rep. Duncan Hunter of California at 1 percent.

The GOP race is still wide open, with critical contests looming Michigan and South Carolina. That fact makes this national poll less predictive than the one for the Democrats, but that said, McCain is clearly emerging as the frontrunner.

Guiliani's Florida strategy is imploding fast, just today he was forced to hold the pay for staff. McCain is benefiting from Guiliani's decline, and a new Florida offering demonstrates the folly of sitting on the sidelines for so long. Guiliani's once solid lead is gone:

McCain 27%
Guiliani 19%
Huckabee 17%
Romney 17%

Advice For Dion

One of the challenges Dion has to address, is the lingering opinion that he is "wishy-washy". That narrative feeds the bigger hurdle, the idea of weak leadership. I would suggest that Dion, or his handlers, stop with the forever changing stance on the need for an election. Saber rattling one week, more coy the next, gives the impression that the Liberals are scattered, poll-driven opportunists.

Yesterday, Dion went back to the previous posture, the one he adopted before the period where he was gung ho, after the period where he laid out his "demands" (hard to keep track):

OTTAWA–Liberal Leader Stéphane Dion is backing away from his tough talk about provoking a federal election at the earliest opportunity.

Talking to reporters yesterday, Dion was repeatedly pressed about whether he'd use his power as Opposition leader to trigger the defeat of the government soon after Parliament resumes Jan. 28.

"I have no plan to do so for now," Dion replied.

Instead, it now seems that the Liberals will be content to wait and see what's in Prime Minister Stephen Harper's next budget – expected in March – and then judge whether to topple the minority government on a budget vote.

It was only a little more than a month ago, in Montreal, when Dion told Liberal riding presidents to be ready for the plug to be pulled on Harper's government as soon as possible.

In fact, Dion told reporters that February represented a symbolic bar of sorts for the electorate, since it will mark the second anniversary of Harper assuming office in 2006. He appeared to be saying that the Liberals were ready to call an end to their controversial fall approach of abstaining on make-or-break votes for the government.

But it seems that there has been a change of mind over the Christmas and New Year's break.

The Star article points to Decima holiday poll to try and understand the different posture. I'm not sure I buy that reasoing, but then again, there does seem to be a definite co-relation between the polls and the Liberal rhetoric.

I don't think the Liberals do themselves any favors with the confusing statements, and it only feeds a negative impression of Dion. Dion's best chance in any election is too present himself as genuine and principled. The "moving the goalposts" routine that we have seen for the past 5 months work against that perception, making the Liberals look self-interested and calculating. If I could offer some advice, get a consistent posture and don't waver, no matter the wind's direction, at a given moment.

McCain On The Move

McCain's win in New Hampshire sets the stage for a three man battle in Michigan with Mitt Romney and a surprisingly relevant Mick Huckabee, followed by the always decisive Republican primary in South Carolina. New polls (I can't help myself) suggest McCain is well placed for two crucial wins, that would catapult him to the nomination.

In Michigan, Romney has put all his advertising into the state, pulling ads from South Carolina and Florida, in a last ditch attempt to salvage his campaign. No polling conducted after New Hampshire, but McCain is already well placed:

Strategic Vision:

January 4-6, 2008. The margin of sampling error is ±4 percentage points.

1. For the 2008 Republican Presidential Nomination whom would you support? (Republicans Only)

John McCain 29%
Mitt Romney 20%
Mike Huckabee 18%
Rudy Giuliani 13%
Fred Thompson 5%
Ron Paul 5%
Duncan Hunter 1%
Undecided 9%

Rossman Group:

01/06 - 01/07
Romney 22
McCain 18
Huckabee 23
Guiliani 8
Paul 4
Thompson 3

Of note, the SV poll is "Republicans only". Independents can vote in the Michigan primary, and with no Democratic race, due to suspension of delegates, McCain should benefit. Reading some of the press clippings, there are reports of Democrats showing up at McCain rallies, it will be interesting to see if independents and "McCain Democrats" put him over the top.

In 2000, South Carolina killed McCain's chances, mostly due to a backlash from the religious right and some dubious tactics by the Bush campaign. Two fresh polls, released after the New Hampshire results show McCain getting a nice bounce:

Fox News/Opinion R:

A new FOX News South Carolina Republican presidential primary poll shows McCain is now the front-runner with 25 percent, followed by Iowa caucus winner Huckabee at 18 percent and Romney at 17 percent. The results for all three top candidates are within the survey’s margin of sampling error.

Fred Thompson, who is from the neighboring state of Tennessee, captures the support of 9 percent, while Rudy Giuliani and Ron Paul both receive 5 percent.

Rasmussen:

Arizona Senator John McCain, fresh from his victory in New Hampshire, has taken a narrow three-point lead over former Arkansas Governor Mike Huckabee in the South Carolina Republican Presidential Primary. The latest Rasmussen Reports telephone survey shows McCain at 27% and Huckabee at 24%.

That’s a significant change since last Sunday. Just before the New Hampshire vote, Huckabee was leading McCain 28% to 21%. In mid-December, Huckabee and Romney were tied for the lead with 23% of the vote while McCain was well off the pace at 12%.

The current survey finds Mitt Romney running a distant third at 16%, little changed since the previous survey.

A new Florida poll shows Guiliani's once huge lead reduced to 5 points, with McCain and Huckabee close behind. Hard to see a scenario where Guiliani is still relevant, should McCain win Michigan and South Carolina.

As an aside, I found this quote on climate change by Mitt Romney. Remind you of anyone?:

"I really don't think it's productive for us to act solely on a unilateral basis to reduce our greenhouse gases if we have developing nations like China and India continue to increase their output of greenhouse gases and not be party to a greenhouse gas effort," he said

New Decima Poll

I'm suffering from poll fatigue, but Harris-Decima was kind enough to conduct a useless poll of Canadians over the holidays. To nobody's surprise, Harper's year end "fireside chat" routine, coupled with a complete news shutdown, has given the Tories a boost in support:

new poll says the Conservatives jumped to a seven-point lead over the holidays.

While Canadians were busy stuffing stockings and carving up turkey, the federal Tories were busily bolting to a sizeable advantage over the Liberals, says the new Canadian Press Harris-Decima survey.

Translation- while Canadians were so thoroughly disinterested in politics, completely distracted, we decided this was a fantastic opportunity to get an accurate read of people's opinions. Alright then.

The numbers, all that might be relevant in the grand scheme, whither the NDP?:

The pollster suggests the Tories had fallen slightly behind the Liberals by mid-December, then leapt past them over the holidays to hold a 37-30 edge by the first week of January.
NDP support among 1,000 Canadians polled from Jan. 3 to 6 dipped in British Columbia, Quebec and Ontario as the party's national support dropped to just 13 per cent.

The latest poll contains plenty of bad news for the NDP.

The party - which won a historic Quebec byelection in September and hopes to take more seats in the province - sagged to eight per cent in Quebec. The Green party had nine per cent in the province.
It was almost as bad for New Democrats in Ontario. In that province, Liberals held a 40-37 lead over the Tories, while the NDP was at 12 per cent and the Green party was at 10.

"When you look at Ontario, the Green party really is edging ahead of the NDP in critical parts of the province," Anderson said.

"That's pretty big news."

I blame it all on the tryptophan in the turkey.

Liberals: Good And Bad

First, the good news. The Liberals policy on Afghanistan, outlined yesterday, stakes out fertile ground within the Canadian mainstream. A balanced view, that leaves room for the military, but doesn’t endorse the current configuration:

the combat mission should end as scheduled in February, 2009, but suggesting troops could remain in the country to perform other tasks.
"We are open to other possible military roles in Afghanistan to continue training the Afghan National Army and police, protect Afghan civilians or for reconstruction efforts," Mr. Dion said in a prepared statement."But we will not accept the simple rebranding of the current combat mission as a training mission. Any new military role must be crafted in such a way as to ensure that other significant Canadian Forces deployments in other parts of the world are possible.

No one can accuse the Liberals of “abandoning” Afghanistan, nor are they endorsing the Harper stubbornness. The argument basically demonstrates some pragmatism, re-directing our effort in such a way to achieve the best results. Many independent military papers have concluded that Afghanistan can’t be won militarily, the Liberal position embraces this concept, while providing alternative assistance that moves towards stability. I think this position will resonate well with Canadians, because it articulates the conflicted view of wanting to help, appreciation that we have a role to play, but not engaging in some endless, tragic game of “whack a mole”.

On the negative side, the way in which the Liberal Party has handled the nomination in Desnethe-Missinippi-Churchill River translates to a complete public relations nightmare. For the record, I’m no fan of David Orchard, and I can understand why prominent Liberals resist his candidacy. However, usurping a democratic process, particularly when you have full knowledge of a potential vocal blowback, seems like a strategic blunder of the highest order.

If key Saskatchewan Liberals like Goodale don’t want Orchard, then they should do everything in there power to amass grassroot forces to back their preferred candidate. Interjecting someone, which alienates a wide swath of voters, in a riding which is decidedly close, is just bad politics. I’ve never agreed with the Dion quota system, what is happening in this riding is representative of forcing a round block into a square hole. The top-down approach, which basically tells the locals to sit down and do as they are told, is the last thing the Liberals want to present, in a climate where they are trying to re-invent themselves.

New Hampshire

Pretty shocking results on the Democratic side, not necessarily a bad development in the grand scheme. On the Republican side, McCain puts a period on a stunning reversal of fortunes. My two cents on why the polls, pundits (and myself) were wrong, what turned the race for Clinton.

The weather was beautiful and warm, a fact which generally means better turnout amongst older voters. By all accounts, older voters decidedly went to Clinton. Clinton also seemed to score very well with women voters, many of whom changed their minds in the last 24 hours. McCain was able to draw a bigger percentage of independents to the Republican Primary, this fact hurt Obama in the end.

There has to be a moment here, because apart from partisan fanatics, there wasn't one columinist that saw this result coming. The press reacted to yesterday's "teary" plea by Clinton with uneven reaction. Apparently, the voters reacted in different fashion, Clinton became sympathetic and the soft voter turned back to her in the end. You don't see a wave stop abruptly, unless it meets something powerful, to my mind this was that moment, which wasn't properly accounted for.

No Democratic that has won the first two contests has failed to win the nomination. With a Clinton win tonight, the race is wide open and a period of sober thought will follow. Despite what looked inevitable, it is a positive development that this race slows down, people can weigh the options, some of the rock star hysteria wanes. Super Tuesday is now what it was intended to be, which makes for a fascinating few weeks.

On the Republican side, McCain's win today sends him off to Michigan, a state he won in 2000. Romney staggers on, pocketbook in hand, but tonight is a devastating loss. Anyone who reads this blog will be aware that I picked up on McCain through the fall, which I offer as balance for the blindside on the Democratic side :)

I'm actually glad that tonight went down in this way. Despite trying to read the tea leaves, that doesn't translate to an endorsement of what can happen in politics. This race really shouldn't end in such short order, whether empirically, philosophically or strategically. Obama may well be the real deal, but the Democrats are better served if he stands in the glare for a time first, to see more layers. Tonight the process wins, let's see what happens.

Canada Isn't Bush Country

Peterborough Politics has a post, which delves into the familiar Conservative rallying cry- the liberal media that conspires against all things Conservative. Anyone who actually pays attention knows full well that Canada's media is hardly a liberal bastion, a quick peruse of who owns what actually suggests otherwise.

Yesterday, Harris-Decima released a poll of Canadian opinion, as it relates to the American Presidential race. These results are quite telling:

A new poll suggests Canadians so massively favour the U.S. Democratic party that they'd back any of its leading candidates in a presidential race against a Republican.

The Harris-Decima survey suggests the Democrats would trounce the Republicans by a four-to-one margin if the voters were Canadian.

U.S. President George W. Bush's Republican party would get creamed even in a hypothetical election in which only Canadian Conservatives voted.

The survey, provided exclusively to The Canadian Press, says 49 per cent of Canadians expressed a preference for Democrats while only 12 per cent did the same for Republicans.

Even self-described Conservatives — who are supposedly more ideologically in tune with the right-leaning Republicans — favoured the Democrats by a 47-23 margin.

What does the above tell us about Canadians, and how should that translate to our newscasts? In my mind, the above proves a basic truth, Canada is a center, center-left country, and true conservatism is really a fringe player in our discourse. With that reality in mind, why is that Conservative bloggers rail against outlets like the CBC, when it would appear they merely reflect the politics of the people? What we have here is a vocal minority, playing the martyr card, who can't stand the fact that they are basically out of touch with mainstream Canada.

Canadians actually like David Suzuki, for the most part. Canadians don't see a show like The Nature Of Things as a vehicle for the CBC to project it's socialist agenda. Canadians do believe in global warming, Canadians don't support capital punishment, Canadians do believe the state has some role to play in our lives..... The CBC, our network, merely reflects the majority perspective.

We can all pick out items and point to bias. For myself, I wonder how a CBC political roundtable can call itself fair when it includes a known Dion hater, the former guru of the National Post and a pollster who worked for Mulroney. If I was a conservative, I would extrapolate this simple fact to the entire network. However, when you step back, you see a balance elsewhere and it becomes more acceptable.

Our current government feeds the conservative rallying cry, with its paranoid and hands off approach to the media. Is that because the media is biased against them, or is it more correctly an acknowledgement, through the reactions, that this government's core belief system is out of step with mainstream Canada? Is the paranoia really a shrewd calculation, the need to hide?

UPDATE

A gigantic yawn, the unwashed will be heard.

Obama Rolling Nationally

I've been waiting for some national polls to see if the Obama "phenomenon" is spreading. The Clinton firewall, her very large lead nationally, which would set her up for Super Tuesday. That lead has evaporated in short order, according to Gallup:

On the Democratic side, Iowa winner Obama has moved into a tie with Clinton. Both now have 33% of the vote. This represents a 6-point gain since December 2007 for Obama and a 12-point loss for Clinton. John Edwards has gained 5 points since December, moving from 15% to 20% support among Democrats. Edwards is now closer to the front-runner among Democrats than he has been at any point since Gallup began tracking the Democratic race more than a year ago. This is also the first time since June that Clinton has not held a statistically significant lead over the rest of her competitors. She had led by 27 points as recently as mid-November.

The Gallup findings are mirrored by the Rasmussen daily tracking poll. Last week Clinton had a 17% advantage. Today:

Before the Iowa caucuses, Clinton held a seventeen-point lead over Barack Obama. Today, that lead is down to four percentage points in a survey with a four-point margin of sampling error.

In the race for the Democratic Presidential Nomination, it’s now Clinton 33%, Barack Obama 29% and John Edwards 20%

Staggering change, by any measure.

The latest CNN/WMUR poll for New Hampshire shows the race stabilizing, with little change from yesterday:

Democrats:

Obama 39% (yesterday 38%)
Clinton 30% (29%)
Edwards 16% (16%)

Republicans

McCain 31% (32%)
Romney 26% (26%)
Huckabee 13% (14%)

All the polls average out to McCain +5% and Obama +8%. The real caveat for McCain, does Obamamania bleed more independents to the Democratic Primary, a block McCain needs to get over the top?

Clinton Gets Emotional

You have to feel sorry for her, on one level.

“We’re going to lose South Carolina”

The above quote, a frank admission from the Clinton camp:

The adviser added that the campaign has come to accept another reality of the early process, which is that African-American voters are convinced that Obama is viable and shifting rapidly in his direction.

Assuming Obama wins New Hampshire, the next showdown will be South Carolina. Polls done in mid-December already pointed to a deadheat, seems fairly intuitive that any polling done in the last few days would show Obama ahead. When you factor in Edwards, who won South Carolina in 2004, the future could hold another embarrassing 3rd place finish for Clinton.

This reality begs the question- how can Clinton expect to win on Super Tuesday, when she will have lost the first three contests? Clinton has always held a size able lead in the national polls, which suggests a chance in the national primary. However, I predict that national advantage completely evaporates by the time South Carolina decides.

With all the focus on individual states, there haven't been many national polls in the last few weeks. One exception is Rasmussen, which runs a continuous national tracking poll. That poll had Clinton ahead by 19% over Obama, one week ago. Yesterday's offering had the lead virtually cut in half, Clinton's advantage down to 11%. This number will continue to narrow as Obama overcomes the "electability" hesitation. Winning breeds viability, Clinton's supposed national appeal will be nullified by the time South Carolina weighs in.

The set up seems to be as follows. Obama heads into Super Tuesday with 3 victories, a wind of momentum at his back. Clinton, the former frontrunner, shut out, desperately looking for a firewall. If you just focus on the optics of that scenario, who would you rather be?

UPDATE

I mentioned the Rasmussen national tracking poll, that showed Obama narrowing the gap with Clinton. Today, the gap shows a large shift, with Obama now trailing by a mere 4% (11% yesterday).

Pulling Away?

There was an interesting survey done, of all the polling outfits, to see what people in the industry consider the most reliable. Near the top of the list for perceived reliablity in New Hampshire, the CNN/WMUR/UNH poll. Yesterday, this poll had Obama and Clinton tied at 33%, Edwards a solid 20%, one of the few polls that still showed a deadheat (although the trends favored Obama).

Tonight's release, done on Saturday and Sunday, provides a massive swing towards Obama:

a new CNN/WMUR poll out Sunday afternoon suggests that Sen. Barack Obama of Illinois has opened up a double digit advantage over New York Sen. Hillary Clinton in the race for the Democratic presidential nomination.

In the survey, conducted by the University of New Hampshire on Saturday and early Sunday, 39 percent of likely Granite State Democratic primary voters back Obama as the party’s nominee — that’s ten points ahead of Clinton’s 29 percent. Obama is up six points and Clinton down four points from our survey conducted on Friday and early Saturday.

Former Sen. John Edwards of North Carolina is at 16 percent in the new survey, down four points from Saturday. Gov. Bill Richardson of New Mexico is in fourth place, with the support of 7 percent of likely New Hampshire Democratic primary voters, with Rep. Dennis Kucinich of Ohio at 2 percent.

The poll strongly suggests an Obama surge in New Hampshire. Obama’s gaining about three points a day, at the expense of both Clinton and Edwards. Obama’s lead has now hit double digits (10 points) going into the home stretch. It’s ‘the Big Mo’!” says CNN Senior Political Analyst Bill Schneider.

"The Iowa caucus results have convinced growing numbers of Granite State voters that Obama can really go all the way. In December, 45 percent thought Clinton had the best chance of beating the GOP nominee. But in Saturday's poll Clinton and Obama were tied on that measure and now Obama has a 42 percent to 31 percent edge over Clinton on electability," says CNN Polling Director Keating Holland.

From a deadheat, to a full 10 point lead, represents seismic movement for Obama.

On the Republican front, today's numbers are essentially unchanged from yesterday's, with McCain holding on to a 6% lead. What is changing, independent voters are now evenly split between voting in the Republican and Democratic primaries. Just last week, there was 60/40 split favoring the Democratic primary. Good news for McCain, but also indicative of Obama's growing support within the Democratic base.

Candidates Meet

One of the more fascinating parts of last night's debate, was when all the candidates, from both parties, meet on stage. Check out McCain and Edwards (50 seconds), who greet like old college roommates.

McCain, Obama Peaking When It Counts

The American Presidential race is bringing a flurry of polls, stepping back, you see common threads developing in both parties.

For the Republicans, McCain seems to be cresting at just the right time. Last night's pivotal debate turned into a Romney bashfest, as all the other candidates pounced on his uneven record and penchant for flip flops. That debate may be McCain's last hurdle, and victory now looks within reach. The poll orgy:

NBC:

McCain 32%
Romney 24%

CNN

McCain 33%
Romney 27%

Concord Monitor

McCain 35%
Romney 29%

Zogby

Romney 32%
McCain 31%

ARG

McCain 39%
Romney 25%

Rasmussen

McCain 31%
Romney 26%

Suffolk Uni

Romney 30%
McCain 27%

Looking at the internals for both the CNN and NBC polls, McCain is extremely well liked, even amongst Democratic voters. If you average out all the polling, McCain is +5%, with a clear wind at his back.

On a side note, it was fascinating to watch McCain bring up global warming in a passionate way, considering the issue doesn't even register with Republicans, in fact it could alienate some. I was also struck with the genuine affection afforded McCain from all the Democrats, when all the candidates from both parties took the stage. Edwards and McCain actually embraced, the two have worked together in the past, most notably on the patient bill of rights legislation.

On the Democratic front, there isn't a poll out that doesn't show Obama moving up, it is the degree that is still an issue. Some polls this morning:

NBC:

Obama 33%
Clinton 31%
Edwards 17%

CNN:

Obama 33%
Clinton 33%
Edwards 20%

Concord Monitor

Obama 34%
Clinton 33%
Edwards 23%

ARG

Obama 38%
Clinton 26%
Edwards 20%

Rasmussen

Obama 37%
Clinton 27%
Edwards 19%

Suff

Clinton 35%
Obama 33%
Edwards 17%

Zogby

Clinton 31%
Obama 30%
Edwards 20%

Of note, both the Zogby and Suffolk rolling average polls have a closing gap. Suffolk had Clinton up 7% just yesterday, which suggests large movement for Obama in the last day of the poll. Zogby also had a 4% gap yesterday, down to 1% today. An average of all the polling, shows Obama +3% with some momentum still filtering through. Interestingly, Obama enjoys the same universal appeal that McCain does, the polls show him quite attractive to independents and Republicans have a favorable opinion.

I thought Obama did quite well last night. Clearly, his handlers focused on the need to look substantive, Obama was very detailed and achieved his goal of putting flesh on the rhetoric. Edwards also performed well, very passionate. Clinton did well, but there were hints of desperation and anger- she probably needed to do more.

This morning, former candidate Bill Bradley will endorse Obama:

"Barack Obama is building a broad new coalition that brings together Democrats, independents and Republicans by once again making idealism a central focus of our politics," Bradley said in a release scheduled to be released on Sunday.

"Because of his enormous appeal to Americans of all ages and backgrounds, Obama is the candidate best positioned to win in November. ... His movement for change could create a new era of American politics _ truly a new American story."

The significance of Bradley, who ran well in New Hampshire in 2000, isn't huge, but the fact that he plans to campaign with Obama tomorrow guarantees more positive press, on the eve of the primaries.

Obama Surging

If anyone doubted the Obama bounce coming out of Iowa, two offerings today should offer confirmation. First, the American Research Group rolling poll, which shows a dramatic change:

Obama 38%
Clinton 26%
Edwards 20%

Barack Obama leads John Edwards among men 42% to 21%, with 19% for Hillary Clinton. Among women, Obama leads Clinton 35% to 31%, with 20% for Edwards. Clinton leads Obama among Democrats 34% to 32%, while Obama leads Edwards among undeclared voters (independents) 49% to 21%.

The ARG poll, just two days ago had Clinton up 4%. This seismic shift amounts to a full 16% swing for Obama, a gigantic bounce coming out of Iowa.

Earlier today, Rasmussen released its first post-Iowa poll, with similar evidence of a massive swing towards Obama:

Barack Obama has taken a huge lead in the first pure post-Iowa poll of New Hampshire. Rasmussen gives Obama 37%, Hillary Clinton 27%, John Edwards 19%, and Bill Richardson 8%. Rasmussen's last poll from two weeks ago had Clinton at 31%, Obama 28%, Edwards 18%, and Richardson 6%.

The poll was conducted on Friday, a one-day poll with the margin of error at ±4.5% — meaning that Obama's ten-point lead is just outside the margin. Also, Obama leads Hillary by 5 points among core Democrats, and by 16 points among independents. Indies are expected to make up 40% of the Dem primary electorate, according to the survey.

Iowa is irrelevant? Apparently, not this year.

UPDATE

Two more polls out, that show the same trends, although a much tighter race. The CNN/WMUR poll:

Senators Hillary Clinton of New York and Barack Obama of Illinois all tied up, with each grabbing the support of 33 percent of likely Democratic primary voters in the Granite State.

Former Senator John Edwards of North Carolina is in third place with 20 percent.

“Both Obama and Edwards appear to have benefited form the Iowa caucuses. Each picked up 3 points in New Hampshire. Clinton lost one point, since our last poll taken before the caucuses,” says CNN Senior Political Analyst Bill Schneider.

The new CNN/WMUR survey was conducted Friday and Saturday, after the Iowa caucuses.

The biggest shift appears to be electability. 36 percent of likely Democratic New Hampshire primary voters now think Clinton has the best chance of beating the Republican presidential nominee. That’s down nine points from our last Granite State survey, which was conducted December 27-30.

Obama is just behind Clinton when it comes electability, at 35 percent, a virtual tie. Obama gained 13 points up since our pre-caucus poll.

“Obama got something else out of winning Iowa: a big boost in his perceived electability. A week ago, Clinton led Obama by better than two to one when New Hampshire Democrats were asked which candidate has the best chance of beating the Republican in November. Obama’s victory in an overwhelmingly white state may have resolved some doubts about an African-American candidate’s electability,” says Schneider.

For context, the last CNN poll had Clinton +4%, so again here we see a bounce, although less pronounced. However, those electability numbers are a real plus for Obama and could pay dividends at the polls. Also, it looks like Edwards is still polling quite well, all the findings show his support strong.

Another poll, this one from the Concord Monitor, which shows a statistical tie:

Among likely Democratic primary voters, Barack Obama was the choice of 34 percent of those surveyed and Hillary Clinton was the choice of 33 percent, suggesting the race is a virtual dead heat. John Edwards was next at 23 percent, followed by Bill Richardson at 4 percent and Dennis Kucinich at 3 percent.

Research 2000 surveyed 400 likely Republican and 400 likely Democratic primary voters yesterday and today. The margin of error for each sample is plus or minus 5 percentage points.

While there seems to be some difference will the four polls today, it is noteworthy that none of them show Clinton ahead and all suggest Obama has the momentum. If you average out all the post-Iowa results you get Obama +5.75%.

Bits And Bites

A few items that caught my eye this morning regarding the Presidential races. If there is one character running that is a real turnoff, it's slick Mitt Romney. I've rarely seen a politician pander and morph to such a great degree, the guy is like a soulless chameleon, who takes shape, depending on the audience. Romney is unleashing his attacks on McCain, claiming that he is now the agent of change, the outsider, while McCain represents Washington, the status quo:

"There’s no way that Senator McCain is going to be able to come to New Hampshire and say that he’s the candidate that represents change -- that he’ll change Washington. He is Washington,” Mr. Romney said while speaking to reporters on Friday.

Another flip-flop, from the master of inconsistency:

In response to Romney's claim that there's "no way" McCain could present himself as the candidate of "change," the McCain campaign dug up an absolute gem that they're now circulating among reporters.

Camp McCain found a quote from 2002, when Romney was running for governor of Massachusetts, in which Romney said precisely the opposite thing about McCain -- that he has always represented change:

"One of the reasons the people of America honor Senator McCain and why I'm so proud to have him standing with me today is that he has brought American values to the debate on the issues we care about.
He has always stood for reform and change."

Ouch.

An American Research poll, released last night, has McCain at 35%, Romney at 25%. A note of caution, this is the same outfit that had Clinton with a good lead heading into the Iowa Caucus. Zogby has McCain leading by 2%, down from 4% the day prior. The Suffolk poll still shows Romney with a 4% lead. Tonight's debate on ABC will be real key. Rumor has it that McCain and Huckabee have a non-aggression pact, look for the Huckster to take on Romney tonight.

On the Democratic side, Obama is drawing overflow crowds, while Clinton actually had a few empty seats at one of her events yesterday. Last night, there was a New Hampshire Democratic dinner, which might speak to where the enthusiasm lies:

The aftermath of the Iowa earthquake wasn't pretty for Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton, D-N.Y. The takeaway from the "100 Club" dinner Friday night in Milford, N.H., is simple enough to give Sen. Barack Obama, D-Ill., another round in the scorecard: Clinton was booed, while Obama's supporters were so energetic that organizers were worried about the security situation.

"Three thousand people packed the auditorium and it seems like there are many more Obama supporters than Clinton supporters," ABC's Eloise Harper and Sunlen Miller report.

"It was not Clinton's best performance."

And this was not the headline she wanted out of her first post-Iowa day: "Hillary Booed at NH Democratic Party Dinner." "When Obama, the dinner's last speaker, took the stage the crowd surged forward chanting 'O-bam-a' and 'Fired Up, Ready to Go!' " Time's Jay Newton-Small reports.


"So many people pressed toward the stage that an announcer asked people to 'please take their seats for safety concerns.' By comparison Hillary was twice booed."

Polls show Obama closing, the rolling averages should start to become indicative tomorrow. Edwards support might be eroding, which could be a deciding factor.

Turnout will be critical, and conventional wisdom assumes a large vote will favor Obama. With that in mind, the predictions of a record turnout are noteworthy:

Secretary of State Bill Gardner is predicting a record half million voters will turn out for Tuesday's presidential primary.

Gardner is predicting 260,000 residents will vote in the Democratic primary and 240,000 will vote in the Republican primary.

He predicts that 150,000 undeclared voters -- who can choose which primary to vote in -- will cast votes. Of those, he thinks 90,000 will choose to vote in the Democratic primary and 60,000 in the Republican.

He predicts that 50,000 New Hampshire residents will register to vote on election day.

The previous record of 396,000 voters was set in the 2000 primary.

Interesting to see how Obama performs in tonight's debate, and whether or not Clinton goes after him in a more direct way.

Found this picture, the one on the left is people waiting for an Obama rally, estimated at a staggering 4000 people:



Apparently, people are also being turned away from McCain's rallies, due to potential fire hazards. These little anecedotes are powerful indicators of who has the mo.

JV, of TPM, offers the following at an Obama rally:

I didn't get there until just before 10, and the place was jammed. I had to park in a church lot a half mile away. This is a new High School, with what must be the largest gym in the state. It was full to overflowing. The picture attached was the line waiting to get in a little after 10. The line extends as far back in the other direction too. Shortly after I took this photo, the line stopped for several minutes. When it started moving again, it was to let us into the "secondary gym" (which is about as large as most high school primary gyms) and they filled that one too. So we didn't get to see Obama, but we did get to hear him. When he finished, he briefly popped into our room to thank us for coming out. (video below) I've lived in NH for 27 years now. I've never seen a candidate pull crowds anything like this.

Democratic Race Over?

The Iowa Caucus results are so telling, it may not be pre-mature to say the Democratic race for President is all but over. An impressive win by an measure, followed up by a speech that is already being framed as "one for the ages", Obama is now set to ride a wave that likely makes him unstoppable.

Edwards will move forward, but his strategy always demanded a Iowa victory, anything less and his lack of resources and momentum would be his undoing. The race is now basically a Clinton/Obama duel, but in reality Obama has all the intangibles on his side and a victory in New Hampshire would effectively end the race.

The latest polling in New Hampshire, done prior to the Iowa Caucuses have already shown a tightening, with Obama within striking distance of Clinton. Given the magnitude of Obama's victory in Iowa, his ability to appeal to independents, his ability to energize the casual voter, we should expect a SIZEABLE jump in his New Hampshire numbers, something in the order of 10% or more.

What happened last night was the birth of a phenomenon, in many respects Obama has stolen the "change" mantle, which is the key for Democrats. How Clinton finds an effective voice in this environment is hard to imagine, possible Obama mis-steps aside (Saturday debates). With the condensed timeframe, only five days between Iowa and New Hampshire, momentum is more important than ever, and Obama now blows into the State like a comet.

Anything can still happen, but something profound was unleashed last night in Iowa, something which to my mind appears unstoppable.

Conservatives Show Little Foresight

First, you hand out billions in tax cuts, lauding Canada's financial circumstance, then a mere six weeks later you start sounding the alarm bells and warning of economic uncertainty that demands belt tightening. Welcome to the bizarre world of Conservative tax policy, which seems to lack any consistency, not to mention very poor political strategy.

Terence Corcoran article today, which argues that the Tories have "lost the tax edge":

The Prime Minister's strategists appear to have stumbled on a novel election strategy and slogan: "Tory Times are Tough." In year-end interviews, both Stephen Harper and his Finance Minister, Jim Flaherty, took what looked like unseemly delight in highlighting economic uncertainty. The United States is in a slump, said Mr. Harper, and it will spill over into Canada. That means fiscal tightness in Canada, a stand-pat fiscal stance, and no room for new tax cuts. Adding to the glooming of the Canadian economy, Mr. Harper warned that the Conservative climate-change measures will begin to "bite," further slowing growth.

Some taxes were cut. As promised, the GST was reduced to 5% this week, and a few other tax measures were rolled out in Mr. Flaherty's last fiscal statement. But now we learn there's nothing more to come, news the government seemed all too keen to deliver.

Flashback to the mini-budget, where Flaherty decided to introduce tax cuts straight away, instead of waiting for next year's budget. A curious decision, because there was little to suggest the Liberals were ready to fight an election over the mini-budget. If you want to maximize the political benefits of tax cuts, it seems pretty basic that you unveil the goodies just prior to an election. Instead, Flaherty delivers tax relief, debatable as it may be, in an environment that generated little momentum, and even worse, leaves little room to move when it may matter most.

The more confusing part, the Conservatives deliver the mini-budget which conveyed a very optimistic message, and then almost immediately the tone changes to negativity, which became quite clear in the year end Prime Minister interviews. All of sudden, the government is warning of lightening's, uncertainty, diminishing revenues, a pessimistic forecast. How do you reconcile this stance with the spirit of the mini-budget? Did things change so fundamentally in a matter of weeks? Would Harper and Flaherty be forced to offer negativity, if they hadn't sold the farm in the mini-budget? In many respects, the government actually set the stage for the negativity we see know, through their earlier actions.

Clearly, the future economic situation was relatively the same at the end of October as it was prior to Christmas. Why the Conservatives would rush all these tax cuts, make many retroactive, with full knowledge that it would handicap any further movement in 2008 is politically suspect. Instead of presenting a feel good budget, the government is now faced with arguing negativity to justify the tightening financial picture. I'm not sure anyone could argue that the Conservatives have handled the taxcut issue very well, in a bizarre way they are now on the defensive. Instead of room, we now are faced with doom and gloom, and most of it comes as a result of the government's own decisions. Strange.

Pass The Popcorn

The American race for President is set to begin tomorrow night in Iowa, with fascinating battles in both the Democratic and Republican fields. Lurking in the background, next week's pivotal primary in New Hampshire, which also has a "too close to call" flavor.

On the Democratic side, the Iowa polls show a tight three-way race, although the key Des Moines Register poll gives Obama a slight lead. The polls suggests a massive turnout, including 40% independents which are moving heavily for Obama. The Edwards and Clinton campaigns have both released campaign memos challenging the polls assertions, because the turnout levels would be unprecedented for the usual limited particpation in the caucuses.

The Iowa Caucus is all about organization, especially for the Democrats, where there is plenty of bartering and side deals with less viable candidates. That said, Edwards is very well placed to stage a mini-upset because his campaign relies heavily on seasoned caucus goers, whereas someone like Obama is counting on first-time participants who don't have a history of actually showing up. Edwards has pretty much lived in Iowa for the last four years, and it wouldn't surprise me in the least if he pulls this out. The really intriguing part, Edwards is polling much better in New Hampshire now(averaging 18%) compared with his 2004 run, so if he were to get the traditional Iowa bounce he could actually be a player in the first primary.

If Obama wins Iowa, he is in great shape to win New Hampshire. Some polls already have him neck and neck in New Hampshire, a victory in Iowa would easily give him the needed momentum. The same scenario could play out if Clinton wins, so Iowa would appear to be almost make or break for the Democratic field.

On the Republican side, Huckabee may have peaked too early, as his lead over Romney in Iowa has eroded. There is now only one poll that gives Huckabee the lead, outside of the margin of error, and that narrowing tends to confirm the combination of Huckabee mis-steps and Romney's negative ad assault. Romney is outspending Huckabee 10-1 in Iowa, using his personal fortune to try and buy the win, but all the polls show voters aren't particularly inspired by his rhetoric. If I had to guess, Romney might get the edge, because he has a very formidable organization, whereas Huckabee is relying on church groups and such to get out the vote. However, just like the Democrats, way too close to make a solid prediction.

If there is one candidate hoping for a Huckabee win, clearly it is John McCain. Should Huckabee take out Romney in Iowa, I don't see any scenario where Romney manages to win in New Hampshire. McCain is already surging in New Hampshire, with the polls showing McCain tied or ahead. Huckabee has no chance in New Hampshire, Guiliani has basically abandoned the state, in what amounts to one of the biggest political blunders I can remember, so McCain will easily ride to victory should Romney stutter in Iowa.

The other scenario, a Romney win in Iowa makes for a far more interesting race in New Hampshire. Romney may get a bounce out of Iowa, although I wouldn't expect it to be as big as tradition suggests, primarily because every newspaper feeding New Hampshire is decidedly anti-Romney, very much on side with McCain (McCain has received every single endorsement, while Romney has actually received two anti-endorsements). Still, Romney will have a very good chance should he win in Iowa.

The wildcard, where does McCain finish in Iowa? McCain basically left Iowa to focus on New Hampshire, so the expectations are quite low. However, the polls have shown McCain rising in Iowa, with a respectable third a very real possibility. This fact might explain why McCain is back in Iowa today and tomorrow, hoping that even if Romney wins, he can claim some of the spotlight with a decent finish.

The big unknown heading out of Iowa will be the debates scheduled for this weekend in New Hampshire. How the candidates perform in these debates might be the determining factor for both the Republicans and Democrats. Whatever happens, one thing is for sure, the next few days are setting up to be a political junkies wet dream :)

Why I Haven't Blogged

I had to have my appendix removed, after a few days in the hospital I'm back home. Apparently, the appendix is a completely useless organ. Some theories suggest the appendix was important, earlier in our evolution, during the neanderthal age. This might explain why removal of the appendix can be far more serious for some people.

Leading By Example

You can offer all the excuses you like, but that doesn't distract from a simple fact- if you want others to follow, you have to lead by example. The government is sending a clear message to Canadians, we are not serious about reducing greenhouse gases:

Led by the new gas-guzzling black SUVs in Prime Minister Stephen Harper's motorcade, the federal government nearly doubled the amount it spent on sport-utility vehicles during the first full year of the Conservative government.

Documents show that government spending on SUVs purchased through Public Works and Government Services Canada reached more than $31 million in 2006-07.

Even as the government offers rebates to encourage Canadians to drive more fuel-efficient cars, Public Works ordered 844 new sport-utilities last year, a large leap from the 500 purchased the year before and the 366 in 2004-05, the last full fiscal year under a Liberal government.

Public works spokesperson Lucie Brosseau attempts to put lipstick on the pig:

She said more than one-third of the SUVs purchased had gas-electric hybrid engines, which cost more, but offer improved fuel efficiency over conventional SUVs. The department now purchases only "greener" passenger vehicles and mini-vans, except for law enforcement or security uses, Ms. Brosseau said.

One-third? Why not every vehicle, was there a study that showed hybrid's don't perform well during border patrols? In reality, there is no logical reason to explain why the government has not only failed to go "green', but has more than doubled its fleet of gas guzzlers. Seems to me, if you are "modernizing" the fleet, you should use the latest technology. In other words, a perfect opportunity to purchase more fuel-efficent vehicles and send a clear message to Canadians.

In the grand scheme, a few government vehicles are a miniscule part of the equation. However, in terms of symbolism and messaging, the government's apparent lack of commitment contradicts much of the rhetoric (how surprising). Flaherty tells us to buy fuel efficient cars, offers rebates, while the government simultaneously moves in the other direction, puking out carbon at an unprecedented rate. And, these people wonder why nobody buys their commitment to dealing with climate change.