We've been debating the "Iowa bounce" for weeks. Was it real? A media fabrication? Did it apply given the changing face of political coverage?
Well, we can finally test our theories against events on the ground, and it seems that not only is the Iowa bounce real, but it takes effect before the first vote is even cast.
Iowa is a frenzy of media activity, with media, old and new, showering the state with 24/7 attention. Clark (and to a far lesser extent, Lieberman), originally took advantage of Iowa by hogging New Hampshire all to themselves. Clark, in particular, shot ahead given the lack of competition. On January 4, Clark had 12 points in the ARG tracking point. Over the following ten days, Clark rose as high as 24 percent, within shouting distance of Dean.
Meanwhile, Kerry was languishing, dropping from 14 percent to as low as 10 in the face of Clark's surge.
But then something happened -- everyone turned to Iowa. And as Kerry surged in Iowa, his numbers in New Hampshire turned around. From that low of 10 percent he has now reached 19 percent. And Clark has dropped back down to 20 percent. This, in a state that Clark has effectively owned for two weeks.
Further evidence? Let's look at Rasmussen's national tracking poll.
1/11 1/12 1/13 1/14 1/15 1/16 1/17 1/18 1/19
Dean 24 21 22 21 21 22 22 24 24
Clark 16 17 18 19 19 18 17 16 14
Kerry 8 8 8 9 9 9 10 11 11
The pattern is similar. A Clark surge as he took the limelight, and a subsequent drop (and Kerry rise) as Iowa took center stage. Will this pattern hold post-Iowa? I can't imagine it won't.
Had Clark competed in Iowa, I bet Edward's surprising last-minute surge would've been Clark's. And the momentum of a surprise finish would've been invaluable heading into New Hampshire and the Feb 3 states.