Post-debate boost seen for Clinton in Rasmussen tracking poll

Attention fabled Hillary lurkers!

Despite the recent Iowa poll which showed an uptick for Obama, it appears that Clinton's (highly-watched) debate performance has caused the national numbers to shift in her favor, according to today's Rasmussen daily tracking poll.

According to the poll, which was conducted from the four-day period immediately following last Thursday's debate, Clinton leads Obama 43% to 20%, with Edwards at 14%. This is a notable difference from the previous day's result of C 41% O 24% E 14%.

A 6 point swing in Hillary's favor in one day in a rolling average tracking poll is a rather sharp change. I'm not a math expert, but it looks to me like Obama's best day just rolled off the four-day average we are seeing. That day looks to be the day of the debate or the day which followed. This is one of the first results I've seen which seems to indicate that Clinton's debate performance did in fact impress democratic voters.

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/...

But I could be wrong. What do you think?

•  just passing it along...

  by ScanDroid on Tue Nov 20, 2007 at 11:57:20 AM PDT

  •  Thanks...

    So I guess for all of us who watched last Thursday's debate, we saw Hillary shine. No matter what crap gets thrown at her, she'll do fine. She has the experience to show us what she's really about. :-)

    by atdnext on Tue Nov 20, 2007 at 12:07:57 PM PDT

  •  So, it's over? It will be Hillary vs the

    vast right wing in Nov. 08?

    I certainly hope that both sides will stay positive during the campaign and focus on how the country can unite to solve our many big problems.

    by wag z dog on Tue Nov 20, 2007 at 01:48:17 PM PDT

•  National numbers

  I don't believe national numbers until after the first couple of states.  If a big name goes down hard in Iowa or NH, the whole narrative changes and opinions shift.

  I do think HRC has been doing enough to keep the national numbers rising.  She hasn't screwed up and every minute she's ahead in the national polls she'll get further ahead in the national polls as people like to back the winner.

  I don't know that she can get far enough ahead to squash Obama or even Edwards if either of them win Iowa.  If she comes in third in either Iowa (possible) or NH (unlikely), it gets even more interesting and you'll see the national numbers swing wildly.

  by nightsweat on Tue Nov 20, 2007 at 12:00:44 PM PDT

  •  your signature says it all (n/t)

    by oscarfrye on Tue Nov 20, 2007 at 12:18:17 PM PDT

•  the national polls are a direct result of the

  Clinton news Network........another NH poll shows Hillary pluging losing 9 points off her lead

  http://marcambinder.theatlantic.com/
  That WMUR poll....
  20 Nov 2007 02:34 pm

  Here it is:

  HRC: 36% (was 43)
  Obama: 22% (was 20)
  Edwards 13% (was 12)
  Richardson 12% (was 6)

  That's a margin drop from 23 to 14 points for Clinton....

  No appreciable gains for any candidate but Bill Richardson....

  by nevadadem on Tue Nov 20, 2007 at 12:01:32 PM PDT

  •  Honestly, you should be ashamed of yourself

    coming on this site and trotting out that age-old Republican canard "Clinton News Network."

    Kossacks are now routinely trollrated for even slight disparagement of the hero Edwards. And you feel free to come on here with that Freeper lingo? Embarrassing, both for you and for the site. I wish kos weren't so busy lining up outside gigs so he could see what's become of the place.

    by Jim J on Tue Nov 20, 2007 at 12:26:56 PM PDT

    •  Jim-

      You think this is bad?  Wait until she is the nominee and then President.  There will be a never ending steam of "i told you so" diaries everytime she does something that doesn't tickle their bottoms.

      by zed on Tue Nov 20, 2007 at 01:18:09 PM PDT

      •  In which year will Hillary be the Dem Nominee?

        2016?

        Good luck with that.

        She's toast.

        by joemcginnissjr on Tue Nov 20, 2007 at 01:59:33 PM PDT

        •  Ooooh, snap!

          You got us with that one...meh

          by jarhead5536 on Tue Nov 20, 2007 at 02:04:59 PM PDT

        •  in what universe...

          ...does a 23-pt lead in the polls = "toast"?

          by ScanDroid on Tue Nov 20, 2007 at 02:09:10 PM PDT

          •  Cling to those inflated, irrelevant numbers

            Those will be the last to fall. But fall they will.

            She's so not winning this race, dudes. Look at her today -- "throwing mud" at Obama about "experience."

            Typically hypocritical of Hillary and Camp Clinton. America's so over their act. She'll be a fine majority leader though -- will help get a lot of Obama's agenda enacted.

            by joemcginnissjr on Tue Nov 20, 2007 at 02:21:13 PM PDT

•  This is weak.

  The fluctuations you describe have been more closely correlated with my paydays and the lunar cycle than with anything else.  This goes all the way back to June.

  by chicago jeff on Tue Nov 20, 2007 at 12:03:57 PM PDT

•  Clinton's getting a little nasty now too.....

  not the sign of a confident frontrunner...http://www.politico.com/blogs/bensmith/
  Now voters will judge whether living in a foreign country at the age of 10 prepares one to face the big, complex international challenges the next President will face. I think we need a President with more experience than that. Someone the rest of the world knows, looks up to, and has confidence in. I don’t think this is the time for on the job training on our economy or on foreign policy.

  ..

  by nevadadem on Tue Nov 20, 2007 at 12:09:10 PM PDT

  •  Obama's dredging up the worst mud

    by BoringDem on Tue Nov 20, 2007 at 12:15:18 PM PDT

  •  Here's how Obama should respond!

    Obama should say:

    I oticed during the past few days , Hillary has bee obsses with me and indirectly talking about me on her stump speech.....I have no problem with her challenging mme on whatever issue , but when i challenged her , she claimed that i was throwing bud.

    This is the problem with Hillary , if she says anything about you , it is fair game , but the instant you start challenging her on her many flip flops , she claims you must be throwing mud...How can i reasonate with someone like that?

    I guess i could claim she's throwing mud at me but i'm not like that and im willing to talk about whatever bothers her and we can have a debate about experience and everything.

    by BlueStateLiberal on Tue Nov 20, 2007 at 12:40:56 PM PDT

•  logical difference from yesterday's AP poll

  I would guess that Obama got a bounce in Iowa from his superb speech at the Iowa J-J dinner. Probably a greater percentage of voters in Iowa saw that speech. On the other hand, lots of viewers nationwide saw the last debate, and Obama's performance wasn't exactly remarkable.

  by jiml on Tue Nov 20, 2007 at 12:12:47 PM PDT

  •  and which is more important right now?

    ?

    by nevadadem on Tue Nov 20, 2007 at 12:14:23 PM PDT

    •  good question

      My guess is that considering HRC's wide nationwide lead, she probably would have preferred an immediate positive impact on the Iowa voters. But it could be argued either way.

      by jiml on Tue Nov 20, 2007 at 12:43:30 PM PDT

      •  Iowans

        Iowans watch TV and saw the debate like everyone else. Anything Hillary does to help herself on the national scene is going to help in Iowa as well.

        by NegSpin on Tue Nov 20, 2007 at 01:12:08 PM PDT

        •  but my point was

          ...that unlike most of the rest of the country, they were also likely to have watched the J-J dinner. So that would have had more of an impact in Iowa.

          by jiml on Tue Nov 20, 2007 at 02:51:08 PM PDT

•  The Rasmussen daily tracker...

  cannot be viewed as a legitimate statistical measure of debate performance.

  by Kimball on Tue Nov 20, 2007 at 12:18:50 PM PDT

•  Actually Clinton's numbers are down on Ramussen

  If you average Clinton and Obama's Ramussen numbers for the 5 days before last Thursday's debate, with her numbers for the five days after Thursday's debate, you get the following result:

  FIVE DAY AVERAGE BEFORE THE DEBATE: Clinton 42.2%, Obama 20%. Difference of 22.2%

  FIVE DAY AVERAGE AFTER THE DEBATE: Clinton 41.6%, Obama 24%. Difference of 17.6%

  In other words, when you look at all the daily polls Ramussen has done since the debate, Obama has actually cut Clinton's lead by one fifth.

  Now you can always cherry-pick a single day like today to focus on to argue Clinton got a bounce; when a poll is taken every day you're bound to find outliers to support any theory-but it's much wiser and much more objective to average the totality of available data.

  by greenboy on Tue Nov 20, 2007 at 12:24:27 PM PDT

  •  actually...

    each day of the poll is a 4-day average already. so averaging 5 of these amounts to an 8-day averaging of averages. or something. better to just look at trends in the rolling daily averages.

    by ScanDroid on Tue Nov 20, 2007 at 12:32:26 PM PDT

    •  The point is averaging several polls

      gives more a reliable result than a single poll because it has a larger sample, and thus a small MoE.

      by greenboy on Tue Nov 20, 2007 at 12:41:43 PM PDT

    •  Bottom line

      It's better to be ahead than behind.

      by NegSpin on Tue Nov 20, 2007 at 01:13:15 PM PDT

•  Not to take the air out of your balloon but

  if there is a one day change that significant, most statisticians will tell you this is more likely to simply be attributed to sampling error. This is especially true with daily sampling. This is why trends are more important than any one day.

  by smartdemmg on Tue Nov 20, 2007 at 12:39:44 PM PDT

•  A pox on ALL navel-gazing poll diaries. n/t

  by philimus on Tue Nov 20, 2007 at 01:42:55 PM PDT

•  mmmm...Nothing beats the smell of desperation in

  the morning!

  panic runs deep in Hillaryland

  A new day is dawning and the queen and her lackeys are grasping at straws.

  She's becoming increasingly agitated and slinging mud -- which is hypocrital of her following the last debate -- but when is she not?

  Turning the page for all of us!

  Obama 08!

  by joemcginnissjr on Tue Nov 20, 2007 at 01:57:46 PM PDT