Edwards, Clinton Lead In New Zogby Iowa Poll

Crossposted to BlueSunbelt.Com the Southern netroots site

Former Sen. John Edwards and Sen. Hillary Clinton are in a statistical tie in Iowa in the latest Zogby poll released today. Clinton has gained 11 points in Iowa since the last Zogby poll and Obama has gained 6 points. Edwards has remained steady at 27%.

http://bluesunbelt.com/...

John Edwards 27%
Hillary Clinton 25%
Barack Obama 23%
Joe Biden 3%
Bill Richardson 3%
Dennis Kucinich 1%
Christopher Dodd 1%
Not Sure 13%

•  +/-

  by Rob on Tue Mar 27, 2007 at 01:52:30 PM PDT

  •  I thought

    this is sort of interesting, Edwards leading among self-identified progressives and moderates while Obama leading among self-identified liberals.

    Edwards appears to be the darling of both the very liberal and the moderates, while Obama leads among liberals. Edward wins 33% support among those who describe themselves as “progressives,” compared to 20% for Obama and 19% for Clinton.

    Among liberals, Obama leads with 33%, compared to 23% for Clinton and 21% for Edwards. Among self–described moderates, Edwards leads with 35%, compared to 23% for Clinton and 19% for Obama.

    by david mizner on Tue Mar 27, 2007 at 02:11:04 PM PDT

    •  link:

      here, sorry.

      by david mizner on Tue Mar 27, 2007 at 02:12:38 PM PDT

    •  HIllary

      She is the dinosours in the new face line up. Her politics specially.

      by fugue on Tue Mar 27, 2007 at 02:21:00 PM PDT

  •  Dishonest title, Rob

    The top three are all within the MOE.

    by PsiFighter37 on Tue Mar 27, 2007 at 02:31:15 PM PDT

•  Three way race?

  Its on man!

  

  by lovingj on Tue Mar 27, 2007 at 01:56:30 PM PDT

•  interesting

  This one is going to be a dog fight to the end.

  by Nathan in MN on Tue Mar 27, 2007 at 01:57:53 PM PDT

  •  or at least until Feb. 5

    by HugoDog on Tue Mar 27, 2007 at 02:04:28 PM PDT

    •  I meant Iowa

      Sorry, I meant Iowa is going to be a dog fight.  I have a feeling that the actual race isn't going to last long, just like in '04.  

      by Nathan in MN on Tue Mar 27, 2007 at 02:17:49 PM PDT

•  If the MoE is 4.5

  Isn't that a 3 way tie?

  Hey, Obama is surging in Iowa!  Along with Clinton!  Edwards is flat!

  Or whatever.  The poll analysis around here is getting a bit silly.  How about...it's a close race that's going down to the wire...10 months from now.  Chill out people.

  by rashomon on Tue Mar 27, 2007 at 01:57:57 PM PDT

  •  Rashomon, I see it the same.

    It's a three-way tie; the title of this post is inaccurate.

    by Adam B on Tue Mar 27, 2007 at 01:58:42 PM PDT

    •  Gains...

      Clinton gained twice as much as Obama so I would not call it a three way tie.

      by Rob on Tue Mar 27, 2007 at 02:01:32 PM PDT

      •  Races aren't won on "gains"

        They're won based on the end result.  "Clinton's Gains Lead To Three-Way Tie In Iowa" might be more accurate.

        by Adam B on Tue Mar 27, 2007 at 02:04:20 PM PDT

      •  I'm just going off

        the margin of error...a 5 point spread between all candidates with a 4.5 point MoE?  That's a statistical tie.

        by rashomon on Tue Mar 27, 2007 at 02:04:22 PM PDT

  •  There's still a war in Iraq, after all. eom

    by Geekesque on Tue Mar 27, 2007 at 01:58:53 PM PDT

  •  Could be...

    It could end up a three way race in Iowa if Obama gains a few more points.

    by Rob on Tue Mar 27, 2007 at 01:59:39 PM PDT

  •  asdf

    that would give some exposure to Obama and we can't have that!

    by bsmcneil on Tue Mar 27, 2007 at 02:11:03 PM PDT

•  Looks like a three-person

  race that's all deadlocked.

  Richardson not doing so hot here.

  by Geekesque on Tue Mar 27, 2007 at 01:58:22 PM PDT

  •  Yup...

    although Biden's got some real Joementum going...

    by rashomon on Tue Mar 27, 2007 at 02:07:25 PM PDT

•  the poll had a very small sample

  only 506 people... that's about half of a normal sample size.

  as always with Zogby polls, take these results with an appropriately-sized grain of salt.

  by Trix on Tue Mar 27, 2007 at 02:00:33 PM PDT

  •  No...actually

    that's a pretty standard sample size for a state primary poll.  Take a look at most of the other polls from IA or NH...or other states...they're all about 500-600.  National polls pull in over 1000...

    by rashomon on Tue Mar 27, 2007 at 02:02:27 PM PDT

    •  good point, but...

      ARG is using about 600 people, so Zogby's sample is still comparatively small.

      by Trix on Tue Mar 27, 2007 at 02:04:51 PM PDT

      •  Fair enough...

        I was just disagreeing with the "half of normal" part of your comment.

        by rashomon on Tue Mar 27, 2007 at 02:05:51 PM PDT

        •  yeah... I'll concede that point :) n/t

          by Trix on Tue Mar 27, 2007 at 02:06:23 PM PDT

      •  obviously...

        when you're only talking about 500 people, 100 people (give or take) is still a big difference.

        by Trix on Tue Mar 27, 2007 at 02:05:57 PM PDT

•  It's obvious what's going to happen...

  brokered convention, baby!  Seventeen rounds of ballots!

  My political heart is ready to weep with joy...

  by rashomon on Tue Mar 27, 2007 at 02:00:52 PM PDT

  •  we should be so lucky...

    :-p

    by Trix on Tue Mar 27, 2007 at 02:02:05 PM PDT

•  Why is the title Edwards and Clinton leads?

  If you are just looking at the numbers then it would be just Edwards.  However, if take into account statistical uncertainty then its a three way tie.

  

  by lovingj on Tue Mar 27, 2007 at 02:02:04 PM PDT

•  Edwards tied? Why?

  You'd think with all the time and money John Edwards has invested in Iowa over the last two years, he'd be a lot further ahead.

  Obama barely has any organization in Iowa !

  by brooklynbadboy on Tue Mar 27, 2007 at 02:02:52 PM PDT

  •  Obama likes to run instead of walking.

    

    by lovingj on Tue Mar 27, 2007 at 02:05:15 PM PDT

    •  don't make me whip out that poster again

      :-p

      by Trix on Tue Mar 27, 2007 at 02:17:02 PM PDT

      •  lol. You know that threat gets to me.

        I'm quiet now.

        

        by lovingj on Tue Mar 27, 2007 at 03:51:24 PM PDT

  •  There are other polls

    that show Edwards leading in Iowa and he just jumped up in the last NH poll which shows Edwards catching up to Obama there. I don't know if you've noticed or not but before Elizabeth's cancer returned the only two getting media attention were Hillary and Obama. Once the primaries get closer and the meet and greets go crazy then we'll see who will jump out front. Right now, it's stupid to assume one candidate over the other. IMO, Hillary could lose some support that according to polls is very fickle. Obama also needs to come out with specifics, and Edwards needs to get more people believing that he can raise the big dollars in a general.

    by sarahlane on Tue Mar 27, 2007 at 02:35:26 PM PDT

  •  Out west, they've just arrived ...

    as has Hillary ... or should we say, the former Vilsack campaign.

    by section29 on Tue Mar 27, 2007 at 02:59:44 PM PDT

  •  That's actually not true

    He has more organization than Hillary does

    http://iowaprogress.com/...

    by okamichan13 on Tue Mar 27, 2007 at 04:15:07 PM PDT

•  Kucinich SURGES

  Isn't 1% a surge for D.K.?

  by nightsweat on Tue Mar 27, 2007 at 02:04:08 PM PDT

  •  He doesn't just surge

    He does cartwheels and the high jump, too.

    by Black Maned Pensator on Tue Mar 27, 2007 at 02:07:30 PM PDT

  •  "Surge" is an aggressive, militarist term

    that's not in keeping with a spirit of universal harmony and quantum chi.

    D.K. would prefer that you say the light of his mote is now beginning to oscillate in tune with the crown chakra of our body politic, and that he's that much closer to bringing his message of light and hope to all the people, especially the unborn children.

    by jxg on Tue Mar 27, 2007 at 02:15:20 PM PDT

  •  Not a surge, an escalation. eom

    by Geekesque on Tue Mar 27, 2007 at 02:33:31 PM PDT

  •  at least there's no Joementum

    As long as Kucinich doesn't proclaim to have Joementum,  then we're cool. (Then again, I suppose it would be called "Dennismentum" even if he did).

    by pine on Tue Mar 27, 2007 at 03:09:09 PM PDT

•  Interesting

  I like Mr. Edwards.  Not as sure that he is a better candidate than Sen. Clinton, though.

  by bink on Tue Mar 27, 2007 at 02:08:18 PM PDT

  •  From my point of view he is.

    And I live in her district.

    But I'd rather have her as Senator the President.

    I would vote for her in the general, however.

    by wrights on Tue Mar 27, 2007 at 02:10:59 PM PDT

    •  Have to agree

      Clinton is running a very cautious, traditional campaign, as if she's run out of imagination and hope after so many years in Washington.  I'm increasingly seeing her as the establishment candidate.  Edwards, however, has a vision, and it's one that I like.

      by Black Maned Pensator on Tue Mar 27, 2007 at 02:13:06 PM PDT

•  Hold on

  Clinton has gained 11 points from the January Zogby poll, but there was a February poll after that which you are ignoring.  The results of that poll were:

  Hillary Clinton 24%, John Edwards 24%, Barack Obama 18%, Tom Vilsack 9%, Joe Biden 4%

  So Hillary's remaining steady (-1%), while Edwards and Obama have gained 3% and 5% respectively.

  by tommyg15 on Tue Mar 27, 2007 at 02:12:30 PM PDT

  •  I'd call that an Obama surge

    Maybe the diary title should be changed to "Obama closes the gap on Hillary and Edwards"

    by Yoshimi on Tue Mar 27, 2007 at 02:20:33 PM PDT

    •  Or Edwards closes gap in NH

      which he is doing according to the latest polls. Look, it's a three way race until someone screws up.

      by sarahlane on Tue Mar 27, 2007 at 02:36:52 PM PDT

      •  Its finally getting exciting. :)

        by Yoshimi on Tue Mar 27, 2007 at 02:39:30 PM PDT

•  Wow.

  23, 25, 27.

  Aren't all three in a statistical tie?

  That looks great for Obama.

  by Yoshimi on Tue Mar 27, 2007 at 02:12:31 PM PDT

  •  And Obama is spending the weekend in IA

    Watch out for Obama folks, esp after the Elizabeths cancer story bump erodes and voters start to focus on HRC high unfavs

    by wuod kwatch on Tue Mar 27, 2007 at 03:22:04 PM PDT

•  wow that poll and it's only one poll

  is unbeleivably good for Obama. If Obama wins Iowa a state will almost no black voters, after Hillary was endorsed by Vilsack and Edwards went for broke trying to carry it, he will be the nominee. When people meet Obama, they personally like him, I think he can pull this off in Iowa especially if Edwards supporters reconsider to try and stop Hillary  from being nominated by supporting Obama.

  by nevadadem on Tue Mar 27, 2007 at 02:17:43 PM PDT

  •  that's a valid point

    although the one I'm really watching (to the extent that I'm watching; we're a loooong way out yet) is South Carolina.  It'll be really interesting to see how the "black vote" (as if blacks voted as a bloc) splits between Clinton and Obama, especially with a native son in the mix in Edwards.

    by Pegasus on Tue Mar 27, 2007 at 02:19:51 PM PDT

    •  Tons of legislators

      in SC just endorsed Edwards as well as tons of people in OK. I'm also watching those races.

      by sarahlane on Tue Mar 27, 2007 at 02:39:35 PM PDT

  •  Obama might turn off Iowans with his big crowds.

    How do you fit 20,000 people in aunt Edna's house for a coffee klatch?

    by Yoshimi on Tue Mar 27, 2007 at 02:38:45 PM PDT

  •  We'll never drop Edwards

    unless he drops out, never. There is a poll that shows that Hillary's supporters aren't totally concrete in supporting her, and that Edwards supporters are here to stay. BTW, I do like Obama better then Hillary but I think Edwards has the best plans, the best vision and that's why I support him.

    by sarahlane on Tue Mar 27, 2007 at 02:38:50 PM PDT

•  by the for those trying to stop a Hillary

  nomination I would begin by telling likely dem primary votes about the poll that shows half of Americans stating that they will not vote for her in a general election. I know that it's one poll (saw another where that was 46%) but the fact that she is so unpopular a general election candidate needs to be known by dem primary voters, I already emailed everyone I know, this election is too important to send up a nominee in hopes we squeak out a close win.

  by nevadadem on Tue Mar 27, 2007 at 02:24:19 PM PDT

  •  that is important

    who do you think from the Dems would have the lowest 'would never vote' for? if they were known by 98% of the electorate like Clinton is?

    by duha on Tue Mar 27, 2007 at 02:32:16 PM PDT

•  i want to point out

  i don't know if the diarist is an edwards fan or not (and it doesn't really matter).  but anytime someone writes something about edwards on dKos - his supporters go nuts over something little and ignore the overall message.  it just seems to be very heavy-handed and ignorant of being able to see more than the one little thing you have a problem with.  

  for me, this diary is about more than obama being at a stastical tie (or gaining from february as was mentioned in the comments) and more about how close the race is (with hillary being the "front-runner", edwards having been there for years and obama being so physically close as well as the media attention).  interesting, indeed.

  by bsmcneil on Tue Mar 27, 2007 at 02:28:24 PM PDT

  •  Not sure what you're getting at

    But it's obvious why this should be -- in the view of us who favor Edwards, he's head and shoulders the best candidate, and yet we're frustrated that he's not ruling the polls, or popular opinion generally.  Especailly at a place like this, which has been willing to ignore polls and the established front-runner narrative in the past.  But (again, it seems to us) for some reason, Obama, who seems like a better choice than Clinton but has nowhere near the chops OR the concrete policy positions that JRE has coming out his wazoo is nonetheless considered the only other "first-tier" candidate.  Based on what seems to us to be image alone.

    Note that I'm not making the case here WHY I think JRE is the guy (there's plenty of other places on dKos that make it plain, IMO).  Merely speaking as an observer of why we get het up and feel we need to be Edwards' warriors.

    by Cliffy on Tue Mar 27, 2007 at 03:10:48 PM PDT

    •  asdf

      i'm getting at - the diarist, IMO, had a pretty small f*up in this diary which was pointed out.  when it happens to edwards, though, his supporters go ballastic and refuse to acknowledge the rest of the diary or talk about the larger point.  i don't get it.  i get wanting to right a wrong, but it seems like (here, at least) people are willing to acknowledge the problem and keep going.

      by bsmcneil on Tue Mar 27, 2007 at 03:20:46 PM PDT

•  3 Candidates within the margin of error?

  That is one tight race.

  by khyber900 on Tue Mar 27, 2007 at 02:43:37 PM PDT

•  how much longer for the single digits?

  Would someone please explain to me why Joe Biden and Chris Dodd are still in the race? Their odds of winning the nomination are zero and I'm not sure what they're trying to accomplish by staying in (perhaps a VP slot or a cabinet position?). Kucinich is also polling single digits, but for all practical purposes, he's always been a protest candidate who at least realizes that he's a long-shot.

  I'm mildly surprised that Richardson isn't doing better. He's not my candidate of choice, but of the 2nd and 3rd tier candidates, I concur with Kos that he's the only one with a chance of making it into the top tier.

  by pine on Tue Mar 27, 2007 at 03:12:59 PM PDT

•  University of Iowa poll

  Iowa numbers seem all over the place:

  ''Among a subsample of likely Democratic caucus-goers polled before the Edwards announcement, Edwards led with 30.2 percent, followed by Clinton at 24.4 percent and U.S. Sen. Barack Obama (D-Ill.) at 22.1 percent. After the announcement, both Edwards and Clinton moved up, while Obama dropped. Among likely caucus-goers after the Edwards announcement, the results were: Edwards 36.4 percent, Clinton 33.9 percent and Obama 14.4 percent.''

  http://news-releases.uiowa.edu/...

  by okamichan13 on Tue Mar 27, 2007 at 04:23:00 PM PDT