First, let us look at what the New Hampshire polls looked like BEFORE Iowa:
As you can tell from the graphic, Clinton was maintaining a slight but steady lead going into Iowa. The long-term trends pointed to a narrow win for Clinton.
Which is exactly what happened.
But, those post-Iowa polls? Well, what that showed is that a poll bounce from a victory in a state is more hype than substance. When people wound up stepping inside the voting booth, the numbers reverted to form.
Importantly, the polls there all along showed Clinton maintaining a tight lead. The polls, looking at the broad picture, were right.
Now, let's look at Nevada polling data.
Reuters/CSpan/Zogby 01/15 - 01/17 814 LV 42 37 12 Clinton +5.0 Mason-Dixon 01/14 - 01/16 500 LV 41 32 14 Clinton +9.0
American Res. Group 01/09 - 01/14 600 LV 35 32 25 Clinton +3.0
Research 2000 01/11 - 01/13 500 LV 30 32 27 Obama +2.0 American Res. Group 12/01 - 12/06 600 LV 45 18 14 Clinton +27.0
Mason-Dixon 12/03 - 12/05 300 LV 34 26 9 Clinton +8.0
Research 2000 11/16 - 11/19 400 LV 45 20 12 Clinton +25.0
CNN 11/09 - 11/13 389 LV 51 23 11 Clinton +28.0
Zogby 11/09 - 11/10 506 LV 37 19 15 Clinton +18.0
Mason-Dixon 10/09 - 10/11 300 LV 39 21 9 Clinton +18.0
American Res. Group 10/05 - 10/09 600 LV 51 11 14 Clinton +37.0
Research 2000 08/14 - 08/16 400 LV 33 19 15 Clinton +14.0
Mason-Dixon 06/20 - 06/22 400 LV 39 17 12 Clinton +22.0
American Res. Group 06/15 - 06/19 600 LV 40 16 16 Clinton +24.0
Mason-Dixon 04/30 - 05/02 300 RV 37 12 13 Clinton +24.0
Zogby 04/11 - 04/12 505 LV 35 21 15 Clinton +14.0
Susquehanna (R) 03/06 - 03/09 210 RV 32 17 16 Clinton +15.0
Research 2000 03/06 - 03/08 400 RV 32 20 11 Clinton +12.0
American Res. Group 12/19 - 12/23 600 LV 37 12 8 Clinton +25.0
Clinton leads in 18/19 polls. There is one, and only one, poll showing Obama with a lead, and that one well inside the margin of error.
The inescapable conclusion is that the poll showing Obama winning Nevada is a textbook example of an outlier.
What, what about the difficulty of polling a caucus?
If you look at the Iowa polling data, there were definite signs that Obama was going to win. He was leading in virtually every poll taken before folks started traveling for the holidays. And, once folks started returning from their holiday travels, he resumed his spot atop the polls.
Here, there is no sign at all that Obama has a shot at winning Nevada. The polling points to a 6-12 point win for Clinton. And that's what we'll see tomorrow.
And, yes, Culinary workers have phone lines and get called by pollsters too, for those who think a single union endorsement is a magic bullet.
The underlying reality--that Clinton enjoys a dominant position here--hasn't changed. Only the media hype has. As one Nevada political scientist put it:
"Hillary Clinton has a solid base of traditional Democrats," said University of Nevada, Reno, political scientist Eric Herzik. "She has the baby boomers. There's a generational split really emerging in this election."
Herzik noted that Clinton had leads of more than 20 points in early polling and has worked hard to bring Nevada Democratic power brokers to her side.
"The story is if she loses," he said. "If she loses Nevada, it's not just a loss, it's a collapse."
Comments are closed on this story.