Here is one more way to look at the impact of Iowa. The plot shows each poll (tracking polls are included only when their samples don't overlap, e.g. every 3rd day for a 3 day track.) Polls ending on the same day are separated in the chart, though the order is arbitrary within day.
McCain had already captured the lead over Romney by the Iowa caucus. While three post-Iowa polls still find a Romney lead, the majority of polls put McCain in the lead. Moreover, the height of the bars is quite similar before and after Iowa, indicating little effect.
That lack of change is interesting since Romney might have been expected to fall due to his disappointing second place finish in Iowa. McCain's 4th place in Iowa wasn't read as a "loss", in the bizarre expectations game. But regardless of their finishes, Iowa seems to have not moved the New Hampshire Republican electorate at all.
On the Democratic side, the large pro-Obama bounce is obvious. If it didn't show up in the first day or two post-Iowa, it clearly appears after that. A Clinton lead of some 10-15 points became an Obama lead of some 8-10 points.
9 comments:
I love this blog. Personally i dont favor Obama becaus e i feel he doesnt hav any real experience to speak of. I think Right Now iss the wrong time for someone like him.
my blog- rocknrollanarchy.blogspot.com
This is a great blog. I love all the data. I'm curious to what extent people randomly polled are representative of people who show up at the polls. In other words, how well does the subset of people who actually go and vote map to the population of all people who respond to polls?
This 2008 Presidential race is a very important one this time around. There are a number of senators running trying to get our vote? Many say we need a change from the Washington insiders? They all blame it on Washington,That Washington is broken? But they tell us we are to pick a senator from Washington? Some say its corporate lobbyist and or big corporations
We have new senators running,We have old senators running?We have senators from both sides of the isle ,We have 22 year senators,We even have former senators? Some senators vote one way and then vote another way,senators that vote against there party Lines, to some senators that wont stand for anything and not vote yes or no? They vote "present" over 130+ times? Senators that think there is something called a "Right Way" or a "Senators Way"
We have traveling senators that some say over stayed there travel! We have other senators that have traveled abroad with the most trips traveled to the most that traveled with and even cost the most in the history of that office.Some senators make us think that traveling abroad gives them a right to this office? We have senators that snub there noses at some state saying awe "its only the first in the nation caucuses ,they don't really count" Senators that stage there winning speech Assemblies ? The every day people are not good enough that they had to stage it?
We have senators that take money from PAC'S, We have some senators that do not take money from PAC'S? We have some senators that use 527's? We have some senators that do not use 527's.We have maverick type senators telling us of the pork they stop,for an earmark they tried to stop but that the recipient still got to keep the bacon? and for the 11,000+ earmarks these senators passed in 2007
Now for the senators that are not running? We have senators that tell us to vote for this senator or that senator? we have senate leaders that pay into other senators re-election funds? We have senators that pass out earmarks only to get their re-election fund contributed to from the recipient of the earmark they gave to? We need to re-examine what we pay these senators compared to their re-election funds some may think is to much? was it us that made them millionaires or did they step out of bounds to have raises voted for themselves by themselves?
Should these Re-election funds be counted as Income? God knows we need the 22% Social Security tax that could be collected? Who votes that into law? The amount raised for this presidential race should and could be taxed at 22% as someones UN-earned income? That may fix Social Security for 5 years? Lets not stop there ,we could /should then tax money spent on re-elections? Taxes or (FEES)? Who votes this into law?
That leaves us with Mayors to chose from or Governors to also choose from? Do we pick Mayors that even found time for extra marital affairs that mayor-ed the second highest office in the land? Do We choose a one time Governor that is from the corporate world? From a state that had the largest PUBLIC WORKS PROJECT (the big dig)in the History of the US Government? Governors that you would think there talking about SPOONS? Gold,silver,bronze? Are they running for a marathon?
Or do we Choose a multi term Governor that governed both democrats and republicans and yes sometimes raised taxes with the people voting for, that was the right thing to do for the good of that state. A state that did not always run to the federal government for money , A state that did cut and did give back to the people. A Governor that has a plan to reform the tax code we have now, wonder why? the senators inside Washington do not mention to us? One has to ask if these Pacs or 527's have benefits that are hidden in this complex tax code may have ? or other re election fund tax LOOP Holes that also may be hidden in the tax code?
Could it be as simple as picking one from the center of this great land that tells the people the truth of the matter? We all know 1 person can't be All we need in a President? So when we say we need a president that wares many hats will this president we pick over ride what his defense secretary says or will he over ride what his secretary of state says? Do we Want a MAVERICK President? Do we want a President that See's temporary citizens more highly than its own citizens?
In closing I have Faith that the people of America will scrutinize the number and quality or the senators running ,To pick one that does not spend lavishly with their war chests that is only a sign of what would come as president ,to pick one that thinks the more money spent somehow thinks they are insured or deserve a victory? I would hope America Picks one that is a good steward of its war chest that believes its more the Message than the money ,after all we all want less government not a president that thinks the more money that is thrown at a problem that that is all it takes.
Thanks and don't forget to keep your stick on the ice,we are all in this together
Very interesting! I'll be following your site!
** Shaun **
My awesome blog: ohpunk.blogspot.com
-
"A Clinton lead of some 10-15 points became an Obama lead of some 8-10 points."
Not quite. Love to have your thoughts on why the apparent Obama lead melted away.
Really interesting blog.
I'm not prepared to say who I think will win yet becuase there are 48 states left (if you discount what has already happened in Wyoming) and a lot can change.
I definitely think that it's a more open contest on the GOP side and it's a two or three horse race with the Democrats.
I've said in my blog that I expect a two or three more candidates with low percentages will drop out soon.
It is likely that the Obama polling failed to reflect reality because the people polled did not represent the people that voted. Typically, this is accounted for in polling but when you have sudden surges over a very short span of time, polling becomes more erratic as people get caught up in the moment and say things they might not otherwise say. It is also possible that the publicity of the polls (in the truly bizarre expectations game) hurt Obama as people who would have otherwise voted for him stayed home because his win was a "lock".
I find it deeply ironic that NH is being spun as a win for Clinton when just two weeks ago she was a shoo in. This type of nonesense just feeds the Norm Chomsky idiots.
Blessings:
Perhaps someone could explain something to me...You currently have a President who got his position by Election Rigging, and yet you feel you can "HONESTLY" elect a new one?
You have a President who should be Impeached for War Crimes, but is serving his second term. You impeached Clinton for sex scandels, yet do nothing about Bush for murdering Americans and still expect people the world over to TRUST American democracy.
What are you people thinking?
Are you people thinking?
Do you not understand; Who you follow is who you are?
your humble servant,
ancient clown
Cogent explanation of a complex topic. Thank you!
Post a Comment