Zogby: Iowa Dems favor Edwards (double–digit lead among likely caucus-goers!)

Iowa Dems favor Edwards, GOP Favors Giuliani, McCain (Zogby)
----
Former vice presidential candidate John Edwards starts the new year with a double–digit lead over three impressive rivals a year before Iowans go to caucus to choose their next presidential nominee, a new Zogby telephone poll of likely Iowa Democratic caucus—goers shows.
Republicans are leaning toward two well–known moderates – Arizona Sen. John McCain and former New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani – in the race to replace George W. Bush at the top of their presidential ticket, a separate Zogby telephone survey of likely Republican caucus participants shows.

DEMOCRATS
Edwards 27%
Obama 17%
Vilsack 16%
Clinton 16%
Biden 3%
Kerry 3%
Kucinich 1%
Richardson 1%
Not sure 13%

REPUBLICANS
Giuliani 19%
McCain 17%
Gingrich 13%
Rice 9%
Romney 5%
Tancredo 2%
Hagel 2%
Brownback 1%
Tommy Thompson 1%
Huckabee 1%
Pataki 1%
Not sure 22%


Pollster John Zogby: Edwards is on top of a very tight field where one of the top four contenders will likely win the nomination. Edwards has shown he has the organization to win, with his strong showing in 2004. He carries a message of both hope and passion into this campaign, and one has to wonder if he is the Bobby Kennedy of this race. Barack Obama’s showing is impressive and Vilsack has a solid showing as the Favorite Son. Hillary has a lot of work cut out for her here, but she is very much a factor in this race.

The Democratic survey included 596 likely caucus-goers and was conducted January 15-16. The margin of error is +/- 4.1 percentage points. The Republican survey was conducted with 465 likely caucus-goers and was conducted January 15-16. It carries a margin of error of +/- 4.6 percentage points.

Take us to the promised land, Iowans!

I still think Edwards is underestimated by many. He is right on the issues important to me.

he is on my short list along with that guy that invented the internets and was the inspiration for Love Story.

Where was Clark on this list?

Obama hasn't campaigned in Iowa. Edwards has lived there for the past 3 years and has probably met every Iowan. He's topping out at 27% while a relative newcomer who hasn't campaigned there is only 10% behind. If I were Edwards, I'd be really scared. Obama doesn't need to win Iowa either. A strong showing by him would catapult into the southern primaries where there are a lot of black voters.

at the Harkin Steak Fry. In Iowa. No, he wasn't campaigning...or was he? I believe that this event, and the surrounding media hype, was a defining moment in his decision to run for the presidency. Obama is also from a neighboring state. So, I guess he has stepped foot in Iowa.

None of the candidates will 'need' to win Iowa but it certainly is a good thing to do so.

and of course coal-to-diesel.

That plays well in Illinois, Ohio,Pennsylvania and West Virginia.

I don't think that there is enough plant matter in the U.S. to make ethanol the answer to gasoline even using cellulose and with the low net energy that you get out of it.

Coal-to-diesel releases lots of carbon unless the plant can sequester the stuff somewhere. Advocating it so strongly really cuts into his Global Warming message.

I mean, if he's coming in third in Iowa.

as I understand it, Gore and Clinton didn't carry their home states either (though I could be wrong).
When Vilsack ran for Governer all the Dems said "He doesn't stand a chance" but he pulled off a win and has served two terms. So he may surprise people.
I'm not a huge supporter of his, but given ONLY the choice of the top three, I would certainly vote Vilsack.

by huge landslides (Gore lost TN to Bush in the general election).

Not a lot of IA Dems are enthused about a Vilsack candidacy.

See my "historical perspective" post on the August 2003 polls.

:bounce:

Edwards is doing good because he has announced and he is openly running for the job.

Obama is doing OK because he is all over the mainstream media the past few weeks.

But everything would change if Gore and/or Clark would decide to enter the race.

What we know for sure about Gore is that in May he will bring out a new book - "The Assault on Reason" - all about how America could be better governed that it has been these past 6 years. Putting forward the case for more rational and reality-based decision-making in government. So in effect he has announced his intention to move on from his current focus on the climate crisis, and start a national debate about what kind of leadership America needs in the 21st Century. The timing of Gore's new book is very interesting. It tells me that he has not ruled out running again - if it appears that enough people want him to be the next President of the US.

If you go to Zogby's website it tells you about their latest national polling, which has Hillary in the lead with 29%, with Edwards, Obama and Gore all at around 13-14%. But then Zogby seems to believe the recent story about Gore "ruling out" running in 2008. So probably that is their excuse for not including his name in their Iowa poll.

As a follow-up, let me share with you all links to some websites where you can learn more about what Al Gore has been doing these past 6 years, and what he is doing right now ...

Like next Monday - when he will speak to more than 12000 people in Boise, Idaho !!! :)

In Gore We Trust :)
www.algore.com
www.algore.org
www.draftgore.com
www.draftgore2008.org
www.patriotsforgore.com

A lot can happen and will happen between now and next year's caucuses & primaries.

Contenders will be making the rounds at Jefferson Jackson Dinners, Conventions and other gatherings critical to becoming President.

Those that have been doing this for a while such as Hillary Clinton, Biden, Edwards and Kerry have a leg up but not a lock.

January 14th. These things keep sneaking up.

last primaries, Zogby was fixing polls for Dean...
He REALLY doesn't like Clark (something to do with their opposing ancestries, I think)
I'll watch for this particular favorite in future Zogby polls

You can read his "thoughts" on his site ...

"The exclusive KCCI News Channel 8 poll, conducted by Research 2000, finds Dean leading the pack of 10 candidates who are running or considering a run for president of the United States. The poll, conducted Aug. 25 through Aug. 27, shows that if the Iowa caucuses were held today, 25 percent of those polled would support Dean. Missouri Rep. Richard Gephardt is second with 21 percent, Massachusetts Sen. John Kerry is third with 16 percent and Connecticut Sen. Joe Lieberman is fourth with 12 percent. The other candidates are all in single digits."


Note: In August 2003 Dean and Gephart were 1st and 2nd with John Kerry 9 points behind Dean and Edwards in single digits, presumably. And what happened? Kerry and Edwards finished 1st and 2nd, Dean and Gephardt, 3rd and 4th. If last August before the caucus polls mean nothing, January polls mean even less.


"On January 19, 2004, Dean's campaign suffered a blow when a last-minute surge by rival John Kerry led to an embarrassing defeat for Dean in the Iowa caucuses, representing the first votes cast in primary season. Dean had been a strong contender for weeks in advance in that state, battling with Dick Gephardt for first place in the polls. To the surprise of the Dean and Gephardt campaigns, Dean finished third in Iowa behind John Kerry and John Edwards. (Gephardt finished fourth.)"

Allow me to take this with a grain of salt.

If I bought polls this early on, I would have supported Lieberman last time around :puke:

show me a poll where Lieberman had the lead and polls don't tell you who to support.

A field full of heavyweights, a surge of rage against *, a new primary/caucus schedule.

The numbers now may be more important than in past years.

As an Iowan I think that these polls of our state mean just about jack diddly for now.

I have asked countless people (especially since Nov) what they think of the 2008 race and the good majority of them will say "isn't hillary running" or "isn't our governor running" (Vilsack). These types of reactions are usually followed by assurances that they have voted/caucused and plan to in 08, but it surely doesn't mean they are planning to vote for either of them. In fact, it seems like the average joe on the street really doesn't know about half of the so-called field right now. Obama? Most of the city folk know him. Edwards? Everybody remembers him from last time. But who the hell knows Dodd? Most regular folk don't even know Biden, even if they really should.

Name recognition doesn't mean votes, and I think people who respond to phone surveys are probably going on mostly name recognition.