MyDD: "Is Clinton Really Ahead in Iowa?"...sure looks like it

Is Clinton Really Ahead In Iowa?

by Todd Beeton, Tue Aug 21, 2007 at 07:56:48 PM EST

August May
Hillary Clinton 30 24
John Edwards 23 26
Barack Obama 19 22
Bill Richardson 10 6
Joe Biden 3 4
Others 2 2
Not Sure 13 16

Now, Iowa is notoriously hard to poll, so what significance does this poll have if any? Well, for one, the trendlines are excellent for Clinton. Not only does Hillary achieve 9 point swings over Edwards and Obama since the May Zogby poll, but Pollster's average currently has Clinton slightly ahead of Edwards 26.8 to 25.4 and her trendline is up while Obama's and Edwards's are down. In addition, looking more closely at Pollster, this is the first non-ARG poll to have Clinton at 30 or higher and the first non-ARG poll to have her in the lead since May.



Another reason this poll is notable: it's the first poll of Iowa Democrats since both Obama and Clinton have gone up on the air in Iowa. Check both ads out below.

If the new Zogby poll does signal a real shift in sentiment among Iowa Democrats toward Clinton, it would seem to be fair to say that it's at least in part due to the effectiveness of Clinton's ad. And if we accept this premise, looking at the two ads might give us a clue as to why, according to Pollster, Clinton is rising while Obama is falling.

I personally think Obama's ad is quite moving and is an excellent intro ad for him (something Clinton has the luxury of not needing) as it accentuates his experience and makes him look presidential. Frankly I would have thought it would drive his numbers up although it is more of a general election ad than a primary campaign ad. But what it also does is call for unity while Clinton's ad picks a fight with Bush, which is an essential difference in the styles of the two campaigns. If Obama doesn't win the nomination I think it will be due in part to something I've been sensing about the Democratic electorate. No matter how many people might say they are sick of partisan bickering, you gotta think that after impeachment, after the 2000 election debacle, after the disastrous invasion and occupation of Iraq, after John Kerry was swiftboated and after almost 7 years of this disaster of a president, the last thing Democrats want is to unite with Republicans. Did you notice how many Republicans who had previously enabled the partisan and divisive Bush administration and re-election were suddenly calling on the Democrats to unite the country after the November elections? Why didn't they hold their own party to the same standard? Why don't they expect the same of Bush? David Brooks has repeatedly attributed Obama's phenomenal fundraising and the crowds he draws to the general mood in the country that people do want to "turn the page," as Obama would say, and heal after 8 years of division. And if that's really the case, Obama will likely win the nomination. But are Democrats really in a forgive and forget place right now or do they really just want to go to battle and win?