Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Rasmussen: Edwards, not Obama, has gained support the last days

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread		 This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU
 
johan helge Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-06-08 03:58 PM
Original message
Rasmussen: Edwards, not Obama, has gained support the last days
From http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/election_20082/daily_presidential_tracking_polling_history:

12/29/07:
Clinton: 43%
Obama: 24%
Edwards: 14%

01/06/08:
Clinton: 36%
Obama: 25%
Edwards: 23%
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
MalloyLiberal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-06-08 04:00 PM
Response to Original message
1. Shouldn't Obama be at 99% ?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Blue_In_AK Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-06-08 04:02 PM
Response to Reply #1
4. Now you just made me laugh, Malloy.
You're over-the-top sometimes, but that was funny.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Swamp Rat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-06-08 04:04 PM
Response to Reply #1
5. No, but Kucinich should be at 99%
:)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Kurovski Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-06-08 04:14 PM
Response to Reply #5
8. You
are just fucking awful. :rofl::rofl:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
helderheid Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-06-08 05:21 PM
Response to Reply #8
22. NO SHIT!
Outdid yourself there! :rofl: I know I shouldn't.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
helderheid Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-06-08 05:20 PM
Response to Reply #1
21. LOL!
:rofl: :yourock:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Proud2BAmurkin Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-06-08 04:01 PM
Response to Original message
2. Interesting. If Hillary loses support it goes to Edwards not Obama
Interesting.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
amandabeech Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-06-08 04:49 PM
Response to Reply #2
15. Well, that explains Edwards tactics last night.
Contrast himself with Hillary and get her voters.

His internal polling must have picked this up earlier.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Arugula Latte Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-06-08 04:01 PM
Response to Original message
3. Hillary lost seven points, according to that poll.
Interesting.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
flyarm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-06-08 04:10 PM
Response to Original message
6. Shhhhhhh..quiet ..the corporate media does not want you to notice that ..
Edwards * has * been trending up in NH//but don't mention it to the masses in this country..its a corp media secret...now please if you keep pointing this out..you will have to go to the media time out chair!!


fly
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
skipos Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-06-08 04:14 PM
Response to Original message
7. I would love to see Edwards win, but am getting a bit sick of the Edwards bias aroun here
You need to look at Edwards numbers in NH, MI, FL and SC. He is a distant 3rd. How is he going to overcome this? 9iu11iani leads the national polls, but has very little chance of being the nominee. Clinton lead the national polls by HUGE margins and look where that has landed her.
If you want to look at his Ras numbers in NH, here is my thread:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=3969041&mesg_id=3969041
NH is his last shot imo. He must top Clinton there. If he is 3rd, he will end up being 3rd in most of the remaining states.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cali Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-06-08 04:18 PM
Response to Original message
9. funny. the edwardians howl the loudest about national polls
constantly saying they're meaningless- until one comes showing a bump for Edwards. Good for him. But the poll that counts is NH and he won't win that. He won't win NV and he certainly won't win SC.

The candidate with momentum in NH and SC is Barack.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AP Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-06-08 04:53 PM
Response to Reply #9
17. National trends aren't meaningless.


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
balantz Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-06-08 04:23 PM
Response to Original message
10. National support for Edwards is now steadily increasing with recent
second placing in Iowa, his consistant message about his fight for the middle class, and his ability to fight and win in the general. Even WITHOUT huge campaign spending and WITHOUT loads of positive media attention he is showing increasing national support.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
scarletwoman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-06-08 04:25 PM
Response to Original message
11. Gee, you mean the Pundits' narrative isn't holding true? (nt)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LonePirate Donating Member (898 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-06-08 04:30 PM
Response to Original message
12. National polls mean very little
In both our primary and general election for President, the national polls are of very little importance apart from tracking some trends. Personally, I'd prefer all of the polling firms to focus on the state by state polling data since that's what really matters. These national numbers are reflective of nothing.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
balantz Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-06-08 04:32 PM
Response to Reply #12
13. I'd say they mean a lot when your candidate gets virtually ignored,
or painted in a bad light.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DLnyc Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-06-08 04:54 PM
Response to Reply #13
18. Yes, national polls mean a lot, when they show a strong (up or down) move
for a candidate. Means his/her message is widely resonating (or not). But they don't determine local primaries at all (see my post number 14 below).

I do like seeing this poll contradict MSM's attempts to marginalize Edwards, all the same!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DLnyc Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-06-08 04:47 PM
Response to Original message
14. Rasmussen is a running average of three nights of polling.
looks like Edwards got a bump from his speech after the Iowa caucus. Will be interesting to see where he is in three days, in response to how he did in last night's debate. My guess is he will go up around 5 points nationally.

But it seems like, once a primary comes to a state, that state gets a closer look and can move quite far from national polls (Rass had Clinton/Obama/Edwards at 41/24/17 last Thursday, but Iowan caucus goers put them 29/38/30). Of course, Rass seems to be a pretty conservative polling base (they use robo-calls), so my guess is they're always gonna over-estimate Hillary.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
autorank Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-06-08 04:49 PM
Response to Original message
16. Here's how they''re spinning it for NH - 'NH doesn't like Southerers.'

But that won't work. Here's an important point. NH has a first rate Secretary of State and
they are attentive to voting. It's not likely we'll see any out of range returns. I have a
reasonable degree of confidence in the vote there.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
autorank Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-08-08 01:53 AM
Response to Reply #16
23. Correction!!! NH didn't complete the project I assumed it had. Not so good.
My "reasonable degree of confidence" has vanished. I got in touch with my contact in NH.

They have 81% Diebold Optical Scans. They get them from a Diebold distributor in Mass and the
counting is also done in Mass by another firm, secret of course.

NH had a huge effort to get optional paper ballots for 2008 - you, the voter would choose.
There were so many people and the state had been in a real dialog. I just assumed the deal
was done. Oops, bad on me. More on this in a few hours.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
book_worm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-06-08 04:59 PM
Response to Original message
19. you probably should have identified this as a national poll not NH poll.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
weeve Donating Member (427 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-06-08 05:19 PM
Response to Original message
20. Just imagine...
... how well John would be doing if the Corporate Media even attempted to give him fair and equal coverage .
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view this author's profile Click to add this author to your buddy list Click to add this author to your Ignore list Wed May 01st 2024, 10:35 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators

Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC