Biden doubled his support to 8% in Iowa and he's attributing it to his performance in this interview on Newshour. I have to admit, I already liked the guy, but this is great stuff:
Alex
quote:
Originally posted by LatinLover
Dont forget that I also teach history ;) You really should come down to Miami and take one of my courses. So for the first time you can learn something ;) Youll be very lucky if you get me as your professor
Name of school and fellow staff members please, or shut the up.
Alex
Haha, wow.
I just re-read your posts and for a "professor" you have truly heinous grammar, way to bull on the internet...Most people just claim to have a huge and a hot GF, you've taken it to the next level man!
Spacey Orange
*laughs at guliani*
Lebezniatnikov
From Des Moines.
If the Iowa Caucus is any indication, the political winds are changing already.
quote:
December 1, 2007
Obama pulls ahead for Democrats in Iowa Poll;
Huckabee, Obama now lead
By THOMAS BEAUMONT
REGISTER STAFF WRITER
Barack Obama has pulled ahead in the race for Iowa's Democratic presidential caucuses, while the party's national frontrunner Hillary Clinton has slipped to second in the leadoff nominating state, according to The Des Moines Register's new Iowa Poll.
Despite the movement, the race for 2008's opening nominating contest remains very competitive about a month before the Jan. 3 caucuses, just over half of likely caucusgoers who favor a candidate saying they could change their minds.
Obama, an Illinois senator, leads for the first time in the Register's poll as the choice of 28 percent of likely caucusgoers, up from 22 percent in October. Clinton, a New York senator, was the preferred candidate of 25 percent, down from 29 percent in the previous poll.
Former North Carolina Sen. John Edwards, who led in the Register's May poll, held steady with 23 percent, in third place, but part of the three-way battle.
The lead change appears after weeks of increasing criticism of Clinton by Obama and Edwards about her position on U.S. policy toward Iran and questions of her candor.
Meanwhile, Clinton has recently begun accusing Obama of inexperience and criticizing his proposal to expand health insurance coverage.
The poll shows what has continued to be a wide gap between the top three candidates and the remainder of the field. The telephone survey of 500 likely Democratic caucusgoers was conducted Nov. 25 to 28 and has a margin of error of plus or minus 4.4 percentage points.
Iowa City Democrat Katharyn Browne said she abandoned her support for Clinton in the past month and now supports Obama in light of the Iran issue.
Obama spent weeks in October and November attacking Clinton's support for a measure that allowed President Bush to declare the Iran's Revolutionary Guard a terrorist organization, a move Obama said was a step toward war. Clinton said the measure enhanced U.S. negotiating strength with Iran.
"An Iran war terrifies me," said Browne, a 30-year-old University of Iowa student.
Browne said she feels Obama is a more inspirational candidate than Clinton, despite the intensifying crossfire between them.
"I just think that Obama is more of a positive candidate overall," she said. "Aside from the Clinton-Obama interaction lately, it's nice to hear a candidate with a positive outlook. I think our country needs that right now."
Browne, who supported Clinton early partly out of gender loyalty, represents a shift among some women caucusgoers from Clinton to Obama.
In the new poll, Obama leads with support from 31 percent of women likely attend the caucuses, compared to 26 percent for Clinton. In October, Clinton was the preferred candidate of 34 percent of women caucusgoers, compared to 21 percent for Obama.
Women represent roughly six in 10 Democratic caucusgoers, according to the new poll.
Obama also dominates among younger caucusgoers, with support from 48 percent from those younger than 35. Clinton was the choice of 19 percent in that group and Edwards of 17 percent.
The under-35 bloc represents 14 percent of Democratic caucusgoers, up from 9 percent in the October poll.
Obama has an advantage among first-time caucusgoers. He also leads among people who say they definitely will attend the caucuses.
Clinton is the top choice among caucusgoers 55 years old and older. The largest share of Democratic caucusgoers — exactly half — are in this age group.
Pleasant Hill Democrat Jack Hill is one of them. The 61-year-old salesman said Clinton is battle-tested and capable of bringing about changes on the domestic and international fronts.
"She's a tough old cookie," said Hill. "She's a tough woman and I feel we need a change from politics as usual."
Clinton continued to rate highest on key traits, such as most presidential, knowledgeable about the world, electable and experienced. She also was seen as the most ego-driven and negative.
Clinton and Obama were viewed as the most committed to public service, while Obama led on traits such as most likeable, principled and best able bring together Republicans and Democrats.
The former first lady continues to face stubborn misgivings, despite her dozens of visits to the state this year and increasing campaign presence of her husband, the popular former president.
Thirty percent of Democratic caucusgoers viewed Sen. Clinton as either mostly or very unfavorably, behind U.S. Rep. Dennis Kucinich of Ohio and former Alaska Sen. Mike Gravel. She topped the list of candidates whose nomination would be one of the biggest disappointments at 27 percent.
Other troubling news for Clinton included a sharp decline in support from members of union households, where she was the preferred candidate with support from 34 percent in the October poll. In the new poll, Clinton is third among union households with 21 percent.
Obama and Edwards have recently criticized Clinton's past support for the North American Free Trade Agreement, which they argue cost the United States millions of jobs. Clinton has said recently the trade pact, enacted during her husband's first term, did not deliver.
Obama's support among caucusgoers from union households rose from 20 percent to 28 percent since the October poll, while Edwards narrowly led, rising from 24 percent to 29 percent since the October poll.
Edwards, who finished second in the 2004 caucuses, led narrowly among men in the new poll and was tied with Clinton for the favorite in Iowa's rural areas. Rural Centerville Democrat Candace Scritchfield supported Edwards in 2004 and plans to again.
"He's a very down-to-earth and trustworthy person," said Scritchfield, a 44-year-old homemaker. "He has a lot of loyalty, that I can tell."
There was little movement in the rest of the field, despite aggressive campaigning in Iowa in the eight weeks between the two polls.
New Mexico Gov. Bill Richardson remained in fourth place as the choice of 9 percent and Delaware Sen. Joe Biden remained in fifth with 6 percent, both virtually unchanged from the October poll. All others had support from 2 percent or less.
Presidential preferences include people leaning toward supporting a candidate. Seven percent said they were uncommitted or unsure about whom to support.
• Giuliani: 25%; vs 28% in the previous survey, taken Nov. 11-14; and 34% in a Nov. 2-4 survey. So, his support has fallen 9 percentage points in a month.
• Mike Huckabee: 16%; vs. 10% in the previous survey; and 6% before that. His support has risen 10 percentage points in a month.
• Fred Thompson: 15%; vs. 19% in the previous survey; and 17% before that.
• Sen. John McCain: 15%; vs. 13% in the previous survey; and 18% before that.
• Mitt Romney: 12%; unchanged from the previous survey; and 14% before that.
No other GOP candidate was above 4%.
Democrats.
• Clinton: 39%; vs. 48% in the previous survey; and 50% before that. Her support has fallen 11 percentage points in a month.
• Sen. Barack Obama: 24%; vs. 21% in the previous survey; and 22% before that.
• John Edwards: 15%; vs. 12% in the previous survey; and 15% before that.
No other candidate was above 4%.
Rudy has fallen nine points since the last Bloomberg/LAT poll in October, while Huckabee has climbed ten points. Thompson, McCain and Romney have all fallen one or two points each, but those are not statistically significant changes.
quote:
Mike Huckabee's surge apparently isn't just happening in Iowa — he's moving up nationwide, too. The new Gallup poll has Huck in a three-way tie for second. Rudy Giuliani leads with a 25% plurality, with Huckabee at 16%, Fred Thompson 15%, John McCain 15%, and Mitt Romney 12%. Huckabee has gone up an amazing ten points in the last month.
On the Democratic side, Hillary Clinton still has a national plurality of 39%, but it's down from a 50% high a month ago. Barack Obama has 24%, and John Edwards 15%.
http://tpmelectioncentral.com/2007/12/02-week/
Lebezniatnikov
Romney was up early this morning to convince the Republican base that being a Mormon ain't so bad. Needless to say, it was a smoke and mirrors show.
quote:
Romney's speech over. Didn't say squat.
Thu Dec 06, 2007 at 09:06:23 AM PST
OK, the "big" Mitt Romney speech is over.
He didn't say the word "Mormon" once, I don't think. [UPDATE: Final word count score -- Mormon: 1; Muslim/Islam/jihad: 5] So to the extent that you bought the hype and tuned in because you had genuine questions about the LDS church, you came away empty-handed. And possibly with the nagging feeling that Romney's hiding something after all.
What the speech did succeed in showing is that the Romney operation is the nearest successor (to date) to the Bush operation in its willingness to play the press corps for suckers. Promise a "major address" on some pressing issue, play the expectations game according to the Conventional Wisdom -- that is, raising the stakes by having surrogates use back channels to inflate expectations about the importance of the substance to be addressed -- and then turn it all on its head by delivering nothing of what was promised, and daring the press corps to write their stories with their pants down, having played into the game of promising something big.
The other master stroke here was the choice of venue: the George H.W. Bush Presidential Library. That puts the Romney name next to the Bush name in the papers -- a grab at the mantle, if people will just look past the "H" -- and it allows Romney to deliver what was essentially Republican religionist pablum (I believe in God, He should be on our money, plus we need "our kind" of judges) from behind a podium bearing the presidential seal. A media consultant's dream come true, and what should be a fat bonus for the advance team (but they never get the money).
Romney also managed to squeeze in a mention of "jihad," just so you wouldn't forget that he has promised to exclude Muslims from his cabinet, even as he was supposedly there to appeal to the American sense of religious tolerance. But then, by skipping out entirely on what was supposed to be the point of the speech -- his Mormonism -- he didn't really do that, so I suppose all's fair, right?
Finally, there was the ridiculous comparison to JFK's 1960 speech. I say the comparison is ridiculous because the situations were completely different. In September 1960, Kennedy was the nominee of the Democratic Party, and faced the task of reassuring Americans that his faith would not conflict with the duties of the office he sought, and upon which Americans would decide within weeks. Today, Romney is just one of several Republican contenders, so his task was actually to convince the evangelical core residing within the Republican Party that his faith is not incompatible with their deciding to let him carry the Republican banner into an election that's still almost a year away. Kennedy's target, by necessity, was the greater America. Romney's target, by necessity, was Republican evangelicals. (Hence the early plug: "Freedom requires religion just as religion requires freedom." Freedom requires religion? Really? That's really intriguing. How so? Oh nevermind, he's not taking questions.) So it should surprise no one that he revealed nothing about his actual religion (which was how the speech was sold), given that an actual appeal for tolerance based on an honest recounting of his theology would have been political suicide.
The question now is, has the media invested so much in insisting that this was indeed what the speech was going to be about that they won't be able to admit he ducked the issue entirely? Or is it just easier to say he did what he set out to do, because that story is already written?
Romney is such a wit. He's like an anoying used-car salesman yes-man. I'm amazed no one is calling him a flip-flopper the guy changes his opinion, personal history, stance, and childhood memories almost daily...
