The inscrutable Iowa polls

Last night, InsiderAdvantage, a Republican polling firm, raised quite a few eyebrows by releasing a new survey of Democrats in Iowa, which put John Edwards out in front with 30% support. Hillary Clinton was second with 26%, followed by Barack Obama with 24%. It was largely the opposite of all the recent data — practically all the recent polls show Obama pulling ahead, with Edwards a close third.

Was the InsiderAdvantage poll a harbinger or an outlier? It’s obviously hard to say for sure, but a new WaPo/ABC poll, which used a more reliable sample, did far more to bolster the conventional wisdom about the Democratic race in Iowa.

Sens. Barack Obama of Illinois and Hillary Rodham Clinton of New York remain deadlocked in Iowa, with former senator John Edwards of North Carolina trailing, according to a new Washington Post-ABC News poll that underscores the importance of the massive efforts the Democratic candidates have set in motion to turn out supporters on Jan. 3.

In a race that could hinge on a campaign’s ability to motivate voters to brave wintry conditions and spend hours attending caucuses, each of the leading contenders appears to enjoy distinct advantages. More of Obama’s backers said they are certain to participate than did those who have gotten behind Clinton. But Clinton’s supporters are the most committed and enthusiastic, and Edwards counts among his supporters experienced caucus attendees who are more likely to turn out again.

According to the poll, Obama now leads among likely caucusgoers with 33%, followed by Clinton at 29%, and Edwards at 20%. Obama’s four-point lead is identical to a Post/ABC poll from a month ago, though both have upped their percentages (it was 30% to 26%).

Given the significance of second-place preferences, it’s also worth noting that among those Iowa Dems whose first choice is below 15%, Obama is the top second-choice candidate with 37%, Clinton is second at 31% and Edwards third at 26%.

What’s striking about the results, though, is that while Obama seems to be up slightly at the moment, the race, which is just 15 days away, is completely unpredictable. Indeed, the poll offers a little good news for fans of each of the top three candidates.

Obama has gained ground on Clinton on the question of which Democrat is seen as most electable in November 2008, which had been one of her early calling cards in wooing voters. Clinton retains a significant advantage as the candidate with the best experience to be president. […]

More than seven in 10 of Obama’s supporters said they are certain to participate in the caucuses, compared with 59 percent of Clinton’s backers.

Clinton’s supporters, however, are the most firmly behind her. Seventy percent said they will definitely caucus for her in two weeks, while Edwards’s and Obama’s supporters were more apt to say there is a good chance they might change their minds. Moreover, 59 percent of Clinton’s backers said they are very enthusiastic about supporting her, compared with 49 percent of Obama’s supporters.

Solid support for both Clinton and Edwards rose over the past month, while Obama’s remained stable. The level of excitement among Clinton’s and Edwards’s supporters also increased in that time, but did not change among Obama’s.

Adding to the challenge for Clinton and Obama is that they are relying more heavily than Edwards on potential first-time caucus participants. More than half the supporters of Clinton and Obama have never caucused, while two-thirds of Edwards’s backers have done so. Edwards is hoping to draw on the network he built in Iowa four years ago when he finished second to Sen. John F. Kerry, the eventual Democratic nominee.

Considering other turnout factors brings no additional clarity. Age and education are two key predictors of caucus participation, with older and more highly educated people disproportionately showing up to vote. While Clinton outpaces Obama among older voters, particularly those aged 65 and up, Obama outperforms her nearly 3 to 1 among those with an education of a college degree or more.

Obama nearly doubles up his competitors among those under age 40 and has made a sizable effort to recruit college students and even some high school students. But they have been far less reliable caucus attendees in the past.

ABC News’ report added, “Applying tighter turnout scenarios can produce anything from a 10-point Obama lead to a 6-point Clinton edge — evidence of the still-unsettled nature of this contest, two weeks before Iowans gather and caucus. And not only do 33 percent say there’s a chance they yet may change their minds, nearly one in five say there’s a ‘good chance’ they’ll do so.”

Stay tuned.

If one were doing a poll, wouldn’t the Iowa Democrats be a lousy sampling of Dems nationwide? Don’t they skew conservative?

  • …while Edwards’s and Obama’s supporters were more apt to say there is a good chance they might change their minds.

    From my understanding, though, they seem to be waffling between these two candidates almost exclusively. In other words, an Edwards leaning caucus goer is more likely to switch to Obama as opposed to Hillary and vice versa.

  • “Was the InsiderAdvantage poll a harbinger or an outlier?”

    Or simple troublemaking? Why would be believe that it’s straight?

  • “Barak Hussion Obama” is an Islam name and you know how rooted he is in Islam. If he became the president of America, he will surrender the whole country to Osma Bin Ladin! Demmies, wake up! You are an American, deny this bastard from any public pffice!!!!!

  • doubtful, my sense is that your are correct for a large percentage of the Obama/Edwards Iowans, although I am certainly aware of exceptions who are at some combination of Clinton and one of the other two main contenders (or vice versa). the competing indicators — prior caucusing, age, certainty of support – have now been steady for about 2 months. this is absolutely going to the wire and the oddities of caucusing will make the outcome pretty unpredictable (which is more fun for political news junkies). it is probably not surprising that the “second choices” are very close in proportion to the first choices.

    Dale, the traditional conventional wisdom has been to the contrary — one of the mainstream complaints about Iowa going first is that it is too liberal, but in a lily-white, academic, limosine liberal sort of way. It is probably more accurate to say Iowa’s caucus-going Dems are a mix — my sense is fairly left on peace and social justice issues, big on farm issues, mixed to moderate on crime issues and immigration issues, fairly left-libertarian on rights issues (choice, gay marriage), moderate on environmental and tax/budget issues, fairly states rights on education, and pragmatic on terror issues and the “can’t we all just get along politically” issues.

  • Dear Lala,

    Hussion = Hussein
    “Islam name” = “Islamic name” (is that like “Democrat Party”?)
    “president of America” = “President of the United States”
    Osma = Osama
    pffice = office
    !!!!! = ! (one exclamation point is more than enough when such incoherent nonsense precedes it).

    But thanks for trying to enlighten us all.

  • Lala’s comment requires no further attention. In the immortal words of Forest Gump “Stupid is, as stupid does.” Peace.

  • I expect from Edwards a suprising finish, if not an outright win.

    Then I expect a lot of shame-faced media and pundits trying to explain why they didn’t notice that John had all the regular caucus attendees locked up years ago.

    People are just not going to come out to their first caucus in January in Iowa for Hillary or Barack.

    So punditizes I.

  • I expect from Edwards a suprising finish, if not an outright win.

    I, too, expect a first or second place finish by Edwards. Who will get the other spot is a big question mark though. I would have thought Clinton, but Obama sure seems to have some big momentum.

  • JTK, @6,

    In Polish, “lala” means “a big doll”. Nobody expects those to have more than sawdust in their heads.

  • InsiderAdvantage is not a Republican pollster. The company is owned by the publishers of a large chain of newspapers and other investots and was founded by a Democrat and a Republican. They were dead right in Iowa in 2004 (see Bob Novak’s column of Jan. 19,2004). I certainly am not convinced Edwards can win Iowa, but I think if you are going put down a polling firm you ouught to at least get your facts right.

  • Layla! get your facts correct if you want to speak…it is Barak HUSSEIN Obama and we all remember how that turned out (so far). If it was HUSSION he would lead us to the pub for a few Guinness.

  • Comments are closed.