It seemed as if the political\/media world had finally settled on a narrative for the Iowa caucuses — Hillary Clinton had a reasonably solid lead, John Edwards had the big mo and was in position to pull the upset, and Mike Huckabee was sinking fast.<\/p>\n
Of course, of all of that may still be true, but the highly-anticipated poll<\/a> from the Des Moines Register<\/i> doesn’t fit the narrative at all. Here’s how the Dems stacked up in the poll, released last night:<\/p>\n * Obama 32% (up from 28% in early December) And the Republicans:<\/p>\n * Huckabee 32% (up from 29% in early December) If accurate, these results are obviously extremely good news for the Obama campaign, whose seven-point lead is larger than any Democrat has enjoyed in any DMR<\/i> poll this year. * Roughly a third of likely caucusgoers say they could be persuaded to choose someone else before Thursday evening.<\/p>\n * The DMR<\/i> poll does not reflect second-choices, which may make quite a difference, given the number of candidates who may not make the 15% threshold in various parts of the state.<\/p>\n * The DMR<\/i> poll isn’t exactly in line with other recent numbers from the state, but it’s generally the most respected poll<\/a> in the state, and has a strong track record for accuracy<\/a>. (The caveat to this, of course, is that all<\/i> polling over the holidays is inherently tricky.)<\/p>\n * Ben Smith notes the makeup<\/a> of the poll participants: “The Register poll is including a surprising 40% of independents and 5% of Republicans among the people likely to attend the Democratic caucuses. If that pans out on January 4, it’s hard to see how Obama wouldn’t win. On the other hand, as David Yepsen points out, Hillary is actually winning among Democrats, who made up 80% of the caucus-goers last cycle.”<\/p>\n * On a related note, Marc Ambinder adds<\/a> that “Obama’s internal polling does not show this high a proportion of independents choosing to caucus.”<\/p>\n * The Edwards campaign is arguing that the poll is exaggerating<\/a> the likely participation of first-timers, which may very well be true.<\/p>\n * If Giuliani comes in a distant sixth, behind Ron Paul, after having been in the lead<\/i><\/a> in the spring of 2007, I’m going to laugh my butt off.<\/p>\n
\n* Clinton 25% (unchanged)
\n* Edwards 24% (up from 23%)
\n* Richardson 6% (down from 9%)
\n* Biden 4% (down from 6%)<\/p>\n
\n* Romney 24% (down from 26%)
\n* McCain 13% (up from 7%)
\n* Thompson 9% (up from 5%)
\n* Paul 9% (up from 7%)
\n* Giuliani 5% (down from 13%)<\/p>\n
\n
\nThere’s no shortage of analysis about What It All Means (if anything), but here are a few points to consider:<\/p>\n