At MyDD, Jerome Armstrong analyzes the most recent polling numbers out of Iowa and New Hampshire. In brief: For the Dems, Iowa is up for grabs. Senator Clinton is ahead by a nose, but her support is soft. Her position in New Hampshire is stronger, but much of this support comes from her perceived electability. I agree with Jerome that if she loses Iowa, which is very possible, New Hampshire could slip away from her also.
But I admit that I have a terrible track record at predicting what voters will do.
Just for some perspective, see Democratic candidate rankings for the 2004 nomination, taken in November 2003:
Not Sure 34%
Howard Dean 15
Wesley Clark 10
Dick Gephardt 9
Joe Lieberman 9
John Kerry 7
Al Sharpton 4
John Edwards 3
Dennis Kucinich 2
Carol Moseley Braun 2
(Zogby America Poll, 558 Likely Democrat Voters Nationwide, Conducted 11/3-5/03, Margin Of Error +/- 4.2%)
New Hampshire only, also November 2003:
Howard Dean 38%
John Kerry 24
Wesley Clark 4
Joe Lieberman 4
John Edwards 4
Dick Gephardt 3
Carol Moseley Braun 1
Dennis Kucinich 1
Al Sharpton 0
(American Research Group Poll, 600 Registered Democrats And Undeclared Voters, Conducted 11/2-5/03, Margin Of Error +/- 4%)
Here are the final results for New Hampshire, 2004.
And the moral is, pre-election poll results are like dust in the wind.
For the Republicans, Mitt Romney is ahead in both polls. In Iowa, Rudy Giuliani is only 4th (after Romney, Huckabee, and Undecided). In New Hampshire, he’s tied for second place with John McCain.
So tell me again why the bobbleheads keep talking about a Clinton-Giuliani race in 2008?
As I remember, all through 2003 many professional television pundits kept saying Dick Gephardt or Joe Lieberman would be the nominee. And now exactly the same crew, albeit a tad more wrinkled, are talking up Clinton and Giuliani. And they get paid for this. I make wrong predictions just as often, but I do it for free. Such a deal.
At the Washington Post, Michael Shear writes about the Hillary phenomenon among the GOP.
They mock her proposals, utter her name with a sneer and win standing ovations by ridiculing her ideas as un-American, even socialistic. She has become the one thing the Republican candidates for president can agree on.
Earlier this year, the senator from New York was the subject of an occasional laugh line from former New York mayor Rudolph W. Giuliani. Now, the trickle has become a torrent as the leading GOP candidates seek to one-up one another in a Clinton-bashing contest aimed at energizing their party faithful.
“The competition inside the GOP for who’s the most anti-Hillary is going to pay dividends,” said Greg Strimple, a GOP pollster and consultant who is not working with any presidential campaign. “Looking for that piece of anti-Hillary energy is what you’re seeing right now.”
I’m glad to see Republicans running an honest campaign for a change. But what will the eventual nominee campaign on if Senator Clinton is not his opponent? The poor dear will have to run on issues. Iraq, health care, the economy? God, guns, and gays?