very good. Also excellent head-to-head matchup #s.

Clinton 51
Rudy 46.

Another poll puts me over 50 points...

, in the field November 2-4 2007

That's the weekend.

November 2-4 2007

LOL.

http://www.surveyusa.com/client/PollRepo rtEmail.aspx?g=0690deb0-f3ea-4916-a53b-7 d604f8fef65

Survey USA has a poll in FL as well. Clinton is crushing the field post debate.

Clinton 56
Obama 19
Edwards 14

Thanks for the great graphs. It's clear that you spent a lot of time working on them. I'm a visual person so it helps me conceptualize these polling trends.

It's interesting that gallup so far has shown no fallout from last week's debate. These results certainly don't help with the horserace narrative that the traditional media is pushing.

Here's a hypothetical. What if there is NO fallout from last week's debate and Edwards/Obama's negative attacks against her? What do those campaigns do then? Once you start going negative, it's a neverending process and the campaign simply can't stop. For one, the media will continue to urge the campaign to continue with the campaign attacks to sell newspaper copy even when it might be best for the campaign to focus on issues. How do Edwards and Obama get back to talking about the issues, if these negative attacks don't work on HRC?

Second issue with all of the negative attacks. What if there actually is a horserace? Wouldn't that put Edwards and Obama under the glare of the media along with Clinton? In order to encourage more conflict, wouldn't the media then decide to bring out whatever dirt they could on Obama/Edwards? Could these candidates handle the bad press?

Inquiring minds want to know....

I think the next few weeks will fulfill every political scientist's fantasies. Good stuff!!

Thanks again for the diary....

These poll results post-debate are incredibly stable when compared to pre-debate.   We have to remember that right before the debate we had seen THREE polls in succession that had shown a downward adjustment closer to a 20% aggregate rather than the 30% we had seen"

Pew Research 21% margin - released 10/25

Foxnews - 17% margin = released 10/26

Zogby 14% margin - released 10/28

An adjustment closer to 20% to 25% was underway already, as expected.  Lofty ~30% polls were not realistically going to hold on a consistent basis, aside from a few polls here and there, such as the Marist poll and this Gallup poll.

If the average margins move along between 20% and 25% from here on out throughout the month of November and into December rather than 30% to 35%, no real complaints from anyone aside the Edwards and Obama camps.      

I've had this same criticism of some other polls, this is a random sample of adults including some who are not even registered voters! USA Today didn't bother to use any kind of likely voter model, so this is a very very very very poor indicator of how a national primary election would play out. And we don't even have a national primary election. Still, notice that Giuliani leads all candidates at 59% in terms of the portion of the population that would consider voting for him in the General Election. Obama is in second place at 58% and Clinton and Edwards both trail at 55%.

We'll see what the national primary polls look like after Iowa and New Hampshire.

I'm glad she is still so high though a little surprised- people seem to hate the idea of giving illegals driver's licenses so that is bound to drop her some support- but she's been much clearer in the last few days about it so I think that will help.  Things are looking good for her, though.

Me thinks voters have started the learning process where Rudy Giuliani is concerned.

Clinton can beat him with 300+ electoral votes.

The only way Tootsie can win is if we run someone other than Clinton and allow Rudy to win New Jersey and put PA, NY, and CT into play.  If we do that we lose bigtime.  Lose just 1 of those and we are most likely toast.

...theyll be long gone and we'll be dealing with their mess for the rest of the election..

Yep. It is the one issue that the Democratic candidates needed to agree amongst themselves to finesse during the primary race.

Clinton has been doing her best to finesse the issue with an eye towards the general election and the other Dems are too brain dead to even figure out that they are pushing the party into a trap.

It doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out that the Dems need to hold the Latino vote without walking into the anticipated Republican anti-Mexican trap.

This was THE issue that every candidate needed to say, "I agree with Joe", "I agree with Barack", "I agree with John", "I agree with Hillary"...all while giving Rorschaulk test wiggle-room answers.

It's just amazing to me how Democrats continue to have a total blind spot to the dynamics of a general election race against the Republican politics of hate.

From the outset, the MSM has been promoting former Mayor Giuliani, what with the false imagery of 9/11, whose images also sustained GWB and his GOP through the worst of times with a collective sense of "fear factor."

Of course in 2006, that scenario had run its course.  Contrary to almost every purveyer of Right-wing spiel on the MSM, both House and Senate and many state houses went blazingly Democratic.

The former NYC Mayor was no longer viable the moment his own city discarded him.  The raison d'etre for his candidacy was completely bankrupt when most New Yorkers not only avoided him like the plague, but often held him in contempt.

This of course left the MSM script for the former Mayor as the GWB successor in tatters.  One must note, quite glaringly, that no one in the MSM asks why Giuliani is a viable presidential contender when much his own city wants nothing to do with him.

As an example, would one trust a medical professional to tend to you if that person was cast out of his or her own hospital in which he or she practiced?  Of course not.  And one would certainly hesitate placing that same person in charge of one's own regional hospital in turn.

Now, of course, consistently polls--and indeed those taken fully after the last Democratic debate--show Senator Clinton often handily besting the former Mayor.  

This has required that the MSM be at their most cunning.  To prevent another Clinton presidency--after all, the Clintons have been for fifteen years the MSM's most despised politicians--it would be necessary to "divide and conquer" from within the ranks of the Democratic Party.

Thus began the egging on, and then the piling on, of invective hurled at Senator Clinton.  

In the vanguard is the whining, unsuccessful candidate for Vice President and former Senator John Edwards--eschewed by his own state, as current polls clearly reveal.  

And in the ranks behind are the immature ramblings of a novice who believes that an Oprah Winfrey endorsement, a fawning media, and a two-year Senate career instantly qualifies him for the United States presidency.

That both bloggers and most MSM wishful-thinkers somewhow believe that these two candidates can somehow best the former First Lady of the United States, herself the spouse of the only twice elected Democratic president since FDR, defies reality.  

When three national polls conducted after the last Democratic debate, and even the Republican based Rasmussen poll all indicate yet extremely healthy national leads for Senator Clinton, one would think that the Clinton detractors would admit to her formidability.  But they do not.  

They are apt to follow the Karl Rove/MSM line that she is unelectable.  This is the great "psych-out," in which Clinton detractors fuel the passions of her adversaries.  They know full well that she is the likely nominee.  And they also know, in truth, that she alone can best Giuliani and any and all other comers.

But there is the hope that those anti-Clinton passions coalesce in November of 2008 and thrust the wholly unqualified, and indeed one discarded by his own city, former Mayor Giuliani into the White House to continue the GWB Reign of Terror.  

It matters not to them that this would signify the very end of the United States, now both fiscally and in terms of international affairs, on the precipice of becoming a has-been superpower, very much on the the route taken by the USSR some twenty years earlier.

These are desperate times, requiring maturity and reason, which Senator Clinton has in spades.  The words must be indeed carefully parsed.  There is no longer time for one-line slogans, and single mindsets--such as utilizing anti-immigration to fuel passions anew.  

When, therefore, former Senator Edwards and Senator Obama went into full assault mode for the matter of a few upticks in some polls (but downward ticks in others), it was not to effect a different dynamic in the Democratic race (where Senator Clinton remains the front-runner), it was to effect, in fact, a different dynamic in the general presidential race next year.  

In that inevitable Clinton-Giuliani matchup, fueling the passions of anti-immigration is, indeed, all the GOP has left.

And the hope is that the Democrats are indeed foolish enough to put up either a former Senator unpopular in his own state, and a political novice junior Senator from Illinois, who, for all his intelligence, still hasn't got a clue.  

Such a scenario, and no other, makes a Giuliani candidacy truly viable.  Such a dream opposition, alone, gives Giuliani hope for the White House in 2009.

I pity you, Joachim.  

The Clintons alone, since FDR, have showed the Democrats the way.  And the Clinton administration was one of long peace and prosperity.  He has merited the respect of his party, and she has carefully walked the path toward a general election victory in 2008.  

The novice Obama, and the former Senator from North Carolina Edwards, not only fuel the passions of the Clinton haters, they alone can make certain a Giuliani victory.  

Whereas Senator Clinton alone keeps the blue states blue and many Southern states in play.

The anti-Clinton Russerts, Matthews, Williams, and their coterie are playing you for fools.  It is why, more so than ever, it will be up to the rest of the nation, to correct the wrong the foolishness of bloggers like yourselves would effect.

Whether supporting Nader over Gore in 2000, and randomly neophytes like Governor Dean in 2004, too many of you have lived in unreality too long, and our poor nation has suffered hugely because of it.

Typical response.
And what is this way the Clintons have showed the democrats.
Act like a republican and play lip service to democratic ideals.
The death penalty, welfare reform, NAFTA that benefited corporations and has decimated the manufacturing base in small town America, Triangulation.
Were those really the progressive priorities??

The majority of the democratic party has rejected that DLC approach so please don't pity me. Pity yourself for being in the wrong party.