On Chris Dodd's Huge Daily Kos Straw Poll

by: Chris Bowers

Mon Oct 22, 2007 at 14:46


While it was expected that his gains from last month would continue, Chris Dodd has surprised even me by shooting all the way to second place in the Dailykos straw poll. After 3,633 votes, here are the current results, which tend to only change from this point based on stuffing (last month's results in parenthesis):

Edwards: 31.5% (39)
Dodd: 23.2% (7)
Obama: 15.8% (21)
Clinton: 9.5% (11)
Other: 7.1% (5)
Kucinich: 5.0% (6)
Unsure: 4.6% (5)
Biden: 1.8% (1)
Richardson: 1.5% (1)

This is interesting for several reasons, many of which are more blogosphere and progressive movement centric than they are 2008 centric. Consider the following:
  1. Chris Dodd still languishes in last place in the Democracy for America straw poll. Even though that poll has been heavily stuffed by at least Al Gore supporters, and probably those of several others, that Dodd remains in last at DFA suggests that his rise at Dailykos is not widespread in the progressive netroots community.

  2. Had Dodd's increase been accompanied with a simultaneous rise in small donors, volunteers, and email sign ups for Dodd? Media buzz from a major blog is certainly helpful, but so are the resources the blogosphere can provide to help run a campaign. As of September 30th, Dodd had actually received the second fewest small contributions of any Presidential candidate except Gravel, and he didn't even lead Gravel by much (source). If the support for Dodd is deep, this should change instantaneously, as blog favorites are known for having a large amount of small contributions. If there has not been a large increase, that would be quite telling.

  3. Even if there was a widespread pro-Dodd shift in the progressive netroots community as a whole, and even if that shift was translating into massive activist support, would it even be possible for the blogosphere and the netroots to make a big difference for a candidate such as Dodd? During the first four months of 2003, Howard Dean averaged 15.3% across ten polls of New Hampshire. By way of contrast, Chris Dodd's best showing in New Hampshire has been only 3%, less than one-fifth of Dean's starting position, and he hasn't achieved that number since July. Dean also started at 5.5% in Iowa, according to the four polls conducted in that state during the first four months of 2003, whereas Dodd has never risen above 2% in any poll of Iowa. Dean was also facing far less well-known and well-financed competition. In 2003, on the Democratic side, Dean's opponents had raised about $69M at the end of Q3 (source), and no one had a name ID in excess of 65%. By way of contrast, three Democrats have name Ids in excess of 90% this time around, and they have raised funds in excess of $206M. Dodd is facing a far, far more formidable situation than Dean.

Now, with all of this in mind, what does it say about the netroots and the 2008 campaign? First, I think it shows quite clearly that the blogosphere is not of one mind on anything, and isolated islands and fragmentation might be emerging to a degree they did not in the past. Second, I think it also demonstrates that the blogosphere is not the primary activist engine of the netroots, and that it is more of a buzz machine. Third, it shows once again that it is virtually impossible for the netroots to accomplish anything on their own, and that we have more success with campaigns, candidates and ideas that have a solid footing offline beforehand. Fourth, it might also show that growing numbers of the blogosphere are starting to view both the Edwards and Obama campaigns as long shots too, so if you are going to support a long shot there is no need to restrict your choices to the second tier. Fifth, and finally, it confirms to me what I have always thought about the ideological bent of the netroots for some time: foreign policy and civil liberties issues are of the most importance to progressive netroots activists, and the willingness to show some fight against Republicans and conservatives are far more important than the specifics of policy proposals will ever be.

Dodd's huge performance in the Dailykos straw poll provides lots of food for thought, both on the blogosphere and the 2008 Presidential campaign. If nothing else, the straw poll certainly is a lot more interesting than most of the other campaign happenings these days.

Update: As far as the second bullet point above is concerned, the Dodd campaign has told me that they raised "well over" $200K entirely in small donations during the two days last week when Dodd announced he would filibuster. Also, traffic to the Chris Dodd campaign website has increased ten fold, and "tens of thousands" of new people have singed up for the email list. So, there has been some real activism. Whether that momentum continues, and then whether the activism reaches a critical mass to start changing the public opinion polls, remains to be seen. The dkos straw poll could still yet prove to be a leading indicator on this one.

Chris Bowers :: On Chris Dodd's Huge Daily Kos Straw Poll

Tags: , , , , (All Tags)
Print Friendly View Send As Email
Cynical (0.00 / 0)
Ask the poll again in a week when the FISA hubbub dies down.  All this tells me is that you can get folks worked up over an issue pretty quickly, and that Edwards' (and to a lesser extent Obama's and Clinton's) online support is fickle.

It might also just show that people don't take polls seriously as a reflection of their own end-preferences, but wanted to reward Dodd for last week's stand.


While I do grant the validity of your point.... (4.00 / 1)
....I'm curious. Why do you think the FISA hubbub will die down? Polling indicates that it is an issue of great improtatance to those annoying and obnoxious folks called 'The Voters'.

Are they going to STFU because 'Sellout' Reid and Miss Nancey insist that they must....

'Keep their powder dry...'?

Seriously, one thing 'Versailles' and many others outside it's gilded halls don't understand. That is that these issues do not 'go away' just because they aren't being covered by the corporatist press or even in Free Left Blogistan. The recent news about the IG's movement against Abu Gonzo is one of many, I and I'm sure you also, could name.

No, sweeping them under the rug doesn't work. Too many folks have been hurt by BushCo and they haven't given up on payback.

I fully expect to see FISA being an issue all the way up to 2008 and beyond.

Peace, Health and Prosperity for Everyone.


[ Parent ]
I think this is more than FISA. (4.00 / 5)
I think my personal experience is probably fairly standard. I called Dodd and encouraged Dodd to put a hold om this bill. And then ... he did.

I make a lot of phone calls, but never before has the politician actually done what I asked. That creates a certain bond.

If I were in the Dodd campain, I'd very publicly ask the netroots for the top ten or five (realistic) things they'd love to see a Senator do right now, that's not currently getting done. There's an opening here for Dodd to become the Guy Who Actually Listens and Acts.


[ Parent ]
why it'll die down (0.00 / 0)
Nothing's hitting the floor until some point in November, and traditional media has yet to treat this as a major issue or development in the race.

[ Parent ]
that is possible (4.00 / 3)
But I think the momentum behind Dodd has been building for a while. I think FISA was more of a tipping point on Dodd than a one-off event. We shall see...

[ Parent ]
To a lesser extent? (4.00 / 2)
Am I reading the numbers wrong, or is Dodd taking the most from Obama?

I think the second point--that this is a short-term reward--makes sense.

Though I think it's also a warning, especially to the other Senators. They can't keep dropping the ball, or someone else might run with it.

Finally, I think Chris is right: all campaigns but one now feel like longshots. Why not go for the guy who just answered the Call of the Netroots?

Also, between Tim Tagaris and Armando, the guy's -got- to be good.


[ Parent ]
Second Big Story (4.00 / 1)
Is Obama's poor performance.  Certainly front page people, here, Josh Marshall, etc have been expressing renewed skepticism about Obama.  This indicates that it is filtering out, at least in the netroots. 


[ Parent ]
Dodd took more (4.00 / 1)
from edwards, but not by much, and edwards had more than obama to begin with.

I voted Dodd for the first time last month, and again this month.

I previously voted obama pretty consistently


[ Parent ]
Re: (0.00 / 0)
This statement is right on…
foreign policy and civil liberties issues are of the most importance to progressive netroots activists, and the willingness to show some fight against Republicans and conservatives are far more important than the specifics of policy proposals will ever be.

Every candidate has their own proposal for this and that domestic issue, and we all know that few if any of those proposals will ever become a reality. I think we look more for principled actions (like Obama's early opposition to the war and Dodd's filibuster threat) than fancy policy ideas.

"Don't hate the media, become the media" -Jello Biafra

the polls have different objectives (0.00 / 0)
I participated in both the Kos poll and the DFA poll, and to me they have different objectives. The Kos poll is a snapshot of WHO YOU LIKE NOW while the DFA poll could result in an eventual endorsement by DFA.  Per a communication that I got from Charles Chamberlain at DFA, if one candidate gets more than 2/3rds of the vote, they could get a DFA endorsement.  What they would do if this candidate is Al Gore I don't know, but it is looking like it *might* go to Edwards.  If so, I wonder how much they will be able to mobilize DFAers for him?  My impression is that no matter what the official DFA endorsement is, people will continue to work for whomever they wish. It could build some Edwards momentum that might bring people with it that way, but I don't think a DFA endorsement alone would change people's minds.
 

It's simpler than that. (0.00 / 0)
I think there are two obvious factors you don't mention: First, Gore is explicitly in the DFA list and not in the Dkos one. Since he's the DFA winner, we don't know how his votes would distribute without him. Second, the DFA poll seems to be a preference system (?) where you can vote for three candidates. I don't know how the points are then distributed, but being able to vote for the 2 and 3 spots has to make a big and unpredictable (by me, at least) difference. It probably explains much of Kucinich's high rank in that poll and not the Dkos one.

I also wonder how the timing of the polls affects the result: does the DFA poll reflect more of Dodd's post-hold standing?


that doesn't explain (0.00 / 0)
why Dodd would perform so much worse against Obama, Edwards, Clinton and others than he does in the Dailykos poll. the difference between last and second is striking, with or without the difference in poll methodology.

[ Parent ]
Al Gore was a write-in for the DFA Pulsepoll (0.00 / 0)


Join us at the Missouri community blog Show Me Progress!

[ Parent ]
Wait til people study Dodd's record (0.00 / 0)
Do you want our next President to be the servant of the American insurance and accounting industries?  On issues of consumer protection, access to our civil justice system, shareholder rights Dodd has regularly sided with corporate America.  He supports "tort reform" and in the mid-1990's helped weakening securities laws for the benefit of Connecticut and corporate business interests, arguably leading to abuses such as Enron and Worldcom.

And look at how he polls in Connecticut.  Among the voters that know him best, he can muster only 7% support for President:
http://www.realclear...

As background:

In the fall of 1994, the so-called "Gingrich Revolution" led to the takeover of the House of Representatives by pro-business Republicans. Tort-reform legislation to curb shareholder lawsuits against companies and accountants was at the top of the agenda. Silicon Valley high-tech firms again aligned with the accounting industry to lobby Congress to pass a tort-reform bill, which it did by large majorities in both houses.

Although President Clinton vetoed the bill, called the Private Securities and Litigation Reform Act of 1995, asserting that it would close the courthouse door on investors with legitimate claims, the Senate -- led by Sen. Christopher Dodd (D-Conn.), chairman of the Democratic National Committee -- overturned the president's veto in December 1995. Sen. Dodd received almost a quarter of a million dollars in political donations from the accounting industry in the 1995-96 election cycle, although he was not up for re-election.

"Chris Dodd, here he is chairman of the Democratic Party, but he's also the leading advocate in the U.S. Senate on behalf of the accounting industry," says Charles Lewis of the Center for Public Integrity. "And he helps overturn the veto of his own president, who installed him as Democratic chairman. Dodd might as well have been on the accounting industry's payroll. He couldn't have helped them any more than he did as a U.S. Senator."

http://www.pbs.org/w...


Shades of Gray (0.00 / 0)
That's a fair counterpoint; but all the Senate Dems outside of Obama have these issues. All I know is, fidelity to the Constitution, separation of powers, and the rule of law -- these trump everything for me right now. I am looking squarely at Dodd whereas before I barely gave him a second thought.

I have not contributed to his campaign yet, nor do I plan to ... unless. Unless he continues to step up and prove that there are things worth fighting for. I'd like to see him galvanize 40 solid Senate votes for no Telecom immunity, for getting info on why exactly this FISA fix is even needed. Fight for the 4th Amendment, dammit. If he does this, and really digs in on the issue, my ears will be even more open and receptive, and we can deal with accounting industry standards at another time. 


[ Parent ]
Hardly surprising (0.00 / 0)
He has been pushed relentlessly on the front page over there. I'm not necessarily saying that is unjustified - it's just that the poll results are not surprising. And the fact that the Democracy for America results are different lend credence to this theory.

As for real world consequences, Rasmussen detects none:

In the race for the Democratic Presidential Nomination, little has changed. Clinton attracts 49% support and continues to enjoy a commanding lead over Barack Obama, who earns the vote from 22%. John Edwards attracts 12% and no other candidate attracts more than 3% support from Likely Democratic Primary Voters


oops, bad link (0.00 / 0)
here is the correct one.

[ Parent ]
I saw Dodd in Manchester, NH (0.00 / 0)
at the Jefferson-Jackson dinner Saturday Night.  He had a room set-up - sponsored by the fire fighters union.

It struck me that it is very easy to underestimate how important labor support can be.  There wasn't a huge group of people there - but I just may have been there at the wrong time. 

My overall impression based on simply observing the number of buttons in the crowd was that there was a substantial gap between Clinton/Obama and the rest of the campaigns.

A minor point - Clinton and Obama were foundation sponsors at the event, and the Richardson people bought a table.  Edwards did not - which may (an Edwards person suggested this to me) be a sign of the state limits imposed by taking the federal financing.  There are other minor things I could point to where money was having a minor impact (eg - the Obama campaign gave every Democratic County Organization a $1,000.)


Donate to Open Left








Friends of the Earth thanks the OpenLeft community for the ideas you generate and your contributions to the progressive movement.

As an anti-spam measure, there is a 24-hour waiting period after registering before new users can comment.
blog advertising is good for you
blog advertising is good for you
SEARCH

   

Advanced Search