Ole' Andy Sullivan says a .. (0.00 / 0)

SurveyUSA poll has Obama at 50% in SC right now .. and as I thought .. Obama now leads 69 to 23 among African-Americans there .. so if voters turn out for Obama tomorrow like they did in Iowa .. she's gonna be in pretty rough shape

---

by: Calvin Jones and the 13th Apostle @ Mon Jan 07, 2008 at 17:52:57 PM CST

Patience on Polling (0.00 / 0)

From the looks of it your "Caution on Momentum" post was a little premature.  I wonder why it's take this long for the true extent of the bounce to show up in the polls.

---

by: geothenes @ Mon Jan 07, 2008 at 18:23:23 PM CST

asdf (0.00 / 0)

How can caution be premature?

---

by: Chris Bowers @ Mon Jan 07, 2008 at 21:31:02 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Mr guess (0.00 / 0)

is that Obama is headed for the 48 point bounce that Kerry and Hart got - well above average.

Obama will be ahead by 15 on Friday.

But the really important number is the Nevada number. 

---

by: fladem @ Mon Jan 07, 2008 at 19:30:27 PM CST

Go Edwards! (0.00 / 0)

Now the real race begins between the populist who can get elected and the Goldman Sachs 'stealth' candidate. whom the ReThugs will beat like a gong.

Peace, Health and Prosperity for Everyone.

---

by: ACitizen @ Mon Jan 07, 2008 at 19:44:16 PM CST

Has anyone mailed this to Mark Penn? (0.00 / 0)

I believe he was wondering where the bounce was. Someone should let him know its in America.

Michael Bloomberg, prince of corporate welfare

---

by: Will @ Mon Jan 07, 2008 at 20:25:32 PM CST

Momentum? (0.00 / 0)

I don't think the bounce is only about momentum. I think the fundamental dynamic in the race is who is the candidate most likely to deliver real change, and Obama is winning that argument.

---

by: Mike Lux @ Mon Jan 07, 2008 at 20:49:45 PM CST

Bounces are NEVER (0.00 / 0)

about just momentum.  They are about fundamental change to the narrative. They are not trivial and should not be lightly dismissed.  In fact, they are single most important thing in politics to study, because they provide an insight into what drives the electorate.

One common characteristic of bounces is a change in perceptions about inevitability and electability.  That is certainly the case here. 

A second characteristic is sudden change in the perception of the front runner.  I would argue that this race never was the same after Hillary made her debate gaffes in late October.  That change was first reflected in Iowa, and is now being magnified throughout the country. At its core was the identification of a fundamental flaw in Hillary the candidate.  This narrative in some ways dominated the narrative when I was in Iowa, and is dominating it here in New Hampshire.

I could go on, but this a serious discussion.  And it is late...

---

by: fladem @ Mon Jan 07, 2008 at 22:21:15 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Good observations Chris (0.00 / 0)

I actualy think Nevada will be the first sign that Obama has it in the bag, if he wins it.  (That and Florida, of course.)

Given the inherent "niceness" of Iowa and New Hampshire, as well as both states' ability to be 'counter the conventional wisdon" in terms of picking political candidates, as well as and racial makeup of the democratic party in South Carolina, you can make the argument that it won't be til you get into a state like Nevada (or more likely, Florida), where you will see traditional Democrats sort of on automatic pilot, voting for Clinton, despite the bounces of NH, IA, and SC.

Given the time between NH and Nevada, and Clinton's winning of Michigan, it is definitely possible that the "big mo" could be blunted in Nevada, and Clinton then shows winning two states - Michigan and Nevada - while Obama wins IA, and NH (and I assume SC as well.)

Now, the SC win - with Florida only 3 days later - any idea or calculations of the "post SC bump" that usually has gone to the next candidate?

That would be very interesting to see.

---

by: JC @ Mon Jan 07, 2008 at 22:33:28 PM CST

Edwards took half of Obama's bounce (0.00 / 0)

Look at the previous Gallup poll and we see something very interesting. Edwards gets half of the bounce out of Iowa.
cellpadding="2" cellspacing="2">

USA Today/Gallup poll href="http://www.pollster.com/blogs/poll_usa_todaygallup_national_4.php">
	Clinton		Edwards		Obama
href="http://www.pollster.com/blogs/poll_usa_todaygallup_national_4.php">1/4-6/08	33	-9%	20	+5%	33	+6%
href="http://blogs.usatoday.com/onpolitics/2007/12/usatgallup-poll.html">12/14-16/07	45		15		27
America has not made up it's mind. Democrats have not made up their mind.

If it isn't inevitable that Hillary's old level of 45% will give her the nomination, then you can't say that Obama's 33% is either.

Edwards climbs from 15% to 20% a growth of 5%, Obama grows 6%, both mostly taking from Clinton's 9% drop. The real debate is about to begin.

I wanted a stronger result here, I know SC is not the next state to bounce Edwards, but this is very early. They were all wrong when they declared Clinton inevitable, they are all wrong that it's already over.

Edwards is still frozen out of the Main Stream Media, he still doesn't take money from PACs. Nothing has changed. This is going to be hard work. Progressives this is how the MSM sold us the Iraq War, by controlling the MSM flush of stories. We have woken up a little, lets have some coffee, lets find strong new ways of getting the message, the demand, for change delivered to Americans. That's going to include a ton of cash from us to the JRE campaign. Lets get John elected president of the United States.

Change
"We must break up the banks and never again let them get so big that they distort our politics and take down the economy.

---

by: HousesofProgress @ Tue Jan 08, 2008 at 09:06:57 AM CST

Sorry about that, it looked fine in Preview. (0.00 / 0)

Change
"We must break up the banks and never again let them get so big that they distort our politics and take down the economy.

---

by: HousesofProgress @ Tue Jan 08, 2008 at 09:08:39 AM CST

[ Parent ]