Iowa Poll: Hillary and Obama Tied at 29%

A new Strategic Vision Iowa poll among likely Democratic caucus voters in Iowa show Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama tied at 29% with John Edwards trailing at 23%.

Poll results are here.

Also noteworthy:

  • 85% of Dems polled say they favor a full troop withdrawal from Iraq within 6 months (compared to 51% of Republicans)
  • 33% say experience is most important in picking a President
  • 29% say ideology is most important, 27% say charisma.

< Nutty Judge of the Week | Replay: Rudy vs. Hillary 2000 >
  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft

  • Display: Sort:
    i was also intrigued (none / 0) (#1)
    by cpinva on Wed Nov 28, 2007 at 05:40:55 PM EST
    by the republican side of that poll: mitt romney and mike huckabee leading the pack, rudy trailing by a mile. thompson and the rest non-entities, for all intents and purposes.

    Huckabee (none / 0) (#2)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Wed Nov 28, 2007 at 06:08:12 PM EST
    Lotsa Christians in Iowa, according to NPR...

    Obama leading in Iowa, ideological regression (none / 0) (#3)
    by Aaron on Wed Nov 28, 2007 at 11:20:16 PM EST
    I'll be back in Iowa again this weekend and next weekend, along with a lot of other people from St. Louis, college students, working people, older folks, high school kids, and we'll all be knocking on doors talking to people about Barack Obama.  The last time we went up there Barack jumped ahead by at least two points, and by January were hoping to make that five points.

    I didn't see any Clinton campaign workers in Ottumwa, only Dodd and Richardson offices and people.

    I still hear some talking about Hillary Clinton's entitlement to the Democratic nomination. I find few viewpoints more repugnant than that of those who believe the Clintons are entitled to anything, and that somehow Hillary Clinton's acquisition of the Democratic nomination is something that she is in some way entitled to. No one is entitled to be my representative, that is the purview and privilege of the voters, and the voters alone.  Lest  everyone forget, Bill Clinton was certainly no progressive messiah.  Only in comparison to the demonic Bush administration, without any other frame of reference, could William Jefferson and Hillary Clinton be held up his messianic liberals.  To do so is nothing more than fanciful projection, brought about by overly nostalgic revisionism.

    The Republicans hated the Clintons with such a passion precisely because he took everything they wanted to do, all their little pet projects like welfare reform (the fantasy of lazy Americans living high on the hog on the US taxpayer dole), among others, plastered a democratic face on them, and got the American people to swallow that garbage far more easily than the Conservatives could have ever hoped.

    And when a million people were being butchered in the streets and villages of Rwanda, it was the Clintons who did nothing, apparently because some idiot was holding a semen impregnated dress over their heads.  Where the hell was Hillary then?  I continue to wonder if Bill turned to his wife in their moments alone, and said, I have to do something, it's genocide for god sake. And how did Hillary, his closest adviser if you believe their recent assertions, how did she respond?  Did Hillary comfort Bill and ease his decision to take no action, telling him that he just didn't have the political capital to stop the murder of hundreds of thousands of African babies who were literally being hacked to death with machetes while the Clintons were busy doing damage control on their public image.

    Is that what real progressives do when confronted with genocide?

    Yeah well excuse me if I vomit all over Bill and Hillary and their hypocrisy should I ever meet them in person, all I will see is blood.

    Maybe I'm just an old-fashioned sexist, but I think a woman should have some compassion, most especially progressive women, lest our country sit by and watch as children are put to the sword, while we superior Americans with our unparalleled power to project military might at a moments notice, hold up our hands and say there's nothing we can do.  No better than George W. Pinhead, the traitor to the Republic, who has no problem letting the same thing go on in Sudan today.  While making up lies to tell the American people in order to get us to support his invasion of the Middle East, and who backed him up when crunch time came, that's right, that darling of the left, if you believe the Republican propaganda, Hillary.

    When I remember Rwanda, I am forced to wonder, if the people in the Clinton administration at some point said to themselves, "ah, just more dead black people in Africa, who'll notice." Since it wasn't an issue of concern to most American voters, and they checked the polls to confirm this, Bill and Hillary made the choice to take no action to stop the genocide.  And we all know now that they didn't need the support of Congress to utilize the military to intervene.

    Reminds me a lot of those in the Roosevelt administration, who apparently once said to themselves, " ah, just more dead Jews in Europe, who'll notice." Assuming that FDR himself wasn't referring to the Jews, homosexuals, disabled people, Jehovah's Witnesses etc. of Europe as "cockroaches" at that point.

    Well some of my people came from eastern Europe (Russia, Germany, Poland), and we lost more of our blood kin then we could count, while a US President chose not to bomb railways and concentration camps that would have put an end to, or at least greatly slowed the genocide, perhaps saving millions.  And those that survived promised that they would never forget, and never let their children forget, lest it happen again.

      Sadly, to the shame of all humankind, it keeps happening, and happened while good folks like the Clintons, sat by and did nothing.  So for my part, when it comes to voting for people who had real power in their hands, and chose to do nothing while genocide happened right before their eyes, well let's just say I'm going to exhaust all my other options before I resign myself to putting such people in the White House once again.

    This country better remember who the real progressives are, and not let our definition of progressive and liberal be dictated to us by conservative Republicans, otherwise we're going to wind up with moderate conservatives passing themselves off as progressives, using the defense that in their hearts they're really liberal, but in the current political atmosphere they can't remain true to progressive values.  Well whether we want to admit it or not, in that equation, the Conservatives win, and will continue to gain ground in this country until someone has the guts to draw a line in the sand and say enough, that's as far as you go.

    Otherwise we will become a country where torture is acceptable, a country where our constitutionally protected rights are ignored by an executive branch which places itself beyond the confines of any law constitutional or otherwise, a country where the mean ugly elements with money and power prey upon the weak and defenseless, while putting on a pretense of defending them, a country that rejects science and reason in favor of superstition and fear.

    Oh snap, wait a minute, that's already happened.

    And you think the Clintons, who helped start this trend with their quiet reframing of the conservative agenda, are going to do what is necessary to alter the course the Conservatives have us on, do you really believe that in your hearts?  Better be sure, because the only thing riding on your decision is all the marbles, and the survival of this nation as a democratic republic.

    By the way, I watched the Republican debates tonight, I forced myself to do it even though it was making me ill.  And the ideas I heard being touted were so ridiculously far to the right, that it was hard to believe that I was hearing this in the 21st-century.  If any of these politicians had dared to take these positions in the 1970s, none of them would've ever been able to get more than 30% of registered voters to support them.  

    From a political ideological perspective, this country has moved back to the equivalent of the late 50s early 60s, and the Clintons bear a significant measure of responsibility for this regression.  Do you Clinton supporters really believe that another Clinton presidency will do anything but slow the inevitable march of this conservative lunacy?

    If this country keeps moving backwards in time, we can look forward to seeing a reenactment of the Salem witch trials in our courts, and the reemergence of the Inquisition by around 2025.

    Thanks for the Obama stump speech. (5.00 / 1) (#5)
    by Artificial Intelligence on Thu Nov 29, 2007 at 06:10:30 AM EST
    No comment necessary.

    i'll take bill clinton (none / 0) (#4)
    by cpinva on Thu Nov 29, 2007 at 12:00:15 AM EST
    for $100 alex!