DMR Poll: Obama With Large Lead

Running counter to every other recently released poll, the DMR Poll not only has Obama holding his lead but widening it:

Obama was the choice of 32 percent of likely Democratic caucusgoers, up from 28 percent in the Register's last poll in late November, while Clinton, a New York senator, held steady at 25 percent and Edwards, a former North Carolina senator, was virtually unchanged at 24 percent.

Remember, the DMR Poll nailed the order of the 2004 Iowa Caucus and is easily the most respected Iowa poll. Obama will now be the odds on favorite to win the Iowa Caucuses.

(Speaking for me only) If the DMR poll is accurate, I predict that not only will Obama win Iowa, he will win the nomination.

For Obama supporters, there are a couple of things to worry about in this poll. The first is the sample here predicts:

Caucusgoers under the age of 35 represent 17 percent of likely attendees, higher than any Register poll this year but lower than any other age group.

In essence, the result is dependent on this age group caucusing as it never has before.

The other worry I would have is the rolling trends the poll produced. Obama was tied with Clinton on the 27-28. He clearly had either a huge December 29 or a bad December 27, as he jumped to 33 from 28 in a two day average for the 28-29 period. But then went up only to 34 on the 29-30 cycle, indicating a dropoff (or a steady result if he had an inferior 27 polling day.)

Do I believe this result? Honestly, I find it hard to believe. At the least, I doubt it jibes with Obama's INTERNAL polling. Why? Because the Obama campaign has been on the attack and on the defensive.

Tomorrow they will be gloating however and I imagine they will turn off all negativity.

A good New Year's Eve for the Obama campaign.

< New Year's Eve in Des Moines | Non-Gold Standard Iowa Polling Contradicts DMR Poll >
  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft

  • Display: Sort:
    Iowans Assess Candidates (5.00 / 1) (#26)
    by Aaron on Tue Jan 01, 2008 at 02:26:06 AM EST
    Best able to bring about change.

    Obama -- 33%

    Clinton -- 26%

    Edwards -- 19%


    Would have the most success as president in unifying the country.

    Obama -- 36%

    Clinton -- 23%

    Edwards -- 20%


    Has the most experience and competence to lead.

    Clinton -- 35%

    Obama -- 21%

    Edwards -- 19%


    Matches my own core principles.

    Obama -- 28%

    Edwards -- 25%

    Clinton -- 21%


    Best able to win the presidential election.

    Clinton -- 31%

    Obama -- 28%

    Edwards -- 21%



    Likely Democratic caucus goers most important issues.

    War Iraq -- 28%

    Healthcare -- 22%

    Economy -- 20%

    Media Cycles (4.00 / 1) (#9)
    by RedHead on Mon Dec 31, 2007 at 09:52:23 PM EST
    One last point.

    This will drive the media cycles for Tuesday and probably most of Wednesday.  

    Obama starts out with the media-darling-halo (anyone see sunday's MTP), so the MSM will hype this up the flag pole.  

    I'd like to see a 3-way dead heat. (3.66 / 3) (#16)
    by Compound F on Mon Dec 31, 2007 at 10:38:54 PM EST
    Hung jury.  Make them all work harder for NH.

    Happy New Year.

    Gad Zhooks (3.00 / 2) (#14)
    by Molly Bloom on Mon Dec 31, 2007 at 10:19:31 PM EST
    If true its Kumbayah. We get nowhere.

    Of course we all know profanity (none / 0) (#19)
    by oculus on Tue Jan 01, 2008 at 12:49:19 AM EST
    is prohibited here, but still:  Gad Zhooks?

    or gadzooks (5.00 / 1) (#35)
    by Molly Bloom on Tue Jan 01, 2008 at 08:44:22 AM EST
    gad-ˈzüks, -ˈzu̇ks\
    often capitalized
    perhaps from God's hooks, the nails of the Crucifixion
    archaic --used as a mild oath

    I could have used 'Zounds!,  I suppose.


    In Yiddish: Gad says (none / 0) (#32)
    by koshembos on Tue Jan 01, 2008 at 07:52:19 AM EST
    Tell me Jgarza (none / 0) (#39)
    by Molly Bloom on Wed Jan 02, 2008 at 08:12:23 AM EST
    Who will Obama sit down and negotiate with on the GOP side? They opposed NHC in the 1990's not because they disagreed with the Clinton Administration proposal, but because they were advised to do so, because if it passed it would be politically disasterous for them. I don't see that mindset changing.

    Reverse order (none / 0) (#1)
    by andgarden on Mon Dec 31, 2007 at 09:12:47 PM EST
    from Insider Advantage. Interesting--we shall just have to see.

    Perfect (none / 0) (#2)
    by Maryb2004 on Mon Dec 31, 2007 at 09:16:15 PM EST
    Nobody agrees.  

    I hate predictable endings, so Thursday should be a fun night.

    Everybody have a safe night and see you next year.

    Looks like Pollster was right (none / 0) (#3)
    by tommyg on Mon Dec 31, 2007 at 09:16:18 PM EST
    Those polls done right after Christmas just weren't reliable.  Even DMR's polling trends show Obama gaining the further out from Christmas it got.

    With all the contradicting polls, it's hard to say there's a clear favorite, but the DMR has a great track record.

    Holy Crap!! (none / 0) (#4)
    by RedHead on Mon Dec 31, 2007 at 09:18:59 PM EST
    I shutter to think of the reaction at Big Orange.

    I guess those giant crowds were for real ~ ya know what I mean.

    Just saw CBS Evening News (I'm on the west coast this week), they literally called Huck "strange" twice.  The feature report focused on Edwards, and his supporters were intense, some even had tears in the eyes.

    talk about a reversal of fortune.  comeback-kid, nothing.  If he pulls it off, he retires the title.

    Jeebus (none / 0) (#5)
    by RedHead on Mon Dec 31, 2007 at 09:21:17 PM EST
    I can't look.  

    I can't look.

    I'm non-violence (unless someone steps on my foot on the subway).

    There is going to be hand-to-hand blogbat the next three days.

    Counter-attack (none / 0) (#6)
    by RedHead on Mon Dec 31, 2007 at 09:30:31 PM EST
    "Tomorrow they will be gloating however and I imagine they will turn off all negativity."

    True.  On the other hand, Team Clinton will likely go negative, as may Team Edwards.

    Two days and a wake-up!!

    Counter-attack (none / 0) (#7)
    by GOPmurderedconscience on Mon Dec 31, 2007 at 09:43:39 PM EST
    I don't think anyone who wasn't going negative today will do it in the next 2 days.

    Always remember: Campaigns react to their own internal polls because they are more reliable than anything we see.

    That's why only junkies know the pollsters of choice of high caliber cabdidates


    Interesting (none / 0) (#8)
    by RalphB on Mon Dec 31, 2007 at 09:49:10 PM EST
    Looks like the DMR poll counted lots more under 35s than the other polls.  Since 72% of Obama's support is from that group, turnout is everything for him

    Yikes! Is that true? (none / 0) (#21)
    by oldpro on Tue Jan 01, 2008 at 01:07:19 AM EST
    72% under 35?  How in Hell do you win a general election with those numbers?  And if it is true, I don't see how he holds sway on SuperTuesday.

    Don't know where you're getting that number. (none / 0) (#36)
    by illissius on Tue Jan 01, 2008 at 08:50:08 AM EST
    "All of the three leaders in Iowa draw a majority of support from new caucusgoers, although Obama benefits the most with 72 percent of his support coming from first-timers compared to 58 percent of Clinton's and 55 percent of Edwards'supporters."

    This is the only occurence of 72% I found. (And yeah, that's cause for concern in itself -- seems like turnout will be everything.)

    He gets 56% of voters from 18-34 -- meaning 56% of those voters support him, not that 56% of his support is from those voters.


    MOE (none / 0) (#10)
    by Natal on Mon Dec 31, 2007 at 10:02:55 PM EST
    Pollisters say that 19 out 20 times their results will be within the margin of error. Perhaps this is the one time out of twenty that falls outside the margin of error?

    a bit more (none / 0) (#11)
    by RalphB on Mon Dec 31, 2007 at 10:08:20 PM EST
    Obama's lead is largely independents.  I hate to argue with the DMR, but I doubt a lot of these people will really caucus.

    Candidate    ALL    DEM    IND
    Obama        32    27    39
    Clinton        25    33    15
    Edwards            24    25    24

    A whopping 60 percent of the Democrats say this would be their first time at a caucus and they aren't all that Democratic. Some 40 percent of the Democratic caucus-goers say they are independents, and another 5 percent say they are Republicans.  Put another way, 54 percent of the Democratic caucus-goers say they're Democrats. In 2004, it was 80 percent.

    If pollsters adjust the party identifications in 2008 to look like they did in 2004, Clinton could beat Obama 31 percent to 29 percent.

    The GOP field (none / 0) (#15)
    by joejoejoe on Mon Dec 31, 2007 at 10:28:46 PM EST
    You can change your party affiliation from GOP to Dem on the night of the Iowa caucus so I wouldn't be suprised to see record numbers of party changers on January 3, not because voters are drawn to the Democrats so much as repelled by an awful GOP field.

    Average of Polls (none / 0) (#12)
    by GOPmurderedconscience on Mon Dec 31, 2007 at 10:09:12 PM EST
    Anybody here knows how Real Clear Politics run their regression? I see he has HRC ahead byu 1.8 after including the DMR poll.

    I know Charles Franklin at pollster.com does a better job at explaining his model. He had HRC ahead by 4 (I think) before the DMR poll.

    Take all the polls with a massive grain of salt (none / 0) (#13)
    by joejoejoe on Mon Dec 31, 2007 at 10:09:31 PM EST
    The reason that pollsters typically avoid polling around the holidays is the assumption that a big chunk of the population is away from home and unavailable for survey calls. As with any sort of "non-response" problem, we risk getting skewed or biased results if the missing respondents are both numerous and different in terms of their political views from those at home when we call.

    There are many obstacles to polling accurately over the holidays. People travel in disproprotionate numbers, are busier than normal, take vacations, visit relatives -- all in ways that are hard to predict. I could speculate that the latest  poll numbers are more accurate because they reflect the return home from the holidays of the younger and more mobile part of Iowa's population but I really have no idea. It's close enough that turnout matters and that's really as fine as you can cut it when looking at polls.

    The DMR poll (none / 0) (#17)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Tue Jan 01, 2008 at 12:05:20 AM EST
    envisions an unprecedented caucus demographic.

    I can make arguments against it.

    But so what?

    This is the gold standard poll.

    They are supposed to be the cream.

    Obama is the odds on favorite.


    Apples-to-apples (5.00 / 1) (#22)
    by joejoejoe on Tue Jan 01, 2008 at 01:11:20 AM EST
    The problems of holiday polling don't disappear for the DMR. Maybe the DMR is capturing the return of Obama voters from holiday travels and I do trust DMR screen and turnout model but there is no 'apples-to-apples' comparison to make that allows you to use DMR past performance as a measure in '08. The noise of holiday polling and the earlier IA caucus date makes polling this caucus unique.

    For example, at UPS and FedEx they run logitics profiles on like circumstances like "how many packages get shipped on a Tuesday following a Monday holiday" and then use the like circumstances to predict trends. It's not enough to make comparisons from year to year, the interaction of an event to where it falls in the week has to be calculated to make decisions on equipment allocation, staffing, etc. Xmas on a Monday in '06 produces much different behavioral patterns than Xmas on a Thursday in '08.

    So just because the DMR did the best job on a Tuesday, January 19th, 2004 election with more than two solid weeks of post-holiday polling DOES NOT mean that they are going to be the gold standard for a Thursday, January 3rd, 2008 election taken on between Xmas and New Year's.

    There simply isn't an "apples-to-apples" comparison to be made by ANY pollster in Iowa because all of the polling outfits are usually shut down for the holiday period. They are all flying blind with their methodology with many possible unknown effects.

    Note - If you need to see the "gold standard" poll before making your assertions then why did you pass along crappy ARG and Zogby polls for a week alongside your analysis of Obama's fade? Garbage in, garbage out.


    Aren't Edwards (none / 0) (#28)
    by Jgarza on Tue Jan 01, 2008 at 03:29:20 AM EST
    Supporters supposed to be these hard knock union people who are so ruff and tumble they can't leave Iowa for the holidays, becasue they are poor and fighting somemean corporation? and Obama's supposed to be these college kids in Illinois for the holidays?   really idont see a logical argument for a poll over polling Obama over a break.

    Voters 55+, young voters, $50K+ voters (none / 0) (#30)
    by joejoejoe on Tue Jan 01, 2008 at 05:33:27 AM EST
    Union members make a decent wage and only a tiny % of Obama's support comes from out-of-state students eligible to vote in Iowa. That said, you're right that it's hard to imagine a logical scenario where Obama's supporters were not underpolled over the holidays.

    Obama's worst age demographic is voters 55+ and those are the voters that are least likely to travel. Obama does best among young voters and those are the most likely to travel. If DMR's numbers are the first accurate post-travel numbers then Obama suffered a triple whammy in the holiday polls by oversampling the 55+ demographic, undersampling the 18-29 demo, and undersampling $50K+ voters who also travel more frequently.

    "The worst-case scenario (for the pollsters) will be if these surveys indicate a false trend, a shift that is less an indicator of real change than an artifact of respondents missing due to holiday travel." (Pollster.com)

    That could be just what happened.

    I'm not convinced there still aren't weird holiday effects that nobody knows about with regards to women or rural voters (no breakdown in the Gallup holiday data for gender or urban/rural living) that might play similar strange effects on Edwards or Clinton's poll numbers. I'm also not convinced that the holiday effects are over yet in the DMR poll. So I still say be wary of this poll.

    BUT, if you stipulate the latest DMR poll is solid and you put the Gallup travel data numbers side-by-side with the latest Obama poll demographics you can make a decent case that the Clinton and Edwards rise in the past week was simply a function of who travels and who stays home during the holidays. Mark Blumenthal at Pollster.com detected some similar downward "travel" fluctuations in Obama's numbers at Thanksgiving in the Rasmussen tracking poll. Since the DMR poll was still taken in the middle of a holiday I'm not ready to say it's a good poll but I will say the 'travel' hypothesis presented by Mark Blumenthal is looking pretty darn good right now.

    And if the holiday pattern was still in effect during the DMR sample and there are no unknown effects for women and rural voters then Obama's support might STILL be undercounted in the DMR poll. That would put Obama in the high 30s and on his way to the White House. John Kerry got 38% of the delegates in '04 in a 4-way race so I'll say...

    Obama 38%, Edwards 32%, Clinton 29% is my prediction.


    Whoo-Hoo!!!! (none / 0) (#18)
    by pontificator on Tue Jan 01, 2008 at 12:26:17 AM EST
    Yes!!!!!!!  Obama with the huge lead!! Sorry A, but after seeing you gloat over the other poll earlier today with the bad Obama numbers, I had to come back and  gloat over THE MOST RELIABLE IOWA POLL PERIOD which shows  HUGE lead for Obama!!!!


    Well deserved (none / 0) (#20)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Tue Jan 01, 2008 at 12:49:26 AM EST
    Happy New Year.

    Obama 08, Inevitable! (none / 0) (#23)
    by Aaron on Tue Jan 01, 2008 at 01:13:06 AM EST
    As everyone who knows Iowa politics understands, the Des Moines register poll is the most important, the one that people actually pay attention to, in Iowa and elsewhere.

    The establishment has been quietly pushing enormous money and resources into Iowa over the last week and a half in the hopes of changing the verdict of the Iowa people, apparently it's not working.  The establishment desperately needs a Clinton or Edwards win, and are desperately afraid of an Obama win, hence all the under the table money, and cheap dirty political tactics they've been exercising in support of their candidates, the candidates they know they can count on, the candidates who are vetted and tested the candidates who can be counted upon to put the concerns of the special-interest groups first, those who believe they really control this country.  Well, in just a couple of days the people of Iowa are going to make their choice, and we'll see how miserably their tactics have failed.  We're going to find out the kind of world the people of Iowa want to live in, a world of fear and division, or a world of unity and hope.

    I predicted this is going to be the largest caucus turnout in Iowa history, and with the independent and Republican crossover vote, Obama is going to squash the establishment candidates, what were their names again, I've almost forgotten as they begin to fade into the pages of obscure history already.  :-)  Obama will go into New Hampshire and South Carolina with irresistible momentum, and God willing this country will find itself in the hands of its people once again, where it rightly belongs.

    I'd like to send out a big thank you to George W. Bush, because without your contribution, without you and those in your administration, who set about dismantling the Republic, America would still be asleep.  Well we're awake now, and we're going to begin speaking loud and clear.  Thank you George, the people need a dose of imperialist dictatorship to make them realize what we had to lose.

    Obama 08, America wins!  

    Edwards?!! (none / 0) (#38)
    by Alien Abductee on Tue Jan 01, 2008 at 03:28:35 PM EST
    You've got to be kidding.

    It's Obama the Villagers loooove for his embrace of "bipartisan" accommodation and harmony.

    They can't wait to have a Dem president they can flatter and manipulate and pressure into pursuing a Republican agenda.

    Partisanship within a bipartisan system is bad?

    If you're a progressive, Aaron, I'm afraid you'll be terribly disappointed with what a President Obama manages to accomplish or even tries to accomplish.


    Three days... (none / 0) (#24)
    by oldpro on Tue Jan 01, 2008 at 01:20:26 AM EST
    I'm trying to remember what the undecided/change mind numbers were in 2000 and '04 in Iowa the last week, last 3 days before caucus.  Huge, if I remember rightly but too tired to go looking 'til tomorrow.

    Hell's bells...this is some sleighride.

    lets be clear (none / 0) (#27)
    by Jgarza on Tue Jan 01, 2008 at 03:24:09 AM EST
    If Obama wins, best presidential candidate ever!!!!

    If Edwards Clinton wins, Clinton will win... Best presidential candidate of my life time!!!

    My Conclusion: Ether way looks pretty good, my figures are crossed for Obama, but I'll be happy if Clinton wins too!!

    i think DMR is a farce. who'd they ask, their (none / 0) (#29)
    by cpinva on Tue Jan 01, 2008 at 05:15:31 AM EST
    friends from oprah? if you believe that nonsense, i have shares in the brooklyn bridge for sale (at least the bridge is a tangible asset), at par.

    the real money's on clinton, not DMR, whoever he is.

    Representative democracy, Iowa counties not equal (none / 0) (#31)
    by Aaron on Tue Jan 01, 2008 at 06:58:19 AM EST
    Some are touting this as Edwards advantage, but you have to conclude that the Des Moines Register poll has taken this into account.

    Rural Counties: Less Caucus Goers Per Delegate

    Since the Iowa Democratic caucuses are a representative democracy, not a straight one person one vote, not every caucus goer carries equal weight. Presidential candidates are spending a lot of time in small courthouse towns, because the way the results are counted, the small counties weigh in disproportionately.

    An analysis of 2004 caucus attendance shows that, on average statewide, it took just under 41 caucus goers to elect a state delegate equivalent. The easiest county to elect a delegate was Fremont County, where 22.3 caucus goers translated into a state delegate.

    The hardest places to elect delegates, in contrast, were college counties, with Johnson County far ahead of the rest. In Johnson County, it took 79.2 people to elect a delegate, nearly twice the state average and almost four times the level of Fremont County.  

    Iowans Who Support of Obama..... (none / 0) (#33)
    by Aaron on Tue Jan 01, 2008 at 07:54:13 AM EST
    ....appear to be better educated and have higher incomes than those who support Hillary Clinton or John Edwards according to this poll.

    Sources of support among likely caucus goers

    College degree

    Obama -- 39%

    Clinton -- 20%

    Edwards -- 22%

    $50,000 to 69,999 yearly income

    Obama -- 39%

    Clinton -- 22%

    Edwards -- 23%


    I wonder how they get journalists, like those on CNN, to keep making statements to the effect that immigration is a huge issue, and will be a huge issue in the coming elections.

    When you take a look at this poll, only 3% of Iowans ranked immigration as their top concern.

    And I've heard almost no mention of the Iraq war as a campaign issue over the last month, yet it's the number one concern of most Iowans according to this poll at 28%.

    I guess what I wonder most is how do those at CNN corporate convince their news anchors to repeat what is quite obviously misinformation.  Don't these journalists want to see a mountain of evidence that supports the assertions that they're reading off the teletype in front of them, or those that so-called experts are quoting?

    Here's some good advice for all Americans, don't trust the national media, because they often don't have the evidence to back up their claims.

    Sad (none / 0) (#34)
    by koshembos on Tue Jan 01, 2008 at 07:59:54 AM EST
    if Obama is a nominee, it's another victory to Karl Rove's political school. Once again, empty slogans and a person with no achievements will get a whack at this poor US of A.

    You can lie to all people all the time.

    The only positive thing I can say (none / 0) (#37)
    by MarkL on Tue Jan 01, 2008 at 01:31:24 PM EST
    is that no Obama supporter now can deny that I have been correct is saying that Obama has successfully emulated Joe Lieberman.
    If you think HoJo would have been a good president, you should love Obama.