Archive for the 'NH-Dem' Category

Democrats concentrate on Nevada, as Obama gets major endorsements and Richardson withdraws

Published
by
Taniel
on January 10, 2008
in NH-Dem and NV-Dem
. 7 Comments

The Democratic race was transformed overnight and we are back to the indecision that was preceding Iowa. In less than a few hours, the Clinton campaign went from staring death in the face to finding itself stunningly victorious and the entire press corps has been searching for an answer for much of the past 24 hours. The two factors that contributed to her victory are obvious. First is her dramatic come-back among the female vote which she carried decisively. And there is no reason to credit “the tears” for that, as her debate performance had all the ingredients to put in place such a gender gap and Clinton’s return to pre-Iowa levels. The second factor is the independent vote with more voting in the GOP race than expected; this accounted for some of McCain’s victory. The reasons for this are probably the most confusing, and they seem to be accounted by a mixture of voters thinking Obama’s win was assured and Barack’s bounce eroding naturally.

As a result, Hillary Clinton is back in the game and it’s hard to figure out a front-runner now. But as was expected, New Hampshire was fatal to any candidate not named Obama or Clinton. John Edwards who placed a very distant third vowed to go on, but it was obvious last Thursday that he had put all his strength in Iowa and he would have trouble to come back from his loss there. His last hope was to get the union endorsements in Nevada and make a play there, but he appears to have lost that as well (more on Nevada below).

The second victim was Bill Richardson who withdrew from the race this afternoon. This has got to be a disappointing week for Richardson, who was polling in the double-digits and rising for a while in the summer and early fall, finished Iowa with 2% of delegates and New Hampshire with 5% of the vote — despite Biden and Dodd’s withdrawal. It is also surprising that he withdrew before Nevada and its high proportion of Hispanic voters. No word yet on who he is endorsing; he had long been vying for Hillary’s VP spot but he backstabbed her on January 3rd by making a (secret) deal with Obama in Iowa.

Now, the Democratic race will slow down a bit as the next contest is Nevada. Michigan, of course, is supposedly voting on January 15th, but Hillary Clinton is the only candidate on the ballot. She might actually find herself facing a test there as voters will have the choice to vote “uncommitted” and it might look bad if that gets too high a percentage. A poll today has Hillary at 48% and uncommitted at 28%, though we’ve got to wonder whether people will actually dare not vote for her given that she is the only Democrat that left her name on the ballot. Word is her rival campaigns are looking at whether it’s worth making a push for uncommitted votes, and don’t forget that Clinton is not allowed to actually go to Michigan because of the early-state pledge (which looks more than ever like an absurd joke, and I would love to see the candidates break their word in Florida).

So Nevada comes next, and Barack Obama has to be deemed the favorite there after he got two major union endorsements today. First, Obama got the support of the Nevada SEIU, which has to be a blow to Edwards since he had gotten the support of the Iowa and New Hampshire chapters. But the most important endorsement by far — and the one watchers of the Nevada caucuses have long been looking out for — is that of the culinary workers union, which has a stronghold on the voting machine in Clark County (Las Vegas) and which is promising to deliver thousands of votes for Obama. The endorsement had been rumored for a few days now, and the decision was apparently taken after Obama’s win in Iowa.

Clinton had an answer ready today, as she unveiled the endorsement of the state’s only Democratic House member, Rep. Shelley Berkley. Reports just 24 hours ago had her campaign considering conceding Nevada and South Carolina to Obama, but her stunning come back has put her back in the running in Nevada. Most polls in the state have had Clinton up big, though the last ones we have seen were taken a few weeks ago. The race has tightened considerably since then and both campaigns have sent an impressive number of staffers in Nevada since and are now running ads, including some in Spanish on radio stations.

Clinton knows that she might not be able to win South Carolina on the 26th, so Nevada is her last chance to make a stand before February 5th (though there is Florida as well, that state is out of anyone’s control since all candidates have pledged to stay out). For a state that has never gotten much political attention and that just 24 hours ago thought it would be overlooked yet again, Nevada will be a major battleground in the Democratic race.

Stunning, yes, but there were clues: Why polls were not wrong

Published
by
Taniel
on January 9, 2008
in NH-Dem
. 10 Comments

About every New Hampshire poll released in the run-up to yesterday’s primary showed Barack Obama leading by significant margins. It was thus to be expected that, after Hillary Clinton’s stunning victory, poll-bashing would become everyone’s favorite pastime. Most observers are lamenting how they were misled by polls, and using them as cover of their deficient coverage.

Yet, the polls did not get this election wrong. A careful reading of the numbers that were being released should have made anyone weary of predictions, as the New Hampshire electorate looked to be in flux. Obama was rightfully considered the favorite, but the results should have been considered unpredictable. But many in the media — MSNBC is a prominent example — are now trying to blame pollsters, when what should be faulted is the way they chose to interpret these surveys and use them to run with the storyline of an unstoppable Obama.

First, a few polls released late Monday and throughout the day Tuesday showed Obama’s bounce stabilizing and Clinton starting to reverse the trend; this was especially the case in the last Rasmussen and ARG polls. Add to this the fact that most polls released on Monday that showed double-digits Obama leads were in the field over the week-end. That means that not only was at least half of the sample tested prior to the ABC debate, but most of the interviews were conducted at the height of the post-Iowa bounce, when voters were still processing the Iowa numbers.

The time allowed for campaigning in New Hampshire was five days; could it really have been expected that surveys taken on Saturday (the second day) would give an adequate picture of what would happen on the fifth? The very fact that time was so compressed guaranteed that the electorate would shift from day-to-day and in much higher proportions than in a typical election, and the swings were perfectly predictable given the race’s timing.

In addition, bounces are intrinsically volatile, one of the famous examples being McCain’s sudden and short-lived South Carolina surge in 2000 in the days after his New Hampshire victory. Here again, Obama jumped 10 to 15% in the space of 48 hours and no bounce like that can be sustained over time.

The question was never whether Obama could make that bounce permanent but whether the surge would last long enough to carry him through the finish line. I thought, like most observers, that five days was way too short a time for Obama’s lead to start eroding and did not believe that Clinton could stage a come back. At the end of the day, she managed to crush Obama’s momentum by Tuesday. But what is surprising is not the fact that she did but the rapidity with which she did it.

Clinton needed every single one of those five days to press her case and, with the clock ticking, she was helped by the intense media coverage and the accumulation of very publicized events, in particular Saturday’s debate and “The Tears.” There is no way that any poll in the field over the week-end, at the height of the Obama buzz, could have picked-up Clinton’s come back.

Finally, the big question mark going into the election was how independents would break down between the two parties’ primaries. Would a larger proportion vote for John McCain or for Barack Obama? This question was deemed decisive in both contests, and indeed the fact of the matter is that many more than expected voted in the GOP primary. And that both propelled John McCain into a solid lead and saved Clinton’s candidacy. It was obvious that both McCain and Obama could not have a big night; they could both win, sure, but two large victories as some polls predicted was out of the question since a key constituency for the two candidates overlapped.

Independents appear to have moved away from Obama in the final day as fast as they had jumped on his bandwagon. Polls had not picked this up but they could not have been expected to. For one, all surveys constantly pointed out that we should watch for independent breakdowns, explicitly stating that these numbers were the most volatile and hinting at the uncertainty they were reading among undecideds. Second, exit polls confirm that this move to the GOP race occurred in the final day, which is perfectly compatible with the volatility of Obama’s momentum.

The most troubling aspect of the night is that coverage of polls might have had a direct influence on the results. Reading everywhere that Obama’s victory was ensured, a large proportion of independents might have then decided to jump to the GOP race where McCain seemed in more trouble and where some polls showed Mitt Romney leading.

The media had all this information in its hand, yet it chose to go ahead and portray the Democratic race as a done deal. While I thought Obama would win yesterday like just about everyone else, I did explain in my pre-election guidelines that the polls had Clinton stabilizing and that a tight defeat is not at all out of the question. And, I added, “a Clinton victory tonight is still possible, and it would (justifiably) be treated as a huge come back.”That the very same observers who trumpeted an Obama lead now are complaining about the treachery of polls is disingenuous.

The second storyline that is being used to deflect the blame is even more stunning, as some are invoking the Bradley effect to explain the polls’ mistake. The Bradley effect contends that many white voters who would be uncomfortable voting for a black candidate might lie to the pollsters to not have to admit their racial instinct, and thus lead the surveys to overstate the support that candidate is getting. In other words, New Hampshire Democrats could not get themselves to vote for an African-American candidate once they were in the privacy of their voting booth.

Even if we admit that New Hampshire Democrats are so dramatically more prone to this racist instinct than Iowa Democrats, the Bradley effect explanation is discredited by every indication we have of what happened yesterday and the breakdown of voting groups. For one, pollsters were modeling more independents to choose the Democratic race that actually did; and given Obama’s lead among unaffiliated voters and Clinton’s among registered Democrat, that discrepancy goes a long way towards explaining the size of yesterday’s swing.

Second, Hillary Clinton’s come back was fueled by a shift of the female vote. The polls showed that Obama had overtaken Clinton among women after his Iowa victory. But exit polls showed that Obama ended up crushing Clinton among men but overwhelmingly losing females. In other words, the polls completely missed the female vote but not the male one, and that is very difficult to reconcile with the Bradley effect; white men are usually described as the group that feels the most threatened by racial dynamics, and if racist instincts kicked in here, it makes little sense that it would have only affected women. In addition, there are many very good explanations that can be offered for the swing of the female vote — the tag-teaming against Clinton at the ABC debate, Clinton’s display of vulnerability on Monday — all of which fit the facts much better than recourse to the Bradley effect.

So do not be afraid of trusting polls in the coming weeks; just learn how to read them better.

New Hampshire results thread: McCain triumphs, Clinton completes an improbable come-back

Published
by
Taniel
on January 8, 2008
in NH-Dem and NH-GOP
. 11 Comments

11:20pm: Clinton’s audience was on fire, the candidate looked tired but clearly looked delighted. One thought to explain the dual results: Some independents could have switched and voted for McCain thinking that Obama had won for sure considering the coverage of the race showing him the quasi-sure winner. Meanwhile, one thought in the GOP race: Michigan is an open primary, and Democrats aren’t having a vote there. That is going to be a very significant boost for McCain’s chances there.
11pm: Obama’s concession speech presses ahead the call for “change” and “hope.” As always, Obama’s speech was powerful and roused the crowd by repeating “yes we can.” By the way, remember how small a 3% lead for Clinton in NH seemed just 10 days ago and how leads in the low double-digits were considered major stumbles until the end of November.
And before we pile on polls, consider that (1) polls were mostly on the field over the week-end when the bounce was at its highest, when bounces are notoriously volatile and it’s a very hard polling period; and (2) independents apparently massively switched their allegiance at the last minute from the Dem to the GOP race. We knew Obama and McCain couldn’t both do well, and that’s what happened. And (3) Rasmussen, ARG and Suffolk all suggested that the race had stabilized and that Clinton was slightly coming back. Remember, ARG said last night that Clinton had regained her lead among female voters. Frankly there were signs in the polls that Clinton was very much alive. The media is trying to push the responsibility of their misguided coverage on polls, when frankly it’s the way they portrayed them (I myself was expecting an Obama victory, obviously, but I was indicating that Clinton still had an opening in commenting on today and yesterday’s polls).

10:35pm: CLINTON PROJECTED WINNER by MSNBC and the AP. CNN is refusing to follow (though they still announced the AP call, which seems like cheating, either you call it or not). MSNBC/AP apparently realized that the college-town storyline was empty given how small those towns are (and UNH is apparently not in school yet) and that there were more votes outstanding from a place like Nashua. With 67% in, it’s still 39% to 36% but that represents 5,500 votes now. The press is running with a giant come-back story (MSNBC reading the headlines of the next few days).

10:20pm: And some good news for Clinton supporters: Nashua has only reported 55% (Clinton leads 48% to 31% in a city with lots of registered Democrats) and a similar situation exists in Manchester (75% reporting). The remaining votes there should balance out Hanover and Durham… A very interesting comment by Marc Ambinder: “Remember: turnout guru Michael Whouley blessed the New Hampshire organization of HRC and didn’t set foot in Iowa.” And now we’re on to the Democratic speeches. Edwards is clearly not withdrawing. His speech sounds very similar to last week’s.
10:10pm: At this point Obama cannot count that much on Hanover and Durham, since there aren’t that many votes in that county. The media has apparently already chosen the storyline for the come-back: it’s the tears. Apparently no one is thinking of crediting her strong debate performance (especially the second-half). With 62% in, Clinton has increased her lead to 4,500 votes.
10pm: Clinton is staying ahead by about 3,500 votes with 59% of the vote reporting. Hanover and Durham appear to still not have reported. Percentage-wise, it’s only 39% to 37%, so obviously a very tight race.
9:50pm: Rochester was carried by Clinton 45% to 30%, which is interesting given that it’s teh hometown of one of Obama’s biggest NH backers, Rep. Shea-Porter who is supposed to be strong among activists. Rochester is also the town where that hostage-crisis occured about 6 weeks ago. With 50% reporting now (we’re getting there, slowly), Obama climbed back to 39% to 37%, trailing by less than 3,500 votes now. And Romney has managed to get up at 32%!
9:40pm: Obama might be waiting for Hanover and Durham, but Clinton is expanding her lead for now, up 4,500 votes (40% to 36% with 47% in). CNN just tried to explain (by the way, Romney is now behind 6%. He would love to stay in this range at this point, as the size of his defeat could play a big role in his viability going forward.
9:30pm: Good news for Obama supporters. CNN is reporting that Hanover (Dartmouth) and Durham (UNH) have not yet reported.
9:25pm: McCain vowed to press ahead to Michigan in his victory speech, in front of a clearly excited crowd chanting “Mac is back.” McCain is channeling the 2000 spirit, but his situation is much stronger than his 2000 position: the exit polls are showing McCain carrying registered Republicans. And Obama has climbed back a point, 39% to 37% (42% in).
9:20pm: Exit polls are now coming out in details, and they imply a Clinton win who needs by 13% among women, loses by 12% among men with women making up 57% of the electorate. With 40% in, it’s 39% to 36% and Romney is narrowing the gap, 37% to 30%. Clinton is ahead among registered Democrats 45% to 34%, and trailing 43% to 31% among independents (Update: more refined numbers have a much smallest Obama lead among independents).
9:05pm: Romney’s speech continued the Olympics metaphor, claiming “silver” for the second time and made sure to claim “gold” for Wyoming. Unfortunately for him, it’s going to be hard for him to spin this given that he is losing really big at this point (though I’ll wait a bit more before assessing his chances, let’s wait to see how big the margin is). Huckabee’s speech was very self-satisfied, celebrating his good score (12% isn’t particularly high, frankly, given that he won Iowa 5 days ago). Meanwhile in the Democratic race, it’s 34% reporting and still 40% to 36% in Clinton’s favor! We’re past a third of precincts…
9:00pm: CNN finally gave some indication of where the votes are coming from. They are reporting that Manchester (which Clinton is winning) is reporting faster than the rest of the state and that Concord where Obama is a bit stronger is slower in reporting (though I’m not sure that’s true given that we already know McCain has won throughout Concord). And Obama is now getting a bit closer, 39% to 36% with 26% in.
8:52pm: Not many more precincts reporting that 10 minutes ago, but Clinton is leading 40% to 34% now with 23% in. Edwards is far behind at 17%. Among Republicans, McCain is still up 9% on Romney (these numbers have been remarkably stable, with Huckabee at 12% and Giuliani and Paul basically tied at 9% (about a 300 votes difference).
8:42pm: With 21% in, Clinton is still up 40-36 with a difference of 2,200 votes. Especially remarkable in this storyline for now is that Clinton is staying strong despite the surge in turnout. But clearly McCain’s huge victory has a lot to do with Obama’s inability to take a lead her. We knew that both Obama and McCain could not win big, what we did not see that Obama would be trailing with 21% in.
8:35pm: First tangible sign that Clinton might actually have a chance: She is leading in Manchester, the state’s biggest city. Meanwhile, Thompson is barely ahead of Hunter…
8:30pm: Time to slowly focus on the Democratic race. And Clinton is now ahead 40% to 36% (!) with 15% in. Obviously surprising numbers and I’m unwilling to try and understand what’s going on for now. Among the GOP, Huckabee, Giuliani and Paul are tightly following each other in that order. Pundits are now taking delights in pounding Romney’s negative ads. For what it’s worth, I would like to point out that most of Romney’s ads were based on policy, much more so than McCain’s personally negative ads. But one key number: McCain carried registered Republicans by about the same percentage than independents!

8:15pm:
McCain called the winner. HUGE defeat for Romney — Losing is one thing, but he looks to have suffered a much bigger defeat than expected if it is being called this early. And this is surely due to a wave of independents going for McCain which could limit Obama’s surge. Truly incredible come-back for McCain. (Another sure thing is that Edwards will not make it in the top two tonight.)

8pm: All polls have now closed. Ambinder reports exit polls have Obama crushing Clinton among independents, but Clinton LEADING among Democrats and among independents. But exit polls have McCain leading among both independents and registered Republicans. Can Clinton actually pull off a win or at least staying within 4-5%? And among Republicans, it looks like McCain for now.
7:45pm: Keep this in mind when Giuliani tells us that he is not weakened by his repeated losses tonight: A new Florida poll has him fourth… For what it’s worth, MyDD is seeing early exit polls with McCain up 6% and Obama up 4%. Those kind of tight numbers in early exit polls means it’s basically impossible to predict off of them. With 9% in among Democrats, Clinton is up 38% to 36% (unclear what precincts are reporting, these are obviously early); among the GOP, it’s 8% in and McCain is up big, 38% to 28%.
7:30pm: I’m not sure why the first results are already being reported before all polls close, but here are results with 6% of precints counting already: Obama and Clinton ae tied at 36% among Democrats. Among Republicans, with 5% counting, it’s McCain 38% to 29% for Romney.
7:10pm: Anecdotal evidence from Nashua County that indies are breaking in the Democratic race, though exit polls are confirming that independent proportions are pretty much in line with prior cycles. Also, 18% of GOPers and 15% of Dems reported deciding on their choice only… today. Late-deciders go for candidates with the most boom (read Obama). And in a possibly big exit poll finding just reported on MSNBC: GOP voters found that Romney’s ads were the most unfair (the Union Leader is a big factor in shaping this).
6:10pm: MSNBC is giving more definite numbers: 43% of the Democratic voters are independents, and 38% in the GOP race (which is a higher than expected number, SOS Gardner had predicted 25%). While this does not mean they are breaking 50-50 since early indications are that Democratic turnout are higher, it’s still dramatically more balanced than what some people were expecting (Romney’s camp was publicly hoping for independents to go more than 70% for the Democratic race). So early indications are good for McCain — and more marginally for Clinton who cannot just rely on this to hope for a win but it could limit the size of Obama’s victory.
5:30pm (all time Eastern): Early exit polls suggest that around 30% of voters in the GOP race are independents and 40% in the Democratic race. The proportions are perhaps closer than expected which is good news for McCain. Though it also looks like those proportions are what most polls were expecting, which would suggest that there won’t be surprises tonight on the basis of a surge among independents.

Original post: Here we are. It’s only been 5 days since the Iowa results thread and I am pulling another late-nighter to cover the New Hampshire primary. It’s truly hard to believe that we will be done with both IA and NH for 4 years in just a few hours. Unless the races are very tight, we should know the results even quicker than we did on Thursday. Networks will rely on their exit polls to make calls shortly after 8pm if there is a blow-out, since New Hampshire is much more straight-forward than Iowa.

First issue: Turnout. And the numbers are likely going to be huge, as all reports are that there is an “absolutely huge” turnout. And many precincts are now on the verge of running out of ballots, especially on the Democratic side — one more indication of which party independents are choosing to vote for. (A reader emails me the link to the Nashua Telegraph’s updates of the race which confirm reports of very high turnout without any mention of more voters and ballot trouble among Democrats).

For now, check my guidelines of what to expect tonight.

Setting the expectations: We will have a whole different race by tomorrow morning

Published
by
Taniel
on January 8, 2008
in NH-Dem and NH-GOP
. 5 Comments

New Hampshire is upon us, and its a much quieter election day than last Thursday. There are no secret deals between candidates (by the way, Richardson is still denying that he made any deal, while most evidence points to the contrary). Not to mention that the election itself feels rather anti-climactic, at least on the Democratic race. After all the excitement and suspense that preceded the caucuses last week, there is now a sense that the Democratic contest got wrapped-up faster than anyone expected and before we had any chance to get into an election rhythm. Just as last Thursday, I will refrain from offering set predictions, though I would like to point out that the one prediction I did before Iowa — that Ron Paul would defeat Giuliani — was vindicated in dramatic fashion. But I will offer a few guidelines for what to look for tonight and what the expectations are a few hours from the results.

Democrats, first place: Hillary Clinton led big in New Hampshire for most of the year and if she had managed to maintain even a consistent double-digit lead going into today she would probably have managed to keep some of it. But her lead was already down to low single-digit and Obama has gotten a massive bounce in the space of a few days. He is clearly favored going into the primary and most polls show him leading by double-digits. Given the state of disarray in the Clinton campaign these past few days, a double-digits defeat would unsettle her even more and lead to a staff shake-up (Update: Begala and Carville deny they will join the campaign).

Yet Clinton supporters should not be too depressed yet. First of all, the latest polls are showing that the race seems to have stabilized, and both Rasmussen and ARG show that Clinton might be slightly coming back. Naturally, Clinton’s number one problem has been that 5 days between Iowa and New Hampshire leaves her no time to fight back, and that a bounce like the one Obama has gotten naturally erodes by itself to some degree — but in a bit more than five days. A Clinton victory tonight is still possible, and it would (justifiably) be treated as a huge come-back.

But what effect would a smaller-than-expected defeat have on the Clinton campaign? Say, if she loses by 3 to 4% ? She would definitely claim victory (the “comeback kid” redux) and given the Obama campaign’s hopes of effectively winning the nomination tonight (and even perhaps forcing Clinton out prematurely) that would surely be a huge disappointment for them. The media has been setting up a Clinton is dead storyline for days, so a tight finish like that, while certainly hurting Clinton further, would certainly give her some sort of morale boost and make her continue the fight.

Democrats, rest of the field: It would be a humongous stunner if Edwards gets second or if Richardson gets third position. Polls show that the former is not at all in the fight for the top positions, and it’s been a long time since Richardson broke double-digits. And remember that Edwards’s argument over the past few days has been a constant insistance that Clinton’s third-place Iowa position eliminated her. How will that play out in the coming days after Edwards gets third-place here?

Republicans, first place: Hard to figure out what is going on in the Romney-McCain showdown. McCain has been ahead in the polls rather consistently since early last week, but Romney did not fall at all post-Iowa. Quite the contrary, polls taken over the week-end and on Monday appear to register a small Romney come-back. That should at least insure that Romney does not fall too far behind tonight — and he is still very much in the lead. The media has been presenting McCain as the overwhelming favorite when, truth is, his position looks much more fragile than Obama’s — and the expectation game is clearly favoring Romney. A Romney victory would be a huge boost and he would have to be consider a strong favorite — not to mention that it would probably eliminate McCain. A McCain victory would make the AZ Senator the national front-runner, but I am now doubting that Romney would be as screwed as the CW dictated a week ago.

Republicans, rest of the race: Lots of questions here — and the tightest race of the night could be that for GOP third-placer. Rudy Giuliani, Mike Huckabee and Ron Paul could all score third-place and it’s almost impossible to predict their order. As in Iowa, Iook for a strong Ron Paul showing tonight as polls probably understate his support. Third-place for either Giuliani or Huckabee could be a boost for their campaigns; it could also be a great (and quite unexpected) way for Rudy to be part of the story-line a week after his sixth-place in Iowa. Another question: How low will Thompson sink? If by some miracle any of the other candidates go below him, it could prove pretty humiliating for them.

It’s election day: Final polls, first votes and high turnout

Published
by
Taniel
on January 8, 2008
in NH-Dem and NH-GOP
. 0 Comments

This is it, the New Hampshire primary has come and it has shifted more rapidly and dramatically than most people were expecting. To revive our memories, here is the first New Hampshire poll I blogged, on August 30th: Clinton led Obama 37% to 17%, with Edwards at 14%. Among Republicans, Romney was ahead 27% to 23% with McCain at 12%.

And with that let’s jump at the final tracking polls that are being delivered right now. Zogby and Rasmussen have released their final tracking polls and expect a few more before voting is over.

  • First up, Zogby: McCain gets 36% to Romney’s 27%, expanding his lead by 4%. But Zogby adds: “Romney had a good day.” Translation, Romney’s Friday was also particularly good so now that it disappeared from the average McCain rose. So conflicting results here.
  • Among Democrats, Obama rose even further, defeating Clinton 42% to 39% with Edwards at 17%.

  • Second, Rasmussen which shows tighter races. Among Republican, there is very little movement, 32% to 31% for McCain.
  • Among Democrats, Obama’s lead has tightened a bit, 37% to 30%, with Edwards at 19%.

And then we get Suffolk which has always had the best numbers for Clinton and Romney, and remains true to form:

  • Clinton trails 39% to 34% with Edwards at 15%. That might seem tighter than other polls, but Clinton was leading just two days ago and was down 1% yesterday. Whatever the turnout model Suffolk is using — and which presumably tests less independents — even that is getting away from Hillary.
  • Romney keeps his lead and even extends it, leading 30% to 26% with Huckabee at 13% and Rudy at 11%.

Keep in mind that these three polls that have just been released all show good Monday polling for Romney — the only day the effect of the week-end debates could start to be felt. Let’s see tonight if that is just a blip or an actual trend.
Meanwhile, New Hampshire stayed true to tradition: Hart’s Location and Dixville Notch, two small villages, voted at midnight and reported resuls within 50 minutes. Dixville Notch won the competition between the two villages as to whom will report results first. And while they’re really not worth much as an indicator (Clark won both villages in 2004), here are the results:

  • Among Democrats, Dixville Notch gave 7 votes to Obama, 2 to Edwards and one to Richardson. In Hart’s Location, Obama got 9 votes, Clinton 3 and Edwards 1.
  • Among Republicans, Dixville Notch went for McCain 4 votes to 2 for Romney and 1 for Giuliani. Hart’s Location had McCain with 6, Huckabee with 5, Paul with 4 and Romney with 1.

And in more relevant news, all reports in the past few hours point to a very large turnout which will set new records for the state’s primary. The CW would dictate that is good news for McCain and Obama since they depend on independents and want to open up voting as much as possible, but as often it is a very tricky exercise to predict on the effect turnout will have without knowing for sure what group of voters are going to the polls.

Unsettled, the Clinton campaign considers withdrawal and sinks in South Carolina

Published
by
Taniel
on January 7, 2008
in NH-Dem and NH-GOP
. 1 Comment

The Clinton campaign is looking increasingly unsettled, and Hillary’s collapse is taking proportions that would have been entirely unconceivable a few days ago. And with every new poll from New Hampshire the trouble seems to be only getting bigger. The Monday edition of the CNN/WMUR/UNH poll (reputed the most reliable of NH polls) is now out and has Obama leading Clinton 39% to 30% — roughly unchanged from the 10% lead the IL Senator enjoyed yesterday. Among Republicans, it’s McCain on top 31% to 26%, only a slight improvement for Romney who trailed 32% to 26% yesterday. Huckabee gets 13% and Paul and Giuliani are tied at 10%.

Three big stories summarize the extent of Clinton’s troubles today. The most stunning is that reports are continuing that Clinton could drop out much earlier than expected if she does not do well tomorrow. TPM details the debate inside Clinton-land about whether Hillary should risk engaging in a long, grueling (and probably negative) campaign if she loses New Hampshire and sees her numbers everywhere else dwindle as a result. The thinking goes that Hillary Clinton has long been a polarizing figure and she had just amassed a lot of good will in Washington and among her Senate collegues — and that pressing ahead could threaten that and undermine the viability of a successful career in the Senate (that would possibily aim at the Senate Majority Leader position).

While this might seem to be a very unlikely scenario considering how sure we all were that Clinton would at least stay on until February 5th, Patti Solis Doyle is apparently one of those worrying about the effects of staying in the race, and Doyle is one of Clinton’s most-trusted advisers. And consider how stunning the turn-around has been. People were saying Clinton would clinch the nomination for sure if she won Iowa and that a loss would create a drawn-out fight that could even last beyond February 5th. Now, New Hampshire hasn’t even voted and we are talking about the very real possibility of a Clinton withdrawal. Talk about the (excessive, too excessive) effect a single state has on the entire process.

Second, the story the media is running with today is the most unlikely one I could have imagined: Hillary Clinton got emotional and teary today at an event with a group of undecided voters. Her voice broke as she told them that, “I couldn’t do it if I didn’t passionately believe it was the right thing to do. This is very personal for me. I have so many ideas for this country and I just don’t want to see us fall backwards.” Yes, it does seem that the criticism that she is cold and calculating seems to have gotten to her; and while she drew laughs by mocking the moderator’s assertion that she was not likable at the Saturday night debate, such attacks do appear to have hurt feeling. But remember also that the candidates have barely slept for at least ten days and have hardly had any break from the campaign trail. They are exhausted and on edge, and it is not surprising to see them crack like this. Edwards probably went a bit too far when informed of Clinton’s tears by using it to pounce her ability to serve as president.

The incident is now the headline in many newspapers and TV news broadcasts. The press has apparently decided to portray this as a touch moment that reveals Hillary’s humanity and ability to show emotion. Just as likely is that Democrats interpret this as a sign of Clinton desperation and defensiveness; after all, voters turn towards those with momentum who look the most likely to win. And combined with Obama’s bounce, Clinton’s tears paint as clear a picture as possible as to who is up — and who is on the verge of elimination.

Third, two new polls indicate that South Carolina looks completely out of reach for the Clinton campaign as the black vote appears to have rallied behind Barack Obama. This conforms to what Clinton advisers have been saying internally, and the campaign appears aware that Nevada is the candidate’s last firewall prior to February 5th (discounting Florida where Clinton had pledged not to campaign in).

A new SUSA survey has Obama trouncing Clinton 50% to 30%. Edwards gets 17%. Three weeks ago, Clinton was up 42% to 39%. The reason for the change: Clinton has collapsed both among female voters (a 31% swing) and especially among black voters, where Obama now leads by a massive 46%. This might not seem that stunning, but consider that Clinton was ahead among the black vote until sometime this fall when Obama managed to pull into a tie by reaching out to the state’s African-American community. But the size of his current lead is truly impressive. A Rasmussen survey has slightly better news for Clinton, though she is still down 42% to 30%. Obama gets 58% of the black vote in this poll.

Republican numbers in that SUSA poll are also fascinating: Mike Huckabee has jumped to a huge lead, with 36% (versus 28% three weeks ago). Romney comes in second at 19%, with McCain at 17%. Thompson who once led in the state now has 11% and Giuliani is fifth with 9%. Some of this will probably change post-New Hampshire and post-Michigan, but considering the size of the evangelical base in South Carolina Huckabee clearly has a clear advantage.

Given the number of stories chronicling Clinton’s doom (including this one), it’s hard to forget that Hillary is still not out of New Hampshire. A quick look at this morning’s polls shows that several of them show an Obama lead under 5%. Clinton could not only come in very close to Obama tomorrow, but it’s not hard to imagine her pulling a win by reclaiming just a small percentage of those who were supporting her just a few days ago.

Rounding up New Hampshire polls: 6 surveys released this morning

Published
by
Taniel
on January 7, 2008
in NH-Dem and NH-GOP
. 3 Comments

It seems like a new poll from New Hampshire is being released every minute and pulling them all together is starting to feel like a full-time job. But with one day to go before the primary, these polls are clearly crucial to knowing where things are heading. They were taken over the week-end, and there is no indication that Clinton has come-back at all.

Let’s start things off with thenon-tracking polls, for example with Marist taken Saturday and Saturday:

  • Among Democrats, Obama is ahead 36% to 28%, with Edwards at 22%. A month ago, it was 37% to 24% in Clinon’s favor. Clinton leads among registered Democrats, and Obama among independents.
  • Among Republicans, McCain is up 35% to 31% with Huckabee at 13%, Ron Paul at 85 and Rudy Giuliani at 5%. A month ago, it was 31% for Romney and 18% each for McCain and Giuliani. In a counter-intuitive finding, McCain has no significant lead among independents who are voting roughly the same as Republicans.

Second, we get a Fox News poll which looks slightly better for Clinton:

  • Obama is up “only” 32% to 28%, with Edwards at 18% and Richardson at 6%.
  • Among Republicans, McCain gets 34% compared to Romney’s 27% and Huckabee’s 11%. Giuliani is only at 9%.

Franklin Pierce polled Friday to Sunday and they show a tight race as well:

  • Obama is up 34% to 31% with Edwards at 20%. And just look at how much Iowa has impacted things. 5 days ago, 48% said Clinton would win the nomination, and 21% said Obama. Today, 38% say Obama and 30% say Clinton, and that perception of momentum is clearly influencing the results.
  • Among Republicans, it’s McCain up 38% to 29% with Huckabee at 9%.

And now, on to the three morning tracking-polls. Let’s start with Zogby where this is only the first entirely post-Iowa sample… and that created some big changes:

  • Clinton was still up 31% to 30% yesterday. Today, Obama has shot up dramatically and is ahead 39% to 29% for Clinton and 19% for Edwards. In a tracking-poll, that is some huge movement. Clinton has kept her lead among women but trails narrowly among registered Democrats.
  • Among Republicans, McCain leads Romney 34% to 29% with Huckabee down 2% since yesterday at 10%.

Even Suffolk has abandonned Clinton! The group that showed the best numbers for Hillary for a few days now has Obama ahead… though only by 1%. The groupis also the only one that has Romney ahead so maybe they have a different model of independent turnout:

  • Among Democrats, it’s Obama up 35% to 34% with Edwards at 15%.
  • Republican numbers have not moved at all, with Romney up 30% to 27% with Giuliani at 10% and Huckabee at 9%.

And finally, on to Rasmussen which gives us a VERY interesting finding: “McCain is losing ground to Obama which is causing him problems with Romney. On Friday, the Rasmussen Reports survey found that Independent voters were likely to make up 32% of the Republican Primary electorate. That dropped to 27% of Sunday.” This is of course the big question going into tomorrow’s voting. And if that holds, McCain could be in some trouble and Obama could nearly be unstoppable (how can Hillary beat him if 73% of independents are voting in the Dem race):

  • The poll has Romney climbing back into a tie, trailing only 32% to 31% with Huckabee at 11%.
  • Among Democrats, Obama is up 38% to 28% and he leads 2:1 among independents… keep that in mind when wondering what is going on.

The questions that will have to be answered tomorrow night (besides the victor and where independents vote):

(1) How low will Rudy Giuliani sink? He has no excuse here the way he did in Iowa. He ran a ton of ads and only stopped doing so a couple of weeks ago. Could he actually sink under Thompson?

(2) Will Hillary maintain her lead among registered Democrats? And if she does, how much does the campaign make use of that to diminish Obama’s showing (think McCain-Bush in 2000)?

Caught in a downward spiral, Clinton wants to at least stay in contact

Published
by
Taniel
on January 7, 2008
in NH-Dem
. 3 Comments

I might have underestimated just how huge an influence the compressed calendar would have on this year’s primaries. Eight days separated Iowa and New Hampshire in 2004, and while that was not enough for Howard Dean to recover from his post-”scream” collapse, he had at least gotten back on track by NH and started to slowly get back up. But with only 5 days between the two contests this year, it is clear that Barack Obama’s bounce is only now getting to full strength as the news of his Iowa win was absorbed throughout the week-end. And by the time voting starts on Tuesday, Clinton will probably barely have time to make a dent on her rival’s surge. Don’t forget, any bounce wears off to some degree or other, but 5 days is certainly not a lot for that to happen.

This basically means that Hillary Clinton could very well be trounced come Tuesday, as New Hampshire is known to reward its conquerors with big victories (Kerry by 13% in 2004, McCain by 18% in 2000). When a candidate enjoys New Hampshire momentum, he can rise high very quickly as independents jump in on the bandwagon. (So much for New Hampshire priding itself for its political acuteness and its independent streak.) However much Obama worked for his Iowa victory, we’ve got to admit that this is a little bit too much power in the hands of a democratically challenged contest in one small-state. Four years Iowa alone made John Kerry the nominee, will history repeat itself and will one candidate ride unstoppable momentum out of the caucuses?

In search of any indicator they can get as to where things are heading, observers might seize tomorrow on this NYT has a devastating article about Bill Clinton’s lackluster New Hampshire performance this past few days (probably unfairly to the Clinton campaign given that anti-Bill pieces have been written by all publications non-stop for the past 2 weeks, and that the article is mostly based on one campaign event that occurred hours after the Iowa results came in). The lede reads, “Former President Bill Clinton has been drawing sleepy and sometimes smallish crowds at big venues in the state that revived his presidential campaign in 1992. He entered to polite applause and rows of empty seats at the University of New Hampshire on Friday.” The article goes on to acknowledge a few redeeming circumstances, but the basic message of the article — that Bill Clinton has lost his touch and that even he is unable to help the sinking ship that his wife’s campaign has become — is sure to be picked up tomorrow by the rest of the press, giving an embarrassing news cycle for the former president 24 hours from the start of the vote.

And how bad could things get? The Politico quotes (anonymous, of course) Clinton advisers who are not only worrying about a massive loss in 48 hours but also acknowledging that South Carolina is now probably lost, as Obama’s early victory(ie) ensures that the black vote gets solidly behind him there and make a Clinton come-back in SC impossible. That would be a huge development — remember just a month ago Clinton was in control of the state’s African-American vote and with that seemed unbeatable. Clinton clearly has to find a state to win sometime in January — can her campaign expect to lose everything pre-February 5th and still get a win? Unless Clinton’s puts up a firewall in Nevada, her situation will quickly resemble Giuliani’s — and she is not even allowed to campaign in Florida!

With this dire situation in mind, Clinton has chosen to go after Obama and knock him off his pedestal. She started this strategy at the debate last night by emphasizing her rival’s position changes and criticizing the hope he claims to represent as empty rhetoric. She continued her attacks today (check out this summary from the NYT): “You campaign in poetry, but you govern in prose,” she said. She also compared Obama to Bush in 2000, explaining that people took a risk then to trust a candidate just because he seemed likable — and that the country cannot afford the same risk twice.

She has one more day to save face and at least keep in close contact with Barack Obama. Not all polls have her down by double-digits yet, and she is even ahead in the entirely post-Iowa Suffolk survey. And yes, believe it or not, there are enough undecideds left that Hillary could very well win on Tuesday night. From the same NYT article I quoted from above comes this, “At each of his stops, Mr. Obama asked how many voters were undecided, and hundreds of people raised their hands.” But just as likely is that Clinton loses by a margin big enough to put her campaign in fatally serious trouble the extent of which would have been unthinkable just 4 days ago.

Add two more polls, and a debate

Published
by
Taniel
on January 7, 2008
in NH-Dem and NH-GOP
. 0 Comments

Add two more polls to today’s deluge of New Hampshire surveys. And the numbers are very much in line with the five we saw earlier today: Obama’s bounce is only getting bigger, and Romney is making up some of his deficit. The major poll that will be talked about a lot tomorrow is the USA Today/Gallup survey, taken Friday to Sunday so clearly post-Iowa:

  • Barack Obama gets his highest percentage yet, beating Hillary 41% to 28% with Edwards at 19%.
  • Among Republicans, McCain has a narrow 34% to 30% lead with Huckabee at 13% and Paul and Giuliani at 8%.

Obviously very damaging numbers for Hillary Clinton who could perhaps stay competitive if she loses in New Hampshire but not if she gets trounced so massively. And we get the ARG tracking poll that is, as any tracking, very useful in determining trends:

  • The number of undecideds among Democrats has collapsed but Barack Obama is still up by double-digits, 39% to 28% (that’s actually a slight improvement for Clinton who was down 12% yesterday). Edwards gets 22% — dangerously close to Clinton.
  • The Republican numbers, meanwhile, are very interesting: Down 14% yesterday, Romney is now trailing 35% to 27% with Huckabee at 12% and Giuliani at 10%.

While the margin is still significant, this is still more evidence that some pro-Romney movement is happening this week-end as almost all of today’s 7 polls have picked it up. And don’t forget we will have even more data points tomorrow with a new round of tracking polls — this primary is truly one of the most polled contests in recent memory.

Meanwhile, the GOP candidates were having their second debate in two days, this time on Fox News. I only got to watch the last 10 minutes so I will not offer much analysis here but to say that the 5 candidates were sitting as cramped as they could possibly be without being on top of each other. Very strange choice on Fox’s part. Ron Paul had been excluded from the debate, which meant the candidates did not have their favorite punching bag.

Check out this recap from Politico’s Jonathan Martin. In brief, it appears that the candidates had been told to tone down the Romney-bashing after yesterday’s pathetic scene of middle-school bullying and as a result the debate was rather tame with candidates making sure to not air anymore negativity. The consensus among observers seems to be that Romney and McCain mostly neutralized each other and that while Romney was in command of the discussion McCain had some good moments that enabled him to shine through. For all it’s worth, Fox News’s panel of undecided voters had overwhelmingly loved Romney and converted into firm believers (though they also seemed to be looking at each other a lot before raising their hand).

Is Romney being helped by the Iowa results?

Published
by
Taniel
on January 6, 2008
in NH-Dem and NH-GOP
. 2 Comments

A fascinating dynamic in the polls I cited below is the McCain-Romney numbers and the fact that Romney seems to not have suffered at all from his defeat in Iowa. Quite the contrary, most tracking polls are showing a slow but sure Romney climb in the days since the caucuses. Is this an example of the media and political observers just getting ahead of itself? The whole reason people thought Romney would crash in NH if he lost IA was that he was long considered the favorite and he massively outspent Huckabee. But do the majority of voters who have still to make up their mind know about all of this? Do they realize just how humiliating Thursday’s results were for Romney, or do they see that he came in second — much ahead of McCain — and give him credit for that. Don’t forget that McCain came in fourth, and while he was just a few hundred votes behind Thompson that prevented the NH press from launching into a long praise of the AZ Senator and how admirably he performed while being so out of it.

Another explanation to Romney’s climb: Obama’s huge momentum (obvious from the kind of bounce he is getting) since his Iowa triumph has McCain in trouble, since independents trying to decide between Obama and McCain are now more likely to vote in the Democratic race. Obama’s surge has got to be due at least in part to an increase of the independent vote — and that could hurting McCain very directly. And add the last factor that Huckabee was never a factor in New Hampshire, so it’s not like Romney had to fear from losing to him.

All in all, this gets us to the striking paradox that I certainly would not have predicted a few days ago that Romney does not appear to be hurt at all by his defeat in Iowa and he is still very much in the running. And for similar reasons, I am on the verge of reversing my previously held conviction that Romney would be toast with a second loss on Tuesday. After all, he would have score second-place twice, winning Wyoming in-between. But more on that later.

Update: Yes, obviously McCain is presently ahead. But he was ahead before Iowa voted, and there is no indication that his situation has improved at all since Thursday. Quite the contrary, I find that today’s eight polls all have had an improving situation for Romney in the past 48 hours.

Surveying the New Hampshire polls: 5 new surveys today only

Published
by
Taniel
on January 6, 2008
in NH-Dem and NH-GOP
. 0 Comments

The Iowa results are starting to sink in voter consciousness at this point, and the tracking polls are now nearly all taken post-Iowa (though not entirely, as we will see). Four new polls out today have good news for Barack Obama, though Clinton is far from out of the race; and on the GOP side, things are looking to tighten up again in Romney’s favor. Naturally, all of these polls released throughout the day were taken prior to yesterday’s debates, so any effect those might have had are obviously not incorporated here.

Let’s start with the poll of polls, the CNN/WMUR/UNH survey. And it exemplifies more than anything just how wounded Clinton is right now:

  • Yesterday, CNN/WMUR had Clinton and Obama tied at 33%. 24 hours later and a new round of interviews later, Obama is up 39% to 29%, with Edwards at 16% (all polls suggest Clinton is losing no ground to Edwards, which has got to reassure her). That is some major movement, as the pollsters are adding that Obama is gaining three points a day — numbers that are confirmed by the other polls listed below.
  • Among Republicans, McCain is at 32% and Romney at 26% in Huckabee at 14% and Giuliani at 11%. The only movement is between Huck and Rudy who have inverted their position.

Second, we have Zogby’s tracking poll. It is a four-day survey so at this point only 50% has been taken post-Iowa, but the trendlines are clear:

  • Among Democrats, Clinton is only ahead 31% to 30% today, with Edwards at 20%. There was a 4% gap yesterday and a 6% gap two days ago. Zogby adds that there is very clear movement in Obama’s favor, so expect Barack to take the lead here tomorrow.
  • But the Republican race has Iowa’s second-place, Mitt Romney, take the lead for the first time by a tiny 32% to 31%. Huckabee is at 12% and Giuliani at 7%.

Next is the Suffolk tracking which is a two-day poll so this is the first time all the sample was tested post-Iowa. And Clinton’s lead has entirely melted — but it is still there:

  • Clinton is up 35% to 33% to Edwards’s 14%. Yesterday, she had a 7% lead — and it was 17% three days ago, a huge decline but it is remarkable that she maintains herself ahead. Suffolk is consistently showing Clinton a few points better than her average in other polls, by the way. Do they have another methodology for tracking independents?
  • In the GOP race, Mitt Romney is still up 30% to 27% with Giuliani at 10%, Ron Paul at 9% and Mike Huckabee at 7%.

Continuing our survey, here is the Rasmussen survey which is also a two-day poll. I believe Rasmussen had only one-day numbers yesterday so he just added a new sample to yesterday’s results:

  • Barack Obama is ahead by 12%, 39% to 27% with Edwards at 18%. Yesterday, Obama was up 10% which means his bounce got bigger on Saturday.
  • Among Republicans, the race has tightened from a 4% McCain lead to a 2% McCain lead, 32% to 30% (which means Romney had a good day Saturday, which appears to conform to all other polls out there). Huckabee and Paul were tied at 11% with Giuliani at 9%.

And last and perhaps least for once we have the Mason-Dixon/MSNBC numbers that were taken January 2nd to January 4th, which means that a significant portion of the results are way pre-Iowa at this point. So treat the numbers accordingly, as Clinton is slightly ahead 33% to 31% but the pollsters are saying that Obama got an 8-point lead in the last day of polling alone. Given how small that sample is by itself, that information is not very useful. And among Republicans, it’s McCain ahead 32% to 24%. Given that the tracking polls have shown a Romney comeback since Thursday, take those numbers with a grain of salt as well.

Romney wins Wyoming (!), and Obama gets varying bounces in NH (Updated with new polls)

Published
by
Taniel
on January 5, 2008
in NH-Dem, NH-GOP and WY-GOP
. 0 Comments

In quasi-total indifference, Mitt Romney got an early-state win! Only, it’s neither Iowa nor New Hampshire… but Wyoming. With 4 delegates still to be attributed in different parts of the state, Romney has six delegates already out of twelve, Duncan Hunter has one and Fred Thompson has another, which means that neither can catch up to Romney (Update: Romney has won 8 of the delegates, Fred Thompson 3, and Duncan Hunter 1). Since these are the first actual delegates to the convention to be attributed (the Iowa distribution will not happen until some time in Iowa), Romney now has a lead in delegates to the convention!

It seems that the media is choosing to talk about this more than I expected. The caucuses are meriting stories in most media groups, for example here with the Washington Post.And count on the Romney campaign to try to spread the word and save face after their stunning crash in Iowa on Thursday. From Romney’s statement: “The people of Wyoming took the first step towards bringing true conservative change to Washington. I am honored to have won many of the first delegates awarded this primary season. As the Republican nominee, I promise to fight to seat all of Wyoming’s delegates at the national convention.”

Meanwhile in New Hampshire the polls are coming in fast. Rasmussen’s poll early this afternoon was the first conducted entirely post-Iowa and it had Obama up 10%. Since then, we have got more surveys, and the news is even more dire for Clinton. Let’s start with ARG:

  • In two days, Clinton has dropped 9% and Obama has risen 7%. A 35-31 lead for Clinton has become a 38% to 26% lead for Obama, with Edwards rising 5 at 20%.
  • Among Republicans, it’s becoming ugly for Romney, who is down 39% to 25%, with Huckabee up 2 at 14%. Giuliani only gets 7% — and Paul is at 6%, much less than the 14% he got in Rasmussen.

The CNN/WMUR/UNH poll, considered by many to be the best poll of New Hampshire, does not have a significant bounce for Obama, despite also being taken on January 4th and 5th. So there is still some hope for Clinton?

  • Clinton and Obama are tied at 33%, with Edwards at 20%. The last CNN poll had Clinton up 4%, so while it has tightened it is nowhere near ARG’s poll. As is expected, Obama leads among independents but Clinton is ahead among Democrats.
  • Among Republicans, McCain is ahead by 6%, 33% to 27%. Giuliani gets 14%, Huckabee 11% and Ron Paul 9%. Giuliani’s total higher than we have seen in the other polls over the past few days. A week ago, there was a tie at 29%.

Keep in mind that the WMUR poll is much more reputed than either ARG or Rasmussen, so most of the storyline is likely to be dictated by this poll rather than those showing a big Obama bounce. That could be a life-savior for Clinton who does not want to face days and days of coverage of her doom.

And third, we get the Concord Monitor/Research 2000 survey, which is very very close to the CNN/WMUR poll:

  • Among Democrats, Obama only rises by 1%, now ahead of Clinton 34% to 33%. Edwards gets 23%.
  • Among Republicans, it’s once again McCain by 6%, 35% to 29%, with Huckabee at 13% and Giuliani at 8%.

The bottom line in all these polls: Mitt Romney is in a bigger hole than Hillary Clinton, but both races are still very much competitive. While McCain and Obama are now clearly favored to win on Tuesday, tonight’s debates could be decisive and bounces don’t last forever.