rucky
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Oct-24-04 02:45 PM
Original message |
What were the pre-Iowa polls like during the Democratic primary? |
|
I recall Kerry's and Edwards' performance being a complete suprise to the "experts" on (DU and beyond). Just an interesting factoid for anyone who likes to cite polls.
|
Quixote1818
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Oct-24-04 02:48 PM
Response to Original message |
1. I think Kerry was up by a couple over Dean and Gephardt |
|
Then Kerry went on to win by ten or fifteen points!!!!
|
Bluzmann57
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Oct-24-04 02:52 PM
Response to Original message |
|
Dean was supposed to blow away the competition, and Kerry was third or fourth. Edwards was second, third, fourth depending on whom you believed. The caucus I attended had Kerry supporters up the ying yang and we who caucused for Edwards were viable after a second session. In this district, Kerry won, followed by Edwards and Gephardt. Kerry had a 30 minute special on a local TV station which was impressive. He spelled out his plans for America, which were the same then as they are now and that helped him at least here in eastern Iowa.
|
murielm99
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Oct-24-04 02:57 PM
Response to Reply #2 |
3. My daughter is in Ames. |
|
Unlike me, she has been a Kerry supporter since day one. I asked her why, and she convinced me.
She said her caucus had mainly Kerry supporters, with Edwards second. She was not surprised by the outcome nationally, and thinks that Edwards was a good choice for VP.
The kid is politically astute and very involved. I always listen to her about Iowa and national politics.
|
sandnsea
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Oct-24-04 02:59 PM
Response to Original message |
|
Edited on Sun Oct-24-04 03:01 PM by sandnsea
Kerry had taken the lead in most polls just days before the caucus. But he still ended up with 5-10 more points than even the late polls predicted. Edwards too. Seems it was that way in most early primary polls, even after Iowa. Later though, the undecideds broke for Edwards alot, I think it was a rejection of a perceived "coronation" by many.
Oh, and IA & NH was an extraordinary ground campaign at the very end, GOTV was masterfully executed. Just can't compete with a bunch of Vietnam vets who respect the contribution of every single worker and can get every ounce of work out of every volunteer!
|
JohnKleeb
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Oct-24-04 03:08 PM
Response to Reply #4 |
6. Kerry won Iowa the same way the Red Sox won the ACLS |
|
Heart. Yep I remember, the polls were narrow for him on the day of Iowa but then I got worried because he lost his voice, then he won a resounding victory, I always had been a fan of Kerry but that day put me officially in his camp. More I learn about Kerry, the more I like, just such an amazing guy. Best nominee of my life I must say.
|
JI7
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Oct-24-04 03:05 PM
Response to Original message |
5. Kerry was not far behind when you looked at internal numbers |
|
he was going up in specific areas such as whether he is a good leader, likable ,on the issues etc. and his numbers were always good in new hampshire also but the only thing holding him back was that he was viewed as having a dead campaign. if he could change that they assumed he would rise in new hampshire. and i guess that's one reason for focus on iowa. a win in iowa would mean he would erase the negative view which was holding him back in new hampshire.
it took a while for these to show up in the final numbers but they did in the end.
but the media whores only focus on those final numbers mostly and not internals. so they were surprised by the outcome. but i guess if one followed the internal numbers they shouldn't be too surprised that Kerry (and Edwards) did well.
|
DU
AdBot (1000+ posts) |
Fri Apr 19th 2024, 08:36 AM
Response to Original message |