New non-Zogby Poll from Iowa

[edwardsdefender]

John Edwards 29%
Barak Obama 23%
Hillary Clinton 21%
Bill Richardson 10%


Mitt Romney 30%
John McCain 18%
Rudy Guiliani 17%
Fred Thompson 7%

http://desmoinesregister.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070519/NEWS/70519028/1001

Romney plays well on television. I still think his Mormonism will matter come decision time.

[elocs]

1. I think a good many evangelicals and fundies will not vote for a Mormon.

The Republicans need all of the religious-right votes that they can get. Couple that with Dobson saying that the evangelicals will sit on their hands if Guiliani gets the nomination and the conservatives who have no stomach for McCain, then it looks good for whoever gets the Democratic nomination.

[Brassballs]

17. Romney is the only one not divorced amongst the top tier GOP

candidates. I don't see how the fundies would favor twice
divorced Rudy who also supports abortion rights or maverick
McCain who wants to raise taxes.

So it may turn out to be wishful thinking that the fundies will
prefer Rudy or McCain over Romney in the primaries.

In the GE, why do you think they would prefer HRC/Obama/Edwards
over Romney assuing Romney gets the nod?

[elocs]

18. Republicans need all of the evangelical/fundy votes they can get.

If the Christian vote sits on their hands or does not vote for the Republican candidate, then that makes the election of a Democrat far more likely given the currnet mood and climate of the country. Also, any Republican candidate who is pro choice is going to have a big problem with the Republican base. Certainly, that can change, but Democrats need to hold the Republican nominee's feet to the flames concerning their stances as well as their flip-flops on big issues.

[Brassballs]

28. There is a likelyhood of that happening....

I am sure a segment of the fundies will stay home in November election.

[flpoljunkie]

23. James Dobson recently offered praise for Romney--has also said he'd never support Giuliani or McCain

Conservative Christian Officer Praise for Romney

By Scott Helman, Globe Staff | May 19, 2007

It wasn't quite an endorsement, but Mitt Romney must see promise in comments conservative icon James Dobson made about him yesterday.

Dobson, the influential leader of the Christian organization Focus on the Family, praised Romney on a radio program and said he may end up supporting him.

"I mean he's very presidential and he's got the right answers to many, many things," Dobson told conservative commenator Laura Ingraham on her show. Dobson said he hasn't decided whom to back, but that Romney "is still on the list."

Dobson, whose voice carries tremendous weight among Christian conservatives, said this week that he could never support former New York mayor Rudolph Giuliani. And he has said before that he won't back the other leading Republican, Arizona Senator John McCain. That leaves Romney as the only top-tier presidential candidate who could land Dobson's endorsement -- a potentially huge boost for him as he tries to win primary voters.

http://www.boston.com/news/nation/articles/2007/05/19/conservative_christian_offers_praise_for_romney/

[Brassballs]

27. Thank you! That confirms my thinking!! eom

[edwardsdefender]

38. Romney versus Edwards, Edwards will get 35% of white evangelicals. It's a guarantee.

Edwards - "I grew up in a Southern Baptist household, my father was a deacon in the church...Romney's a mormon." = 35% guranteed. Why do you think Edwards always destroys Romney in the polls more than Clinton and Obama do. Geography is playing a role, there.

[bklyncowgirl]

20. They will if their leaders support him.

My feeling is that the GOP establishment has decided to unite around Romney.

[elocs]

24. Well the GOP establishment may unite around Romney,

but you are not going to persuade Christian evangelicals or fundamentalists to support a candidate who they believe is part of a cult. That is a big, big deal for these particular Christians.

[bklyncowgirl]

41. There are some who won't,, you're right. That's a good thing. nt

[On the Road]

2. I Do Think Edwards Will Win Iowa

but that is still a stunning poll. And the winner of Iowa has a lot of momentum going into NH.

[Jackpine Radical]

3. Awfully early.

I'm not sure any poll this long before spring has any meaning whatsoever.

Edwards may very well end up being the nominee, but any connection between this poll and that event is purely by chance.

[jefferson_dem]

6. True that January is a *long way off* but these polls are important...

for what they are - a snapshot of public opinion as of this moment. Good poll numbers mean more favorable media coverage, more $, better organizational morale...more bandwagon supporters. We know the campaigns are watching these numbers and doing their own internal polling. They know numbers matter...even this far before the actual votes are cast. Hell, Iowa's own Gov. Vilsak can attest to that.

Oh, not to mention...polls also give us freaks something to chatter on about.

[edwardsdefender]

8. And since Edwards has not been getting favorable media coverage, then what do his

poll numbers in Iowa and against Republicans mean? Even in the face of constant smears, he still polls well against Republicans. If they started smearing Clinton or Obama, do you think their advantages against Republicans would hold up?

[jefferson_dem]

10. Three points.

In my view, Edwards problems are of his own making, and the media are merely doing what they do --- sensing the blood in the water and seizing the opportunities.

Edwards is not the only one being smeared. Have you not been paying attention?

The favorable media coverage i was referring to are the reporting of these specific poll results on local Iowa media. People like to support "winners." When Iowans wake up to the news that Edwards is still winning, that only stands to snowball into more support for him...within certain limits, of course.

One more thing: Welcome to DU! :hi:

[edwardsdefender]

42. Edwards is smeared 24/7, "Clinton v. Obama" is propped on the television screen constantly

Of course the media are promoting Clinton and Obama and trying to marginalize Edwards. Most of Edwards problems are manufactured, because the swiftboating media is trying to create the caricature of Edwards that the Republicans want.

[Andrew_Lindsey]

Edwards has had TONS of coverage locally in Iowa.

The man has practically lived here for the past few years. He is on a morning news show, or an evening news broadcast, at least once a week...if not more.

Edwards is not experiencing anything close to a blackout, or unfair coverage.

I live here.

[Inspired]

21. So do I Andrew.

I don't see him getting more coverage than any other candidate. What TV market do you live in? I'm in Des Moines.

[Andrew_Lindsey]

25. Iowa City/Cedar Rapids

I think he is getting more coverage than Obama, perhaps equal to Clinton, and a lot more than any 2nd-tier candidates, like Richardson (who is doing very well locally). Most of it, at least the local coverage, is positive.

[Andrew_Lindsey]

15. self delete

[On the Road]

13. I Don't Think That Because of the Poll

Edwards beat the polls and almost won Iowa last time, and the slate of candidates in 2004 (Gephardt, Kerry, and Dean) was probably more appealing to caucus-goers than Clinton and Obama. The top three are pretty much in a tie now. Anything can certainly change, but I would think those are the odds now.

[jefferson_dem]

4. As an Obama supporter, i would be more than happy with a strong second in IOWA, especially with

Hillary in the third slot. Then, win in NH and SC...

That's the plan.

[illinoisprogressive]

5. JD, I have to agree with your thinking

[edwardsdefender]

7. If Edwards wins Iowa, he will win NV, NH, and SC. That's a guarantee. Most of Hillary's SC support

will go to Edwards if she finished 3rd in Iowa.

[jefferson_dem]

9. Don't mean to challenge your "guarantee" but that seems a bit of a stretch.

According to the latest polls --

Hillary is way ahead in Nevada.
Edwards is a fairly distant third in NH and SC.

Edwards has been banking on Iowa and campaigning there since the close of the 04 race. It is a "must win" for him but i would doubt anything short of a double digit win there carries much of a bounce.

[SoxFan]

31. NH

Edwards is weak in New Hampshire. His message isn't a good fit for what is essentially a big suburb, and he doesn't have much of a grassroots organization. Obama has a strong field presence, and Clinton has the machine politicians.

[edwardsdefender]

36. Two polls over the last 2 months had Edwards in 2nd in NH, with Obama third, so don't speak so fast

[jefferson_dem]

11. From the same poll, more evidence that Obama has cross-over appeal.

"On the flip side, the Democrat with the greatest crossover repeal among likely Republican caucus participants is Barack Obama, who could get the support of 15 percent. Bill Richardson could get 11 percent. John Edwards, 9 percent. Hillary Clinton, just 6 percent."

[Catchawave]

12. I love all the polls that have Edwards ahead :)

Welcome to DU edwardsdefender :toast: :bounce: :bounce:

[Andrew_Lindsey]

14. WIth a 5% margin of error...

We aren't looking at anyone dominating anything.

If anything, with all of the time/money spent in Iowa over the past 4-5 years, I'd be disappointed if I were Edwards. It does show that it is anyone's race at this point.

[Inspired]

22. It's still a lead and I'll take the good news for what it is.

All I had to do was open up my Sunday DM Register and see the headline that Edwards leads Iowa. Sure, I wish his numbers were even higher but good news is good news.

The person who should be disappointed is Hillary Clinton.

[Andrew_Lindsey]

26. I don't mean to take away from Edwards.

I think he is truly leading the state, to say otherwise would be sour grapes. What I am saying is that his lead is not overwhelming, and with so long before anyone stands up in caucus, it's anyone's race at this point.

[PresidentObama]

16. Edwards still holds the edge in Iowa.

The race in that state is close though, and Edwards has to maintain his lead there. Especially since Iowa is the centerpiece of whether he'll be in the race to the end or not. My money is on Edwards, but we will see. The horse race is still very long, and I think Edwards has a lot of time to advance his image in this race.

[Ethelk2044]

19. It is Good to see Obama

is moving up in Iowa. Hopefully the more he concentrates on that area he will continue to move up.

[Colobo]

29. Exactly; that's the best part of the poll.

[Capn Sunshine]

30. IMO, Edwards will come to the wire w/ Obama

I was just going to publish this poll.

Thank goodness the real world intrudes on the "Inevitability of Hillary" meme so popular with several posters here.

[PresidentObama]

32. If comes down to Edwards and Obama tooth and nail in Iowa, I'll be a happy Democrat n/t

[Capn Sunshine]

33. me too

It was a hard choice who to work for. I really like John Edwards. I think we have a good ground game in Iowa, the equal of the Edwards campaign.
stay tuned.
:popcorn:

[jcrew2001]

34. I think Romney has a good shot at the GOP, however he is a sure

loser in the GE, so if I were him, I would do just good enough for a VP spot. He could very well win Iowa and NH (geographical advantage) but I don't think he can win the other states.

[jcrew2001]

35. Actually a Romney/Fred ticket might be formidable

I wonder if there has been any polling done on these matchups?

[edwardsdefender]

37. It will be Romney/Jeb Bush, which is why I pray that Clinton is not anywhere on the Dems' ticket

[jcrew2001]

40. I use to think it would be JEB, but I think He'll wait until 2012

when he knows he'll have a better chance - he knows Romney's a sure loser.

[Morgana LaFey]

39. Romney plays well on TV -- IF you like

smarmy panderers. I don't. But then I'm not a Repug.