So what will the excuse be when Senator Clinton continues to dominate the polls...

[IndianaJones]

after this debate? The fix is in? The media is brainwashing the masses? It just ain't fair?

I gage her success by the amount of whining I see here. From the looks of things, she is doing well.

[seriousstan]

1. Good "gage".

[IndianaJones]

6. "thanks". "dictionary?" nt.

[Honeycombe8]

14. LOL LOL! Or should I say, "LOL LOL"? n/t

[IndianaJones]

15. and they wonder why their candidate is losing. nt.

[PDittie]

41. It appears to be in need of recalibration eom

[jmp]

2. Inertia?

But I suspect that she will dip some in the next round of polls. Maybe even a good 5 points down.

[emilyg]

9. She'll be fine.

[Steve_in_California]

3. That Iran vote will sink her like a stone.

She falsely claimed that George Bush tricked her into voting for the Iraq war. Now, she turns around and gives him a toehold on making war on Iran! She's outed--pure and simple. She has never admitted her Iraq vote was a mistake. The lady is toast.

[jmp]

10. I wouldn't say like a stone but ...

It will hurt her. Few Americans believe that we are suffering from a war deficit.

[Freddie Stubbs]

46. Most Americans don't know about this vote and most candidates won't bring it up

[The Backlash Cometh]

49. What will sink her like a stone is her own words.

Here, read this article. You'll see what I mean:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=103x310253

[saltpoint]

4. By December 1st she'll be running third or fourth in Iowa.

Behind a close cluster of John Edwards, Barack Obama, and Joe Biden, in no particular order, but all head of New York's junior senator.

And Bill Richardson can't be counted out, either.

[ElizabethDC]

7. You really think so?

Because, as of late, she's been running (mostly) first in Iowa, and her poll numbers show an upward trend.

(See graph here: http://www.pollster.com/08-IA-Dem-Pres-Primary.php - it is a couple of weeks old, but I don't know that things have changed that much in the Iowa polls in the past couple weeks anyway.)

[saltpoint]

13. Hi, ElizabethDC. Yes. As this fall's Middle East headlines come into sharper

relief, I believe Biden's partition plan generally but his intricate currency in foreign policy especially lift him into contention at the expense of Sen. Clinton's support in Iowa. Not all, but some of Clinton's Iowa support comes via Evan Bayh's odd withdrawal from the race (he'd raised some very serious cash and was well-connected on the ground before mysteriously withdrawing...nearly simultaneous to Sen. Clinton's inviting him on her Iraq trip) and from the withdrawal of Tom Vilsack, the native son option who knew a lot of local county folks but couldn't parlay that into contention. Read: he was getting his ass kicked anyway and she offered to pay off his bills if he'd swap an endorsement.

Not saying Sen. Clinton WILL not win in Iowa or elsewhere; only saying the trendlines do not favor her against both a concerted field (most of whom are to her left) AND the news headlines. I've heard no military representative of any rank speak about things getting better in Iraq -- only of things growing much worse either quickly or gradually. IMO that boosts Edwards and Obama on the issue itself versus Clinton and it boosts Biden owing to his almost singular expertise in foreign policy.

As always, a significantly large percentage of caucus voters are undecided now; still a larger chunk will (as they have traditionally, reliably done) swerve from one preference to a final commitment. Presidents Dean and Gephardt can speak to this phenomena with some authority. In this reliable, traditional shift, I believe Senator Clinton finishes no better than third and very likely fourth in the Hawkeye State in 3 and a half months.

[IndianaJones]

8. It will not be difficult to determine if you are correct. Dec. 1st eh? We'll see. nt.

[saltpoint]

16. I'm invoking the precipitous plunge of Dick Gephardt in 2003 in Iowa.

He first lost his sturdy lead to Howard Dean, and then to both John Edwards and John Kerry. Kerry (37%), Edwards (32%), and Dean (17%) buried Gephardt alive in Iowa in January 04. Gep withdrew within hours from the presidential race, having held a handsome lead only a couple months prior.

Senator Clinton has a much stronger national profile (and lead) than she does in Iowa. Right now, Iowa is a mad scramble. I don't see any reliable predictions at the moment.

[knight_of_the_star]

23. Edwards has held an edge there for a bit

Partly because that's where he needs and can afford to do so, but he has the real best shot there because of his focus on that, but it still is hairy there.

[saltpoint]

24. Yes. I'm getting that impression, even if it's from afar. With only a

handful of money, he still managed 32% of the Iowa caucus vote in 04. He's better funded this time and has been in the state many times.

I like the description you gave of the situation on the ground out there. It feels just right.

[knight_of_the_star]

25. Doesn't hurt that he's been camped out in that state since '04

Hopefully that will tip the balance, if he wins Iowa then maybe Nevada then places in the top 3 in NH he'll be fine for the next round.

[saltpoint]

26. Agree. If Edwards takes Iowa, the headlines for a week belong to his

campaign. There'll be some momentum. Biden, I believe, will be far stronger by December than he is now, and I believe he will place ahead of Sen. Clinton in Iowa.

If he does, she's done for.

And if he doesn't, she's weakened nevertheless if at least Edwards and Obama place in the first two positions.

Add Biden as a third person placing either 1, 2, or 3 ahead of Clinton, and she limps into New Hampshire a week later as damaged goods.

[knight_of_the_star]

27. And if she gets nailed in NH

Then the shit really hits the fan for her at that point. If she takes 4th in Iowa she would need a 1st place finish in NH to walkaway intact, anything less and she's in trouble, if by some strange twist of fate at that point she takes third in Iowa after a 4th in NH she is finished. The whole inevitability approach will come back to bite her ass off at that point.

[saltpoint]

30. She likely would have to do well -- or win -- one or the other. Agree that if

she were to place poorly in both, she'd be a far longer shot than she'd wish to be.

She does have a very fierce apparatus in place for her campaign, and a veteran team, and cash galore. I'm not writing her off.

But agree with you that early losses in one or both Iowa and NH would lower her odds dramatically and swiftly.

[knight_of_the_star]

31. Her strategy works for now

Because there's no actual votes in primaries or caucuses to refute it yet, but if she gets knocked around too much in the first few primaries she won't look so inevitable anymore.

[Hippo_Tron]

33. Good analysis, but you have to factor in expectations

If any of the candidates are expected to win in Iowa but don't deliver, it will probably sink them. We don't know what expectations will be until January.

Howard Dean would have done well to play down his expectations in Iowa and play up Kerry's. Kerry's victory in Iowa was so huge because nobody saw it coming.

[saltpoint]

48. Agree on all counts. Expectation is a gigantic "unforeseeable."

I thought Dean would win once he passd Gephardt in the polls. This was after I thought Gephardt would win.

I didn't see either Kerry or Edwards passing those two, and the polls in Iowa didn't have a very good handle on the 04 Democratic caucus-goer. Not saying the polling was incompetent, only that it's mighty fluid in early January in Iowa.

Likely the same this coming January, too.

[Steve_in_California]

29. I agree.

Biden will finish in Iowa in the top 3. In New Hampshire in the top 3. In North Carolina in the top 2. By then he'll have enough money to take him all the way.

[zulchzulu]

51. Hey OC, don't forget Chris

From my view, it's going to be Edwards and Obama in a nail-biter with Dodd in third and Clinton either fourth or fifth behind Biden. Iowans will see the light soon enough.

We'll see...

[saltpoint]

60. Hi, zulchzulu. You could have a headline in the making there. Dodd is

an attractive candidate, IMO, and I think his white hair flashing in the winter mornings in Iowa could leave a kind of symbolic mark. Experience and smarts, plus ideologically liberal... not bad all tolled.

[rinsd]

59. I respect your opinion...I just think you'll be wrong.

;-)

So tell you what, how about a friendly wager? $10 donation to DU (assigning a star to whomever the victor wants) if Hillary is running 3rd or lower in most polling in IA by Dec 1st. We can renew the bet leading up to the caucuses if you like.

I think we should define how many polls qualify as most polling; a set number an average or whatever.

[saltpoint]

61. Hi, rinsd.

A fair offer, but I won't bet the cash.

What I will do is post a public concession to you on the boards here on the night of Dec. 1 if current polling reflects your version and not mine.

You know those hurricane projection charts they use down in Miami? I think of primary/caucus politics in the same way. I'm aware of the cash kitty and national polling for Sen. Clinton and have evolved quite a bit on her candidacy to where I've pledged to support it if she wins the nomination. Same offer is good for Gov. Richardson or Congressman Kucinich, etc.

But I think the polls right now are a tease. And I'm not even factoring in a Gore candidacy, if there is one. If he comes into the race, it's going to be a jumble sack of new polling.

[madeline_con]

5. She's always sucked.

It just took a while for some people to catch on.

[illinoisprogressive]

11. I have some crow in my freezer waiting for you. The woman has peaked already.

[IndianaJones]

12. We can both bookmark the thread. Keep it on ice. nt.

[Clintonista2]

21. I thought she peaked a month ago!!!?!?!

Is that crow in your freezer, or in hell freezing over?

[ElizabethDC]

22. She'll probably be peaking again next month, too. n/t

[Honeycombe8]

17. Oh, come on. There's no fix. I'm not a Hillary supporter, but I can recognize...

when most of the country knows and thinks it will vote for someone, regardless of how s/he performs in one debate.

Clinton has the best known name, the most experience of the top 3 contenders, her husband was a popular President, the public knows her and her family, and she apparently has done a good job as a Senator for 7 years. A LOT of people will vote for her just because of those things, regardless of how she does in a debate or what her positions are on issues, or even how she votes in Congress. And some others will vote for her because they agree with her positions and votes.

Clinton did well tonight. Not as well as she has done all the other nights. Edwards made three very good points, to her detriment.

Edwards and Biden did very well. Richardson did himself a bit of good... not much, but a bit. Kucinich did well, also.

Dodd and Gravel were the only two losers, IMO.

[azurnoir]

18. Her success is simple

she appeals to Democrats with very right-wing leanings.

[IndianaJones]

19. uh huh. thats it. nt.

[azurnoir]

56. So do you also support war with Iran? n/t

[ElizabethDC]

20. Ummm, yeah, I'm not so sure about that. n/t

[azurnoir]

55. i am sure she she voted yea

on Lieberman's pet issue. I was indifferent or undecided till then

[Perry Logan]

38. Then why do the anti-Hillerites talk and act just like Freepers?

[azurnoir]

54. Why does she endorse another war?

That seems a bit more Freeper like but thats just me and my values:sarcasm:

[urgk]

44. If by "right-wing leanings" you mean...

...the tendency to replace actual thought with blind loyalty to a name-brand politician, I'll second that one.

[azurnoir]

53. no I mean

promoting another oil war, Iran

[urgk]

57. I know...

I was trying my hand at "wit." ;-)

[knight_of_the_star]

28. Here's my response

The fat lady hasn't begun to warm up yet. And HRC's high profile in the polls could just as easily destroy her, if she doesn't live up to the high expectations in the voting booth she's done.

[Milo_Bloom]

32. No decent candidates, so they default to the name they know. (nt)

[Perry Logan]

34. People still like her best--even after 15 years of incontinent slander. She must be awesome!

[eShirl]

35. accusations of "whining" on a message board, now where have I heard that before....

hmmm...

[Demeter]

36. I Prefer Someone Who Does GOOD over One Who Does Well in a Beauty Contest

Hillary hasn't done any GOOD, and that is why I cannot think she would be the best Democrat or an acceptable President.

[BoneDaddy]

37. Excuse?

or reality. She may win the Democratic vote but she will lose the presidential election.

[Perry Logan]

39. Spoken like a loser. No wonder Republicans win so often.

[BoneDaddy]

40. LOL

it is called being politically real. Clinton is a lead zeppelin. I will remember your name when we lose in 08.

[PDittie]

42. I like the sound of

"peaked too soon", personally.

[urgk]

43. My excuse will be --->

"People just don't think."

Or

"I didn't post this link enough" --> http://www.motherjones.com/news/feature/2007/09/hillarys-prayer.html

[Prophet 451]

45. People are stupid

I have two rules to life that have never yet let me down:
1. People will believe what they want to believe or what they fear to be true.
2. Always bet on stupidity.

Look, I'm not saying Hillary is the anti-Christ. I'm sure she'd make a decent president, I just think that some of the other candidates (Kucinich especially) would be better. But I also think that the majority of people voting for Hillary won't be voting for her Senate record or her policies. They'll be voting for Bill Clinton's wife or the reasonably attractive woman or simply because she acts like the nomination is already hers (well, that's my impression anyway). The ones who vote against her are mostly voting against a decade of Billary jokes or against the woman or against the pinko socialist. Hate to say it but I think most people really are that superficial.

[Dawgs]

47. That's not fair, I was going to say 'people are stupid'.

[robcon]

50. I think it will continue to be the same excuse ...

Name recognition - as if Democrats haven't heard of Obama and Edwards. It's an old story by now, but the anti-Hillaryites seem never to get tired of this mistaken impression.

[Scriptor Ignotus]

52. we whine about Bush and the Republicans all the time

are they a success in your book too? Are they doing well?

[Zandor]

58. The corporate media is working with the

neo-cons, AIPAC, and big business to rig the polls.

:sarcasm: