JOHN EDWARDS (not Hillary) leads 08 Pres poll released today!!

[RiverStone]

This is not really BIG news, though this dated poll, released today, which has someone leading other then MSM "presumed" front runner Hillary Clinton is refreshing! Edwards is not my first choice, yet very glad to see him mixing things up. I believe the Pres field for 2008 is far more competitive then all these polls which assume HRC will be our party's nominee.

GORE/OBAMA 08 :7


* * * * * *

Edwards leads in poll of likely caucusgoers
Iowa Gov. Tom Vilsack is in fourth place; Sen. Hillary Clinton is second.

By JANE NORMAN
REGISTER WASHINGTON BUREAU

December 14, 2006

Washington, D.C. - John Edwards came out far ahead of the rest of the pack of possible Democratic presidential candidates in a poll of Iowa Democrats conducted in October by an environmental group and released Wednesday.

Edwards, a former senator from North Carolina and the second-place finisher in the 2004 caucuses, was picked as the early preference of 36 percent of likely caucusgoers in the survey.

Sen. Hillary Clinton of New York came in second with 16 percent.

Third was Sen. Barack Obama with 13 percent, and Iowa Gov. Tom Vilsack trailed in fourth place at 9 percent.

The survey of voters who said they definitely or probably would attend the January 2008 first-in-the-nation caucuses was commissioned by the advocacy group Environmental Defense and conducted by Harstad Strategic Research Inc. The poll of 602 Iowans from Oct. 12 to Oct. 19 had a margin of error of 4 percentage points.

Farther back in the poll were Sen. John Kerry of Massachusetts at 6 percent, Sen. Joe Biden of Delaware at 5 percent, retired Gen. Wesley Clark at 3 percent and New Mexico Gov. Bill Richardson at 2 percent.

The poll also found that 32 percent of the caucusgoers say global warming is an extremely serious problem.

full story here:

http://desmoinesregister.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20061214/NEWS09/612140397/-1/politics&lead=1

[Infinite Hope]

1. No surprise. He's been leading Iowa for a long time.

He has a great ground operation an continues to have the support of those who supported him last time. That 36% number will easily ensure him a victory if he maintains it because of the way the caucus system works. He'll be a lot of people's second choice. I won't be surprised to see him take 50% in Iowa.

[Inspired]

5. It is true about Iowa

John Edwards is adored in Iowa. Many of his supporters are loyal to the core because we know he would have won the caucus in '04 if we only had a couple more days. The momentum around Edwards back then was growing like nothing I had ever seen before.

The entire Edwards family is adored. Elizabeth was right on Hardball the other night when she said she has many friends here. She does indeed.

[Avalux]

2. I absolutely loved his interview on Hardball the other night.

He did the full hour at the University of North Carolina, and Elizabeth joined him for the last few minutes. I liked John Edwards during the 2004 campaign, but he certainly wasn't my favorite - there were times I thought he seemed a bit contrived. It's now two years later and the John Edwards on Hardball seemed so much more mature and at ease with himself. He admitted that when he ran for Prez he was constantly worrying about whether or not he said the right things and if the crowds liked him. Now, he doesn't worry about it anymore and the work he's been doing in Africa and other places has made him grow personally.

I would give my full support to John Edwards in 2008 without hesitation. :hi:

[Lex]

23. I agree

100%! I'm partial to him because he's an NC guy and I met him years ago and he was a nice, and very smart, guy. I would of course throw my support to whomever wins the Dem primary, but I'm glad to see Edwards doing well so early.

:thumbsup:

[Bitwit1234]

3. I like Edwards BUT

that's Iowa..he's not anywhere first in the rest of the country. I think he is a good candidate but I think his association to Kerry will hurt him.

[question everything]

9. Hardball had a poll where Edwards was second after Clinton

and ahead of Obama, but I don't know the source of that poll.

[Joe Chi Minh]

12. The CIA? FBI?

[question everything]

15. Marist College Institute for Public Opinion

(don't ask me who they are)

http://www.angus-reid.com/polls/index.cfm/fuseaction/viewItem/itemID/14062

Hillary Rodham Clinton remains the top presidential contender for Democratic Party supporters in the United States, according to a poll by the Marist College Institute for Public Opinion released by WNBC. 33 per cent of respondents would support the New York senator in a 2008 presidential primary.

Former North Carolina senator John Edwards is second with 14 per cent, followed by former vice-president Al Gore with 13 per cent, Illinois senator Barack Obama with 12 per cent, and Massachusetts senator and 2004 presidential nominee John Kerry with five per cent. Support is lower for Delaware senator Joseph Biden, New Mexico governor Bill Richardson, Indiana senator Evan Bayh, retired general Wesley Clark, and Iowa governor Tom Vilsack.

[Joe Chi Minh]

18. Thanks for that, and for your name, qe.

Normally, I would trust a Catholic institution now, but I don't know the situation in the US in terms of its political involvement.

[OrangeCountyDemocrat]

4. Without Gore...

I think Edwards is the best option to either Hillary or Obama.

Flame if you must, but I don't think either Hillary or Obama would fare well in a General Election. Hillary is Hillary, and Obama is still a bit premature. He needs more seasoning IMO.

[William769]

6. Well we already saw how Edwards faired in the primary and the general.

Hint hint.

[OrangeCountyDemocrat]

13. No We Didn't

Kerry was running, Edwards was not the candidate for President.

And this will be 2008, not 2004. Different climate. And like Gore, Edwards is viewed as someone who is not necessarily a career politician. That's acutally a good thing right now with the "throw the bums out" climate.

[William769]

21. We did in the primary

And when your 2nd man you lose if the first man does too.

[stevietheman]

14. I seem to recall that Kerry was at the top of that ticket.

Edwards campaigned his heart out, and we know how Kerry "campaigned".

[William769]

22. And Edwards chose to jump on that band wagon didn't he?

[stevietheman]

24. So? n/t

n/t

[William769]

25. So...

Blows your argument right out of the water.

[longship]

7. This shows the intelligence of caucus vs primary.

Hillary and Obama are popularity contest winners. But that's precisely *not* what this country needs. Selecting a President goes much deeper than that. The Iowa caucus is the only holdover from the old "smoke-filled rooms" of the previous era.

I yearn for those days. flawed? Yes. But I sincerely doubt that Democrats would have put up so many losing candidates in the past decades if we hadn't let Presidential campaigns descend into the realm of mere popularity contests where a candidate's "rock star status" becomes the sole criteria. After all, the two worst presidents of our era, Reagan and Dubya, were selected that way.

Bring back the "smoke-filled rooms".

[Inspired]

19. Thanks!

I am thrilled to read a comment by someone who actually gets it. The caucus process is awesome. You discuss and you hear representatives from all campaigns. You also discuss the party platform. It is engaging, personal and it is not at all intimidating. The people who participate know the candidates and what they stand for. When you choose a candidate to caucus for it is done very wisely and with a lot of knowledge.

I wish every state had a process like Iowa does. It is grassroots politics at its finest.

[longship]

20. Wow! Well said.

You defended the caucus system much better than I could have, although I have participated in more than one.

So many of our citizens are so caught up in the "democracy as the people's choice" do not understand that an uneducated people can make such absolutely horrible choices. In the best of all possible worlds, where the electorate is educated and aware of the issues, nominating elections would work well. But that has *never* been the case in the United
States or, for that matter, any other country.

The combination of state caucuses and a national nominating convention was the rigor for almost all this country's history. Yes, it nominated more than one knucklehead. However, I cannot see that would have resulted in such a long stream of knuckleheads as the nominating election has brought us.

I long for smoke-filled rooms.

[edwardsfeingold08]

8. Thanks for the post

There's also a poll out that shows Edwards beating McCain in the general election while Clinton is losing to McCain.

[Captain Hilts]

11. Another poll shows Clinton and RudyG leading. It's too early. nt

[WI_DEM]

16. Is it an Iowa poll?

[dazzlerazzle]

10. Edwards/ Obama

Ticket with these two would attract the younger voters, but you can bet there are people digging into the Obama family looking for anything they may have done or said in order to weaken their prospects.

[Mass]

17. Nice poll, but it is 2 months old.

[1932]

26. You're not going to find accurate and recent polls.

A good poll is expensive to produce, and people pay for them, and they pay to know the information before anyone else. So, if a poll is worth anything, someone who paid to get the data is going to have exclusive access to it for a period of time before they start giving the data away for free, presuming they ever do.