The Fall of Goliath

JaJae · 12-01-2007, 12:31 PM

Well it's finally happened. Hillary has essentially been defeated by the GOP. Democrats have the advantage this election over the Republicans. But, Hillary does not. If the elections were held today Hillary would lose to every one of the top FIVE Republican candidates.

Zogby International

Zogby Poll: Obama, Edwards Strong but Clinton Slips Against GOPers

General election match-ups show the New York Senator would lose against every top Republican

UTICA, New York – A new Zogby Interactive survey shows Democrat Hillary Clinton of New York would lose to every one of the top five Republican presidential contenders, representing a reversal of fortune for the national Democratic front–runner who had led against all prospective GOP opponents earlier this year.

This could be the begining of the end for Hillary. America doesn't want a Republican candidate, but they also don't want Hillary. If the Democrats continue to frontrun her they could end up throwing away another election. This report is a few days old now, but when if it gets national play in the media it could have devastating effects on the Clinton campaign.

At this point in time she can't win on a the national level. She's a huge gamble. I have a feeling a lot of her supporters only support her because of name recognition and because they think she can beat the Republicans. But that's simply not true anymore.

On the flip-side Obama leads ALL of the top five Republican candidates by a larger margin than Hillary loses. It seems the Rock Star Barack Obama should rationally become the new number one contender. And the Zogby polls show his numbers are already severely gaining on Hillary. When people realize Hillary loses to all Republicans and Obama beats all Republicans I think much of Hillary's support will go down the tubes.

Donkey® · 12-01-2007, 12:51 PM

It's a poll. Sorry, can't put any faith in what it says.

JaJae · 12-01-2007, 12:59 PM

Originally Posted by Donkey®

It's a poll. Sorry, can't put any faith in what it says.

Understandable. It's beyond the margin of error, but polls have been wrong.

motivez · 12-01-2007, 01:50 PM

I actually talked about this in another thread, it's a bullshit online e-mail poll, one that has performed terribly historically..

Gallup did a scientific poll the same day showing they beat them all, that's far more respectable organization and polling method than what essentially amounts to nothing more than the survey's put on MSNBC / Fox / etc that show Ron Paul winning all of them.

Here's a link:

Media Lavishes Attention On Bogus Internet Poll Showing Hillary Losing To Repubs -- And Ignores Reputable Poll Finding Opposite
November 27, 2007 -- 11:03 AM EST // //

Ladies and gentlemen, a tale of two polls. Yesterday two polling firms -- Zogby and Gallup -- released surveys of the presidential race that offered strikingly different conclusions. The Zogby poll found that Hillary is trailing five leading GOP candidates in general election matchups. The Gallup Poll, by contrast, found that Hillary, and to a lesser degree Obama, has a slight to sizable lead over the top GOP contenders.

A couple of other things that distinguish these two polls: The Zogby one is an online poll, a notoriously unreliable method, while the Gallup one is a telephone poll. And, as Charles Franklin of Pollster.com observed yesterday, the Zogby poll is completely out of sync with multiple other national polls finding Hillary with a lead over the GOP candidates. The Zogby poll actually found that Mike Huckabee is leading Hillary in a national matchup. The Gallup findings were in line with most other surveys.

I don't need to tell you which poll got all the media attention. Do I?
The Zogby survey was covered repeatedly on CNN, earned coverage from MSNBC, Fox News, and Reuters and was covered by multiple other smaller outlets.

By contrast, I can't find a single example of any reporter or commentator on the major networks or news outlets referring to the Gallup poll at all, with the lone exception of UPI. While the Zogby poll was mentioned by multiple reporters and pundits, the only mentions the Gallup poll got on TV were from Hillary advisers who had to bring it up themselves on the air in order to inject it into the conversation.

You could argue that the Zogby poll got all the coverage it did precisely because it is out of sync with multiple other polls, and thus is news. But the truth is that the reporters and editors at the major nets know full well that the Zogby poll is bunk -- yet they breathlessly covered it anyway.

Worse, the Zogby poll was covered with few mentions either of its dubious methodology or of the degree to which its findings don't jibe with other surveys. Bottom line: The Zogby poll was considered big news because many in the political press are heavily invested in the Hillary-is-unelectable narrative for all kinds of reasons that have little to do with a desire to, you know, practice journalism.

Horses Mouth November 27, 2007 11:03 AM

JaJae · 12-01-2007, 01:52 PM

motivez · 12-01-2007, 01:56 PM

It was honestly surprising to me to see the zogby poll get SO much attention compared to the Gallup, I only heard about Gallup one because I happened to read various blogs on the day that the polls were released

6SpeedTA95 · 12-01-2007, 02:07 PM

I'm not a big fan of polls. I htink hillary would lose to at least three republicans off the top of my head. But polls are worthless as they've been proven the last 8 years.

JaJae · 12-01-2007, 03:02 PM

The most recent Rasmussen poll shows:
Rasmussen Reports™: The most comprehensive public opinion coverage ever provided for a mid-term election.
Giuliani (46%) Clinton (42%) Nov 23
Huckabee (45%) Clinton (46%) Dec 3
McCain (47%) Clinton (45%) Nov 11
Paul (38%) Clinton (48%) Oct 20
Romney (42%) Clinton (47%) Nov 11
Tancredo (37%) Clinton (50%) Aug 29
Thompson (44%) Clinton (46%) Nov 23

Two GOP candidates have Clinton beat according to Rasmussen.

JaJae · 12-01-2007, 03:05 PM

The Gallup poll I think they're referring to is the one I posted about earlier which was conducted between November 11 - 14 and was released almost a week ago. Can anyone confirm there hasn't been a more recent poll? The data from this poll is almost three weeks old.
Democratic Candidates Look Good in Latest 2008 Trial Heats

This poll says there is no statistical significance between her and Rudy/McCain. The more recent Rasmussen poll shows she's fallen behind and Thomspson/Huckabee are dangerously close.

JaJae · 12-01-2007, 03:06 PM

Zogby methodology for those interested:

Figures from the earlier surveys cited in this news release are from Zogby International telephone surveys, including 1,012 likely voters in the July survey and 993 likely voters in the May survey.

The online survey included 9,150 likely voters nationwide, and was conducted Nov. 21–26, 2007. It carries a margin of error of +/– 1.0 percentage points.

JaJae · 12-01-2007, 03:09 PM

I updated the dates the polls were taken from Rasmussen. It seems the more recent the polls the more Clinton slips away. I wouldn't be surprised if Huckabee narrowed that lead.

motivez · 12-01-2007, 04:06 PM

Zogby's margin of error for that specific poll is wrong, his e-poll has performed far worse than any traditional polling data.. and he has certainly not been within a 1 point margin of error...

I'm not trying to suggest that Hillary hasn't been slipping in the polls, she certainly has, but pointing to Zogby's internet poll as proof (like most of the media did) when other traditional, far more accurate polls showed exactly the opposite.. isn't something people should be doing.

JaJae · 12-01-2007, 04:15 PM

Originally Posted by motivez

Zogby's margin of error for that specific poll is wrong, his e-poll has performed far worse than any traditional polling data.. and he has certainly not been within a 1 point margin of error...

I'm not trying to suggest that Hillary hasn't been slipping in the polls, she certainly has, but pointing to Zogby's internet poll as proof (like most of the media did) when other traditional, far more accurate polls showed exactly the opposite.. isn't something people should be doing.

I'm not suggesting the Zogby poll is necessarily accurate. I'm just saying the blog you linked to is using data from 3 weeks ago. Although it was more accurate at the time I'm wondering if anyone has more accurate information now. According to more recent Rasmussen polls it seems Hillary is drifting away, perhaps not as far as the Zogby poll suggests.

But according the recent trends and data from Rasmussen it's likely Huckabee and Thomspon are within the margin of error and two other GOP candidates have already surpassed her. So while the data may not be fully accurate, their more recent data seems to be further on target with current standings than the out of date Gallup poll.

But I agree in a lot of ways with what you are saying. I didn't realize the Zogby poll was based mostly on online results. That definitely questions the accuracy in comparison to other polling means. I just think the Gallup poll used in that blog is a bit outdated to be used as a counter source. Rasmussen hasn't updated enough to get a clear picture either, but the info they have released does show a more similar result in comparison to the Zogby.

RMNIXON · 12-01-2007, 05:40 PM

Originally Posted by JaJae

Doh

Yep!

All the polls turned to bullshit as soon as she sank...........................

JaJae · 12-01-2007, 05:47 PM

Originally Posted by RMNIXON

Yep!

All the polls turned to bullshit as soon as she sank...........................

My doh comment was in response to not knowing it was based on an online poll. I looked into it further and don't think the blog that was posted in response was fair or unbiased. You can't disprove poll numbers by using older data. That doesn't change the inherent flaw of the Zogby poll though.

I think the current Rasmussen polls are a much better indicator. And they are showing Hillary is either being beaten or about to be engulfed by the GOP. In any event Hillary is very likely to see her demise as the frontrunner very soon, if she hasn't already.

RMNIXON · 12-01-2007, 05:51 PM

Originally Posted by 6SpeedTA95

I'm not a big fan of polls. I htink hillary would lose to at least three republicans off the top of my head. But polls are worthless as they've been proven the last 8 years.

It is way to early period!

We don't even have real "head to head" candidates yet and much can happen between now and November. I have already posted that Hillary can win. I still think that is true.

What I think has happened is that this won't be as easy as she planned. And she is a planner! When Bill Clinton ran there was no Fox News and no internet blogsphere like we have now. Bush was in the tank over the economy and the mainstream media rolled over him. Spin is not what it was. She is in a politcal world with far less control over information. There is no easy sell in politics these days. Perhaps that is a good thing?

motivez · 12-01-2007, 06:05 PM

The Gallup and Zogby polls used data from approximately the same time period, so if you're going to say it's outdated, well, the Zogby one is too.. you can't say "Rasmussen is using more current data than Gallup, and more closely resembles Zogby, therefore Zogby might not be far off the mark" when the data would have been from the same time period as Gallup's, but not Rasmussen's.

These polls aren't conducted in a vacuum, the new data will take into account new stuff that's happened (which I'm not trying to deny), the old polling data would not have

Point is, the Zogby email poll is crap, wasn't accurate when it was released, and it's historically off the mark by a factor of two or three compared to traditional polling methods..

JaJae · 12-01-2007, 06:43 PM

Rough day in Iowa:
Political Radar: Clinton Booed at Heartland Forum

Soft booing could be heard from the audience. The man repeated his question about the first 100 days. Clinton replied, "Well you've to get congress to pass the legislation and the president to do as much as possible, which I will do." Louder boos came from the crowd.

Clinton was thanked for her appearance and the moderator expressed sympathies for the ordeal she suffered yesterday. Clinton thanked the moderator. More booing could be heard from the crowd again after she hung up the line.

Immigration is a huge issue in many of the early primary states. A lot of candidates are going to shoot themselves in the foot there. Hillary is only going to keep droppping in the polls.

motivez · 12-01-2007, 06:49 PM

Another reason we need to get out of this Iowa / NH primary bullshit that we're in now, those states play far too an important role in the presidential selection process while not being compromised of a diverse enough citizenship.

You certainly don't get a full enough range of opinion on certain issues.

Michigan, Florida, Ohio, all play more important roles in the actual election process and are far more diverse than Iowa or New Hampshire.

JaJae · 12-01-2007, 07:05 PM

Originally Posted by motivez

Another reason we need to get out of this Iowa / NH primary bullshit that we're in now, those states play far too an important role in the presidential selection process while not being compromised of a diverse enough citizenship.

You certainly don't get a full enough range of opinion on certain issues.

Michigan, Florida, Ohio, all play more important roles in the actual election process and are far more diverse than Iowa or New Hampshire.

I completely agree.