Political Animal

Blog

December 30, 2011 8:06 AM Pollsters Descend on Iowa

By Ed Kilgore

There are three new polls of Iowa out today which mostly confirm the impression that Paul and Romney are battling for first place while Rick Santorum may be on the verge of breaking away from the other putative “true conservative” candidates, Gingrich, Perry and Bachmann. But with so many candidates bunched so closely together, almost anything could happen.

The only two-day poll in the batch, from NBC/Marist, has Romney at 23%, Paul at 21%, Santorum at 15%, Perry at 14%, Gingrich at 13%, and Bachmann at 6%.

Rasmussen’s results are very similar: Romney 23, Paul 22, Santorum 16, Perry and Gingrich 13, and Bachmann 5.

Insider Advantage, as is often the case, shows things a bit differently, with Romney, Paul and Gingrich tied at 17%, Santorum at 13%, Bachmann at 12%, and Perry at 11%. IA should be praised for publishing a few crosstabs, but they do have some odd numbers, such as Bachmann running ahead of Paul among 18-29 year olds.

In any event, these polls will feed the media beast until the big mamba-jamba, the Des Moines Register Iowa Poll, comes out on Saturday night.

Ed Kilgore is managing editor of the Democratic Strategist and a senior fellow at the Progressive Policy Institute.

Comments

Post a comment
  • c u n d gulag on December 30, 2011 8:28 AM:

    After all of the hoopla, it's come down to where, except for the comedy of the debates leading up to this, I don't give a 'Hershey-squirt.'

    "...the big mamba-jamba..."
    OOOH YEAH!
    A state in which less people will vote in the caucuses than live in any two large NY City housing complexes.

    The problem is, we've got three countries.
    Rural.
    Urban.
    Suburban.

    The rural part almost always vote Republican.
    The urban part, for the most part, always vote Democratic.
    So, the whole battle is for the suburbanites.

    Based on that, I don't think Iowa will tell us squat - except by the turnout.
    If a lot of Republicans show up that means that, despite the outright ridiculousness of their candidates to anyone in the real world outside of rural America, enough of the them are showing up just to stop Obama.

    And if the turnout's not big, then these people are smarter than I think, and maybe realize the ridiculousness of their candidates, and the fact that you shouldn't vote them in for dog-catcher, is not enough motivation to get up off their corn-dog fed fat asses, even if it means Obama wins.
    Or, maybe their reasoning is that none of them is ridiculous or religious enough! And that is scary in its own right.

    My apologies for too much generalization.

    I hope that may if start generalizing more, I'll get a promotion to Field Marshall. :-)

  • DAY on December 30, 2011 8:38 AM:

    IOWA: Full of sound and fury, signifying nothing.

  • Marko on December 30, 2011 8:40 AM:

    Iowa is like a preseason football game: It doesn't mean much if you win, but if you get your ass kicked it should send you a big message.

  • Ron Byers on December 30, 2011 9:21 AM:

    Day is right. Can we talk about something else. How about the climate. This year should turn out to be one of the warmest and most violent on record.This is in a string of really warm years. Nothing that is happening hasn't been predicted by the global warming people. Maybe we should be paying a little more attention.

  • Anonymous on December 30, 2011 11:23 AM:

    I'm with Day and Ron Byers: totally sick of Iowa and the Republican horse race. They're all a joke and anyone who supports any of them is ignorant at best.

  • Rick B on December 30, 2011 4:50 PM:

    @c u n d, I think you have it pegged.

    And of the three groups you describe, Romney is the representative of the suburbanites mostly and is trying not to get knocked out of the race by the rural troglodytes. His flip-flopping image comes from trying to straddle the mostly incompatible requirements of the rural clinically insane without also losing the suburbanites.

  •  
  •  
  •