Sat Jan 30, 2016, 08:40 PM
CajunBlazer (5,648 posts)
The most accurate Iowa Democratic poll has just come out!Last edited Sat Jan 30, 2016, 10:38 PM - Edit history (2)
The final Des Moines Register Iowa Democratic Caucus poll has historically been the best predictor of the final results. The results of their final poll was published by the paper on their Website at 6:07 local time this afternoon and it there is good news for Hillary Clinton fans.
The Poll shows that Hillary has 3% lead over Bernie Sanders. Clinton is the top pick for 45 percent of likely Democratic caucusgoers, with Sanders at 42 percent, The Des Moines Register/Bloomberg Politics poll shows. Clinton's support is up 3 percentage points from earlier this month, and Sanders' is 2 percentage points higher. Hillary Clinton has kept a tight grip on her slim lead over Bernie Sanders in the waning hours leading into the Iowa caucuses, a new Iowa Poll shows. Clinton, a former first lady and former secretary of state, wins a majority among caucusgoers who are 65 and older, Catholics and moderates. Sanders, a U.S. senator representing Vermont, wins a majority of those under 35, first-time caucusgoers and political independents. "Clinton's voters are more certain and much more likely to have caucused before," Axelrod said. "Bernie's organizational task, counting so heavily on first-time caucusgoers — many of them young — is greater." Former Maryland Gov. Martin O’Malley snags 3 percent of likely caucusgoers' support. He had 4 percent support in early January. Clinton keeps slim edge over Sanders Sanders supporters will claim that Bernie can easily make up the difference with a good turn out, but the final Des Moines Register has an excellent track record of picking the ultimate winner. Regardless, you can bet Bernie supporters wish that the numbers were reversed. EDIT: Discussion of Poll Accuracy Some have asked for information confirming how accurate this poll is. I stole this link from the reply by DemocrateSinceBirth below with the link from a Politico article: The recent track record of her firm, Selzer & Company, is impressive: Selzer, who has polled for the Des Moines Register for decades, was the only pollster to nail the order of Democratic candidates in 2004. Her final poll before the 2008 caucuses accurately predicted that a surge of first-time caucusgoers would propel Barack Obama to a decisive victory. Selzer saw former Pennsylvania Sen. Rick Santorum’s surge in the waning days before the 2012 GOP caucuses when few others did. (snip) “I will take the Des Moines Register poll, which is the gold standard for polls in Iowa,” Sanders said in late October. Ann Selzer's secret sauce
|
59 replies, 3876 views
![]() |
Author | Time | Post |
![]() |
CajunBlazer | Jan 2016 | OP |
lunamagica | Jan 2016 | #1 | |
californiabernin | Jan 2016 | #2 | |
Agschmid | Jan 2016 | #4 | |
kristopher | Jan 2016 | #9 | |
CajunBlazer | Jan 2016 | #46 | |
kristopher | Jan 2016 | #49 | |
kristopher | Jan 2016 | #50 | |
BlueMTexpat | Jan 2016 | #51 | |
nc4bo | Jan 2016 | #3 | |
840high | Jan 2016 | #19 | |
CajunBlazer | Jan 2016 | #20 | |
nc4bo | Jan 2016 | #22 | |
CajunBlazer | Jan 2016 | #32 | |
nc4bo | Jan 2016 | #36 | |
CajunBlazer | Jan 2016 | #37 | |
Mike__M | Jan 2016 | #25 | |
CajunBlazer | Jan 2016 | #31 | |
winter is coming | Jan 2016 | #38 | |
CajunBlazer | Jan 2016 | #40 | |
NowSam | Jan 2016 | #5 | |
DemocratSinceBirth | Jan 2016 | #11 | |
NowSam | Jan 2016 | #12 | |
CajunBlazer | Jan 2016 | #45 | |
NowSam | Jan 2016 | #56 | |
kristopher | Jan 2016 | #18 | |
BainsBane | Jan 2016 | #23 | |
CajunBlazer | Jan 2016 | #26 | |
Mike__M | Jan 2016 | #34 | |
CajunBlazer | Jan 2016 | #35 | |
Depaysement | Jan 2016 | #6 | |
Hoyt | Jan 2016 | #7 | |
Hortensis | Jan 2016 | #8 | |
lovemydog | Jan 2016 | #48 | |
BlueMTexpat | Jan 2016 | #52 | |
Hortensis | Jan 2016 | #59 | |
DemocratSinceBirth | Jan 2016 | #10 | |
John Poet | Jan 2016 | #53 | |
Hortensis | Jan 2016 | #54 | |
SoLeftIAmRight | Jan 2016 | #13 | |
morningfog | Jan 2016 | #14 | |
CajunBlazer | Jan 2016 | #41 | |
morningfog | Jan 2016 | #47 | |
joshcryer | Jan 2016 | #15 | |
thesquanderer | Jan 2016 | #16 | |
cali | Jan 2016 | #17 | |
CajunBlazer | Jan 2016 | #39 | |
DCBob | Jan 2016 | #42 | |
SheenaR | Jan 2016 | #21 | |
CajunBlazer | Jan 2016 | #29 | |
DemocratSinceBirth | Jan 2016 | #55 | |
DCBob | Jan 2016 | #24 | |
SidDithers | Jan 2016 | #27 | |
bunnies | Jan 2016 | #28 | |
CajunBlazer | Jan 2016 | #30 | |
amborin | Jan 2016 | #33 | |
DCBob | Jan 2016 | #43 | |
CajunBlazer | Jan 2016 | #44 | |
Gothmog | Jan 2016 | #57 | |
amborin | Jan 2016 | #58 |
Response to CajunBlazer (Original post)
Sat Jan 30, 2016, 08:41 PM
lunamagica (9,967 posts)
1. K&R. Go Hillary!
![]() |
Response to CajunBlazer (Original post)
Sat Jan 30, 2016, 08:45 PM
californiabernin (421 posts)
2. What about the other 10%? n/t
Response to californiabernin (Reply #2)
Sat Jan 30, 2016, 08:47 PM
Agschmid (28,749 posts)
4. Up for grabs! Get canvassing!
Response to californiabernin (Reply #2)
Sat Jan 30, 2016, 09:07 PM
kristopher (29,798 posts)
9. What about some support for the Register's claim of accuracy?
I can't find anything with hard data to back up the claim about their polling. The accuracy claim itself, however, has been a headline for months.
|
Response to kristopher (Reply #9)
Sun Jan 31, 2016, 04:22 AM
CajunBlazer (5,648 posts)
46. I have edited my original post above to include links to a Politico article about accuracy
Even Bernie has referred to this poll as the "gold standard" poll.
Here is that Politico link again: Ann Selzer's secret sauce |
Response to CajunBlazer (Reply #46)
Sun Jan 31, 2016, 04:59 AM
kristopher (29,798 posts)
49. 1000 words of prose and anecdotes isn't worth one graph.
If that graph quantifies the question and answer.
It sounds to me like it could as easily be a PR gimmick as a truly exceptional example of polling. For example, with data collection and analysis like that below, I can support near anything I want. The recent track record of her firm, Selzer & Company, is impressive: Selzer, who has polled for the Des Moines Register for decades, was the only pollster to nail the order of Democratic candidates in 2004. Her final poll before the 2008 caucuses accurately predicted that a surge of first-time caucusgoers would propel Barack Obama to a decisive victory. Selzer saw former Pennsylvania Sen. Rick Santorum’s surge in the waning days before the 2012 GOP caucuses when few others did.
And just last year, the final Register poll in the Iowa Senate race showed Republican Joni Ernst with a 7-point lead, contrary to other polls that showed a much closer race with Democrat Bruce Braley. Braley’s campaign decried the poll, calling it an “outlier.” But Ernst won by 9 points. IF they have such a superlative record of predicting the future statistics, I don't think it's too damned much to ask for a few solid stats from the rearview mirror. |
Response to CajunBlazer (Reply #46)
Sun Jan 31, 2016, 05:41 AM
kristopher (29,798 posts)
50. My 2nd reply.
I was too curt in the previous response, I neglected to add that their polling methodology is excellent. As far as the broad strokes can be done correctly it looks like they are doing it right and not cutting corners. So they deserve a judo for that.
But since its results over time are not quantified, and since I am by default skeptical of their impartiality, it does, still, present the opportunity for PR manipulation. We'll know more monday night. Thank you for the Politico reference, it was helpful. |
Response to CajunBlazer (Reply #46)
Sun Jan 31, 2016, 06:09 AM
BlueMTexpat (15,168 posts)
51. FiveThirtyEight concurs.
http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/the-final-des-moines-register-iowa-poll-is-out-how-accurate-will-it-be/
The Best Pollster In Iowa Just Released Its Final Survey — How Accurate Has It Been? That’s not to say the Des Moines Register poll is perfect. It sometimes misses on a candidate by a lot. Selzer’s final poll in 1988 missed Republican Pat Robertson’s eventual vote share by just more than 10 percentage points. Same thing with Kerry in 2004.3
Who might benefit from that type of miss this time around? History suggests there are two types of candidates who tend to outperform their polls. The first is a candidate who does well among Christian conservatives. Selzer’s final polls on the Republican side in 1988, 1996 and 2012 all missed the candidate favored by Christian conservatives by at least 8.5 percentage points. That could be good news for Cruz. Secondly, candidates with late momentum, such as Kerry in 2004 and Santorum in 2012, also tend to beat their polls. That could be beneficial to Rubio, who seems to be gaining in some polls. Could there also be a big error on the Democratic side? It’s possible, but Selzer did particularly well in 2000, the last Democratic campaign with only a few candidates running. Fewer candidates means voters have an easier time settling on one candidate and reallocation of support becomes less of an issue. Of course, we won’t know how accurate Selzer’s final poll is this year until Monday or the day after. It’s worth remembering, however, that even the best pollsters — and Selzer is one of the best — aren’t perfect. |
Response to CajunBlazer (Original post)
Sat Jan 30, 2016, 08:47 PM
nc4bo (17,651 posts)
3. GO BERNIE!!!! SoundS fantastic to me. Going from zero to nearly tied is INCREDIBLE!
![]() The Sanders campaign is doing some incredible things no one would ever dare believe! |
Response to nc4bo (Reply #3)
Sat Jan 30, 2016, 10:02 PM
CajunBlazer (5,648 posts)
20. Close only counts in hand grenades and atomic bombs
If the poll is accurate - a loss is a loss.
|
Response to CajunBlazer (Reply #20)
Sat Jan 30, 2016, 10:06 PM
nc4bo (17,651 posts)
22. Within MOE is too close to call. This is great news for Sanders.
He came from out of nowhere and is basically TIED with the inevitable front-runner.
Incredible! |
Response to nc4bo (Reply #22)
Sat Jan 30, 2016, 11:20 PM
CajunBlazer (5,648 posts)
32. Incredibly meaningless
basically tied means he loses.
|
Response to CajunBlazer (Reply #32)
Sat Jan 30, 2016, 11:47 PM
nc4bo (17,651 posts)
36. Bernie was never inevitable but Hill sure was and lookie
The poll is TIED!!
Bernie's campaign is doing some very incredible things against the inevitable. Go Bernie! |
Response to nc4bo (Reply #36)
Sun Jan 31, 2016, 02:25 AM
CajunBlazer (5,648 posts)
37. As a Hillary supporter I would rather be in my shoes than yours
![]() |
Response to CajunBlazer (Reply #20)
Sat Jan 30, 2016, 10:15 PM
Mike__M (1,052 posts)
25. "Close" counts in delegates (n/t)
Response to Mike__M (Reply #25)
Sat Jan 30, 2016, 11:19 PM
CajunBlazer (5,648 posts)
31. And if Bernie's college students don't caucus in their home towns...
...those Bernie votes will be concentrated in college towns resulting in fewer delegates.
Let's say the the average Iowa college student lives an hour and a half from his/her home. That's a 3 hour round trip plus 2 hours at the caucus. I'm not sure how many students will want to spend 5 hours traveling home and have to be in class in the morning. The caucus start at 7:00 PM. That's a lot to ask of a college student since those telling pollsters that they are going to caucus for the first time are the least dependable. The people telling pollsters that the are going to support Hillary are almost all those who attend every caucus and are the most dependable. And since Hillary has a great ground game in Iowa, my money is on her. |
Response to CajunBlazer (Reply #31)
Sun Jan 31, 2016, 02:30 AM
winter is coming (11,785 posts)
38. I expect a lot of students will simply cut class on Tuesday.
Even the ones who aren't leaving town.
![]() |
Response to winter is coming (Reply #38)
Sun Jan 31, 2016, 03:04 AM
CajunBlazer (5,648 posts)
40. Hmmm.....
Not sure of that. That is if the college students caucus at all. People under 35 who tell pollsters that they are going to caucus for the first time are the least likely to actually caucus. People over the age of 35 who have caucused before are the most likely caucus.
In addition, while Sanders' best voter segment is is between 18 and 35, they make up a significantly smaller segment of the voter population than those who are over 35. |
Response to CajunBlazer (Original post)
Sat Jan 30, 2016, 08:48 PM
NowSam (1,252 posts)
5. Poll not reflective of youth voters who don't have land line
But hey 42% voting for honesty and integrity PLUS great ideas is terrific. Even though we are within the main of error, let's assume that HRC is ahead in this under sampled poll. That means turnout is everything. This is about the future so it is only right that the youth decide.
Feel the Bern. It's all up to you kids. |
Response to NowSam (Reply #5)
Sat Jan 30, 2016, 09:10 PM
DemocratSinceBirth (98,829 posts)
11. The poll consisted of landline AND cell phone users.
“I will take the Des Moines Register poll, which is the gold standard for polls in Iowa,”
-Bernie Sanders |
Response to DemocratSinceBirth (Reply #11)
Sat Jan 30, 2016, 09:20 PM
NowSam (1,252 posts)
12. I stand corrected.
My son, 19, lives on his phone - via text and web - rarely answers a call. Many of these kids are hip to the sales calls, debt collectors (Student debt collectors) and other unwanted calls. They simply don't answer the phone.
Look HRC is up by 3% but within the margin of error. The full stadiums for Bernie compared to empty halls for Hilalry are a more accurate poll in my opinion. Turn out for the Bernster and it is a win for the people. Stay home on Monday and the Status Quo wins. The rich get richer - on the backs of the rest of the people. Wars continue and new wars begin. Dirty energy continues to pollute the air. I put my faith in the people of Iowa seeing through a candidate's "position of the day" on issue after issue and instead voting for honesty, integrity and a more perfect union. |
Response to NowSam (Reply #12)
Sun Jan 31, 2016, 04:20 AM
CajunBlazer (5,648 posts)
45. Actually they call enough young people with cell phones to get a good sample
This poll is the best at predicting voting surges by college students and first time caucusgoers.
Improperly sampling this segment of the population is not going to be a problem. |
Response to CajunBlazer (Reply #45)
Sun Jan 31, 2016, 01:38 PM
NowSam (1,252 posts)
56. Okay so we can safely say that at least 42% of Iowans polled
Stand with Bernie. Margin of error is 4% and the poll got 2012 wrong in regards to Romney & Santorum?
Add to that - that Bernie is filling stadiums and the other is playing half filled cafeterias...I'd say there is serious desire for change in 2016. Bernie said it - IF turn out is big than he wins. If the status quo prevails in Iowa there are still three tickets out of there - if we believe conventional wisdom. If we believe the conventional wisdom of this poll than we can believe the 3 tickets out of Iowa adage. Than New Hampshire goes to Bernie and then it is neck and neck all the way through BUT I think Bernie is David and the system is Goliath. If memory serves, David surpassed expectations against Goliath. |
Response to DemocratSinceBirth (Reply #11)
Sat Jan 30, 2016, 09:31 PM
kristopher (29,798 posts)
18. DMR says new caucus goer turnout is going to be higher for Rs than for Ds
Response to NowSam (Reply #5)
Sat Jan 30, 2016, 10:07 PM
BainsBane (52,711 posts)
23. Yesterday a voxal bernie supporter
Insisted this was THE poll on Iowa. Not surprising its A plus rating is suddenly insufficient.
|
Response to NowSam (Reply #5)
Sat Jan 30, 2016, 10:16 PM
CajunBlazer (5,648 posts)
26. Not to rain on your parade
I's more than turn out - it's were the turnout occurs:
College students are Bernie's biggest fans in Iowa. Since delegates are won by geographic area, the college vote for Bernie would be much more effective if the college students from rural areas of Iowa travel home rather than in caucusing in the area where their college is located. Since the caucuses are on a Monday night, I am not sure that students would want to make a maybe three to six hour round trip with a two hour caucus in the middle when they need to be in class the next morning. I'm sure that some of Bernie's younger supporters are very motivated and will certainly caucus, but college age kids are the least dependable voting group in Iowa. The type of voters that are supporting Hillary are people who caucused many times and are the most dependable voters in Iowa. All of that said we'll find out Monday night, but I right now, with all factors considered, I would rather be in Hillary's camp then Bernie's. |
Response to CajunBlazer (Reply #26)
Sat Jan 30, 2016, 11:27 PM
Mike__M (1,052 posts)
34. Personally, regardless of outcome
I'd rather be in Martin's camp than Hillary's.
|
Response to Mike__M (Reply #34)
Sat Jan 30, 2016, 11:45 PM
CajunBlazer (5,648 posts)
35. Typical - its another conspiriency - LOL!!!
If they O'Malley's people aren't 15% of their caucus, their votes don't count. Prediction - O'Malley will get no Iowa delegates.
|
Response to CajunBlazer (Original post)
Sat Jan 30, 2016, 08:50 PM
Depaysement (1,835 posts)
6. Poll's margin of error is 4 points
And there are 48 hours to go. It's neck and neck.
|
Response to CajunBlazer (Original post)
Sat Jan 30, 2016, 08:51 PM
Hoyt (54,770 posts)
7. It will be quite interesting to watch results. If general election is so close, I will need meds.
Response to CajunBlazer (Original post)
Sat Jan 30, 2016, 08:53 PM
Hortensis (56,885 posts)
8. Over 80% have favorable opinion of BOTH Hillary and Bernie.
The pollster used the word RESPECT to describe their feelings for "the other" candidate, who was also their stated second choice.
|
Response to Hortensis (Reply #8)
Sun Jan 31, 2016, 04:50 AM
lovemydog (11,833 posts)
48. I do too. I respect them and O'Malley.
Thanks for sharing that Hortensis.
|
Response to Hortensis (Reply #8)
Sun Jan 31, 2016, 06:12 AM
BlueMTexpat (15,168 posts)
52. That is a major point that is too often lost on those
who insist that it must be their preferred candidate or none.
![]() |
Response to BlueMTexpat (Reply #52)
Sun Jan 31, 2016, 02:05 PM
Hortensis (56,885 posts)
59. Iowa's Democratics are notable for being strongly liberal.
I strongly suspect our Bernie-or-no-one contingent has few liberals and that that is the reason for that striking difference.
Most berners here may be leftist, but their emotional behavior and reasoning are definitely pretty consistent with those of extremists in the right wing. And not at all with liberal reasoning. I wasn't here for other elections, so I'm very curious about how many might end up behind Trump or Rubio if Bernie loses the nomination. Also about how many might become more open to other ideas if the influence of the anti-liberals was lessened. Btw, I saw your "Hillary calm and confident" post. I find it easy to believe that she may be a very good president. Women tend to be pretty hard-nosed about problems and less inclined to just work around them than men. Let it be so! ![]() |
Response to CajunBlazer (Original post)
Sat Jan 30, 2016, 09:08 PM
DemocratSinceBirth (98,829 posts)
10. “I will take the Des Moines Register poll, which is the gold standard for polls in Iowa,”
“I will take the Des Moines Register poll, which is the gold standard for polls in Iowa,”
-Bernie Sanders Read more: http://www.politico.com/story/2015/12/ann-selzer-iowa-pollster-216151#ixzz3ymOxICOo |
Response to DemocratSinceBirth (Reply #10)
Sun Jan 31, 2016, 06:14 AM
John Poet (2,510 posts)
53. That's the third time you've posted that here.
Whatsamatter, afraid nobody saw you the first two times?
Kinda like spam to keep repeating yourself like that. They may be the 'gold standard' in Iowa polls, but that doesn't mean the situation may not change by the time people actually vote. |
Response to DemocratSinceBirth (Reply #10)
Sun Jan 31, 2016, 08:39 AM
Hortensis (56,885 posts)
54. That's that direct, no-nonsense side I admire in him.
Sounds like he is not having any part of attempts of partisans to deride anything that doesn't show a clear win. If people who want Bernie come out in higher numbers than usual, as may well be the case, he will win the Iowa primary.
|
Response to CajunBlazer (Original post)
Sat Jan 30, 2016, 09:21 PM
SoLeftIAmRight (4,883 posts)
13. That would be a huge win for sanders
no will hill should pack hers bags and head back to arkansas
|
Response to CajunBlazer (Original post)
Sat Jan 30, 2016, 09:22 PM
morningfog (18,115 posts)
14. Lol. When it's within the MOE, it middles little diffence
Who is first.
The numbers are good. I predict Bernie will take more precincts than Hillary. |
Response to morningfog (Reply #14)
Sun Jan 31, 2016, 04:12 AM
CajunBlazer (5,648 posts)
41. Wrong - this poll actually means statistially that Clinton has....
....a better than 85% of winning Iowa. I explain why in other post on this thread.
|
Response to CajunBlazer (Reply #41)
Sun Jan 31, 2016, 04:37 AM
morningfog (18,115 posts)
47. We'll know in a very short time. Go Bernie!
Response to CajunBlazer (Original post)
Sat Jan 30, 2016, 09:23 PM
joshcryer (62,185 posts)
15. Actually, a very slim loss wouldn't be terrible.
Response to CajunBlazer (Original post)
Sat Jan 30, 2016, 09:28 PM
thesquanderer (11,611 posts)
16. And where does O'Malley's 3% go when he fails to reach the 15% threshold?
I read elsewhere that when asked about their second choice, they break for Sanders, something like 2 to 1. It's going to be a squeaker.
|
Response to CajunBlazer (Original post)
Sat Jan 30, 2016, 09:29 PM
cali (114,904 posts)
17. Statistical dead heat. Amazing.
Response to cali (Reply #17)
Sun Jan 31, 2016, 02:59 AM
CajunBlazer (5,648 posts)
39. Just because the results are within the poll's Margin of Error (or MoE)....
... does not make it a statistical dead heat - if you think it does, you have been listening too many talking heads on TV.
First of all the the MoE works both ways. With a 4.0 MoE the results could be Sanders +1 (least likely), Tie, Clinton +1, Clinton +2, Clinton +3 (most likely), Clinton +4, Clinton +5, Clinton +6, Clinton +7 (least likely). Note that with most of the possible outcomes, including the most likely outcome (Clinton +3), Clinton wins. In addition, as you move one step at a time away from the most likely outcome (Clinton +3) towards the edges (Sanders +1 and Clinton +7) the chances of those results happening get less and less. The least likely outcomes by far are Sanders +1 and Clinton +7. If you want to get technical, there is a 95% chance with this poll that the result will be within the MoE of 4.0, and a 5% chance that it will be off more than 4.0%. Since the graph of this poll's possible results is the area under a bell shaped curve, there is actually just a 2.5% chance that Sanders could win by more than +1 and 2.5% that Clinton could win by more than +7 so such results are highly unlikely. If you have kept up - great! If you haven't, no worries,the statistics of polling are complicated. But here is the bottom line, according to this poll, there is a much greater chance that Clinton will win the caucus fight than she will lose it. |
Response to CajunBlazer (Reply #39)
Sun Jan 31, 2016, 04:13 AM
DCBob (24,689 posts)
42. In fact I believe it would be 77% chance Hillary is ahead.
Response to CajunBlazer (Original post)
Sat Jan 30, 2016, 10:05 PM
SheenaR (2,052 posts)
21. Again, from Twitter
Gentle reminder to those anxiously awaiting DMR/Selzer, their last pre-IA 2012 poll had Romney 24%, Paul 22%, Santorum 15%...
|
Response to SheenaR (Reply #21)
Sat Jan 30, 2016, 11:07 PM
CajunBlazer (5,648 posts)
29. That wasn't the Des Moines Register poll - The DMR poll was the only one to call that race right
That wasn't the Des Moines Register poll - The DMR poll was the only one to call that race right
It was the only one to predict a narrow Santorum victory by correctly predicting last minute race trends. It was also the only Iowa poll to correctly gauge the new caucusgoers trend which gave Obama is unexpected victory in Iowa in 2008. |
Response to SheenaR (Reply #21)
Sun Jan 31, 2016, 09:07 AM
DemocratSinceBirth (98,829 posts)
55. Ann has picked eight of the last nine IA caucus winners./Nt
Response to CajunBlazer (Original post)
Sat Jan 30, 2016, 10:12 PM
DCBob (24,689 posts)
24. Looks like a victory for Hillary in Iowa.
Her superior ground game will clinch it.
Cheers! ![]() |
Response to CajunBlazer (Original post)
Sat Jan 30, 2016, 10:20 PM
SidDithers (44,228 posts)
27. DU rec...nt
Sid
|
Response to CajunBlazer (Original post)
Sat Jan 30, 2016, 10:27 PM
bunnies (15,859 posts)
28. 3 percent of landline voters without electricity.
Response to bunnies (Reply #28)
Sat Jan 30, 2016, 11:09 PM
CajunBlazer (5,648 posts)
30. If they have cell phones they're covered in this poll already
And they aren't covered in this poll, my money is on them being Hillary voters.
![]() |
Response to CajunBlazer (Original post)
Sat Jan 30, 2016, 11:25 PM
amborin (16,631 posts)
33. It's basically tied; the difference is within the margin of error; it's a statistical tie; GO BERNIE
Response to amborin (Reply #33)
Sun Jan 31, 2016, 04:14 AM
CajunBlazer (5,648 posts)
44. Wrong - the poll results actually mean that Hillary has...
... better than an 85% chance of winning Iowa. I explain why in another post on this thread.
|
Response to CajunBlazer (Original post)
Sun Jan 31, 2016, 01:50 PM
Gothmog (130,538 posts)
57. Thanks for posting
Response to CajunBlazer (Original post)
Sun Jan 31, 2016, 01:53 PM
amborin (16,631 posts)