For the DMR poll to verify there will probably need to be 200,000+ caucus goers, follow my logic...

Close to 100,000 of which will have to change voter registration ON THE DAY OF THE CAUCUS since the DMR poll said 45% of participants will be either independents or republicans.

Considering that only 120,000 people attended the democratic caucuses in 2004, that would mean that almost as many independents and republicans will have to switch registration ON THE DAY OF THE CAUCUS as caucused in 2004.

Now I know we all have biases for our candidates but that doesn't make us incapable of rational thought.

If this verifies, we probably won't know the result for days because that's how long it'll take to get everyone to fill out their paperwork so they can caucus!

there's no use in stressing out about this poll. Happy new year to all!

The democratic roles remained coonstant and that all of the 120k that attended last time were registered dems.

What is the real breakdown of that 120k number and what is the number of registered dems today? Give me those numbers and we can begin to have a conversation about logic.

2004 caucus participants 122,193

http://iowaprogress.com/2007/02/27/the-inequalities-of-the-iowa-caucus/#more-289

Independents/Republicans 20%

http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2004/primaries/pages/epolls/IA/

That breaks down to 97,754 democrats and 24,438 independents

Assuming that there is a 15% increase in the amount of democrats participating this year because of all the excitement in the race and 45% of the total are republicans/independents like the DMR poll showed,

That would mean there would be 204,394 caucus goers

112,417 democrats attending (55%)
91,977 republicans/independents (45%)

that the didn't even endorse. You're accusing them of fudging numbers. The entire idea is absurd, because its not the DMR's endorsed candidate. I trust a local poll, which also happens to be the most reliable poll historically, over your analysis.

I'm accusing them of using a bad polling methodology that no other reputable poll uses and that doesn't pass the straight face test. Run the math and see for yourself. I only assumed a 15% increase in democratic turnout and that may be very low. What if it's 30% increase or 50% increase? Then the numbers get more insane, upwards of 300,000 caucus goers for the math to work.


BTW, Insider Advantage also got it right in 2004. And they have Edwards winning and Clinton in second and Obama a distant 3rd.

It's an admittedly right wing poll from GA. If you're putting stock into IA, you're crazy.

I don't know how many ways I have to say this. The DMR is riding a wave of respectability, and there is no way they would throw out a bullshit model unless they had reason to believe that it would be more then valid. You're grasping and straws here Herman, and I don't blame you, given the historical accuracy of this last DMR poll.

other than DMR's prior trackrecord which missed Kerry's margin of victory by oh an insignificant 12%.

If Hillary had won, using this same model, you would be completely cool with it, due to the reputation of the DMR. I wish you would admit that the DMR might have a better grip on what is going on is Iowa then you do. I'm willing to put my trust in them.

does come out for Obama then you will have to at least "acknowledge" the hype.


I doubt the paperwork will be that tough, though it may slow things down a bit. I am skeptical about this kind of turnout actually materializing.

your entire logic is based on a faulty assumption.

It is quite possible that a lot of traditional folks are just turned off by the bickering, particularly the negative campaigning of the hillary campaign, and the turn out is low among the normal participants. Yet, at the same time, Obama has attracted new blood into the campaign, with the net result to be about the same.

In any case, my prediction is for a huge turnout. And I have been predicting a squeaker between obama and edwards with edwards maybe a half point to a point ahead. Now I am seeing Obama with the momentum.

It really depends on the turnout, not the polls. With a large turnout i predict an obama win. With a smaller turnout edwards or hillary.

Obama is the real deal and he's THE ONE. He's not your typical waspy candidate running for president. He appeals to so many people across all demographics. So yes, expect high voter turnout and an Obama will win because of that.