Latest Iowa and New Hampshire Democratic polls from RealClearPolitics.com

[CajunBlazer]

Latest Iowa Democratic caucus polls and average:

RCP Average 1/2-1/19 Clinton 47.0 Sanders 42.3 O'Malley 5.4
Clinton +4.7

KBUR 1/18 - 1/19 Clinton 48 Sanders 39 O'Malley 7
Clinton +9

DM Reg/Bloomb 1/7 - 1/10 Clinton 42 Sanders 40 O'Malley 4
Clinton +2

Gravis 1/11 - 1/12 Clinton 57 Sanders 36 O'Malley 7
Clinton +21

PPP (D) 1/8 - 1/10 Clinton 46 Sanders 40 O'Malley 8
Clinton +6

ARG 1/6 - 1/10 Clinton 44 Sanders 47 O'Malley 3
Sanders +3

Quinnipiac 1/5 - 1/10 Clinton 44 Sanders 49 O'Malley 4
Sanders +5

NBC/WSJ/Marist 1/2 - 1/7 Clinton 48 Sanders 45 O'Malley 5
Clinton +3

Latest New Hampshire Democratic primary polls and average:

RCP Average 1/4-1/18 Sanders 51.6 Clinton 39.0 O'Malley2.8
Sanders +12.6

CNN/WMUR 1/13-1/18 Sanders 60 Clinton 33 O'Mally 1
Sanders +27

ARG 1/15-1/18 Sanders 49 Clinton 43 O'Malley 3
Sanders +6

Gravis 1/15-1/18 Sanders 46 Clinton 43 O'Malley 2
Sanders +3

Monmouth 1/7-1/10 Sanders 53 Clinton 39 O'Malley 5
Sanders +14

FOX News 1/4-1/7 Sanders 50 Clinton 37 O'Malley 3
Sanders +13

[underpants]

1. Super Tuesday is the big event but Iowa shows the strength of campaigns

Can they get each person to go tongue caucus site and stay there for 2-4 hours? That is a lot harder than just getting them out to vote.

[JonLeibowitz]

2. Your NH CNN/WMUR numbers are wrong. n/t

[CajunBlazer]

3. They were copied and pasted from the RCP site

Go to the site and pull up of all of the NH polls and tell me how particular poll number is wrong. I doubt if I could screw up a copy and past, but I had to do a lot of formatting so something could have been screwed up in the process.

Here is a direct copy:

CNN/WMUR 1/13-1/18 Sanders 60 Clinton 33 O'Mally 1
Sanders +27

Everyone, including both the Clinton and Sanders campaigns, consider this poll to be inaccurate - that happens sometimes. You can see how much it differs from all of the other polls taken at about the same time.

That why most pollsters describe the accuracy of their polls like this - Within X% 95% of the time. No matter how scientifically the sample is chosen, a poll still has a 2.5% chance of being out of that X% range on the high side and 2.5% on the low side. This one is as bad as I have seen it. It is so far off I think that someone at the polling company screwed up bad.

That's why an average of recent poll is almost always more accurate then an individual poll.

Opps, it is wrong - I'll fix it - must have done something wrong in the formatting.

[JonLeibowitz]

4. Your "direct copy" does not match your OP. So yes, you did screw up the copy/paste. Not a big deal.

[CajunBlazer]

5. Yep, you're right - I fixed it - thanks much!

Where is the embarrassed smiley when you need it.

[Attorney in Texas]

6. The Gravis and KBUR/Monmouth polling uses the controversial robo-call methodology that has a huge

in-house pro-Trump and pro-Clinton effect (I have not seen a convincing explanation for this, but the effect is well documented).

If you do nothing other than exclude robo-call polls, Iowa is a dead heat and Sanders is comfortably up by double-digits in New Hampshire:





I think it does Clinton no favors to set her expectations in Iowa based on robo-call polls because, historically, falling short of expectations is almost worse than losing in Iowa.

[CajunBlazer]

7. Don't be so dismissive

While those polls may use robo calls, they do weight their populations like all other polls. For instance they may not reach as many young people as those polls that use people to conduct the polls, but they do weight their results. That means that votes of those young people they do reach are given weight proportional to their numbers in the population.

It is not the best way to poll, but aside from the obvious cost factor, they have their advantages. People are more likely provide responses to automated poll calls because they are quick and easy compared to people placed calls.

While you have a point, I wouldn't dismiss those polls entirely. Bernie will probably win in NH and Iowa is close no matter which polls you look at.

You might also want to look at the latest polls in Nevada and South Carolina. If I have time I will post them.

And don't forget the so called SEC primaries which follow right after which includes your State of Texas with all of those delegates. According to the latest Texas polls Clinton leads Sanders 52.0% to 21.3% for a 30.7% difference. I would like to see more current Texas polls but I strongly suspect most the Texas delegates at the convention will be voting for Clinton. Do you disagree?