New KCCI poll #'s (sorry, no link at the moment - will look for one)

[Debi]

Yesterday, at 5 p.m, KCCI-TV released its latest Iowa Poll, which was conducted 5/20-22, with a sample of 600 likely voters, and a subsample of 400 likely Dem primary voters, The margin of error is +/- 5%. Below are the results.


Primary election (March numbers in parens):

Culver 38 (33)

Blouin 25 (16)

Fallon 20 (13)

Undecided 17 (38)


General election (March numbers in parens):

Culver 49 (44)

Nussle 41 (43)


Blouin 39 (37)

Nussle 42 (43)


Fallon 35 (34)

Nussle 46 (44)

[Debi]

1. Link to pdf - sorry about the wait

http://www.kcci.com/download/2006/0523/9261908.pdf


Forget what I just wrote...I need a day off :blush:

[IA_Seth]

2. Great results!

It looks like, according to these numbers, Culver is walking away with the nomination...it looks like the other 2 candidate's numbers are rising fast so it could get interesting...but Culver's numbers are rishing at a pretty good clip as well so if he can maintain his momentum it looks like he's got it.

As far as the general election goes, it's nice to see that we are within the margin of error for all our candidate's to beat Nussle, regardless of who it may be. It's interesting to note that although Blouin is shilled as the "electable" candidate, Culver appears (and has consistently appeared) to be the more electable of the two.

[Debi]

3. Yes, Seth, Culver's numbers are RISHING!! heee heee

If you look at the remaining undecideds - (and if they break the way they did between March and May) Culver ends up the winner in June. Of course nothing is predictable - and I hope that the winner gets above 35% (no matter who the winner is) so that this nomination doesn't get decided at State Convention :scared: 13 days :bounce:

[IA_Seth]

4. You shuck!

And it's pasht the time allowed to edit.

[Debi]

5. You just made me spit Alfredo Tortellini soup on my laptop!!

:spray:

DAMMIT!!!Got some cleaning to do now.....

[IA_Seth]

7. lol...

Well be careful with the shoup next time shilly!

[LincolnMcGrath]

6. Thanks Debi!

[bigdemfan67]

8. I like

to see these types of numbers. Shows that Culver can win in november. Maybe it will prove to the doubters of the Culver campaign that he can truely win in November. Thanks for posting these results!

[Hardrada]

9. I guess everybody is going to be choosing their Lt. Govs.

the first thing from henceforth.

Did they list the Revolutionary Communist Party candidate anywhere?

[Debi]

12. I didn't know you were running

:P

[Hardrada]

13. I was merely curious!

Theoretically as an anarchist of sorts I shouldn't think of voting let alone running for office in a bourgeois capitalist society! My wife insists that good liberals need my vote however.

[Debi]

17. Your wife is a kind and giving woman!

(and you should do something nice for her) :P

[Hardrada]

20. Excellent advice.

:D

[progressoid]

10. Interesting numbers. Too bad Fallon doesn't do better against Nussle

Apparently Iowans aren't as progressive as they used to be.

With only 600 polled that makes a pretty big MOE, but looks good for our team at this point!

:toast: :toast: :toast:
:toast: :toast: :toast:
:toast: :toast: :toast:

[6demkids]

11. Thanks Debi

I like to see these kind of numbers!! Go CULVER!!!

[dan east]

14. Am I the only one here who likes Fallon over the other 2?

[pstans]

15. I am for Fallon

and there are quite a few others here. I have been busy canvassing (you know that grassroots stuff) and haven't been posting as much lately.

[Debi]

18. Welcome to DU! and No you are not the only Fallon supporter here

Several other Iowa DUers are Fallon fans and (as a Culver supporter) I would have no problem supporting Ed in the general if he is victorious in the primary. :hi:

Hope to see more of you on this board. :7

[CornField]

16. Okay, please explain this to me

...with a sample of 600 likely voters, and a subsample of 400 likely Dem primary voters...

Does this mean they polled 600 total, 400 of those being Dem?

If that's the case, then please explain the percentages to me: if Dems already had 2/3 of the poll numbers, why are the percentages so low on the Dem candidates?

[Debi]

19. Maybe they polled 600 for the general election match-up

and then polled a totally different 400 for the Dem match-up? :shrug:

[9119495]

21. They polled 600 for the r vs. D race and then of the voters

that expressed a preference for dems, they asked about the primary.

We're looking good. It seems Blouin may be hurting because of his negative ads. I think this is great news because if the trend holds for the general election, Nussle may not be able to use that big bag o' cash to go negative. I had thought going negative would be the only way for him to win.