Obama Ahead In All NH Polls Except CNN Poll - Did CNN Bias Impact Their Poll?

Several Polls have been conducted after the Iowa Caucus and all of them have Senator Obama ahead save for one poll: The CNN / WMUR / UNH Poll, which has Obama and Clinton tied at 33 percent, with Edwards at 20 percent.

Why is the CNN Poll the only one that does not have Obama ahead? It's a good question as last year, many pollsters had Senator Clinton in front in national polls, except a June 5th USA Today / Gallup Poll, which had Obama tied with Clinton. Frank Newport of Gallup, Inc., stated that he actually called for a new poll with a different sample size because he could not believe that Obama was tied, and wanted to be consistent with other polls. So what kind of sample configuration did they use this time?

Well, the introduction to the PDF file reads "Interviews with 672 likely New Hampshire primary voters in
New Hampshire conducted by telephone on January 4-5, 2008." When I read "most likely" voters, that is older voters. But the file data does not tell us what the age range was. But my guess is that the average age was skewed up over the other polls, thus explaining how Clinton could tie Obama.

But even with that, the CNN / WMUR / UNH Poll reports that 60 percent of the people responding said that Senator Obama was the most inspirational candidate and that 72 percent had a favorable response to him, versus 46 percent and 18 percent respectively for Senator Clinton and 58 percent and 13 percent for former Senator Edwards.

Wow. That seems to be the foundation for a potential landslide in Obama's favor in New Hampshire.

But still the question of how the CNN / WMUR / UNH Poll could come out with a Clinton / Obama tie and not an Obama lead is active. In the search for the answer, I found this note in the PDF file, which you can get by clicking on this link.

The data have been weighted to adjust for numbers of voters and telephone lines within households, respondent sex, and region of the state. In addition to potential sampling error, all surveys have other potential sources of non-sampling error including question order effects, question wording effects, and non-response.

To "weight" data is to change it by adding a mutiplier, thus effecting the final outcome of how the data reads. What's very disturbing is that the data file does not explain how the data was "adusted" and what was effected. That's scary and my guess is that that weighting process is at the center of the "tie" we see in this poll, versus the other polls. Take a look below.

But before you do, consider the constant CNN bias that has been exacted against Senator Obama and for Senator Clinton, as well as the CNN personalities like Larry King, who support Hillary Clinton, yet claim to report the news without bias. Also, ask why both CNN and ABC are only mentioning the results of the CNN / WMUR / UNH Poll, and not the others?

I'd call this a massive bias against Senator Obama, and the mainstream media trying to control what you the voter thinks. But in an Internet World, that's hard to do, plus, it should be considered illegal.

Here are the polls:


RealClearPolitics.com Average

Obama 33.2
Clinton 31.2
Edwards 19.2
Richardson 5.0

McCain 32.7
Romney 27.8
Huckabee 12
Giuliani 9.5
Paul 8.5
Thompson 2.2

Concord Monitor (January 5)

Obama 34
Clinton 33
Edwards 23
Richardson 4
Kucinich 3

McCain 35
Romney 29
Huckabee 13
Giuliani 8
Paul 7
Thompson 3

See full results here.

***

CNN/WMUR Poll (January 4-5)

Clinton 33%
Obama 33%
Edwards 20%
Richardson 4%
Kucinich 2%

Sampling error: +/-5% pts

McCain 33%
Romney 27%
Giuliani 14%
Huckabee 11%
Paul 9%
Hunter 1%
Thompson 1%

Sampling error: +/-5% pts

See full results here.

+++

American Research Group (January 5)

Obama 38%
Clinton 26%
Edwards 20%
Undecided 8%
Richardson 3%
Gravel 3%
Kucinich 1%

Barack Obama leads John Edwards among men 42% to 21%, with 19% for Hillary Clinton. Among women, Obama leads Clinton 35% to 31%, with 20% for Edwards. Clinton leads Obama among Democrats 34% to 32%, while Obama leads Edwards among undeclared voters (independents) 49% to 21%.

McCain 39%
Romney 25%
Huckabee 14%
Giuliani 7%
Paul 6%
Undecided 6%
Hunter 1%
Keyes 1%
Thompson 1%

John McCain leads Mitt Romney among men 42% to 21% and McCain leads Romney 35% to 30% among women. McCain leads Romney 44% to 19% among undeclared (independent) voters, with 18% for Huckabee. Undeclared voters are now 27% of the total Republican vote.

See full results here.

+++

Rasmussen Reports (January 4)

Obama 37%
Clinton 27%
Edwards 19%
Richardson 8%
Kucinich 3%
Gravel 1%

See full results here.

McCain 31%
Romney 26%
Paul 14%
Huckabee 11%
Giuliani 8%
Thompson 5%
Some other candidate 2%

Hillary's Stupid Move - Hits Obama On Prison Sentences As Courts Give Judges More Power In Effort to Have Fair Sentencing Guidelines

Senator Hillary Clinton is either desparate, totally out-to-lunch, or just plain stupid. I'm not sure which one. But Senator Clinton has decided to attack Senator Barack Obama on his opposition of harsh prison sentences, according to The Huffington Posts' Thomas Edsall and in an article that's not very detailed indeed.

Remember the Feds just relaxed sentencing on drug crimes because the courts had a terrible race-bias problem where Blacks were being charged with more serious sentences for drug possession offenses than Whites, yet because of the rules, Federal judges had their hands tied.

No more.

So Hillary Clinton walks into this head first and gets a knock on the head. What she was thinking, I don't know, but it was certainly dumb. Clinton has long wanted America to think she's the person for African Americans, but like the whole deal with the HIV AIDS Bill she rejected at the same time she claimed she was the person who made sure HIV AIDS fund for the treatment of African Americans was in good supply, people have seen her use "triangulation" politics again and again.

The truth is that many of us hold Senator Obama in high regard and want him to succeed. And the truth is that Senator Clinton can't say that she's behind Blacks and then vote against bills that make outcomes of, in this case, the drug court, fair and reasonable.

Britney Spears Needs Our Help And Prayers

Britney Spears is going through a terrible period in her life, which is not like what you would go through because as of this writing you don't have her money, fame, or access.

This video shows her being brought to the hospital by ambulance and also a bunch of photogs trying to get into a car that was obviouly new to them..

CNN's Jeffrey Toobin Tells LIE About Barack Obama - Says He Flip-Flopped on Iraq - Send Jeff an EMAIL!

CNN commentator Jeffrey Toobin has twice today got on CNN and said
that Barack Obama "flipped flopped" on Iraq, which we all know is not
true.

I need your help in sending Jeff an email or 100 telling him that he's
wrong, and showing why.

This, below the line, is what I sent to him via his contact page at this link:

http://www.jeffreytoobin.com/contact/

And his Facebook page:

http://www.facebook.com/inbox/?compose&id=629136693

___________________________________________________________

Title: You Are Wrong About Barack Obama and Iraq

Greetings Mr. Toobin,

Twice today, you've appeared on CNN and accused Senator Barack Obama
of flip-flopping on Iraq. You know and I know that's not true. You
know that Senator Obama has opposed the Iraq War since 2002.

NBC's Tim Russert tried to accuse Senator Obama of this on his show,
and Obama corrected him. In the same show, it was revealed that Tim
Russert misquoted Senator Obama.

Jeff, I enjoy your commentary, but this is a terrible error on your part.

Please see this video:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ytsf4qw4OIc

Then please correct your statement the next time you appear on CNN. ASAP.

Thanks and Happy New Year,

Zennie Abraham

_______________________________________________________________


Please help me by flooding Toobin's email box and facebook message
area. This does work, folks. It really does.

Thanks,

--
Zennie Abraham, Jr.

John Edwards' Alledged Lover Rielle Hunter Pregnant By Either "Edwards Operative" Or Edwards Himself

UPDATE: JOHN EDWARDS ADMITS TO AFFAIR

UPDATE: EDWARDS / HUNTER ALLEGED BABY PHOTOS SURFACE

UPDATE: JOHN EDWARDS CAUGHT VISITING RIELLE HUNTER AND CHILD JULY 21, 2008.

UPDATE: EDWARDS VISIT CONFIRMED BY SECURITY GUARD

EDWARDS AFFAIR VIDEO LINK

BREAKING:





As John Edwards prepares to go negative on Barack Obama after Obama's big Iowa win, there's a looming spectre of a story that should be of concern to him and it seems to be.

This is a story that will not go away and it comes up again, as The National Enquirer and Sam Stein over at the Huffington Post first introduced a story asserting that former U.S. Senator and Presidential Candidate John Edwards had an affair in 2006.

I wrote about it a while back , but focused on the Enquirer / Clinton angle. But I'm done with that as the story has massive legs.

Now, the Enquirer is reporting that the woman of interest as the supposed lover, Rielle Hunter is pregnant, and has a photo , shown here, to prove it. Now this is where the story gets even weirder. Because both the Enquirer and the Huff Post report...

Now, as the Enquirer has published photos of a clearly pregnant Hunter, she has gone on the record confirming that she is pregnant but denying that Edwards is the father. She claims that the biological father is Edwards operative Andrew Young, a married man who confirms both his extramarital affair with Hunter and that the baby is his. Hunter, who lived in New York, has recently relocated to a gated community in North Carolina near Young and his family. But, the Enquirer claims that Hunter is privately telling friends that Edwards fathered the baby.

That's the Huff Post's watered -down version of what the Enquirer reported, which is this:

The ENQUIRER has now confirmed not only that Rielle is expecting, but that she's gone into hiding with the help of a former aide to Edwards. The visibly pregnant blonde has relocated from the New York area to Chapel Hill, N.C., where she is living in an upscale gated community near political operative Andrew Young, who's been extremely close to Edwards for years and was a key official in his presidential campaign.

And in a bizarre twist, Young — a 41-year-old married man with young children — now claims HE is the father of Rielle's baby! But others are skeptical, wondering if Young's paternity claim is a cover-up to protect Edwards.

And what's interesting even more is that the Huff Post's original article by Sam Stein was taken down. But this Google search result will show that it was Sam Stein who gave more life to the story.

So let me get this straight. It's not Edwards, but an Edwards "oprative" -- who's marrried? Either way you spin it -- Edwards or Edwards operative -- the story seems, well, seemy at best with two married men behaving badly. Take your pick. And one things for sure : it's connected with John Edwards, one way or another.

It also brings up a question" will a John Edwards Presidency be like a Bill Clinton affair, all over again, with another sex scandal and a "Monica Lewinsky" running around?

The other question is why is the mainstream press ignoring this story that's all over the Internet? Redstate raises this issue, quoting Mickey Kaus...

"But there's a second way to divide the electorate that asks how the voters inform themselves. Do they rely on the traditional Mainstream Media (MSM), or do they get their political information from the Web, from cable news, from the tabloids, etc. This division may have once seemed unimportant, but it doesn't anymore--its seriousness is suggested by the MSM's impressive resistance to stories bubbling up from the blogs and the tabs that don't meet MSM standards (putting aside whether you regard those standards as high or merely idiosyncratic). "Rielle Hunter"--the woman whom the National Enquirer alleges was John Edwards' mistress--was the top-searched name on the MSN site at one point Thursday, I'm told. Meanwhile, in the traditional mainstream press, 'Rielle Hunter" was mentioned only ... well, zero times.
Of the two ways to divide the electorate, the second is arguably more important. After all, even those who don't follow politics, will eventually inform themselves before the election.** But if the MSM/Web barrier remains as robust as it's been, those who inform themselves from the MSM will find out something different, when they finally tune in, than those who go to the Web and learn both the news and what might be called the "undernews."

But this thing -- this story -- is all over the blogsphere, and as Bloggers have pointed out as well , the CNN's and ABCs of the world are trying not to pay attention to it.

Clinton Campaign Head Mark Penn Says He Will Use Same (Racist) Strategy Against Obama in NH

Some people never learn and Clinton Campaign head Mark Penn is one of them. Read this new account in the LA Times Blog. Either Penn's not playing with a full deck or is tone-deaf, but whatever the case, he does not understand the new America. He just does not get it. He thinks America will buy a strategy already considered racist in many corners and failed in Iowa. Read the text...

Clinton aides hint now things'll get nasty - LA Times Blog

While you were sleeping, the chartered jet of the third-place finisher in the Iowa Democratic caucus winged its way from Des Moines to Manchester, N.H. And it sounds like some decisions were made on that plane that may alter the course of that party's presidential race.

At her concession speech in Des Moines Thursday night Hillary Clinton was all gracious and determined and smiling. But hours later on that flight someone named Mark Penn, who happens to be her chief political strategist, ominously told a gaggle of reporters, including The Times' Peter Nicholas, that the campaign's focus needs to shift now onto, you might have guessed, someone named Barack Obama.

The Illinois senator happens to be the first-place finisher in those same caucuses and now Clinton, once the inevitable Democratic nominee, is playing catch-up. Things could get nasty with some pretty sharp media contrasts made in coming days, it would seem. "This has been very much a referendum on her,'' said Penn. "And people will take a harder look at the choice and the kind of president who will be needed in these times.''

Penn hinted that the Clinton campaign may be poised to mount a more aggressive campaign in New Hampshire than in Iowa. "Time and again in the Democratic primaries," he said,....

"you've seen people latch onto the new, seemingly fresh candidate only to then take a sobering look at the choice they have when it comes down to the end of it. I think you're going to see that again.''

He claimed that Obama's record is comparatively unexplored and he suggested the news media should ask itself about taking a closer look at Obama's history. "Does everyone know everything they need to know about Barack Obama?'' Penn asked. "That's a decision you're going to have to make. I think at this point his record is not very well known. And she is really well-known. She's fully vetted, fully tested. And I don't think that process has occurred with Barack Obama.''

For weeks now Clinton aides have been threatening on and off the record to use some bad stuff against their chief opponent. First, two of them told conservative columnist Robert Novak the Clintons had very damaging information on Obama, but they weren't going to use it. Then her New Hampshire co-chair, Billy Shaheen, said, not that any Democrat would use Obama's admitted youthful drug use against him, but boy, would the Republicans have a field day with that later this year.

Early this morning Penn told Nicholas he didn't believe Obama was positioned to win in New Hamsphire, which votes Tuesday. "The only thing Obama has going for him in New Hampshire," Penn added, "is some sense of momentum. Let's see whether or not that sustains itself ... when people really focus in on the choice of picking a president.''

Some adjustments need to be made in the Clinton strategy, Penn admitted. Clinton's strongest appeal in Iowa, he said, was with older voters. Now, she must reach across generational lines. "I think her appeal as we move forward can be broader than it was (in Iowa),'' Penn said. "And I think that will happen.''

The architect of the Clinton campaign claimed she is still positioned to win the nomination and he sought, as every political strategist would at a time like this, to play down the Iowa setback. "This is a bump in the road," he said. "No question about that. But we're in a very, very strong position to move forward and tackle the challenges that this presents.''

Kinda makes you remember that long internal memo that someone named Mike Henry wrote to Clinton last spring. At the time he was her deputy campaign manager. And he wrote: “My recommendation is to pull completely out of Iowa and spend the money and Senator Clinton’s time on other states. If she walks away from Iowa, she will devalue Iowa — our consistently weakest state.”

At the time the campaign disavowed that leaked document.

But that was last spring. And this is now.

Chris Matthews On Obama's "Projectile Victory" - Video