DISQUS

I get it... I understand where you are coming from - but at least with PAC money or traditionally raised money there is DISCLOSURE.  Fallon doesn't have to disclose a single donor to "I'M FOR IOWA".  NOT ONE. 

By the way Where did you get the data for your table?  Is there a citation?

Also, what is your citation for this paragraph?

Another factor that skews caucus representation toward rural counties is the state's shifting population.  Joining the college counties in the top ten list of hardest counties to elect delegates are high-growth areas in central Iowa -- Dallas, Madison, Polk and Warren counties, four of the six fastest growing counties in the state from July 2000 to July 2003 (the Census estimates closest to caucus dates).  Dallas County grew 13.2% in those three years.  But a voter who moved to Dallas County three years before the caucuses won't count in the county's presidential vote totals used to calculate delegates, because they voted somewhere else.  A voter who moved in after the gubernatorial election wouldn't count at all toward the delegate count.

Good post John, your post is very informative.  There's a great post from Iowa Progress from last February that goes into pretty deep detail on the subject as well.

word... That's great!  Right?  Getting cited on the premier right-wing outlet - good for you Iowa Independent!

....snark!

Lineage... So you know - Brad Frevert is not Rep. Frevert's son....

There are a BUNCH of Biden Stories.... You can find them by doing a "Joe Biden""Caucus" search on the sight - and there are over 80+ of them.

Again... It's about trends.  I agree that the poll doesn't fit "traditional" polling methodology.  Yet it does still serve as a decent gauge of who will be each caucusgoer's "#1" choice at this point - a snapshot in time.  Since the poll used the same methodology as the polling they did in August you can still discern trends.  Plus, the numbers seem to correspond with what people have been finding in other polls - along the trend lines at least.

They also took the data they collected from the random telephone sample and cross-referenced with voter registration data so they could find out who caucused in 2004 as well.  In particular they found that Edwards voters are much more likely to be past voters in the Democratic caucus.

Ok, that's a great comment Don, that's quite the insightful commentary coming from the Cyclone Conservative.  I don't think that the poll is necessarily a great measure against other polls.  The methodology is much more open ended.

As Mark Blumenthal over at Pollster.Com says:

Readers should consider that the methodology of this survey, as in August, is different from most of the other Iowa caucus surveys we have seen. According to Professor David Redlawski, who spoke at a Washington press briefing this morning, [...snip...] this most recent survey used essentially the same methodology as their August survey. That is, it used an open-ended vote question, the same screening questions and sampled from a list of telephone numbers drawn from listed telephone directories (i.e. not a registered voter list and not using a random digit dial methodology).

So, when looking at this data it's important to interpret trends - not absolute numbers.  I think the internals to the poll are even more interesting.  Over at the Kevin McCarthy page:

The new University of Iowa "Hawkeye Poll" show Senator Joe Biden making gains since August. Biden was polling at less than 1% support in August and is now pulling close to Richardson with 5.3% in the latest polling done of likely Iowa caucus attendees.

Biden is polling well ahead of Richardson amongst likely caucus goers over 61 years of age - coming in with 9.9% support vs. Richardson's 4.1% amongst this key caucus demographic.

Just cross-posted... I just gave you a heads up over at the "McCarthy for Iowa" site.

The vote wasn't ENTIRELY bipartisan

Secretary Northey is correct that the vote on the Power Fund was "bipartisan" but you can see from the actual vote count there were 10 Republicans that voted against the bill creating the Power Fund in the House:

Rep. Alons
Rep. Sands

Rep. Watts

Rep. Chambers

Rep. Soderberg

Rep. Windschitl

Rep. De Boef

Rep. Tymeson

Rep. Forristall

Rep. Van Fossen

Really....is this new "news"?

Doug,

I have been a fan of your writing in the Carroll paper for some time now.  Your editorial commentary is funny, insightful, and well thought.  

Yet, I've been troubled lately reading your commentary on Iowa Independent. Your columns have seemed - familiar. Now I know why. You have reprinted a number of your columns from the Carroll paper as original columns on Iowa Independent. You can find the column I'm posting this in response to here. The original article was posted to the web on March 29, 2007 at 11:53 a.m. Here is the opening paragraph:

Iowa men should watch the 1983 movie "Scarface."

Over and over.

Not for the iconic moments provided by Al Pacino's Tony Montana with his ridiculous Cuban affectation and over-the-top lines like, "Say hello to my little friend." (In reference to his machine gun before he starts mowing down rivals in a drug war.)

This is EXACTLY the same opening paragraph as the article here on Iowa Independent.

According to the Iowa Independent "Code of Ethics":

New Journalist Fellows should inform the public of news stories and issues without letting improper relationships compromise their integrity.

New Journalist Fellows should:

* Always be fair, but always favor truth over balance.

* <bold>Avoid conflicts of interest, real or perceived, and disclose unavoidable conflicts.</bold>

* Remain active, interested, and involved members of society without letting their activities unduly influence their duties to their readers and the public.

* Refuse gifts, favors, fees, free travel and special treatment, and shun employment or engagement in organizations that would compromise professional integrity.

* Hold the powerful accountable without exception.

* Maintain integrity by resisting pressure from advertisers and special interests to influence news coverage.

* Keep a clear-eyed sense of distrust of sources offering information for favors or money.

At the very least, if you are going to re-publish material from previously written columns - please give yourself appropriate credit with a citation or reference to the previous column. I come to Iowa Independent to read fresh and NEW commentary on issues relevant to Iowa progressives - not to read rehashed editorials from a column I already enjoy reading.