A Clinton Metaphor

Before Obamaiania in Iowa, Sen. Clinton stood at 39% in the New Hampshire polls.

Last night, she finished at 39%.

Clinton is the best political example of an efficiently priced security.

There is so much information about her in the marketplace; there is absolute liquidity.

Obamania comes along and messes up the equilibrium.

It is restored a few days later.

Comments

Good catch. I noted a blogger over the past few days complaining the "supposedly well-informed, serious New Hampshire voter" seemed remarkably willing to switch on a whim to Obama because of what happened in Iowa. This indicates that big switch never happened.

Posted by Helter | January 9, 2008 6:05 AM

I said yesterday that the polls were setting Obama up for disappointment. Now it has come true. Obama would have been ecstatic about this finish had it come without any of these polls saying he was going to kick Hillary out of the race.

Besides that, the story is that the real losers are the pundits and the pollsters. The winners are the people of America and its democracy.

The pundits and pollsters should shut the fuck up and the "journalists" should report the results of the voters and stop trying to drive the process.

Posted by bajsa | January 9, 2008 6:31 AM

I think that analysis is a bit oversimplified. The 39% before Iowa presumably would have been higher if it included undecideds.

Looking at those same pre-Iowa polls, I note that Obama actually picked up 10-15 pts by primary day, while Clinton stayed at 39%. So how is that restoring equilibrium? Instead perhaps it suggests that Clinton had a 40% ceiling in NH? Or something else?

Ultimately, I don't think anybody can explain the volatility in the polling... so please don't reduce the analysis to the 'security' of the Clinton brand and the implicit endorsement thereof.

Posted by wk | January 9, 2008 11:05 AM

Let's see...Clinton stayed static at 39%, Obama gained 10-15 points, Edwards came in at 17%...adding Obama and Edwards together gives you 54%...who exactly "won" here...

Posted by Mike D | January 9, 2008 6:03 PM