Sure, I know Iowa\u2019s nearly two weeks away. But I\u2019m taking next week off, so I thought I\u2019d go out on a limb and make some predictions now about the January 3rd caucuses.<\/p>\n
Barack Obama will win the Democratic caucus in a landslide. OK, that was too easy. Let me take a stab at the Republican race.<\/p>\n
For a while, it looked like Newt Gingrich was the one to beat, but the latest state and national polls show his popularity sliding. As I observed in a previous column<\/a>, all the other ABM (Anybody but Mitt<\/em>) candidates enjoyed five to six week upswings in their poll numbers followed by sharp drop-offs. Gingrich reached the six-week mark about 7 days ago \u2013 and right on cue, his poll numbers started to tumble. \u00a0[I\u2019m beginning to think that an ADD epidemic has struck one-fifth of the GOP primary electorate. The predictability of their fickleness is uncanny \u2013 and unnerving.]<\/p>\n Gingrich will continue to go down, and no matter what share of the vote he takes in Iowa, if he doesn\u2019t win it, he will have performed below expectations. And that is what will be focused on \u2013 performance against somewhat arbitrary, and often erroneous, expectations.<\/p>\n This brings us to Ron Paul.\u00a0 He is surging in Iowa (and experiencing a slight but noticeable increase in his national support). Among the four Iowa polls out this week<\/a>, he leads the pack by 3 to 6 points in three polls (Insider Advantage, Iowa State U, PPP) and places second to Mitt Romney by 5 points in one (Rasmussen).<\/p>\n Are the polls accurate – will Ron Paul win Iowa? It\u2019s really too early to tell. Iowa caucus polls are notoriously unstable even in the final weeks.\u00a0 We saw this for both parties\u2019 caucuses in 2008. It wasn\u2019t until the final Des Moines Register<\/em> poll<\/a> conducted just days before the last caucuses that we got a fairly accurate read of what would happen.<\/p>\n Dave Peterson from Iowa State\u2019s Harkin Institute, one of the academics behind that poll, remarked, \u201cI think Paul probably under-polls<\/a>.\u201d I actually think it\u2019s the opposite in this case \u2013 Paul is now over-polling, mainly because the demographic mix of voters in these Iowa caucus polls may unrepresentative of actual caucus-goers.<\/p>\n Keep in mind that approximately 610,000 registered Republicans and 705,000 registered independents are eligible to show up at the GOP caucuses. In 2008, just 119,000 did.\u00a0 In 2000, the turnout was about 88,000. In other words, much less than 10% of the eligible electorate will show up. Determining who they are for a poll is not easy<\/a>.<\/p>\n For one, most of the public pollsters rely on self-reported intentions of caucus attendance. Unlike primaries where turnout records are publicly available, the Iowa Secretary of State does not maintain caucus attendance \u2013 the parties do.\u00a0 If you want past turnout reports you have to buy those lists directly from the parties at a steep cost.\u00a0 Furthermore, past caucus attendance is really not a good barometer of current intentions (again, unlike primaries).<\/p>\n Polling the Iowa caucuses is notoriously difficult. Which brings us back to Ron Paul. He does extraordinarily well among younger (i.e. under the age of 45), independent voters. The released cross-tabulations from two polls demonstrate this.<\/p>\n The Insider Advantage poll shows Paul with nearly half the vote among \u201clikely caucus goers\u201d under the age of 30 and leading with 30% among those age 30 to 44. He runs even with Romney (22% each) among those age 45-64, but Romney pulls ahead among those age 65 and over with Paul dropping to 5th<\/sup> place. Among self-identified independent voters, Paul leads with 28%, compared to 19% for Rick Perry and 17% for Romney. Among Republican partisans, Paul enjoys a narrow 22% to 20% edge over Romney, with Perry (15%), Gingrich (15%), and Michele Bachmann (11%) close behind.<\/p>\n The Iowa State Poll paints a similar picture. Paul garners a clear majority of the vote among those under the age of 45. However, Newt Gingrich has the lead among older voters. It\u2019s worth noting that the Iowa State Poll did two things that are different from most other polls.\u00a0 They used a very long field period, starting their interviews on December 8, when Gingrich\u2019s popularity was still at its height. They also used a panel sample \u2013 in other words, they re-interviewed a subset of the voters they spoke to in their November poll.\u00a0 It\u2019s unclear what impact the use of a panel has on their results, but the extended field period certainly does not capture the exceptional fluidity of this race.<\/p>\n I think that these polls may be inflating Paul\u2019s support because they over-represent a segment of the electorate that is less likely to turn out. Keep in mind that the caucuses are a long process. You have to listen to hours of speeches from representatives of each candidate before you get to cast your vote. And you have to do this on a cold Iowa workday.<\/p>\n