To read the pundit press and blogsphere is be told that the Democratic Party is severely split, and that Clinton supporters are on the verge of leaving the party. In fact, Clinton supporters themselves in blogsphere are repeating this. See for example BTD's post this morning on Talk Left.

But is this true?

No, it isn't. T The table below compares Obama's performance among Democrats in the most recent CBS CBS poll poll taken during the summer in 2004, 2000 and 1996. This poll is almost identical the most recent Rasmussen poll.

	1996	2000	2004	2008
For Democrat	90	73	87	80
For GOP	6	17	9	12
Net Dem Advantage	84	56	78	68

Here is the key point: at this point Obama runs better than Gore did among Democrats, and pretty to close to where Kerry did. But at this point in the cycle Kerry and Gore had had months to consolidate the party. Obama has just completing a tough primary season: and is almost exactly where they were. We have to stop buying into the Democrats are not united frame. IT ISN"T TRUE!!!

Even more importantly, though, Rassmussen found that the Democratic Party is bigger than it was in 2004. Democrats now lead in Party ID 41.7 to 31.6 (versus 1.6% advantage on election day 2004).

I would expect that Obama will improve his numbers among Democrats over the next few days, but his current position among Democrats is strong.

Finally, let me once again observe how rarely people who write about politics both to check political history.

Tonight we witnessed what may become viewed as a "tipping point" in American Politics.

Not because I think Obama won.  And not because I think Clinton won.

There was only one real winner in tonight's debate:  Matt Drudge.  

Think about the first 45 minutes of the debate tonight.  How many of the questions ABC asked tonight were the result of issues that really took off when Matt Drudge highlighted them?  I think the answer is at least half.
Tonight we saw the capitulation of the MSM to Matt Drudge.  In fact, I think you can say that the debate tonight was Matt Drudge's crowning achievement.  This was the night when the issues he highlighted came first, and other more serious concern (Iraq, The Economy...) were relegated to the back of the bus.

A great poet once wrote:

THEY must to keep their certainty accuse
All that are different of a base intent;
Pull down established honour; hawk for news
Whatever their loose fantasy invent

So what are the wages of  circular firing squads?

I know something about primary history.  On Friday I will post a review of National Polling from 1972 to 2004 at Openleft.  Here is one fact I have found in my work:

No one with an approval rating under 40 at this point in the cycle has ever won a two way race.

The last two days have seen clear evidence that the race has broken for Clinton in Ohio. Here are the latest polls I have seen and the margin:

Pollster	Dates	Clinton	Obama	Shift from Prior Poll if recent
Survey USA	March 1-2	54	44	Clinton +4
Rassmussen	March 2	50	44	Clinton +4
Suffolk	March 1 -2	52	40	N/A
PPD	March 1 -2	51	42	Clinton +5
Univ of Cinc - Ohio Poll	Feb 28 - March 2	52	41	N/A
Quinnipiac	Feb 27 - March 2	49	45	N/A
Zogby	Feb 29 - March 1	45	47	Obama +3
ARG	Feb 29 - March 1	51	44	NA
Mason Dixon	Feb 29 - March 1	47	43	NA

If you throw out Zogby the average is 50.75 Clinton 42.875 Obama. Please note the table has been updated to reflect the PPD poll that just came out

In June of this year I became increasingly frustrated by the political discussion in blogsphere.  It was all about the National Polls, and how Clinton could not be beaten.  This disappointed me - it was really no different than what you would read in the Washington Post or Time.  It also angered me, because in a way the national polling was being used as a weapon against dissent within the Democratic Party.  

But what really made me mad was that is completely wrong.  I have been involved in Democratic Politics for nearly 30 years, and the one thing I do know is that National Polls are meaningless before New Hampshire.  And yet these polls were being used to create the impression that resistance to Clinton was futile.

The point of the diary is not to say I told you so.  OK, so it isn't the ENTIRE point of this diary.  I am a strong believer that history can provide guidance about how primaries affect each other.  

Here is what history teaches about the current state of the race:  it is far from over.  After the diary about Iowa and New Hampshire, I wrote another diary about how New Hampshire changed National Polling.  On average, it found that when a front-runner loses New Hampshire, there is a 33-point swing in National Polling.  Since that time I have done more detailed analysis that shows when you include GOP contests since 1980, the average is 34.  

But the data also shows something else: This bounce is reversible.  In at least three instances (1984, 1992 and 1996) the bounce from New Hampshire substantially receded about 3 weeks after New Hampshire.  The reasons for this are complex, and I will write more about this tomorrow.  

Yesterday I wrote a diary suggesting that New Hampshire was breaking towards Hillary.   But as any native Northern New Englander knows, polls are like the weather:  wait a minute and they will change.

As I documented yesterday, polling was showing a pronounced movement to Clinton.  BUT, here are the last 3 polls in New Hampshire:
http://www.usatoday.com/news/polls/table s/live/2007-12-20-nhpoll.htm?loc=interst itialskip

USA Today: Clinton 32, Obama 32, Edwards 18
American Res. Group,  12/16 - 12/19, Clinton 38 Obama 24 Edwards 15  
Rasmussen 12/18 Clinton 31 Obama 28 Edwards 18

There are number of recent polls suggesting that the race may be turning back towards Clinton in New Hampshire. The evidence is consistent and has important implications, particularly for Edwards (whom I support). Let's start by looking at the changes in four recent polls in New Hampshire (I am a strong believer that comparing polls over time from the same pollster is the best way to get a sense of the direction of a race).

Pollster	Period compared	Clinton	Obama	Edwards	Richardson
American Research Group	Dec 12-16 vs Nov 26-29	4	1	-2	-4
Rassmussen	Dec 18 vs Dec 11	3	-3	-1	0
UNH (CNN)	12/13-17 vs 12/6-10	7	-4	-2	1
Fox News	12/11-13 vs 11/27-29	4	2	-2	-6

From Fox News, November 27-29

Clinton 30
Obama 23
Edwards 17
Richardson 12
Biden 3
Kuchinich 3

http://www.foxnews.com/projects/pdf/FOX_ NH_2008_release113007_web.pdf