No Runny Eggs

Jim Geraghty steps back into the time machine and pulls out the last 2000 poll numbers as well as the actual results:

Des Moines Register – George W. Bush 43%, Steve Forbes 20%, Alan Keyes 8%, John McCain 8%, Gary Bauer 6% (with scattering and undecided 15%)
University of Iowa – Bush 55%, Forbes 12%, Keyes 9%, Bauer 8%, McCain 5% (scattering/undecided 11%)
Research 2000 – Bush 46%, Forbes 23%, Keyes 9%, McCain 7%, Bauer 7% (scattering/undecided 8%)
LA Times – Bush 43%, Forbes 25%, Keyes 10%, McCain 8%, Bauer 7% (scattering/undecided 7%)
Average poll – Bush 46.75%, Forbes 20.00%, Keyes 9.00%, McCain 7.75%, Bauer 6.25% (scattering/undecided 10.25%)
Actual results – Bush 43%, Forbes 30%, Keyes 14%, Bauer 9%, McCain 5% (scattering/rounding error 1%)

Geraghty asks whether Huckabee or Keyes 2008 is the closest one to Keyes 2000. I’ll submit Huckabee is closer to Bauer (Gary, or perhaps Graem, definitely not Jack) than Keyes 2000 mainly because Bauer was that year’s “evangelical” candidate, and Keyes 2008 is a complete non-factor. The real question is who will be this year’s Forbes and 2000 Keyes, or whether there are (Geraghty says the pollsters are better than they were, but also points to Zogby’s 2004 Dem failure).

I’ll submit that Thompson is this year’s Forbes, with Paul being this year’s Keyes 2000 (take that whichever way you want; forehanded or backhanded).

Regarding McCain, Geraghty notes that he isn’t skipping Iowa this time around. I counter that his final poll numbers also reflect that, and once again, he will underperform because of the built-in biases.