jefferson_dem
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed May-16-07 08:44 PM
Original message |
Another POLL shows Obama within single digits of Hillary (32 / 24) |
|
Cook/RT Strategies 05/11 - 05/13 Clinton 32% Obama 24% Edwards 13% Gore 10% Richardson 3% Biden 2% Dodd 1% Kucinich 1% Gravel 1% Other 1% Not sure 13% http://www.cookpolitical.com/races/report_pdfs/2007poll_tl_may11.pdf
|
illinoisprogressive
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed May-16-07 08:51 PM
Response to Original message |
1. Thanks. The polls are all over the place this week. strange... |
SaveElmer
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed May-16-07 08:55 PM
Response to Reply #1 |
|
She is between 8-13 points ahead in every one of them...
The Rasmussen that was published showing a 2 pt difference included Democratic leaning independents, who are notoriously volatile...
Among Democrats she is ahead 8 pts even in Rasmussen...
|
calteacherguy
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed May-16-07 09:56 PM
Response to Reply #3 |
15. How is she doing among Americans? nt |
CTLawGuy
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed May-16-07 08:53 PM
Response to Original message |
2. what bothers me is that all these polls have Gore in them |
|
Gore is not running. So I don't understand why they include him....
|
illinoisprogressive
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed May-16-07 08:57 PM
Response to Reply #2 |
4. Lynn Sweet was saying this today. No reason to put Gore as he is not running |
Ethelk2044
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed May-16-07 08:58 PM
Response to Reply #2 |
5. Yes and if you watched Tucker today |
|
Edited on Wed May-16-07 09:03 PM by Ethelk2044
Tucker and Lynn Sweet stated the Polls are not accurate because Gore is in them. The Polls need to include the acutal candidates who are running. If they did that both of them feel Obama numbers would even be higher than the polls are showing.
|
jefferson_dem
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed May-16-07 09:04 PM
Response to Reply #5 |
7. Most polls include a "without Gore" set of choice and Obama tends to fare worse in those. |
|
Like this one (Cook), Hillary's lead stretches to 11 when Gore is not included. Click on the pdf for details.
|
David Dunham
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed May-16-07 09:05 PM
Response to Reply #5 |
8. Wrong. Hillary's lead has been greater in polls that omit Gore. |
|
Remember Clinton-Gore. If people can not have Gore, they prefer another Clinton.
|
liberal renegade
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed May-16-07 09:01 PM
Response to Original message |
6. future running mates? n/t |
jefferson_dem
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed May-16-07 09:08 PM
Response to Reply #6 |
9. I'm not sure Hillary would be willing to take the VEEP slot...or that Obama would want her there. |
|
:)
Obama - Clark would be rather tasty though...
|
Ethelk2044
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed May-16-07 09:10 PM
Response to Reply #9 |
10. You and I are thinking alike |
liberal renegade
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed May-16-07 09:12 PM
Response to Reply #9 |
liberal renegade
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed May-16-07 09:15 PM
Response to Reply #9 |
13. she's not going to need the veep slot |
|
but Obama will and he'll gladly accept...
|
David Zephyr
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed May-16-07 09:11 PM
Response to Original message |
SaveElmer
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed May-16-07 09:20 PM
Response to Original message |
14. Without Gore Hillary is up 11... |
|
And since Gore is not running I would submit this is the more accurate figure!!!
|
DU
AdBot (1000+ posts) |
Wed May 08th 2024, 07:53 AM
Response to Original message |