Herman Munster
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Feb-04-08 06:40 PM
Original message |
Hillary with 12% lead in California early voting, 34% of expected total vote is already in |
|
What this means is that Obama will have to win precincts on election day in California by at least 6-7% just to tie Hillary. Anything less and Hillary still wins based on her early vote advantage. http://www.surveyusa.com/client/PollReport.aspx?g=5fb08a99-97a2-4e13-a586-d2ed83c3ceea
|
The Delegates
(206 posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Feb-04-08 06:40 PM
Response to Original message |
1. Everyone, say it with me |
|
The Democratic Primaries are NOT winner take all. The Democratic Primaries are NOT winner take all. The Democratic Primaries are NOT winner take all. The Democratic Primaries are NOT winner take all. The Democratic Primaries are NOT winner take all. The Democratic Primaries are NOT winner take all. The Democratic Primaries are NOT winner take all. The Democratic Primaries are NOT winner take all. The Democratic Primaries are NOT winner take all. The Democratic Primaries are NOT winner take all. The Democratic Primaries are NOT winner take all. The Democratic Primaries are NOT winner take all. The Democratic Primaries are NOT winner take all. The Democratic Primaries are NOT winner take all.
|
REDFISHBLUEFISH
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Feb-04-08 06:41 PM
Response to Reply #1 |
mckeown1128
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Feb-04-08 06:51 PM
Response to Reply #2 |
|
They divide up the delegates of Congressional districts per the vote in that district. If a CD has 4 delegates and the vote in that CD is HRC 55 O 45 then they both get 4 delagates.
|
krkaufman
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Feb-04-08 06:53 PM
Response to Reply #25 |
32. 4 or 2? 4 / 2 = 2. Right? n/t |
mckeown1128
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Feb-04-08 06:58 PM
Response to Reply #32 |
|
sorry I didn't double check what I wrote. :dunce:
|
BootinUp
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Feb-04-08 07:27 PM
Response to Reply #1 |
69. They should probably change that after this election. nt |
elixir
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Feb-04-08 08:37 PM
Response to Reply #1 |
73. Hillary has a 12% lead! Hillary has a 12% lead! Hillary has a 12% lead! Hillary has a 12% lead! |
|
Hillary has a 12% lead! Hillary has a 12% lead! Hillary has a 12% lead! Hillary has a 12% lead! Hillary has a 12% lead! Hillary has a 12% lead! Hillary has a 12% lead! Hillary has a 12% lead! Hillary has a 12% lead! Hillary has a 12% lead! Hillary has a 12% lead! Hillary has a 12% lead! Hillary has a 12% lead! Hillary has a 12% lead! Hillary has a 12% lead! Hillary has a 12% lead! Hillary has a 12% lead!
|
BeyondGeography
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Feb-04-08 06:42 PM
Response to Original message |
Thrill
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Feb-04-08 06:42 PM
Response to Original message |
4. Anything less than an 8% win for Hillary, is a failure for her. |
krkaufman
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Feb-04-08 06:54 PM
Response to Reply #4 |
34. The figure I've heard is 8.7% : ) |
|
It'll be a spin & expectations game.
|
KittyWampus
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Feb-04-08 06:43 PM
Response to Original message |
5. so she has to rely on votes from people who mostly never got a chance to hear Obama |
in_cog_ni_to
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Feb-04-08 06:45 PM
Response to Reply #5 |
9. LOL...a vote is a vote is a vote. |
|
Hillary is going to win!:woohoo:
|
KittyWampus
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Feb-04-08 06:48 PM
Response to Reply #9 |
15. yes, you are right. She will win CA. |
jenmito
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Feb-04-08 06:46 PM
Response to Reply #5 |
11. Exactly. I started a thread talking about just that yesterday! |
|
She is the past in every way.
|
in_cog_ni_to
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Feb-04-08 06:47 PM
Response to Reply #11 |
jenmito
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Feb-04-08 06:50 PM
Response to Reply #13 |
23. "Boo hoo" that Hillary's the past and is losing her lead? |
in_cog_ni_to
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Feb-04-08 08:43 PM
Response to Reply #23 |
76. Not going to happen. I hate to tell you, Obama is going to lose. |
Straight Shooter
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Feb-04-08 06:53 PM
Response to Reply #11 |
31. You bet she's the past. Retro is in. Nostalgia is hip. It's cool. It's tie-dye and all that. |
|
And if that doesn't please you, check out the words of the great William Faulkner:
"The past is not dead. In fact, it's not even past."
|
jenmito
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Feb-04-08 06:57 PM
Response to Reply #31 |
38. Retro may be in but Hillary's not. |
Straight Shooter
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Feb-04-08 06:59 PM
Response to Reply #38 |
|
But I admire your dedication to not believing that.
|
jenmito
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Feb-04-08 07:03 PM
Response to Reply #40 |
46. Then why is her camp counting on early voting for the win in CA? |
|
She's slipping and he's rising every day.
|
Straight Shooter
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Feb-04-08 07:05 PM
Response to Reply #46 |
49. I won't answer for her camp. Personally, I'm not relying on anything at all. |
|
It's been a rollercoaster so far; why should anything change now?
|
jenmito
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Feb-04-08 07:08 PM
Response to Reply #49 |
54. It doesn't really matter what you're relying on. n/t |
tritsofme
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Feb-04-08 06:48 PM
Response to Reply #5 |
14. I didn't realize Obama only got in the race a few weeks ago. |
KittyWampus
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Feb-04-08 06:49 PM
Response to Reply #14 |
17. the race narrowed down only a few weeks ago. A few weeks ago, I rooted for Biden |
|
Edited on Mon Feb-04-08 06:50 PM by cryingshame
|
rodeodance
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Feb-04-08 06:50 PM
Original message |
got more excuses?? this one went PUFF |
rodeodance
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Feb-04-08 06:49 PM
Response to Reply #5 |
18. just another little obamababy whining again-- |
KittyWampus
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Feb-04-08 06:51 PM
Response to Reply #18 |
27. whining? OBAMABABY? Actually, unless YOUR "girl" wins by a large margin, she's toast |
jenmito
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Feb-04-08 06:52 PM
Response to Reply #18 |
29. Those early voters recognized the Clinton name-not the Obama name. |
rodeodance
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Feb-04-08 06:55 PM
Response to Reply #29 |
36. excuses, excuses--pile em high!! |
jenmito
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Feb-04-08 07:05 PM
Response to Reply #36 |
48. The only thing piling high is Obama's poll numbers! |
rodeodance
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Feb-04-08 07:22 PM
Response to Reply #48 |
64. ~YES SHE CAN, YES WE CAN~~ |
Lucinda
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Feb-04-08 07:03 PM
Response to Reply #29 |
44. It's been a while, but I'm pretty sure California still gets television service. |
Lucinda
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Feb-04-08 06:50 PM
Response to Reply #5 |
22. California has television. They get the news. Most of the people in this county will vote |
|
Edited on Mon Feb-04-08 06:51 PM by wlucinda
without ever meeting or seeing a candidate in person.
|
jenmito
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Feb-04-08 07:00 PM
Response to Reply #22 |
42. Then you might remember back when Obama was being called "naive" and a "rookie." |
Lucinda
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Feb-04-08 07:04 PM
Response to Reply #42 |
47. He's straight out of Chicago politics. The last thing I'd ever call him is naive. |
jenmito
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Feb-04-08 07:06 PM
Response to Reply #47 |
52. You're obviously not in the MSM. That was the storyline back then. |
Lucinda
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Feb-04-08 07:12 PM
Response to Reply #52 |
58. That was thousands of hours of coverage ago. |
|
And several debates later too. If you really don't think people are informed, you must be expecting Obama to crash tomorrow.
|
jenmito
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Feb-04-08 07:19 PM
Response to Reply #58 |
62. You'd be surprised at how many people are not informed when they vote. Some people see the Clinton |
|
name and say that's the one for them.
|
flordehinojos
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Feb-04-08 06:53 PM
Original message |
or maybe those who did hear him ... and decided hillary rings true! |
rodeodance
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Feb-04-08 06:53 PM
Response to Original message |
jenmito
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Feb-04-08 07:11 PM
Response to Original message |
57. You forgot the "sarcasm" thingy. |
MonkeyFunk
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Feb-04-08 07:18 PM
Response to Reply #5 |
61. Never got a chance to hear him? |
|
He's been running for a year.
|
jenmito
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Feb-04-08 07:21 PM
Response to Reply #61 |
63. My doctor didn't even know Obama spoke out against the war before the war. n/t |
MonkeyFunk
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Feb-04-08 07:23 PM
Response to Reply #63 |
66. regardless of how politically unaware your doctor is |
|
Obama's been running for a year. People in California know who he is.
|
jenmito
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Feb-04-08 08:20 PM
Response to Reply #66 |
elixir
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Feb-04-08 08:39 PM
Response to Reply #5 |
74. I'm sure they've heard enough hope and change to make a decision for Hillary. |
Andromeda
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Feb-04-08 08:41 PM
Response to Reply #5 |
75. Everybody has heard from Obama by now... |
|
I just wish he'd go away.
|
Kermitt Gribble
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Feb-04-08 09:22 PM
Response to Reply #5 |
|
Californians have their miracle ears shut off for the past year? This campaign's been going on for more than the past few weeks.
|
LVjinx
(711 posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Feb-04-08 10:50 PM
Response to Reply #5 |
80. Or people who need more specific details than Obama has provided |
|
I think it will be very very close. But I think she will ultimately win in CA. Whether that equates into a delegate advantage remains to be seen... They may split the haul pretty evenly.
|
Thrill
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Feb-04-08 06:44 PM
Response to Original message |
6. Just heard on AA that Obama could win more Delegates in California |
|
Edited on Mon Feb-04-08 06:49 PM by BrentTaylor
even if Hillary has more votes. Because of how they distribute with the districts
The interview is with a Political Reporter in California
|
Nitrogenica
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Feb-04-08 06:44 PM
Response to Original message |
7. How are you helping us defeat John McCain by posting this? |
JackORoses
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Feb-04-08 06:45 PM
Response to Original message |
8. but, but, the Hillarites said Mail-In Ballots would be 50% of the votes |
|
Now it is only a third?
That's bad news for Hillary.
|
Herman Munster
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Feb-04-08 06:51 PM
Response to Reply #8 |
26. they will be around 50% |
|
Many people like to deliver their absentee ballots to the polling place on election day.
|
mckeown1128
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Feb-04-08 06:56 PM
Response to Reply #26 |
37. those delivering theres on election day would |
|
reflect the current polling that is favorable to Obama. HRC advantage in absentee ballots are in those that were sent in a long time ago. The people who wouldn't change their mind because they already sent theirs in. The people dropping theirs off tomorrow will reflect the current polling.
|
Uben
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Feb-04-08 06:45 PM
Response to Original message |
10. Dammit! Where's Miss Cleo when you need her? |
|
Whoever she endorses is bound to be the winner!
Speaking of that, how come we never hear from all these psychics during the primaries?
(other than the ones here, of course)
|
in_cog_ni_to
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Feb-04-08 06:46 PM
Response to Original message |
12. YAY! Go, Hillary!!!! n/t |
rodeodance
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Feb-04-08 06:48 PM
Response to Original message |
16. ~ALL FIRED-UP FOR THE LADY~~YES SHE CAN, YES WE CAN~ |
Thrill
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Feb-04-08 06:50 PM
Response to Reply #16 |
20. Can't even make up your own slogans. Much like Hillary |
|
You steal material from Obama and Edwards
|
rodeodance
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Feb-04-08 06:53 PM
Response to Reply #20 |
30. Obamacampers stole the YES WE CAN from the United Farm Workers-know your History before spouting off |
Jai4WKC08
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Feb-04-08 07:09 PM
Response to Reply #20 |
55. Actually, it's a strength to be able to use good ideas no matter where they come from |
|
It's a sign of maturity. ;)
|
Tellurian
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Feb-04-08 07:25 PM
Response to Reply #55 |
68. Actually, it's a: "If you can't beat em, Copy em".. strategy! |
REDFISHBLUEFISH
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Feb-04-08 06:50 PM
Response to Reply #16 |
24. YES SHE IS! YES SHE IS! |
|
Can implies possibility IS states a fact!
|
psychopomp
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Tue Feb-05-08 08:37 AM
Response to Reply #24 |
86. Depends on what the meaning of "is" is |
BootinUp
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Feb-04-08 07:05 PM
Response to Reply #16 |
depakid
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Feb-04-08 06:49 PM
Response to Original message |
19. Sometimes I wonder what it's going to take before people stop bantering around |
|
Edited on Mon Feb-04-08 07:06 PM by depakid
all these bogus polls like they were gospel....
Looking stupid and being proven wrong over and over is apparently not enough.
|
Sensitivity
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Feb-04-08 06:50 PM
Response to Original message |
21. That's why Obama is not in CA. Early vote States will go to Hillary because |
|
of name recognition and establishment endorsements early on.
That is how it is.
|
TomClash
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Feb-04-08 06:51 PM
Response to Original message |
28. One pertinent question |
|
Why do you think the Field Poll, which is a California based organization and had early voting even between Barack and Hillary, is less reliable than SurveyUSA?
|
Herman Munster
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Feb-04-08 07:00 PM
Response to Reply #28 |
41. the field poll didn't technically poll early voters who have voted already |
|
they polled early voters and people who "intend" to vote early. Also, the poll was done over an 8 day time period and had a very high undecided response.
|
TomClash
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Feb-04-08 08:05 PM
Response to Reply #41 |
70. Same with Survery USA |
|
Same methodology. Be fair.
|
Xithras
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Feb-04-08 06:55 PM
Response to Original message |
35. There's an interesting difference between Hillary and Obama voters in there (Rethug meddling). |
|
Edited on Mon Feb-04-08 07:02 PM by Xithras
Aside from the fact that women voters are dispropotionatly voting for her.
Hillary voters, according to that poll, seem to place the economy, health care, and immigration(!) as their top priorities. Hillary voters also apparently support the draft, oppose same-sex marriage, think the US is winning the war on terrorism, and a stunning 70% listed George Bush as one of the greatest presidents in history.
Obama voters rank the environment and Iraq as their top priorities. Guess that explains why I'm leaning Obama.
Or then again, maybe it just goes to show that the poll is junk and rates PREFERENCE, not actual votes factored by the respondants party affiliation. If you look at those numbers, you'll see that they include 70% of Republicans, who apparently prefer Hillary to Obama. That puts these numbers about three points east of useless.
If you break it down by party affiliation, Clinton has a 14 point lead among Democrats while Obama has a 12 point lead among Independents (roughly 10% of the voters in California). Without knowing the actual numbers for each party, it's hard to really tell how useful these numbers are.
But then again, that's how these polls work.
|
pampango
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Feb-04-08 07:00 PM
Response to Original message |
43. The tightening polls don't change any votes already cast. |
|
Hard to see how Obama wins but it will be interesting to see how close it gets tomorrow.
|
NJSecularist
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Feb-04-08 07:03 PM
Response to Original message |
45. This is only this one particular survey |
|
22% of the votes are absentee ballots, for both Republicans and Democrats.
34% is just not an accurate number.
|
krkaufman
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Feb-04-08 07:06 PM
Response to Original message |
51. As expected. Final results should be interesting... |
|
... especially vote trends.
Super Tuesday will be a win for Obama if he isn't knocked-out or severely disabled. All trends point to Obama momentum, so the longer the campaign goes, the better the odds for Obama. Obama just needs to stay close on Tuesday to take the race into the following primaries, and he apparently already has the money to keep going.
|
Summerza
(59 posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Feb-04-08 07:07 PM
Response to Original message |
53. Releasing early voting results is ILLEGAL and Survey USA should be reprimanded |
|
Releasing voting results OR EXIT POLLS, which are much like official results in that it closely approximate them, is illegal, and Survey USA is playing with fire by doing this.
|
NJSecularist
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Feb-04-08 07:09 PM
Response to Reply #53 |
56. These are not exit polls |
|
These are just the author's guesses.
|
Summerza
(59 posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Feb-04-08 07:14 PM
Response to Reply #56 |
59. The OP categorically asserts that Clinton leads by 12% |
|
Doesn't sound like a guess to me. Or maybe you are right, and the OP wanted to exaggerate, as it usually happens in DU.
|
NJSecularist
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Feb-04-08 07:15 PM
Response to Reply #59 |
60. It's a Survey USA poll |
|
Edited on Mon Feb-04-08 07:15 PM by NJSecularist
Polls don't categorically know anything. They poll about 500 people, while California's voting electorate is in the millions.
|
Inuca
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Feb-04-08 08:09 PM
Response to Reply #59 |
|
and/or does not know what he is talking about. OTOH it is probably true that the early voting (heavily?) favors Clinton.
|
thevoiceofreason
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Feb-04-08 07:23 PM
Response to Original message |
65. And how many folks without land lines were polled? |
|
Edited on Mon Feb-04-08 07:34 PM by thevoiceofreason
That's right. ZERO. Who supports the BIG O? That's right, folks without land lines. Survey USA sucks in 2008.
|
BootinUp
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Feb-04-08 07:24 PM
Response to Reply #65 |
67. People without land lines dont vote, they are nomads. lol |
TheDonkey
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Feb-04-08 09:30 PM
Response to Original message |
78. You hear it California. No reason to vote tomorrow. sHillbots have already declated victory |
LordJFT
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Feb-04-08 10:06 PM
Response to Original message |
79. you're just trying to cover up your disappointment from this poll |
stevenleser
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Feb-04-08 10:55 PM
Response to Original message |
81. Survey USA's results are outliers in virtually every state. |
|
Just check Realclearpolitics.com
|
thevoiceofreason
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Feb-04-08 10:58 PM
Response to Reply #81 |
82. I don't like going to that site |
|
Is it true? The SUSA numbers seemed so odd. How did they perform in Iowa, NH and SC? I have to be ale to defend this debate against my best friend.
|
stevenleser
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Feb-04-08 11:27 PM
Response to Reply #82 |
83. They massively underestimated Obamas SC win |
|
They did not have a poll in NH or Iowa, but in SC, they had:
PollDate Sample Obama Clinton Edwards Spread SurveyUSA 01/23 - 01/24 553 LV 43 30 24 Obama +13.0
Final results were: Poll Date Sample Obama Clinton Edwards Spread Final Results - - 55.4 26.5 17.6 Obama +28.9
----------------------------- More convincingly, look at polling data for Massachusetts right now. Poll Date Sample Clinton Obama Spread
SurveyUSA 02/02 - 02/03 651 LV 56 39 Clinton +17.0 Suffolk/WHDH 02/01 - 02/03 400 LV 44 46 Obama +2.0 Rasmussen 01/28 - 01/28 1023 LV 43 37 Clinton +6.0
and Missouri
SurveyUSA 02/02 - 02/03 671 LV 54 43 Clinton +11.0 Reuters/CSpan/Zogby 02/01 - 02/03 851 LV 42 47 Obama +5.0 Mason-Dixon 01/30 - 02/01 400 LV 47 41 Clinton +6.0
To me, it seems like SurveyUSA is exaggerating Clinton's strength by anywhere from 10% to 16% vs other polls
|
mrreowwr_kittty
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Feb-04-08 11:28 PM
Response to Original message |
84. 12%? I thought she was supposed to be 25% ahead in early voting. |
|
BTW the primary is proportional so one can win the pop. vote and the other can get more delegates.
Just like NV.
|
Tellurian
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Tue Feb-05-08 08:23 AM
Response to Reply #84 |
DU
AdBot (1000+ posts) |
Fri Apr 19th 2024, 09:36 PM
Response to Original message |