Three PA polls out today: Clinton leads in all three as Obama momentum stops. H wins "Reagan Dems"

[jackson_dem]

SurveyUSA (arguably the most reliable pollster this cycle, although they seem to be an outlier in this case): H 56, O 38
Rasmussen: H 48, O 43
Quinnipiac: H 50, O 44

The more important thing is Obama's surge has stopped. We saw this in Ohio. Obama gained rapidly as he had a monopoly on the airwaves and then once Clinton began advertising, albeit at a lesser rate, Obama stopped gaining and in the end he actually lost ground during the final week.

SurveyUSA: Clinton gains 6%
Rasmussen: no net change (both up 1%)
Quinnipiac: Obama gains 3% (not statistically significant)

The Quinnipiac poll included an interesting and important category that you never see in polls: Reagan Democrats. If we are to win this election we will need their solid support. Clinton leads 55-37 among them in Pennsylvania.

Why is Clinton winning?

Class: working folks heavily for Clinton

The Quinnipiac poll breaks things down by education and income. More polls should do that since income is a great predictor of voting. Clinton leads 62-32 among working folks while her lead among those making over $50,000 a year is only ten points. We can presume that Obama is probably running even or slightly ahead among those making over $100,000 but Obama needs big margins among the rich to offset some of Clinton's advantage among working people.

Another proxy for class is education. Clinton leads 62-32 among those without a college degree but Obama wins those with college degrees 54-42.

Race

SurveyUSA and Quinnipiac provide crosstabs. A crucial thing for Obama is retaining 85-90% black support, since that is the only racial group Obama wins. He isn't doing it in Pennsylvania. Clinton gets 24% black support in the former poll and 17% in the latter. Obama is at 74 and 75%. The reason? Popular Philadelphia mayor Michael Nutter, a real reformer and agent of change who Obama showed his true colors to by endorsing a crony of the corrupy Street administration. Obama's talk is just words and few in America know this better than Nutter.

He gets 32% of whites in the SurveyUSA poll and does only slightly better, 38%, in the Quinnipiac.

Gender

In the Quinnipiac Obama wins men 48-44 but he loses women by double digits, 54-41. In SurveyUSA Clinton leads only 48-45 among men but she clobbers him 61-33 among women. Quinnipiac breaks this down by race, which is important since Clinton is a white woman. Clinton leads 49-42 among white men but has a massive 62-34 lead among white women.

Age

For a candidate who claims to desire unity Obama sure does pit generation against generation often. This is likely a factor in him struggling with seniors in PA, like he does almost everywhere. While he essentially ties Clinton, 45-44 among 18-34 year olds, he loses seniors 65-29 (SurvUSA). 29% among seniors and not winning his traditional base of young voters by a large margin is not going to cut it.

Commander-in-Chief

The SurveyUSA poll includes terrorism as an issue. Clinton leads among voters for who this is the top issue by a whopping margin of 78-11. She also leads on Iraq 52-43 in the SurveyUSA poll, although Obama edges her out 49-45 on "the war" in the Quinnipiac. Perhaps the different term used helps Obama as "the war" reminds folks of the initial decision regarding the war in 2002 while "Iraq" is more prospective and conjures images up about what to do in the future in Iraq.

Economy

Clinton leads 54-40 on this issue in the SU poll, 49-45 in the Quinn poll. These are good performances for Obama, given the fact he has no economic record. The problem is he should be doing better on Iraq since much of his candidacy is premised on what he said in one speech six years ago about the war.

Health care

Clinton dominates on this issue. She leads 59-32 in the SU, 62-32 in the Quinnipiac.

Chink in Clinton's armor: trust?

Obama leads 59-32 on trust in the Quinnipiac poll. This is not surprising. Obama for over a year has hammered away at Clinton's honesty and integrity and his negative campaign has taken its toll on perceptions of Clinton's honesty. This is something that may be hard to repair in the general election. This is different than pointing out Obama is inexperienced. That is a fact that everyone in the real world recognizes. The notion that Clinton is an uber-dishonest politician is a lie but Obama, by reinforcing this right-wing talking point, may make it hard to shake.

Casey factor?

There is a category for that divides Democrats by their position on abortion. This could be used as a proxy for Casey Democrats. Obama does 9 points better among pro-life Democrats (41-51) than he does among pro-choice (38-57) Democrats. However, much of this can be explained by him doing relatively worse among women than men.

Casey is very popular among Catholics. However, Clinton leads 62-29 among Catholics.

[PBS Poll-435]

1. Great news.

If we are going to go recruiting, I would prefer that we go get the people we used to have.

[democrattotheend]

24. Why? The new people tend to be more progressive than the Reagan Dems.

Students and young people tend to be more progressive than Reagan Democrats, who tend to be much more conservative on social issues. So I'd rather bring young people into the party so we can elect more genuine progressives and fewer DINOs.

[PBS Poll-435]

35. Yes - The new people seem so progressive!

"Hillary needs a primary challenge in 2012."

"Bill & Hillary are big fucking liars. I HATE THEM."

etc.

Students & young people are fickle. If John McCain plays Guitar Hero on Conan O'Brien, he will pick up 15% of them...

[Cessna Invesco Palin]

67. You know...

This attitude is EXACTLY what turns a lot of people like me off to Hillary's campaign.

[PBS Poll-435]

69. What is the hell does this have to do with Hillary's Campaign?

The "new" people seem to like to bring up "stuff" from the past. Just like "old" FReepers.

[democrattotheend]

83. There's a lot of ageism against Obama supporters

I get the sense that some Clinton supporters resent our involvement and feel that we are trying to hijack the party. They of course want us to come out and vote Democratic in November, but resent our having influence in the primaries, and think we are not mature enough to understand the issues and think rationally about our choice. Stuff like this comment that I saw the other day:

"This really is simple. Obama cannot win. Only Hillary can win against McCain. If the children in college in this country cannot vote according to who's the better candidate, then perhaps we should raise the voting age so they can't continue to vote without understanding what's at stake or who will make this country better. This is not American Idol Presidential."

Of course, it goes both ways, and I have seen plenty of Obama supporters here complain about "stupid old white people" who support Clinton. I don't think that's right either.

[Rob Gregory Browne]

91. I'm an old white person and

I wouldn't call other people my age stupid for supporting Clinton, but I'd certainly say they're misguided. As for young people, they are this country's future and I would hope that they would vote for the candidate who best represents their point of view, the candidate who has stirred them to get involved in the first place.

I can't think of any greater gift to the Democratic party than the young people who are pouring into it and getting involved, in hopes that we can change the stranglehold the corporations and the old guard in DC have on our lives. We have Obama to thank for their involvement.

[struck_dumb]

68. :) lol

[jackson_dem]

51. Let's face it the reality is we need both if we are to build a long-term governing majority

[PBS Poll-435]

70. I agree. I am just happy that people are comin' home!

[OzarkDem]

2. Obama is weak on all issues

But his negative smear campaigns against Clinton have helped him a smidgen in the area of trust.

No wonder he's running his campaign against Clinton like Rove would.

[mckeown1128]

4. Negative attacks like these:

A lesson in history: Hillary's ATTACK mailers!!! and robocalls.

1. This is one where Hillary attacks Obama using Republican fear mongering on taxes. Obama has said that as a possible solution to the SS problem. Of course the mailer says it will be a trillion dollar tax increase on working Americans. That leave the impression of the middle class, but in reality Obama has said that if we raise the SS cap, that he would make sure there is a donut protecting "hard working families." Something along the line of only people earning more than 200,000 would have to pay more. Hmm... sounds kinda... progressive to me. Of course Hillary leaves out the details in the hope of scaring up votes.

On Eve Of Primary, Hillary Drops Negative Mailer Hitting Obama On Taxes

here in New Hampshire http://tpmelectioncentral.talkingpointsmem...
and here in Nevada http://www.politico.com/blogs/bensmith/010...


2. You may ask "what if right wing talking points on SS don't work?" Well, AFSCME on Hillary's behalf sent out this wonderful mailer in an attempt to scare voters into voting for Hillary.

"A Prime Minister is on the phone: They've lost a warhead," says the fictional memo on the front of the mailing.

The solution?

"Send in the right woman for the job."

http://www.politico.com/blogs/bensmith/010...

This disgusting tactic lead to some members of AFCSME to right this letter. Where they say they are "shocked and appalled" at the deceptive tactics.

http://thepage.time.com/letter-to-afscme-p... /


3. And another mailer attacking Obama on "possibly" raising the cap on SS for those over 200,000.

http://marcambinder.theatlantic.com/archiv...


4. If this still didn't seem enough for the Hillary campaign. They could always LIE by implying that Obama isn't pro-choice.

Barrack Obama. Unwilling to take a stand on a woman's right to choose.

http://tpmelectioncentral.talkingpointsmem...

Only problem is that... Obama voted present on those few Illinois state senate issues because Planned Parenthood asked him to vote present as part of Planned Parenthood's strategy. Ohh... and Obama has a 100% rating from Planned Parenthood and NARAL. More on this here:

http://thecapitolfaxblog.com/2007/12/04/ab... /


5. Just to mix it up here is another Hillary attack on Obama's SS this time a robocall that also wrongly accuses him of wanting to cut benefits. (Which, falls under his statements that everything is on the table. Even though he said it isn't a serious consideration.)

http://hotlineblog.nationaljournal.com/arc...

6. We all know that Hillary said MI (and thought the same logic fl) "doesn't count for anything" and now she says it should count based on Obama running national ads. Remember all the faux outrage about Obama advertising in FL by default. Well, Hillary did have her "supporters" run a robocall and GOTV operation. And while this robocall isn't a direct attack on Obama, it does show the absurdity of that big spectacle Hillary's campaign made of FL based on Obama running ads nationally on CNN and MSNBC.

http://hotlineblog.nationaljournal.com/arc...

7. In SC Hillary's campaign didn't even try to spin a lie. They just flat out lied. This time claiming that Obama would "dismantle the minimum wage."

here:http://www.observer.com/2008/obama-creates...
and here: http://hotlineblog.nationaljournal.com/arc...

8. I guess lying about Obama's policies wasn't enough. Hillary's campaign apparently decided that to appeal to religious bigots and racists. This robocall seemed to serve no purpose with the exception of emphasizing Obama's middle name of Hussein, mentioning it 4 times. I like the last line of "You just can't take a CHANCEHUSSEIN Obama." (Clinton loyalists will be quick to say that "there is nothing wrong with his middle name" of course that is bullshit.. These candidates have experts to poor over EVERY single word to make sure the word frames give the correct impression at all times. Also, how many robocalls will a campaign put out that say the name of the opposing candidate 4 times)

http://www.politico.com/blogs/bensmith/010...

9. Of course here is where we get the hypocritical BS from Hillary herself. She says that Obama attacked her health care plan unfairly. (I personally think there is nothing wrong with criticizing someone else's positions.) Hillary of course forgets that she has been attacking Obama's health care plan too. This attack is over the lack of a mandate. Hillary shows a diverse group of people and the mailer asks "Which of these people doesn't deserve health care?". Of course that is misleading. Hillary's attack is that Obama's health care plan will prevent 15 million people from getting health care, but that doesn't match up with what the difference is. Hillary's logic is that 15 million people won't choose to get insured... that is a big difference from people being "left" out of the plan(as she is implying.)

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2008/... /

[jackson_dem]

10. A similar and longer list could be compiled regarding Obama

He is no saint, neither is Clinton.

[mckeown1128]

94. Ok.. let me see it... I don't believe you. nt

[nichomachus]

58. That is just so out of touch with reality

that it really tarnishes Clinton and her supporters. You're not doing her any favors by claiming victimhood, when most uncommitted observers think that Obama's campaign has taken a much higher road than hers.

[nichomachus]

64. Oddsmakers: She'll win some battles but lose the war

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Democratic presidential contender Hillary Clinton will win several state nominating contests in the coming months but has little chance of becoming the party's candidate for the November 2008 election, traders were betting on Tuesday.

Traders in the Dublin-based Intrade prediction market gave Democratic front-runner Barack Obama an 86 percent chance of being the Democratic presidential nominee, versus a 12.8 percent for Clinton, the New York senator and former first lady.

Results were similar on the Iowa Electronic Markets at the University of Iowa, with traders giving Obama an 82.9 percent chance of winning, versus a 12.8 percent chance for Clinton.

Intrade traders were betting the Democratic nominee would ultimately become president. They gave the Democrat a 59.1 percent chance of winning, versus a 48.8 percent chance for the Republican. Iowa traders gave the Democrat a 57.1 percent chance of winning, versus 46.3 percent for the Republican.

Prediction exchanges let traders buy and sell contracts on the likelihood of future events. Contracts are structured so the prices can be read as a percent likelihood of an event occurring. Studies of prediction markets have shown they have an accuracy comparable to that of public opinion polls.

Expectations that Illinois Sen. Obama would be the Democratic presidential nominee have strengthened from 75 percent a month ago.

During that time Obama, who would be the first black U.S. president, has weathered a political storm over controversial statements made by the pastor of his church and has delivered a well-received speech on race in America.

The strong view of Obama's ultimate success came despite expectations that Clinton would win several important state nominating contests in the coming months.

Intrade traders were betting Clinton would win the contest in Pennsylvania on April 22, giving her a 66.1 percent chance, versus 32.8 percent for Obama. They gave her a 79 percent chance of winning the West Virginia contest on May 13, versus 20.5 percent for Obama, and a 70 percent chance of winning in Kentucky on May 20, versus 30.5 percent for Obama.

Traders were betting Obama would win the Indiana contest on May 6. They gave him a 58 percent chance, versus 45 percent for Clinton. Traders gave him an 88 percent chance of winning the May 20 Oregon contest, versus 12 percent for Clinton, and an 82.5 percent chance of winning the June 3 Montana contest, versus 17.5 percent chance for Clinton.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20080408/pl_nm/usa_politics_predictions_dc

[polichick]

3. Dropping from a 30 pt lead to a 6 pt lead is good news??

[GarbagemanLB]

6. Remember, this is Hillaryworld: up is down, black is white, etc. etc.

[Alexander]

7. At this point they've moved the goalposts into a different area code.

[Zachstar]

8. Only in the minds of Some Clinton supporters

Last time I checked a firewall was supposed to mean a candidate wins big.

[Mooney]

13. It's the end of his momentum!

[jackson_dem]

14. What 30 pt lead? Apparently you didn't read the OP, typical for an Obamite

Why read something that make cause cognitive dissonance? ;)

[polichick]

17. LOL - You're really pretending there was no such lead???

[jackson_dem]

23. There wasn't. Have you heard the term "outlier"?

[stray cat]

22. I may be missing something but for the last 3 months I've heard about Hillary's massive lead in PA

are we on the same planet?

[polichick]

28. Shhhhh - that poster is pretending.

[jackson_dem]

36. 18-19 points tops. The 26 pt one was an outlier

You remember her massive leads in Ohio and Texas too right? In Ohio Obama cut it down to 3-4 at one point, in Texas he actually surged into the lead. What happened when it counted? The same Obamites who are now arguing Obama's momentum is inexorable were saying the same thing before Ohio and Texas. ;)

[polichick]

44. Let's not forget that Obama won Texas.

[jackson_dem]

52. Obama lost by something like 100,000 votes

[polichick]

56. This is a delegate race, and he won Texas. Get a grip.

[swishyfeet]

75. 100,000 dittoheads.

[AX10]

100. jackson_dem, you are spot on!

:thumbsup:

[Arkana]

72. Yeah, sometimes I find myself wondering what happened to it

but then the sniper fire starts up again and as I'm dodging it I start to remember.

[AX10]

97. She increased her lead.

And that was AFTER Obama started his statewide bus tour!

I guess a bad bowling game can really hurt ones political career in some states. :silly:

[AllentownJake]

15. I don't trust these polls

I don't think they take into account the 250,000 newly registered democrats which will break 2-1 for Obama. The reason I think 2-1 is history of where independents go and the Obama team had a better voter registration drive. Nobody has the registration information for these people yet and the polls are of likely democratic primary voters i.e. registered democratic voters they know of not including the people who were independents or republicans a month ago.

[polichick]

21. I spoke with someone just today who works closely with Gallup...

He says exactly that ~ polls use old voter data; new voters aren't factored in at all.

[AllentownJake]

27. They have no way of predicting

My mother has voted in every race since 1978 at her address as a member of the GOP she's now a registered democrat for Obama...how can you predict and capture those people.

[jackson_dem]

53. Just like Ohio and Texas where Obama did better in polls than the actual vote

;)

[ORDem]

86. Younger voters tend to have cell phones only, pollsters can't reach them.

[jackson_dem]

25. Perhaps but perhaps not. The new voters didn't rescue Obama in Ohio

In fact he did worse on election day than he was doing in Ohio polling.

[AllentownJake]

39. Same day voter registration

They went 50/50 from the Limbaugh effect...there may be some Limbaugh effect here but having to go to the trouble of registering a month beforehand dampens that considerably.

All I know is the campaign collected a very large number of voter registrations from Independent supporters. There were over 5000 in the small county I live in. Not new registrations...registrations the campaign collected.

[AX10]

98. The polls had her winning Ohio by 5%.

She won by 10%.

[jackson_dem]

20. Gaining 6 points is bad news? Retaining a lead without losing ground is bad news?

Only the Quinn poll has bad news (-3) and even that is within the margin of error. You do realize Obama is outspending her something like 3:1 or 4:1 on ads here, don't you?

[polichick]

33. Retaining a lead "without losing ground"??? You're too much!

[jackson_dem]

38. That is very good when you are being outspent 3:1/4:1 on advertising

Ask John Edwards. It was a miracle that he was able to compete in Iowa despite being outspent 6:1 by Obama and by a large margin by Clinton as well, who he actually beat.

[polichick]

40. Obama's ads are introductions - everybody already knows Hillary.

[jackson_dem]

55. Everybody knows Obama too. Ads have a big effect when you outspend 3:1/4:1

How often does the candidate outspend 4:1 on ads win?

[polichick]

61. In case you've forgotten, Hillary was First Lady for 8 years...

There has never been such a well-known candidate!

[jackson_dem]

84. Yes, her name recognition three months ago ws 99%. Obama's was only 97%

[polichick]

90. Name recognition is hardly enough - people across the country know Hillary...

...in a much more comprehensive way than they know Barack ~ pretending that this isn't so is just as ridiculous as pretending that the latest poll numbers are good for the Clinton camp.

(btw, the reason Senator Obama can afford enough ads to properly introduce himself to voters is because he's on an enormous roll ~ though I'm sure you'll pretend that isn't true either.)

[jgraz]

81. It's not Obama's fault that Hillary's a craptastic money manager.

She's being outspent because she ran her campaign into the ground early. That more than anything is an indictment of her executive skills.

[GoesTo11]

104. No, first she dropped from a 30 to a 2 point lead, now it's back up to 6

Comeback kid!

[Barack_America]

5. Lol. Mark Penn, is that you?

You certainly seem to "interpret" polls the same way.

Let's see how the pollsters themselves analyzed them:

"With two weeks to go, Sen. Barack Obama is knocking on the door of a major political upset in the Pennsylvania Democratic primary. Obama is not only building on his own constituencies, but is taking away voters in Sen. Hillary Clinton's strongest areas - whites including white women, voters in the key swing Philadelphia suburbs and those who say the economy is the most important issue in the campaign," said Clay F. Richards, assistant director of the Quinnipiac University Polling Institute."

http://www.quinnipiac.edu/x1327.xml?ReleaseID=1165

Nice try, anyhow.

[jackson_dem]

16. That and what I wrote are not mutually exclusive

He is competitive but his momentum has stalled. He is not done but he is no longer surging either. This is reminiscent of Ohio.

Your post, though, is revealing. You cherry picked one poll. I could have done the same with SurveyUSA. I didn't. I look at polling as a whole for trends and the trend is clear: right now things have stabilized and that is good news for Clinton.

[Barack_America]

47. Actually all of the recent PA polls, excluding SUSA...

...have drawn similar conclusions. So I "cherry-picked" nothing. Obama closing the gap is the trend.

What proof do you have the Obama has "stalled"? The fact that he is getting progressively closer in the polls? I love how you say that your interpretation and the interpretations of the pollsters aren't "mutually exclusive". I guess they're just complete opposites.

You say "stalled".
They say "surging".

Lol.

[jackson_dem]

59. It depends on what time frame you cherry pick

He is surging over the past few weeks. The latest polls show him stalling compared to the previous polls from that firm. Are four polling firms all wrong?

This is a surge?

-6
+0
+3
+3

Margin of error ranges from 3 to 4 points...

[AX10]

99. And Hillary has her ground forces out.

And the valuable endorsements and the full force of the machinery of Rendell :bounce: and Nutter :bounce: working with her!

[mckeown1128]

9. Typical Clinton spin...

Hillary goes down in one out of three polls over the last three weeks..
Hillary stays down in a poll that had a big dip last week..
Hillary regains a little bit in the poll with the smallest sample..(ALL the other recent polls show big dips for Clinton)


and it is.. GOOD NEWS for her... whatever.

[rodeodance]

54. She is up REGARDLESS that Obama is OUTSPENDING her 4: 1-SPIN THAT!!

[mckeown1128]

93. Don't complain about money being spent...

Too bad Clinton doesn't inspire people to fund her campain... And considering Obama has gained 15+ points in the last two weeks... I think he is doing just fine. Ohh... and FYI since Clinton supporters don't like to look at the math... but she needs to win by more than 20 points to even stand a chance of catching up in the delegate count.

[MadBadger]

11. He gained 3 points in the Q-Poll in five days, so some polls do not show the MO stopping

The Strategic Vision Poll also will show him gaining a point and her losing two points.

[jackson_dem]

30. 3 points is meaningless due to margin of error

lol he is outspending her 3:1/4:1 on ads and you are clinging to him going up 1, her down 2 as sign of momentum? THAT is good news. :)

[BlueIdaho]

88. What's the margin of error on the Hillary up 6 poll? nt.

[Bigleaf]

12. You must be extremely dizzy.

:P

[slick8790]

19. Dude sounds like he'd try to sell a ceiling fan in a hurricane. n/t

[youknowmenotdlc]

87. I don't see how these poll trends are good for Hil

If Hillary wins PA by 5-10 points but Obama wins NC by 20+ points (just going by recent polls)doesn't that result in a wash?

I believe Hil has to win Pa by 20+ to even make a case for staying in.

[stray cat]

18. Clinton has been ahead by 20 points how is this bad for Obama?

[jackson_dem]

34. Where were you for Ohio?

Clinton was also ahead by 20 points in Ohio. Obama blitzed the airwaves and rapidly gained. Then, about the time Clinton began running ads although at a far lower rate than Obama, Obama stalled and things stabilized. This appears to be happening in Pennsylvania as well. What happened in the final week in Ohio (and Texas for that matter)? Clinton actually gained...

This isn't so much bad for Obama--he is still very much in striking distance--as it is good news for Clinton.

[apocalypsehow]

42. It's not, this OP just like to play games with numbers, and indulge in fairy tales.

n/t.

[AtomicKitten]

26. "Why is Clinton winning?"

She's not.

[PresidentObama]

29. LOL good point n/t

[AtomicKitten]

this is exhausting

I say we hole up in a bar til it's done. :)

[truebrit71]

37. ROFL!!!

:rofl:

[jackson_dem]

41. If you "believe" Obama is winning PA go ahead

You must also "believe" he will lead to veto proof majorities in both houses of Congress and win places like Kansas, Idaho, and Montana in November...

[AtomicKitten]

43. Hello! It doesn't matter. His delegate lead is insurmountable.

We're just waiting for you to do the math.

[jackson_dem]

60. He has 2,024?

[jgraz]

71. You Clintonites really need to learn the meaning of "insurmountable lead"

It doesn't mean the contest is "officially over". It just means that there is no reasonable way for Hillary to catch up. (yeah, I can't believe this still needs to be explained).

If you disagree that his lead is insurmountable, the burden is on you to explain how Hillary can possibly win the nomination. Oh, and in case you're unclear, "2024" is not an explanation.

[sniffa]

76. As a non-participant in this thread

it's still exhausting watching some respond to delusion.

[Perry Logan]

31. Once again, the prick of reality bursts the Obamite bubble.

[Bigleaf]

46. Yep. We're all devastated. Can't you tell? Things are getting really bad in Camp Obama.

:sarcasm:

[bowens43]

49. The reality is that Hill needed a HUGE win in PA and she isn't going to get it.

Stick a fork in her, the goose is cooked.

[rodeodance]

62. "Stick a fork in her, the goose is cooked"--are you advocating violence?

[Forkboy]

73. Are you batshit insane?

[jgraz]

77. You seriously don't know the answer to that question?

Seriously?

[Forkboy]

80. Sorry. I don't know what I was thinking.

:rofl:

[jackson_dem]

63. She needs a win. The bamites saying she needed a "huge win" said the same thing about OH/TX

[book_worm]

32. most of the polls except for Survey USA show Obama gaining

the question is if this particular Survey USA poll is a outlier or not. If not they are going against the grain of all the other polls and they will be vindicated--if not, they will have egg on their face. Time will tell.

[jackson_dem]

45. Rassmussen shows no gain, Quinn is within the margin of error

Strategic Vision will come out tomorrow and show the same thing Quinn did: a 3 point gain for Obama, again within the margin of error.

I agree and I personally think SU is an outlier. They are the only poll showing Clinton gaining and give her by far the largest margins.

[lefty from jersey]

50. Ed Rendell lurks

These polls do not take in the Ed Rendell factor. Ed is a "fixer" he will have the late Democrats voting early and often. This is Hillary's firewall. If she can not win big with Rendell fixing the votes in the cities, she is done. I think Rendell is up to the task. Obama should understand, he is from Cook County, they wrote the book.

[AX10]

102. Anytime HRC wins,

there is some kind of fraud, when Obama wins it's all "legitimate". This game you lefties have going is getting very old. :eyes:

There is nothing more corrupt than the Cook County Illinois Democrats (and Tom Delay of course).

[bowens43]

48. These numbers are devastating for hillary!!!! Thanks for posting!!

Hillary needed to win big in PA and NC. If these numbers hold true , it effectively knocks Hillary completely out of the running!!!

I'm surprised you posted this, I thought you were a Hillary Supporter!!

[jackson_dem]

66. Facts are facts. She is losing NC and I still posted it

You can't bury your head in the sand if your team is losing or in a close game. Is this what Obamites do when their sports team isn't winning big? ;)

[rodeodance]

57. REC

[kwenu]

65. I was ready to say well good for Hillary until I read your Bullshit commentary.

The PA race is hers to lose. Without it she is FINISHED!!! No such thing for Obama and that should tell you something.

[Forkboy]

74. She appeals to people who only share our ideals when it suits them.

:shrug:

[Bensthename]

78. Obama has made up almost 20 points in a few weeks. And still 2 weeks to go..

Hillary was supposed to win this by 20.. Doesnt look like that is going to happen. I still have my money on Obama.

[wowimthere]

79. Okay so the fix is in. Machine Politics as usual but you wouldn't think...

a Democrat would do this to a democrat in a presidential contest. How about this? Dems shouldn't complain when it gets done by a Republican. If the machine wasn't fixing for Clinton, Obama would have had this all sewed up. She can't be trusted because she is the establishment we've come to know. They all are. Rendell and the whole machine lot.

She can move that goal post back as much as she wants with the help of her cronies but come the GE I'm not gonna be responsible for putting another warmonger back in the white house.

[Tropics_Dude83]

82. Unlike you, Jackson_Dem...

I am tired of republican-lite democrats. I support the "democratic wing of the democratic party." Not the wing that has Barbara Bush say is like a "son to her." Not the wing that supported the Iraq war, welfare reform, or telecommunications reform. Not the wing of the party that caused devastation by voting for Reagan.

[jackson_dem]

85. So you want the rethugs to win every election for a generation?

That is what will happen without the "Reagan Democrats".

[superkia]

89. I cant believe she has lost so much ground, what did she do?

[ChimpersMcSmirkers]

92. I present, The Trend

Let me know when Barack's slope stops gaining on Hillary's

[anonymous171]

95. lol. She leads in Reagan democrats.

All I need to know.

[madrchsod]

101. she`s not going to get them...

barack will get a more than a lot of people think...i know 6 republicans that are voting for obama and these guys know he is black...ya have to know these guys to understand

[AX10]

96. K & R!

So far, SurveyUSA has been spot on! We will see if their track record continues.

[jefferson_dem]

103. Any objective, reasoned analysis shows PA is tightening.

Check out Ambinder - -

Why Is Pennsylvania Tightening?
08 Apr 2008 06:28 pm

Some thoughts:

1. Obama is on the air there now and his invisible army is organizing.

2. Clinton has been the major focus of the national press and the local press; the coverage has been unflattering; her mistakes are accumulating. There has been no corresponding attention on Obama's fitness for the office.

3. Obama spent five consecutive days in the state on a bus tour, and his campaign aggressively bracketed the visit with local news interviews and targeted local advertisements.

4., I don't like the phrase "natural tightening" because I think it's kind of dirty, but we've seen similar Obama "surges" in Ohio and California.

http://marcambinder.theatlantic.com/archives/2008/04/why_is_pennsylvania_tightening.php#comments