5 polls out today. Clinton leads by 10, 5, 6, 7 and trails by 3 in one

[jackson_dem]

This needs to be put out there because Obama's followers have cherry picked one poll to shield themselves from the inconvenient truth that he probably choked down the stretch in Pennsylvania and failed to close the deal. 10, 5, 6, 7. That is basically where he has been for three weeks, as well as where he was two months ago. Cherry pickers love to point out where he was in the beginning of March but ignore he had closed to within 4-6 in PA before choking away Texas and Ohio.

Suffolk U: H 52, O 42
Rasmussen: H 49, O 44
SUSA: H 50, O 44
PPP: O 49, H 46
Quinnipiac: H 51, O 44

The PPP poll is the only poll ever to show Obama above the 45% mark in Pennsylvania. It is likely an outlier.

[anonymous171]

1. She's supposed to win PA. Been that way since the beggining

The only point of Obama campaigning there was to avoid a blowout and to get Hillary to waste money defending her turf.

[jackson_dem]

4. Who loses when you outspend the other candidate 3:1 and get all the newspaper endorsements?

Obama has all the money and the entire MSM in his corner. He is supposed to be "inevitable" yet he can't close the deal?

[anonymous171]

7. 80% of Obama's donors have yet to max out. He has tons of money

Didn't you see the finance reports?

[jackson_dem]

10. Yes and she is in debt. Yet he still can't beat her!

[anonymous171]

16. He IS beating her. He could destroy her easily if he didn't want her supporters help in the GE

[jackson_dem]

21. He is going to lose tomorrow. How?

[anonymous171]

26. He is going to lose tommorow. That's a fact.

He just has to avoid a +20 point blowout.

[Honeycombe8]

120. Money isn't everything, as Romney and McCain can tell you. But when you're ...

the unknown running against the most well known woman in the world, you have to spend a lot more money just to familiarize people with who you are and what you stand for.

This is Clinton's territory. She will win, of course. But Obama's campaign's strategic spending of money and going around the state has slashed her 20% lead to half of what it was. That is an unbelievable feat.

If he loses by 8% or less, he will have won. Her campaign contributions will dry up. The superdelegates won't jump on her bandwagon. She needed to win HUGE in her territory. She will not, it seems.

Do you see how it is? I can assure you that she does.

[jenmito]

18. HAHAHAHAHA!!! 2-1, and that's ALL he has-cash. Hillary IS a Pennsylvanian (since she says so), has

the entire establishment behind her, and lots of people owe her favors! If she can't win by over 20 points, it's over. And she has to do it in EVERY REMAINING STATE! :rofl:

[jackson_dem]

23. When is the last time someone was outspent 3:1, got no MSM support and won?

[jenmito]

27. When your name is Clinton and the state is PA, you win, despite being outspend TWO to one.

Even Wolfson said it was 2-1.

[jackson_dem]

33. 3:1 overall. 2:1 over the past week or so

That is a cop out. You are saying Obama--the alleged greatest politician ever--is going to lose to a name? He had six weeks to win it and all the money in the world and the entire MSM, including all the newspaper endorsements, to help him do it.

[jenmito]

40. Whatever way you try to justify Hillary winning by only single digits, it doesn't wash. She was up

over 30 points early on! Hillary was raised in PA according to her! BOTH Clintons have DEEP roots and connections there. Money can't buy that type of support.

[jackson_dem]

59. It depends on how you cherry pick. Obama is now where he was 2 months ago

It depends on which point you cherry pick. February? March? January?

Her roots are in Scranton--home of the Casey dynasty which backs Obama.

[jenmito]

71. She was up 30 points months ago. Her roots and long-time connections trump money.

But you knew that-I hope.

[Exilednight]

94. Two months ago he was trailing Hillary in PA by 26 points. Where do you get 6? n/t

[jackson_dem]

107. That is where he was before he lost Ohio and Texas

He had cut it down to 4-6.

[Exilednight]

112. That would be more than two months ago, and he won Texas...........

Edit: Only one poll ever had him within 6 two months ago, all the rest had him behind by 15 or more.


Quinnipiac 02/21 - 02/25 506 LV 49 43 Clinton +6.0

Rasmussen 03/24 - 03/24 690 LV 49 39 Clinton +10.0

PPP (D) 03/15 - 03/16 597 LV 56 30 Clinton +26.0

Franklin & Marshall 03/11 - 03/16 294 LV 51 35 Clinton +16.0

Quinnipiac 03/10 - 03/16 1304 LV 53 41 Clinton +12.0

Rasmussen 03/12 - 03/12 697 LV 51 38 Clinton +13.0

SurveyUSA 03/08 - 03/10 608 LV 55 36 Clinton +19.0

Susquehanna 03/05 - 03/10 500 LV 45 31 Clinton +14.0

Strategic Vision (R) 03/07 - 03/09 600 LV 56 38 Clinton +18.0

Rasmussen 03/05 - 03/05 690 LV 52 37 Clinton +15.0

[jackson_dem]

117. Wrong. The two polls between WI and him losin on 3/4 had him down 4-6

Rasmussen 2/26/08 820 LV 46 42 12
Quinnipiac 2/21-25/08 506 LV 49 43 7

He "won" Texas? Apparently PA didn't get the memo about this netroots "fact".

[indimuse]

82. Yeah..BUT!! Obama and his campaign....along with

MSM 24/7 swiftboating circus attacking Madame Hillary..c'mon...that's what's happened!

[jenmito]

96. You forgot the "sarcasm" smiley.

:eyes:

[ihelpu2see]

108. ?No MSM support, what have you been watching? CNN especially Wolf and Sanchez

then ABC and I even watched Fox the other night with that polster and his tracking device where everyone gets to "Dial" their response while they watch everyone else respond, no pressure but honestly the "fair and balanced" channel is pulling hard for Clinton...

The only Obama channel is MSNBC...

[Zachstar]

106. Um when dealing with a firewall state you usually lose despite your best efforts.

This is not some blank slate state. There are many isms and other crap that had to be defeated before he could get this far.

Turn down the RPMs on the Spin machine.

[yourguide]

2. I can count 28 states your candidate has choked in.

Considering she was the presumptive front runner and all. Didn't she say this was all over on Super Tuesday?

[jackson_dem]

8. Wisconsin is one state

Losing isn't choking. Choking is rapidly gaining, even taking the lead (Texas) and then blowing it at the end. Wisconsin is the only place where she choked and even there she was expected to lose but just not by as much as she did.

[yourguide]

31. Iowa is another.

And every state she lost on super tuesday.

In her case losing IS choking, she had the lead everywhere as the presumptive front runner.

[TheDoorbellRang]

35. Wisconsin is one state. That is absolutely correct

Perhaps you missed this gentle reminder by grantcart:

SOME PEOPLE SEEMED TO HAVE A LITTLE SHORT TERM MEMORY PROBLEM

SO LETS REVIEW

IOWA +9%

SOUTH CAROLINA + 28%

UTAH + 18%

NORTH DAKOTA +24%

MISSOURI + 1%

MINNESOTA + 34%

KANSAS + 48%

ILLINOIS + 32%

IDAHO +63%

GEORGIA + 35%

DEMOCRATS +34%

DELAWARE + 11%

CONNECTICUT + 4%

ALASKA + 50%

ALABAMA + 14%

WASHINGTON + 37%

VIRGIN ISLANDS + 82%

NEBRASKA + 36%

LOUISIANA + 21%

MAINE + 19%

VIRGINIA + 19%

DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA +49%

WISCONSIN +17%

HAWAII +52%

VERMONT +20%

WYOMING + 23%

MISSISSIPPI +24%

[Exilednight]

95. Yep, and Hillary lost Texas. n/t

[Cosmocat]

52. Chocked down the stretch ??? Is that a joke ...

a candidate who is the wife of a popular two term president, and who has basically been running for the job for two decades, and as of this time last year as the presumptive, prohibitive, by far favorite, to cruise the nomination, by polling and punditry, was the clear favorite as recently as three months ago ...

And, now has no chance of winning either the delegate count or popular vote ...

And, her OPPONENT is chocking down the stretch ???

[Diamond Dog]

3. Since when did Obama need to 'close the deal' in Pennsylvania?

He only needed to knock down her twenty point lead by half. Which he's done, and potentially more than done.

[jackson_dem]

13. To clinch the nomination. He spent $3 million this week. Did he do it for fun?

[Diamond Dog]

24. He'll do that just fine in North Carolina, thank you.

Have a nice day!

[scheming daemons]

86. Because it is NOT winner take all.... every delegate counts....

He's fighting for individual delegate wins... not the state "overall".

[XemaSab]

20. Obama could win 47% in every remaining state plus 47% of the superdelegates

and still get the nomination.

A "loss" for him isn't that big a deal.

[jenmito]

5. Thanks for the polls! Buh bye, Hillary!

:hi:

[totodeinhere]

6. If you average out all of those polls, Clinton only wins by six points.

That would not be the blowout that she needs to stay viable. It would net her fewer than ten delegates. Obama should make that back and then some in North Carolina.

[harun]

75. That's what I see on the ground here in PA, HRC by 5-10% (n/t)

[PBS Poll-435]

9. It is likely to be 12-18 pts for Clinton.

And a perception boost.

Not bad.

[jackson_dem]

17. I doubt it. I would say 8-10 at best if the undecideds break for her as they tend to do

[cali]

11. Can you be honest about anything? Seriously, this is ridiculous

most Obama supporters here are predicting a hillary win, sweetie. And you are the DU KING of cherry picking, your majesty.

[PBS Poll-435]

15. Even Obama is predicting it now...

[AtomicKitten]

22. Tell the truth: His prediction is that he will do well

and that means all he has to do is keep her margins down, which it appears he will do quite nicely.

[PBS Poll-435]

29. You "Tell the Truth"

http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/nation/politics/bal-primary0421,0,5343158.story

[AtomicKitten]

49. Jeez, his camp has ALWAYS said they expect her to win Penn what with her once 30-pt lead.

He never said he would win Pennsylvania nor does he need to. All he has to do is keep her margins down and the rest is gravy.

[PBS Poll-435]

60. AK said "tell the truth." I did, and I provided the link to prove it

:crazy:

[jenmito]

53. What's WRONG with you?????

:wtf:

[Teaser]

121. bad gas

.

[jenmito]

25. NOW? He predicted it MONTHS ago! He also predicted today that he'll do better than most

people think! :rofl:

[PBS Poll-435]

32. Way to rally the troops..."We are gonna lose, but maybe not so bad?"

Right...

http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/nation/politics/bal-primary0421,0,5343158.story

[jenmito]

47. What don't you understand about the fact that Obama PREDICTED a loss in PA MONTHS ago???

So far, he's been right about his wins and losses in every state except Maine, where he predicted a loss but WON. :hi:

[PBS Poll-435]

63. Simply Orwellian.

[jenmito]

69. You obviously don't know what "Orwellian" means.

:hi:

[jackson_dem]

73. That is called lowering expectations. The fact is he is now where he was 2 months ago in PA

All his spending spree did in 6 weeks was to make up when he lost after losing Texas and Ohio.

[jenmito]

91. AGAIN-He PREDICTED he would lose MONTHS ago. His sheet of predictions was attached to another

memo and reporters got a hold of it. He predicted every state correctly except Maine, which he predicted he'd lose but he won. And he WON TX, BTW.

[sniffa]

37. Very true, HOWEVER

Why is he constantly being fed on threads like these? :shrug:

[cali]

54. I don't know. I plead guilty to feeding his hungry maw.

It's just the Baghdad Bobs and Bobettes, are irresistable.

[PBS Poll-435]

97. ...

:shrug: :woohoo: :shrug: :woohoo:

[XemaSab]

12. Here's the deal: I am not in denial about the fact that Hillary will probably win tomorrow

I think she's going to win by single-digits though.

I'm even going to go so far as to say by prediction of Hillary by 8 points may be too wide.

In order to gain ground, however, Hillary needs to win Pennsylvania and all the other states by a MUCH wider margin than even the 10 points predicted in the most favorable poll above.

A win that narrow will only increase the amount she has to win by in all the remaining states, many of which are very unfavorable to her.

I think it's the Clinton supporters who are in denial here.

[Upton]

14. The only ones who choked down the stretch

was your Phoenix Suns on Saturday. As for the Pa. primary, Hillary wins by 10%, she'll gain about 9 delegates on Obama, big deal.

http://www.mydd.com/story/2008/3/12/17239/2856

[jackson_dem]

28. How many superdelegates will she gain by shutting Obama out in the key big states?

Obama supporters act as if superdelegates don't exist.

The Suns lost in double OT on the road against the defending champs. That is not too shabby. What Obama did is equivalent to playing a game with the other team being limited to 5 players the entire game and still losing.

[anonymous171]

30. She's winning because the establishment is behind her.

Obama can get them behind him in the GE easily. Rendell even said he could win PA.

[BeyondGeography]

45. Obama's up 3-1 in a 7 games series

after she makes it 3-2 tomorrow, winning by less than she needs to, the series will be decided on pledged delegates.

Guess who wins?

[jackson_dem]

55. Why doesn't Obama "know" this? Will he waste time campaigning against her in IN?

Why doesn't he begin the general election campaign since it is over?

[onenote]

76. why is it a "waste" of time to campaign?

[Name removed]

48. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[onenote]

74. how many has she gained so far?

Seem like her lead in SDs has been shrinking, despite her alleged dominance in "key big states"

Or am I wrong about that?

[rodeodance]

83. Hillary picked up FOUR new SD's last week. --ck her website.

[onenote]

116. Actually I thought she picked up six. And Obama picked up seven

Reality is hard for you, I realize. But try it. Try the fact that since the week before the Ohio and Texas primaries -- the primaries that supposedly turned the tide back towards HRC -- her lead in superdelegates has shrunk from 47 to 25.

http://demconwatch.blogspot.com/2008/02/superdelegate-history-tracker.html

Facts. Darn darn facts.

[gcomeau]

19. Hate to break this to you...

...but we like ALL those polls. ANY of those margins are bad news for Clinton.

I know this doesn't get broadcast into the world you apparently live in, but Hillary needs something like 25 point wins in all the remaining states just to catch up with Obama. And Pennsylvania was one of the very, very few states where that even looked possible, let alone likely. And it clearly isn't happening.

[gcomeau]

87. Also...

...hearing jackson_dem of all people complain about cherry picking polls almost caused me to fall right out of my chair laughing. That's almost all you've been doing on this board for weeks.

[tabasco]

34. I don't understand your point.

What do you mean by "close the deal?"

PA is one state out of fifty.

[anonymous171]

39. Doesn't get the 50 state strategy, obviously.

They've been indoctrinated by Clinton and her 11 state strategy.

[jackson_dem]

42. The only prez candidate to run a 50 state strategy was Nixon in 1960

How did that work out?

[Diamond Dog]

46. Actually, very well. Nixon was within a million votes of Kennedy.

He also suspected - probably erroneously - that he lost to voter fraud.

[jackson_dem]

51. That may have been moot if he spent the closing days in Illinois instead of making a trip to Alaska!

[Diamond Dog]

58. And your point is still moot, so stop trying to change it.

The fifty-state strategy has no appreciable negative effects, and worked pretty well for Nixon, who wasn't nearly so popular in '60 as Obama is in '08.

No more distractions.

[jackson_dem]

62. Nixon in 1960 wasn't as popular as Obama in 2008?

What evidence is that based on? The "netroots" love affair with him?

The 50 state strategy is idiotic for a presidential campaign. Why do you think Nixon didn't do the same thing in 1968? He had spent time in the swing states he probably would have won.

[Diamond Dog]

65. The fact that about half of the liberal 'Rockefeller' Republicans voted for Kennedy in '6-.

And that Eisenhower made some pretty stinging public remarks about his distaste for Nixon which likely justified that.

[jackson_dem]

68. He lost by less than 1% at a time when Dems greatly outnumbered rethugs

He also ran against the charismatic JFK, who Obama is compared to. Nixon had no charisma.

[Diamond Dog]

72. Alright, so we agree. What's your point again?

Nixon lost, not because of the fifty-state strategy, but because he was a douche. And a douche like Nixon/McCain always loses against a charismatic individual like Kennedy/Obama. But despite Nixon's personality and inter-party problems, he still brought it to within a million thanks to the fifty-state strategy.

[jackson_dem]

77. That is very rose-colored at best

He lost in part due to his 50 state campaign. Charisma can only go so far as JFK proved. Given his charisma and the huge Dem advantage in party ID JFK should have won comfortably. That fact that he didn't showed that JFK the candidate was flawed. One problem he had was a lot of people voted against him at the last minute due to his religion. His campaign expected him to win comfortably but that did not factor in the last minute bigot defections to Nixon.

The point is simple: a 50 state strategy is foolish for a presidential campaign and that is why no one has used it since Nixon.

[Diamond Dog]

81. No; it shows that the fifty-state strategy worked.

Very few Republicans in 1960 thought Nixon was a worthwhile candidate. He was perceived to be a furrow-browed career politician who couldn't help but insert his foot in his mouth every time he opened it. He further helped to alienate the liberal wing of the Republican Party through playing up Rockefeller's sex 'scandal'. He won the nomination but lost the Presidency for precisely the reason that Clinton would if she were to miraculously win it - nobody can stand her.

And yet, despite his issues, he went on to close the gap to within a million, thanks to the fifty-state strategy. To try to spin what is frankly an impressive defeat into somehow discrediting the fifty-state strategy is intellectually dishonest. It's also nonsensical.

[rodeodance]

88. Except Dean and Obama say that MI and FL don't count

[Diamond Dog]

90. So did Clinton when she agreed to the DNC schedule. n/t

[jackson_dem]

41. Had he won Texas or Ohio it would have been over. If he wins tomorrow it will be over

It seems he can't close the deal with Democratic voters. Buyer's remorse? This will mean he will have lost Texas, Ohio, Rhode Island, and Pennsylvania since March. He won three states during this time but one was a caucus with almost no turnout. When people are allowed equal access to voting Obama loses.

[XemaSab]

56. How exactly did Obama "lose" Texas?

IIRC, he got more delegates than she did...

[jackson_dem]

64. Ask him. Why is he fighting in PA instead of running in the general election?

He lost by over 100,000 votes. Had he won Clinton would have been out the next day. Instead he is forced to unleash a flurry of last minute attacks to try to do in Pennsylvania what he failed to do in Texas and Ohio (remember that all he needed was to win one): close the deal.

[Justitia]

67. He didn't. Obama won TX: Obama - 99, Hillary - 94 -eom

[jackson_dem]

78. Oh really? So Obama won the nomination on 3/5 when Clinton was forced to quit?

[Justitia]

84. I have no idea what crazy thing you are talking about. I posted the winning delegate #s in TX. -nt

[onenote]

79. can you explain why there was no "equal access" to voters in VT and Mississippi?

Since that's what you are asserting.

[jackson_dem]

103. VT and MS were legit elections

[book_worm]

36. Great! Obama's made big strides forward.

[GoesTo11]

38. You forgot Clinton's internal poll +11

Looks like Clinton by between 5 and 10. But with a wide margin of error (from Obama +2 to Clinton +13 would probably be a 95% confidence interval).

[jackson_dem]

43. Thanks. Where did you read about that?

I wonder what Obama's internal polling is showing. He has went very negative lately so that suggests he is desperate.

[Diamond Dog]

50. "Very negative"? Relative to *what*? n/t

[thevoiceofreason]

44. Gonna be quite a tussle. I can't wait.

I like the sport of it all. I've sworn to not get riled up by the he said/she said anymore.

[Milo_Bloom]

57. Anything less than 20 is the official end of Clinton's campaign.

[NJmaverick]

61. If your candidate can't win by double digits in a state that she grew up in

and has the perfect demographics, she is not a suitable to run in the GE

[jackson_dem]

66. Name the last Dem front runner to outspend his rival 3:1 and still lose a major contest

[NJmaverick]

70. Actually it was much closer to 2:1- 2.3:1 to be exact

Still PA is whiter, older and more female than the rest of the Country. So it is hardly representative of the Country and it's certainly ideal for Hillary.

[JackORoses]

92. name the last Dem Nominee who couldn't even pay their bills.

Much less win more delegates, votes, states, etc. etc.

[Hippo_Tron]

113. Name the last frontrunner whose remaining opponent was a former first lady

[rodeodance]

80. And Hillary picked up FOUR new SD's last week***********************

[BlueIdaho]

85. With a 10% victory

What is HRC's net delegate gain in the last large state primary left in the season?

Answer - not enough.

[The Stranger]

89. It is all over but the crying. We need to thank Hillary and send her on her way.

It is over for her, now and forever.

Amen.

[Independent-Voter]

93. Wasn't Veruca up 25% not 4 weeks ago? What happened?

[jackson_dem]

101. Obama was down 4-6 points 8-9 weeks ago. He couldn't gain anything with all his $$$ and the MSM?

[Independent-Voter]

122. Bullshit - EVERY poll had her up at least 15-20% in Pennsylvania

It's filled with the ignorant hicks that are her base afterall.

[malik flavors]

98. Why do so many people always respond to this dude's threads? Haha, seems strange to me.

[PBS Poll-435]

99. He usually backs up what he says. And...

Although it may be slanted toward his candidate, his analysis is sometimes fascinating.

[RiverStone]

100. If she wins by 6-7%, the finish line even gets more distant

It would barely make a dent in Obama's delegate lead, and now she would have even less time and numbers to work with.

Obama's win in N.C. will cancel out PA and another close race in Indiana keeps her equally distant (on May 6th) with even less time.

What is her end game? But have you not answered and been asked this 1000X's already???

Staying just as far back, not gaining or losing = a certain Hillary loss.

Unless she talks the SuperD's into a coup.

[jackson_dem]

102. Her only path is through the supers

Right now she has to close the gap in pd's, capture momentum, win the popular vote and create buyer's remorse among Dems about Obama. This is unlikely but I would give her a 20% shot.

[kwenu]

104. I love the accusation about cherry picking. That's Pot, Kettle, Black for sure.

Let's agree that the only PA poll that matters at this point is the official election one tomorrow.

Then we'll sit back and watch Hillary and her supporters struggle to make her campaign seem far more relevant than it really is at this point.

[jackson_dem]

109. How do you cherry pick polls if you post all 5?

:crazy:

[kwenu]

114. You're the one who made the accusation. Go back and read your own OP.

[CakeGrrl]

105. Blah blah "close the deal" blah blah

Is it therapeutic to keep repeating this to yourself?

She was always supposed to win PA. BIG.

Obama has closed the gap. That's a good thing for him. This is what his money is FOR. The closer he gets, the more even the delegate split and that means NO GAIN for HRC.

He's forcing her to pull out all the stops to maintain a lead, and it's forcing her campaign further into the financial red. That's a win for Obama.

She's so financially strapped, he can put her away in NC and make a good run at an IN win. After that, she's realistically not going to catch him.

[jackson_dem]

110. Going from down 4-6 to being down 6-7 in 2 months is a great feat!

[Diamond Dog]

115. Yeah, man! A 1-3 percent drop is fucking incredible!

Pass me the bong, please, I'd like a hit.

[jackson_dem]

118. Apparently it is. I read it on the netroots! He has made a great march from -4/6 to -6/7!

And it only took him boatloads of $$$ to do it!

[Zachstar]

111. jackson_dem you can spin all you want. It will not change the simple fact.

Clinton expected a short term win. (Do you not remember the "Wrapped up by Super Tuesday?"

Obama set up for the long haul.

Now he has more delegates MORE money. More grassroots support, More net support, More Donors, FAR less donors maxed out, etc...

Yes he will likely not win. And I know you likely have 100 talking points ready to spring when she wins by 1 point or whatever. Yet that changes nothing.

It is all about the warchest. And while Clinton will use her speech to ask for new donors. Obama supporters will be donating as well adding to an already gigantic warchest going into May.

If you have to start spinning inside the month of Hillary Clinton (Several addon superdelegates, endorsements, Elton John etc...) You get my point. It is ALL FAIL

So go ahead. Continue to crap on Obama. Continue to encourage people to donate to his campaign by alienating his supporters with your crap. You mise well put the Obama Donate button in your sig for all the good you are doing.

[jackson_dem]

119. New poll: Clinton 49%, Obama 39% (Insider Advantage)

http://www.southernpoliticalreport.com/storylink_421_351.aspx

:thumbsup: