« Obama Radio Ad In Vermont Stars Patrick Leahy | Home | Report: Clinton Campaign May Try To Peel Away Obama's Pledged Delegates »
SurveyUSA: Hillary Up Five Points In Texas Primary
The Texas Democratic primary is officially a tight race. A new SurveyUSA poll shows the primary to be a dead heat, corroborating a CNN poll released yesterday. The numbers: Clinton 50%, Obama 45%.
Some analysis from SurveyUSA:
BUT: there is "give" in these numbers that must be mentioned in the same breath. Among Hispanic voters, Clinton leads 2:1. SurveyUSA estimates that Hispanics make-up 32% of Democratic primary voters in a Primary today. If Hispanics vote in larger numbers, Clinton's lead is larger than the 5 points shown here. If Hispanics vote in smaller numbers, Obama runs stronger than these numbers show.
Advertisement
Other than the number of Hispanics, the demographics of Democratic voters in Texas do not favor HRC. They are concentrated in the urban centers such as Houston and especially Dallas and Austin, where they are predominantly well educated and African-American. Any lead of hers in other parts of the state (probably concentrated in El Paso, San Antonio, and Beaumont) is unlikely to counteract this. After 2 more weeks I don't see how any lead of hers can hold up.
February 19, 2008 8:33 AM | Reply | Permalink
Even as an Obama supporter, I don't see 50-45 as a 'dead heat.' I'll agree that it does confirm that the race is tightening, and that with two weeks to go (especially with Obama's upward trend) it could go either way. Also, with the delegate distribution system, Obama has a better than average chance of coming away with the majority of the delegates.
My best guess at this point, is that Hillary wins the Primary, but Obama wins the Caucus and the Delegates.
February 19, 2008 8:34 AM | Reply | Permalink
Agreed. I think the popular vote in Texas could be a statistical tie or slight Hillary win, but Obama wins the delegate count. Austin, Houston and Dallas have more delegates than the border districts with larger Hispanic populations. It's a crappy system designed to "reward" districts for voting Democratic. Unfortunately for HRC, it's the system they have for this election.
We'll be spun dizzy after this one.
February 19, 2008 10:24 AM | Reply | Permalink
The real point is, she needs to kick his ass in both Texas and Ohio to even pretend to pull out of her death spiral...and she isn't going to be able to do it.
February 19, 2008 8:36 AM | Reply | Permalink
I would agree. Her whole strategy is about spinning two close wins in TX & OH into a miraculous comeback. If she can't win the popular vote in TX then it's a tie (assuming she still wins OH comfortably which isn't a given). And from here on out ties benefit Obama.
February 19, 2008 8:59 AM | Reply | Permalink
I'll agree with those commenters who've pointed out that none of this is meaningful before tonight's results.
February 19, 2008 9:07 AM | Reply | Permalink
Oh wow, look at the top of the screen! Hillary does better against McCain than Obama in FL, a key swing state. OMG! Time to get self-righteous. Hillary is MORE ELECTABLE than Obama! Right? Aren't polls what we go by for that proof, Obama supporters?
February 19, 2008 9:12 AM | Reply | Permalink
If poll after poll, in swing state after swing state, gave the same result, I think you'd have a point. I think there's a simple explanation for why Hillary would do better than Obama in Florida—she wants to seat their delegates.
I.e., I think it's likely that this poll is accurate (right now) and captures the general feeling of Floridians. Obama and all Democrats (if they want to win in November) are going to have to work hard to overcome this negative.
Why this poll captures your notice so strongly, of course, is that almost* every other poll has had the opposite result.
*The qualifier "almost" might not be necessary. I honestly don't know.
February 19, 2008 9:26 AM | Reply | Permalink
My point, really, was that it's ridiculous to point to these polls as proof of anything. The general election is sure to bring as many twists and turns as this primary one.
February 19, 2008 9:36 AM | Reply | Permalink
I'd say it's sort of like global warming: a single hot day doesn't prove it, any more than a single cold day disproves it. It's a combination of a lot of data points and the trend (or lack thereof).
February 19, 2008 10:22 AM | Reply | Permalink
Red states don't count - remember?
February 19, 2008 9:29 AM | Reply | Permalink
yes, she's doing obviously better than Obama against McCain in Florida, but she's still losing by a heavy margin
that is what the poll you're pointing at says
at the same time, all polls saying that Obama does better against McCain in certain states also say the following: Obama wins clearly (think 6-10 points) against McCain in all 4-5 surveyed states, and at the same time Hillary is losing clearly against McCain (which, as I said, is also happening in Florida)
February 19, 2008 10:46 AM | Reply | Permalink
I agree with you that it is a very large stretch to take the polls today as especially indicative of how the race will look in Nov. That said, what the poll you are citing says to me is that neither Clinton nor Obama stand much of a chance in FL (which is what I have been saying all along). She is "more electable" there only in the same way that an ice-cube is "more resistant" to the fires of hell than is a snowball. Both, however, will melt, just as both democrats will lose in FL. Neither candidate stands any chance vs McCain in the south. The trick to winning for us is to do well in the midwestern and western swing states, and right now Obama is polling better against McCain than is Clinton in all of those states.
February 19, 2008 10:52 AM | Reply | Permalink
I would care more about Hillary doing better than McCain in Florida if she was actually beating him in Florida. The fact that both Clinton and Obama lose to McCain and lose handily means the difference in margin in pretty irrelevant. Of course, that's assuming that you think these kinds of polls mean anything this far out, anyway.
February 19, 2008 9:30 AM | Reply | Permalink
People, it really helps to see the margin of error in each poll.
This SUSA poll? I believe the MOE is 3.9%. That means there really isn't a front-runner; it's a dead heat. If the candidates aren't separated by a gap larger than the MOE, you've got to consider it even. According to SUSA, the two candidates are within the margin of error in North, East, and Central Texas; Clinton is ahead in South and West Texas.
February 19, 2008 10:06 AM | Reply | Permalink
Isn't the mantra: "it's all about the delegates"
As such, simple polls are inadequate for the purpose of predicting outcomes which depend on said delegate counts. In particular, attention to the peculiarities/nuances/details of the local (Texas) system for allocating delegates is required. Since delegates are allocated based on past Democratic voting patterns and within districts, a credible argument is made (e.g. read "Clinton Up 49-41 in Texas Poll; Obama May Win More Delegates" at www.burntorangereport.com for an interesting analysis) that splitting hairs regarding who is ahead in statewide poll numbers in such a close race is essentially irrelevant from the perspective of choosing a leader according to the Byzantine "logic" of the DNC selection processes.
No flames regarding electoral college systems please - that is another discussion
February 19, 2008 10:42 AM | Reply | Permalink
in terms of delegates, 50-45 in Texas really means dead heat
and not just because of the margin of error
but the delegate distribution is weighted so that the districts which had more Democratic voters in previous elections get more delegates
and those districts seem to be tilted towards Obama
I can't say these rules are good or bad (there are arguments going both ways), but according to them, Texas is a draw right now
PS and even if it weren't like I said, Obama does not need to win Texas, he just needs to hold his ground; -5 sounds close enough
February 19, 2008 10:56 AM | Reply | Permalink
Oh wow, look at the top of the screen! Hillary does better against McCain than Obama in FL, a key swing state. OMG! Time to get self-righteous. Hillary is MORE ELECTABLE than Obama! Right? Aren't polls what we go by for that proof, Obama supporters?
Those numbers are from Rassmussen which has McCain beating Clinton in Colorado, Minnesota, Nevada, Oregon, and Pennsylvania, but Obama leading McCain in each of those states.
While SurveyUSA is out with a poll today showing McCain trouncing Clinton in Iowa while Obama trounces McCain in Iowa. Yesterday, SurveyUSA had the same results in Wisconsin.
What makes you think HRC with her 100% name recognition will be able to change this dynamic?
All you Clinton Kool Aid drinkers are going to lead the Dems straight into Dukakis territory.
February 19, 2008 10:44 AM | Reply | Permalink
If I'm Obama I'm absolutely giddy over this poll. First of all, given that Latinos have not voted in 2000, 2004 and 2006 elections heavily, there aren't many delegates at stake in the Southwest. So even if she gets a bump and large turnout of Latinos, at the end of the day it's not going to help her where it counts: pledged delegates. I wouldn't be surprised if we had another Nevada: she wins the popular vote and he picks up a few more pledged delegates than she does.
February 19, 2008 11:06 AM | Reply | Permalink
A win for Obama is a knockout blow, but in all practicality, a 50-45 split would likely end up being a draw or even a slight delegate lead for Obama.
HRC needs to win this state decisively and rout Obama in Ohio to have much of a chance.
I think she made a huge tactical error not throwing everything she had at Wisconsin, a win today would have done wonders in terms of halting Obama's momentum and the states demographics should have meant a very real chance at winning.
The problem is, assuming Obama wins, even very narrowly, the headlines will not be, as Chris Matthews suggested: "Hillary cuts lead, loses narrowly in WI."
It will be "10 in a row!"
And I don't think she can overcome this. He'll likely ride that momentum to a narrow win in Texas, and a 5-10 point loss in Ohio...which will lead many of her supporters to push for her to drop out.
February 19, 2008 11:27 AM | Reply | Permalink
The cross-tabs for the SUSA poll have independents comprising 11% of the Dem primary voters, but in the 2004 primary, they were 20%. If that holds true this year, that'd be enough to swing things Obama's way.
February 19, 2008 12:16 PM | Reply | Permalink