Zogby has had a spotty record but given this is in line with a number of other polls it is probably not an outlier.

Actually, this is a good time for Idiotic to pipe up that this is EXCELLENT NEWS!! FOR HILLARY!!! because Zogby has been terribly off this campaign season.

Actually Zogby has been bad but not quite as bad as people seem to think. They are above Rasmussen and CNN in SUSA's report card:

http://www.surveyusa.com/index.php/surveyusa-report-cards/

I was surprised.

I'm ready to start looking past the primary. Here is a "behind the scenes" look at Obama's foreign policy apparatus, and a good look at why he is different (in a very good way) from Hillary and the Republicans on foreign policy (and in how he operates in general):

http://thepersonalispolitical.tumblr.com/post/27610653

Don't trust these numbers, it will be close no matter what.

For the good of the party's chances in November, we need to wrap this up sooner rather than later. Clinton is already causing a lot of damage with her increasingly desperate tactics.

Obama partisans need to work the phonebanks and get to the caucuses!

I have this rising-sinking feeling in the pit of my stomach. Do I need a doctor? Leaning in very close to my computer screen, I can see on the Pollster.com graph for Texas that the yellow Obama line is perceptibly bent at the top. What does that mean?

As an Ombamanite, a Zogby poll is the worst news possible

Zogby is in the tank for Obama. His brother is an Obama superdelegate. His polls should come with a disclaimer.

Seriously, there's one questionable number on the Texas poll. Obama is winning women overall 47-45%. While I realize that Obama has been siphoning younger women away from Hillary, I'll believe that number when I see it.

I realize it's fashionable to slam and insult the performance of the Clinton campaign recently - but there's a few areas where they still excel. One of those is early voting. Early voting was a major reason Hillary won in California, New Jersey and Massachusetts. Zogby has Obama winning early voters in Texas 51-42%, representing 36% of the sampling. However, the most recent SurveyUSA poll from February 26th has Hillary winning them 51-46%, with early birds at 25%. One of those numbers is way off. I tend to trust SurveyUSA more . . . but if Zogby's number is right here, then Hillary's Alamo might be in trouble.

Eeep! An internal from Hilldawg's camp says she's up by 5 with a 4 point drop for Obama from Wed and she's threatening to sue over the caucus system. She's never going away!

Zogby should print his polling numbers on toilet paper.

Just saw this on CNN.com - Clinton campaign trying to lower expectations by saying Obama's campaign would need to win all 4 primaries by a big margin or "there's a problem"

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2008/02/29/clinton-campaign-obama-needs-to-sweep-march-4/

Is there a difference between this poll and other Zogby polls? When I heard it on the radio this morning it was announced as a Reuters/CSPAN/Houston Chronicle poll. Are they all like that? Or maybe this is like when there are Gallup polls and then the Gallup/USA Today polls...there seem to be very different results.

Maquis - a good question. I was worried about women rallying to her side in WI and that didn't happen so I'm hopeful. They can try playing the victim but I don't think it will play well at this stage of the race. I think the difference in NH is that people were really not ready to a) throw Hillary overboard so early or b) fully ready to embrace this young upstart of a candidate. Neither of those things seems to be true anymore. People seem to be clearly done with Hillary and Obama is no longer an unknown.

Independent Ben, that held true until WI, when most last-minute deciders went Obama. It's probably fair to say that we've no idea what's really going on anymore. Further, as is being reported, TX and OH are very different states - almost polar opposites.

I'm a big Obamaphile but always expect HRC to pull out a win - (1) because she and her peeps are ruthless and (2) it makes Obama wins all the sweeter. That said, I don't think TX will be that close. Though I'm living with the expectation, something - partly reports from family - make me think under-40 TX voters are going to bring it home for Obama.

OH, though, I expect to go to HRC. Still, Obama's trajectory in the OH polls is breathtaking. Just a few weeks ago, he was back by serious double-digits...

I used to do online polls for Zogby, as a responder, and he was not always correct. I want to know where this poll was done: by phone or on line, because there is a difference.
Zogby is supporting Obama, and is asking the Arab American to do so as well, saying Obama is closely aligned with the Arab community. That’s fine. That's OK. Nothing wrong with that at all. Obama is NOT a Muslim, NEVER has been, and in fact was known in Hawaii as Barry Obama, not Barak.
Anyone who thinks he is some kind of 'secret agent" for the Arab world is crazy. Obama is as homegrown as I am; he is running an historic race. I just wish it were a more honest race. But he has a little problem with situational ethics. He kinda sorta lives by the motto: Do what I say, not what I do.

Rezko is going on trial MONDAY, and Barak or Barry is going to be spending a lot of time trying to get away from that, ESPECIALLY that list of donors connected to Rezko that gave money to Obama.

Why? It's not just the $157k he had to give back, or the fact that a lot of these donors are now facing corruption and money laundering using campaigns as the wash.

It's that a LOT of these donors are SYRIAN NATIONALS. So what? So, Rezko is a Syrian National, still holding that passport. These are all Rezko clients, the ones who paid him money to get jobs or contracts with city hall.

For starters, that list is no doubt the "fact" that the people cling to when they wrongly call him a Muslim. It is a concern to Jewish voters when they see all these Syrian names giving all this cash to Obama. It calls into question Obama’s honesty, and YES, JUDGMENT.

So what does this say about Obama, the new messiah?

It calls into question his actual ethics: he KEPT this money until he was FORCED to admit he had taken it. He gave it back a little at a time, keeping as much as possible for as long as possible, with various stories about his connection to Rezko, how well he knew him, even telling Diane Sawyer that Rezko was a person he knew from "around" Chicago politics. He has never admitted his FINANCIAL connection to Rezko, and has never addressed those donors. He is so fast to call Clinton on her “judgment”. So fast to claim the brain trust here. But let’s not talk about HIS judgment on whom to take money from. Clinton is too much of a lady to talk about this. NOT ME. I’m talking about it because I worry about it.

Obama wrote a letter asking city hall to give Rezko the contract on those buildings in his State Senate District, on official stationary, which worked. Rezko got the job, and Obama’s former boss partnered with Rezko to rehab the project and make a lot of money. The work was shoddy, and Rezko didn’t pay the bills, like heat, and allowed the project to go to hell, in general.

Rezko allowed the tenants of those buildings go with out HEAT in the dead of winter, claiming he had no money to get the heat back on, while he held a lavish fundraiser with his new partner, and Obama’s former boss for Obama. Literally, the champagne flowed, the food was fantastic, and the tenants in HIS District froze.

The city finally stepped in to pay the heating bill. Obama? What did HE do for his people living in those districts?

NOTHING. His local Senate (State) office could not name anything specific he did for those people he represented. They suppose it was handled as any complaint would be. Ok. No heat in the Chicago winter, the building falling down,…………..hey, where’s the fire anyway? Barry is running for the US Senate, and he is BUSY. Just like his NATO oversight hearings: yes he took the job, but we need to EXCUSE him, because he is running for President, and he is BUSY.

If you doubt me, go look it up at the Chicago Sun Times web site, search "Rezko" and "Obama". This is what Obama fears, and his response, "ignoring" it all, is not a smart thing. I am certain the GOP 527 attack machine is already finishing up the ads. They are going to paint him as corrupt. And the “fact check” will be hard to DIS prove. They are going to question his “judgment”, and they will be right. All you have is your associations in politics, your good name, and Barry has dirt on his. Maybe rightly or maybe wrongly, but there it is.

Obama is perhaps setting up the trial coverage as more smear tactics from (fill in the blank). He will no doubt turn it around, and it remains to be seen if his adoring press will call him on this. Probably not. They all make me ashamed to watch them, all except for Dan Abrams at MSNBC and LOU DOBBS, (imagine THAT) who are calling the Press up short. For sure you will have the Black power structure on CNN calling this a race based attack. Oh, yes, the handy dandy “race” card they pull out when things get tough. They will bring out Oprah who will tell her book club to reject this. But THIS time it will be an old friend, the very respected and revered AG who went after Scooter Libby. It will be hard to call this a racial slur. It’s a federal trial.

So how does Barry deal with questions about his “experience?”

His message is clear: Give up, get in line, follow me, OR ELSE. Ask any Black politician supporting Clinton.

John Lewis?

This hero of the civil rights movement, who faced down dogs and hoses and beatings and jail, unafraid of the risk to life and limb, THAT John Lewis, is gone, replaced by an old man, too worried about the silly challenge from some crazy 30 year old minister for the seat Lewis holds, with a platform based on ONE issue: Lewis supports Clinton.

Had he stood up and said what CLINTON says every day: "the race is far from over. This is a democracy, and I do not intend to give in" he would have had a lot of support. Robo calls are not votes. They are threats. And Lewis CAVED. WOW! That is the TRUTH. He was worried he would LOOSE HIS SEAT, so he bailed on Clinton and ran like a chicken to Obama. He is mumbling about this and that, but the TRUTH is that he was not willing to stand up for the person he KNOWS is the BEST choice. Not anymore.

But let’s take a last look at the OLD John Lewis.

Those buildings are the slums mentioned in the debate that Clinton referenced, information she got from JOHN LEWIS. Lewis wanted her to go after Obama on that, because it speaks volumes about Obama's attention to the little details like helping his constituents, and his "judgment" on choosing his finance chairs for his Senate race, and who he takes money from. John Lewis is an excellent Congressman, Service is his name, and he cares deeply about his People, of which I am one. He would NEVER let HIS PEOPLE go without heat. He would NEVER get in the mud with a REZKO. NEVER. So I can see why he wanted this exposed.

Too bad he lost my vote.

Now, I support Clinton and I think she has FANTASTIC judgment. SHE did what Obama wants the Super Delegates to do:

She is the Senator from NEW YORK. She was a FRESHMAN SENATOR. SHE HAD TO FOLLOW HER VOTERS, THE ONES WHO SENT HER TO DC. Her people wanted her to vote YES. She looked at her voters, at what they wanted and VOTED ON THEIR BEHALF, AS THEY INSTRUCTED HER TO DO. She listened to COLIN POWEL, reviewed the “evidence” and voted the will of HER State. She was not alone. Maybe some of you agreed. So maybe YOUR judgment sucks too.

Of course, again Barry’s ethics are situational. If you are Black, and you support Clinton, YOU are wrong, and need to change your vote to Obama, the man who is NOT running on RACE, unless it works for him, because the WILL OF THE PEOPLE IS ALL THAT COUNTS.

If you are Clinton, and you voted on behalf of YOUR people, the wounded, grieving, bloody people of New York, to go after the people COLIN POWELL told us were the BAD GUYS, then you are a victim of bad “judgment”.

HEY! Barry, Barak, what ever you call your self today. I’m so on to you. Tell me again: how are you different from Bush? How is this change?