Poll Sheds Light On Impact Wright Is Having On Obama
The new NBC/WSJ survey has some interesting new polling of registered voters on the Wright controversy, finding that it's been a mixed bag for Obama:
On that issue specifically, 32% of folks said he "sufficiently addressed the issue," while 26% of those folks believe he needs to address the Wright controversy further; 31% of voters surveyed did not see the speech or had no opinion. Interestingly, of those voters who said they saw the speech, 47% said Obama sufficiently addressed the Wright issue while 37% said he needs to address it further. Among whites, 45% were satisfied with Obama's explanation, 38% were not; Among blacks, 67% said the speech was sufficient while 25% want him to address it further.
But...
Overall, 55% of voters told us that they were "disturbed" by the Rev. Jeremiah Wright videos that circulated so widely on cable TV and the Internet.
Obama's numbers did fall slightly among Republicans, but he remains considerably more competitive among independents than Hillary does.
And while his positive rating fell only slightly in the past two weeks, to 49%, Hillary's fell further, dropping down to 37%, its lowest in this poll since March of 2001.
Meanwhile, in the national match-up, the two are tied at 45%.
Advertisement

Comments (132)
Overall, 55% of voters told us that they were "disturbed" by the Rev. Jeremiah Wright videos that circulated so widely on cable TV and the Internet.
Melanie, pass me the smelling salts. Hurry! That horrible *man* is on TV again. I can't believe they let this Reverend Wright walk around loose! He's a menace! It's all too much... {faint}
March 26, 2008 7:08 PM | Reply | Permalink
As time moves on and the stupid Wright fiasco fades from memory his numbers will be completely back to normal. Maybe even better, who knows. Her ratings aren't likely to improve any though.
Somehow should explain to Hillary the concept of mutually assured destruction, especially against someone so adept at countering attacks.
March 26, 2008 7:11 PM | Reply | Permalink
And while his positive rating fell only slightly in the past two weeks, to 49%, Hillary's fell further, dropping down to 37%, its lowest in this poll since March of 2001.
Wait, what? That's really interesting, I wonder why it's not being reported more widely. What was Clinton at in the previous poll?
Why would the last two weeks have been *more* damaging for Clinton than Obama? Could that be fallout from the Ferraro thing? Is it some sort of backlash, kind of like how media lambasting of Clinton right before NH may have actually hurt Obama because the smearing only made voters sympathetic to Clinton? Is the whole thing unrelated to scandal and more about Clinton's diminishing perceived chances? What's going on here?
March 26, 2008 7:13 PM | Reply | Permalink
yes 37 percent and this was before the media picked up the Bosnia video.
March 26, 2008 7:20 PM | Reply | Permalink
People are starting to see through her charade around her viability towards achieving the nomination. Her negative campaigning is turning people off. And those that may have been on the fence are simply growing sick of her.
March 26, 2008 8:20 PM | Reply | Permalink
No kidding! Talk about burying the lede!
"Interesting internals about Wright" be damned -- Obama's positives are basically unmoved after the fiasco, while Clinton's are down 8 points.
March 26, 2008 8:59 PM | Reply | Permalink
Idiotic, please respond.
Thanks,
Hoost
March 26, 2008 7:14 PM | Reply | Permalink
Idiotic must be asleep. I'll do it for him: DRINK MORE KOOL-AID!!! TASTES GREAT!!! GOD-DAMN AMERICA!!!
There. Feel better now?
March 26, 2008 11:06 PM | Reply | Permalink
Once again the Clinton Talking Points Memo seems to soft pedal any good news for Obama.
Electability, Obama ahead of McCain, Clinton behind McCain.
From Chuck Todd:
http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2008/03/26/821438.aspx
"And he still sports a net-positive personal rating of 49-32, which is down only slightly from two weeks ago when it was 51-28. Again, the biggest shift in those negative numbers were among Republicans.
On one of the most critical questions we've been tracking for a few months, Obama showed resilience. When asked if the three presidential candidates could be successful in uniting the country if they were elected president, 60% of all voters believed Obama could be successful at doing this, 58% of all voters said McCain could unite the country while only 46% of voters said the same about Clinton. All three candidates saw dips on this issue, by the way. In January, 67% thought Obama could unite the country; 68% thought McCain could do it; and 55% said Clinton would be able to pull it off.
The fact they all three dropped equally in the last three months is a sign that the campaign is becoming more ideological and partisan.
In the head-to-head matchups, there weren't huge shifts in the numbers with Obama and Clinton dead even at 45% in the national Democratic primary matchup (a slight increase for Obama from early March). In the general-election matchups, Obama led McCain by 2 points and McCain led Clinton by 2 points; all margin of error results and nothing to get too excited over.
.....
Why? Because among Obama voters, Clinton has a net-negative personal rating (35-43) while Clinton voters have a net-positive view of Obama (50-29). Taken together, this appears to be evidence that Obama, intially, should have the easier time uniting the party than Clinton.
Considering the doom-and-gloom some predicted for Obama with regard to the Wright controversy, the overall tenor of the electorate appears to still be favorable for him."
March 26, 2008 7:18 PM | Reply | Permalink
THE TEXAS DEMOCRATIC PARTY SAID THEY WILL NOT CLAIM A CAUCUS WINNER UNTIL MARCH 29TH, EVEN THOUGH MOST NEWS CHANNELS HAVE.... THEY SAID THAT THE RESULTS ARE UNOFFICIAL THAT WERE GIVEN TO THE NEW CHANNELS.
OUT OF THE 31 DISTRICTS THAT HAVE VOTED ONLY 42% OF THE VOTES HAVE BEEN COUNTED... OBAMA IS HEAD WITH A 14 POINT LEAD... OBAMA: 57% TO CLINTON: 43%....
OBAMA LEADS IN 21 DISTRICTS TO CLINTON'S 10 DISTRICTS... HOWEVER THEY SAID THINGS COULD CHANGE BECAUSE EACH DISTRICT HAS REPORTED UNDER 50% OF THE VOTES.... AND THERE HAVE BEEN SOME VOTES REMOVED AFTER SEEING THAT SOME VOTED MORE THAN ONCE.....
ALSO IT WAS STATED THAT EVEN IF OBAMA WINS THE CAUCUS DOES NOT MEAN THAT HE WILL GET THE MOST DELEGATES.
I AM SO LOOKING FORWARD TO THE OFFICIAL RESULTS ON MARCH 29TH....LETS KEEP OUR FINGERS CROSS:)
i found this above info. on the hillary clinton blog website..... i totally agree with it.
March 26, 2008 7:19 PM | Reply | Permalink
Was the original off of Hillary's website in all caps too? She is pretty annoying, I wouldn't doubt it.
March 26, 2008 7:36 PM | Reply | Permalink
HC08 is becoming progressively more unhinged week by week. Did Hillary leaflet on Prozac bottles or what? I mean, strong support for a candidate is great and all, but some of her supporters seem really batty.
March 27, 2008 4:30 AM | Reply | Permalink
my boss is an ALLCAPSer. I can't read it without going batty. If you do a translation I will read it.
March 26, 2008 8:37 PM | Reply | Permalink
Translation:
The Genleman from Illinois is kicking the snot out of New York's Junior Senator in the Texas Caucus, but things could change if they can get some more lawyers...
March 27, 2008 1:11 AM | Reply | Permalink
What about Bosnia impact on HRC? C'mon. She's net negative now in favorables. Doesn't that deserve a block quote??
The big news in the poll is that Obama was only hurt slightly by Wright whereas Clinton is currently in freefall over Bosnia. I realize the poll was during the worst period for her, but it's there.
March 26, 2008 7:20 PM | Reply | Permalink
A more interesting fact....
This same polling has Obama ahead of McCain by 2, and Hillary BEHIND McCain by 3. Interesting. Very interetsing.
Chuck Todd was hysterical on MSNBC just now...discussing how they did this polling Monday and Tuesday to see how badly Obama had been hurt by Wright....only to find out Hillary is the one who was hurt. Whoopsie!
Another interetsing discussion point... they discoverd that most of Obama's negatives were heavily located in older deep southern Democratic areas..... places Democrats never win anyway....
But Obama didn't lose ANY ground in the Midwest, Northeast, Northwest, Southwest and West.
More importantly, Hillary's favorables are in the gutter, with little chance for redemption. Obama's fairly intact!
Let's sum this up in language that alllllll people can understand.
Obama is rubber, Clinton is glue... whatever you bounces off of him and sticks to you.
WHOOP WHOOP!
GOOOOOOOOOOOOOOBAMA! 2008
March 26, 2008 7:25 PM | Reply | Permalink
Hillary's positive rating fell 8 points in two weeks.
Last poll had Hillary leading by 4 points. Now it is tied at 45. Obama beats McCain by 2; Hillary loses by 2 (all within the MOE).
Obama survived with minimal damage - mostly from Republicans. Hillary's positives plummet.
Heh.
Karmic justice?
March 26, 2008 7:26 PM | Reply | Permalink
That Poll Sheds Light On Impact Sinbad Is Having On Hillary Rambo Clinton, The Heroine of Tuzla!!!!
March 26, 2008 7:32 PM | Reply | Permalink
Clin/Bad '08!!!
March 26, 2008 7:59 PM | Reply | Permalink
Way to go Hillary. Nice way to shoot yourself in the foot.
At what point does her unwillingness to cope with reality call into question her overall fitness?
March 27, 2008 4:33 AM | Reply | Permalink
You know Wright is not a 30 or 40 year old fiery black guy starting a radical movement. He's 80 years old. Just how much can you pile on an old man without getting some backlash from those not convinced that there's much authentic in all the supposed shock and outrage.
March 26, 2008 7:27 PM | Reply | Permalink
Wright was born in 1941, so, setting aside Hillary campaign math magic, that would make Wright about 66-67 years old.
March 26, 2008 10:06 PM | Reply | Permalink
I'm confused. I've been assured by many HRC supporters, and Sean Hannity, that the Wright situation has made Obama completely unelectable.
They seem quite certain when they tell me this. I don't understand why they would lead me astray on this matter...
March 26, 2008 7:30 PM | Reply | Permalink
Even if Obama's negatives go up, people are still going to "hold their nose" and vote for him if the alternative is John "bomb bomb bomb, bomb bomb Iran" McCain.
I mean come on. Once the general election rolls around, people are not going to vote for John "10,000 years in Iraq" anymore in November then they would have in January.
March 26, 2008 7:31 PM | Reply | Permalink
Greg, new Obama memo, please post this, it's quite important.
http://thepage.time.com/obama-camp-memo-on-clintons-exaggerations-in-her-domestic-record/
March 26, 2008 7:31 PM | Reply | Permalink
Fabulous! Obama is intellectually superior. Clear argument. Hillary is sounding not so lately.
March 26, 2008 7:49 PM | Reply | Permalink
It would be nice if Obama's memos received 1/2 of the attention every uttering of Camp Clinton does in this section of TPM.
March 26, 2008 8:25 PM | Reply | Permalink
As Chuck Todd said on the Teevee, if THIS is what happens to Obama's poll numbers after the two worst weeks of the campaign for him in terms of media coverage, they should feel pretty good about their chances right now
March 26, 2008 7:32 PM | Reply | Permalink
People really do want change.
Is Hillary going to be forced to go positive? Maybe tell the truth a bit more? Release her tax returns? Stop sending threatening letters to other Dems? The coming week should be interesting after this poll.
March 26, 2008 7:34 PM | Reply | Permalink
Surrender Hillary
March 26, 2008 7:35 PM | Reply | Permalink
I wrote a blog recently about this very matter...folks out there need a little more time to digest all this stuff they've seen about Rev. Wright. Several people I know who were perfectly fine about Obama prior to the "Wright flap" are disturbed by the language and the images they see on YouTube and TV reports.
In my estimation, though, this is where the long-delayed PA primary has an upside: Obama has TIME to make a further case for himself and sooth their fears. Deep down, I think these voters WANT to believe in him, but they don't know as much about him as they do Clinton, and they hope to goodness he's what he says he is - that he's not a radical in any way, shape or form but is, on the contrary, a very thoughtful and talented communicator who can bring parties together and get the good things we need done in Congress.
So if we can all bear up under the stress of waiting for April's PA primary to come around - and if Senator Obama can sigh (deeply, if need be) and answer yet a few more questions about both his connections to Rev. Wright and his differences with Rev. Wright, I think we'll see his polling numbers start rising again.
Patience...
March 26, 2008 7:36 PM | Reply | Permalink
Hillary's fell further, dropping down to 37%, its lowest in this poll since March of 2001.
Um ... isn't this the real story here?
March 26, 2008 7:37 PM | Reply | Permalink
Yes, it is. It marks a descent that completely belies her claim of electability (a claim she trumpets despite having not proven her electability in actual primary/caucus voting).
March 26, 2008 8:30 PM | Reply | Permalink
Karma, indeed.
Greg left out the part where Obama is ahead of McCain by 2 and She's behind McCain by 2.
No surprise.
March 26, 2008 7:37 PM | Reply | Permalink
Overall, 55% of voters told us that they were "disturbed" by the Rev. Jeremiah Wright videos that circulated so widely on cable TV and the Internet.
Well, hell, "disturbed" is a vague word. I thought some of the things he said were stupid, but I was raised Catholic, and Wright has a long way to go before he disturbs me as much as Benny Ratzinger does on an almost monthly basis.
And Wright's words have no bearing on my support for Obama. I didn't blame Kerry for the varied and multiple woes of the Catholic Church, nor did I blame Clinton or Gore for the oddities regularly put on display by Baptists. And I like Quakers, but I hate Nixon.
Next.
March 26, 2008 7:39 PM | Reply | Permalink
It is pathetic and a bit telling for the Obama Cult that so many folks want to use this as a opportunity to vent their prejudices against the Catholic Church and other organized religious groups. While I am not as religious as my wife and some of our friends, I can tell you that trashing other religions to distract from Obama's racist and hate-America church won't win you many, if any supporters.
March 26, 2008 8:00 PM | Reply | Permalink
Saying it's a "racist and hate-America chruch" is just as much a generalization as saying the Catholic church is a bunch of pedophiles or Baptists are a bunch of Fundamenalist crazies. And saying the Catholic church has "varied and multiple woes" isnt exactly bashing it, its stating the truth.
March 26, 2008 8:27 PM | Reply | Permalink
Dude, the Pilgrims => Congregationalists => United Church of Christ.
It's hardly a fringe, hate-America church. It's been here a while.
March 26, 2008 8:37 PM | Reply | Permalink
Funny, the pastor to the church the Clinton's attended while they were in the White House say the exact opposite of Obama's church than you do.
So you are suggesting that Oprah Winfrey attends a racist church?
Are you suggesting that the pastor of Clinton's church when they lived int he White House is a liar?
So you are saying that the United Church of Christ is a racist denomination?
March 26, 2008 9:04 PM | Reply | Permalink
I was going to respond to your post, but reading through the thread I see you're even less worth responding to than your response to my post suggested.
March 26, 2008 11:54 PM | Reply | Permalink
The less you post, the better life is.
March 27, 2008 1:17 AM | Reply | Permalink
As Chuck Todd said on the Teevee, if THIS is what happens to Obama's poll numbers after the two worst weeks of the campaign for him in terms of media coverage, they should feel pretty good about their chances right now
O I know I do.
and answer yet a few more questions about both his connections to Rev. Wright and his differences with Rev. Wright, I think we'll see his polling numbers start rising again.
I honestly think he's said everything that needs to be said. Any "problems" people are having are due to their total ignorance about black liberation theology. If the ladies will just untwist their pearls, I think they'll find that they are all perfectly safe from the good reverend and his flock.
March 26, 2008 7:43 PM | Reply | Permalink
That's the very thing Obama would pooh-pooh in his efforts to reach across the aisle...you need to "roll" with this reaction, as he can so well do, and begin to believe again in HIS ability to reach even these folks. He has it in him, so why not you?
March 26, 2008 8:14 PM | Reply | Permalink
okay here is an interesting thing about this poll ..
"In addition, we oversampled African-Americans in order to get a more reliable cross-tab on many of the questions we asked in this poll regarding Sen. Barack Obama's speech on race and overall response to last week's Rev. Jeremiah Wright dustup"
This just throws the whole polling into a BIG QUESTION MARK. how can you expect to get a fair polling data when one demography is so tilted against 1 candidate.
ow wait - it's NBC news, THE pro-obama broadcast network.
March 26, 2008 7:52 PM | Reply | Permalink
Nope. They sampled additional African-Americans in order to get more accurate numbers for that group on particular questions, but they normalized the numbers of AAs in the overall so that there was no over-representation. Sorry.
March 26, 2008 8:33 PM | Reply | Permalink
So, uh, people don't like Hillary? Now why would that be?
March 26, 2008 7:55 PM | Reply | Permalink
OK:
Given the choice between 2 headlines, why choose this one (impact of Wright)?
Is it not significant that Clinton came out of the week worse off than Obama?? (hmmm...as David Brooks suggested)?
I would like to agree with one of the most humane postings about Wright I have seen: He is an 80 year old man who has served his community. Much has been written about him and the rhetorical and social justice tradition of "Jeremiad" (s) out of which he emerges (not just a "black" thing, you know).
This week he canceled appearances because of "security" reasons (CNN seems to be stalking him). I would offer that media and web folk need to think about whether or not continued intense coverage of the guy is now becoming irresponsible.
Just something to think about.
March 26, 2008 7:56 PM | Reply | Permalink
I would offer that media and web folk need to think about whether or not continued intense coverage of the guy is now becoming irresponsible.
Because he's damaging to Little Baby Jesus?
March 26, 2008 9:04 PM | Reply | Permalink
I do not see the relationship of Clinton's numbers in the discussion of Obama and his 20-year relationship with a racist and hate-America church, reverend, and community. Anyway, I think the impact on Obama are just beginning. Consider that he has not disassociated himself from the church, reverend, or community. Second, consider that, even today, he still defends Rev. Wright. Third, consider that the only criticism has been within the Democratic primary process and some of the MSM. Wait until the Republicans and others get going. Racism is a potent issue and Obama has since shown his with is "typical White person" comments. And, worse, if there can be worse for a national candidate, the hate-America aspect of this will linger and be volatile throughout the campaign. Personally, I do not see how Obama can recover from this since he insists on continuing to defend Wright, continues to attend the church with his children, and uses racist language and stereotypes.
March 26, 2008 7:56 PM | Reply | Permalink
re: "Racism is a potent issue"
It is for you, you one-trick pony.
Here's a challenge for you: Try to go 5 comments in this or any thread without mentioning Wright, reverse racism, or America hating. Bonus points if you can intelligently discuss an actual issue beyond character issues and not name-call.
I double-dare ya.
March 26, 2008 8:35 PM | Reply | Permalink
Twirling fartknocker,
Why bother? Well, okay, if you really insist. Shall we talk about his spoonfed Illinois senate record? Or, how about Rezko and his friends? Ah, we can get pretty close to linking Obama with terrorists with that one. Or, what about that sweet deal on the house with Rezko's wife? Or, Michelle's nearly 3x salary increase once Obama got to the U.S. Senate, then his pushing earmarks for her employer? Or, his failure in the Senate to hold hearings as committee chair and explaining he was too busy campaigning for president? Or, how about his claiming credit recently for Sen. Dodd's work in the Senate? And of course, lets not forget his apparent lies about NAFTA and his out of control staff. Want more?
March 26, 2008 9:16 PM | Reply | Permalink
Matthew, seriously dude, just cut it out. Don't you see it, you pretty much make every blog reek with filth.
March 26, 2008 9:12 PM | Reply | Permalink
Yes, it is. Too bad for you that most people can see sentiments such as yours (and Pat Buchanan's) for the racism they are.
In fact, I'd wager that most people are far, far more disturbed by such extremist beliefs as you display than are bothered by images of "angry black people".
March 26, 2008 9:15 PM | Reply | Permalink
To Matt Weaver,
Give it a rest man! You plaster your disparaging remarks about Reverend Wright all over these threads. As far as I can tell you are just a mouthpiece of Fox News, taking bits and snips of his sermons completely out of context and claiming that he is an America hating racist. I admit that I was disturbed when Wright's comments came out in the news. But then I looked into the charges and found that it was a smear campaign. Check out his Wikipedia listing. The man is an ex-Marine, and has nobly served the poorest folks in Chicago through his ministry, rooted in Christian social justice. Yes, he's said some outlandish things. He has also spoken truth to power. Sometimes the truth hurts.
By the way, the Catholic Church does have multiple and varied woes, not to mention much to answer for over the millennia. And I say that as a practicing Catholic... not to mention as a Kool-Aid drinking (when not sipping lattes) member of the Obama cult.
March 27, 2008 1:57 AM | Reply | Permalink
Poll results show that Hillary Rambo Clinton's positive ratings have fallen by 8% in just the past two weeks.
Those poll results "shed light on impact" Sinbad is having on Hillary!!!!!!
March 26, 2008 7:58 PM | Reply | Permalink
People. The Wright thing is over. I've said this before - If that's all they've got on Obama, it just shows what a superior candidate he is. Hillary just looks silly now.
March 26, 2008 8:02 PM | Reply | Permalink
You wish.
March 26, 2008 8:20 PM | Reply | Permalink
Amazing. Obama pulls even with Clinton nationally, Clinton's favorability rating drops 8 points, his positives drop 2 points - and we get headlines screaming that Wright is having a "real" impact on Obama. Nevermind that the movement is within the MOE. And let's not show that 45/45 is a lot better for Obama than the 43/47 deficit he showed in the last poll.
Almost everyone else is reporting this as bad news for Clinton and good news for Obama. Not here, though. All in all not a surprise from Greg, I guess.
March 26, 2008 8:03 PM | Reply | Permalink
O great - the White Supremacist wing of the Clinton Support Team.
March 26, 2008 8:09 PM | Reply | Permalink
I see that Racist Scum Weaver has reemerged from his Sewer abode!!!!!
March 26, 2008 8:12 PM | Reply | Permalink
Your level of intelligence and inability to engage in a substantive discussion are severely challenged. You are why it is so easy to label and deride the Obama Cult. Luckily, there are more credible people to read and exchange with.
March 26, 2008 8:31 PM | Reply | Permalink
ROFL
The irony is completely lost on you, when you scream "racist church" about Oprah Winfrey's church (we know what a racist she is after all) even though the pastor of Clinton's church when they lived in the White House basically calls bullshit on ignorant characterizations like yours about Trinity UCC.
March 26, 2008 9:10 PM | Reply | Permalink
Yes, calling people who support Obama a "cult" and saying that his church and it's followers (thousands of people) are racist and America hating, that's what I call intelligant and substantive discussion. Though to be both Weaver and liam should really think about what they're saying before they say it.
March 26, 2008 9:19 PM | Reply | Permalink
Substantive argument? Look guy you're to the right of Mike Huckabee on this issue; don't expect a lot of credibility, respect, or sympathy:
So uh... guess you've got Rush Limbaugh and Bill O'Reilly backing you up though, which reminds me of that saying about getting out of a hole: you gotta stop digging first.
March 26, 2008 9:40 PM | Reply | Permalink
Matthew, I know I've said some sharp stuff to you over these last few weeks, but seriously man, I'm respectfully and humbly asking you to forgive me if I've made you angry long enough to give this a read:
http://www.foundryumc.org/sermons/3_23_2008.htm
It's the Easter sermon from the current pastor at the church Hillary used to attend in Georgetown.
Open your heart, set aside, just for a few minutes, your clearly deep-seated conviction that you are in possession of the absolute truth about Wright and his church, give it a read and spend a few hours kicking it around. Please. I'm saying please.
March 26, 2008 9:46 PM | Reply | Permalink
THIS IS EXCELLENT!! NEWS FOR HILLARY!!!
March 26, 2008 8:16 PM | Reply | Permalink
As time moves on and the stupid Wright fiasco fades from memory...
Ha ha. Like the republicans are going to allow that to happen? You really believe that when you read...
Overall, 55% of voters told us that they were "disturbed" by the Rev. Jeremiah Wright videos...
I'll bet the pubbies haven't even noticed the issue.
Yeah. Wright.
March 26, 2008 8:17 PM | Reply | Permalink
I'll bet the pubbies haven't even noticed the issue.
Yeah. Wright.
You think Hillary would make it through the general election unsullied? Are you totally insane? Do you have any idea what the Republicans will do to her? They have had government paid special prosecutors on her ass constantly since Bill was in the White House. You think they won't drag every single bit of Whitewater and all the rest of it, including Bill's infidelities up over and over and over?
If this is the worst they have against Obama - I can't wait for the general. The Republicans run on their racist credentials, and they can kiss any chance of seeing the majority again in at least 2 generations instead of possibly just 1.
March 26, 2008 8:23 PM | Reply | Permalink
Poll results show that Hillary Rambo Clinton's positive ratings have fallen by 8% in just the past two weeks.
Those poll results "shed light on impact" Sinbad is having on Hillary!!!!!!
March 26, 2008 8:25 PM | Reply | Permalink
I would really like to see the detail of the poll .. because it runs totally counter to the logical argument as Chuck Todd said himself. And oversampling of african-american just throws the whole poll into question.
March 26, 2008 8:26 PM | Reply | Permalink
Oversampling is a statistical technique used to enable a more accurate analysis with respect to minority or difficult to reach populations. Google it and you see that it makes a survey *more reliable, although it is also more expensive.
March 27, 2008 4:42 AM | Reply | Permalink
MichaelWeaver,
Your prediction of Obama's political death are premature. The Clintons survived the Republican attack machine and Obama can too. All he needs is the spine for counterattack; the spine that eluded both John Kerry and Al Gore. From what I see, Obama is learning how to play the negative counterattack game very well. He needs more seasoning but the candidate has a good right jab and left hook. He's learning.
The Hillary Haters at this site will one day turn their guns on McCain. When that day comes--and it will come sooner than you would like--the fun part of this election season will commence. I hope you stick around; you'll get all sorts of attention now focused on Hillary supporters. And so will a decrepit 72 year old warmonger named John McCain.
March 26, 2008 8:44 PM | Reply | Permalink
They oversample so that they have enough African American responses to break them down.
Take an intentionally extreme example of only being able to sample 2 African Americans out of the entire poll. Well in that case you would be unable to make any breakdown on how African Americans on any issue. By artificially increasing the number sampled, you have enough data points to do analysis.
Oh, and of course they adjust the results to reflect the fact that they oversampled. If they get twice as many African Americans than they should, then they simply count each one half as much. Do you really think people that do this for a living would miss something so trivial?
March 26, 2008 8:44 PM | Reply | Permalink
This is not a story that is going to go away. Fox News has run stories on Obama and his pastor Jeremiah Wright continuously since the big flap erupted. Obama was forced to respond about it again today when he returned from vacation. He says that the infamous videos and speeches that were flashed across the Internet were taken out of context. That isn't going to satisfy most people, including Republicans. Fox News has found the same kind of blatant racist rhetoric from another pastor who is also a Senator from Chicago, and a pro-Obama superdelegate. Plus another explosive sermon from Pastor Wright, this one in writing, has surfaced from last year.
If Hillary's or McCain's pastor had been caught giving such blatantly anti-Amarican and racist sermons, the firestorm would be enormous, even though they are not as closely associated with their pastors and Obama is with his. It goes directly to his credibility as a uniter and someone able to help bridge America's racial divide. The story will not go away.
March 26, 2008 8:47 PM | Reply | Permalink
I think the point, right now, is that it doesn't matter whether it goes away or not.
Smears have a limited lifespan and limited impact. That's why they're best administered just before an election.
Obama's survived this one, and if all Fox and the GOP can do is beat this dead horse over and over until election day, the public will vote for Obama out of sheer revenge.
March 26, 2008 9:06 PM | Reply | Permalink
Actually, I'll bet the GOP is rather sorry all this Wright stuff came out now instead of later, in the GE. They would've LOVED to unleash it.
With Hillary's tall tale in play, Obama is starting to look good again and - if he remains patient over the coming few days with the inevitable questions about his feelings for Wright's comments - he'll start doing better in the polls, as the Wright stuff will lose its potency. I think it comes down to Obama's ability to weather the storm. Again, patience.
March 26, 2008 9:09 PM | Reply | Permalink
FOX NEWS! FOX NEWS!! RUN!!!!
Do you have any inkling - ANY clue - how many times a day Fox News is going to run Bill's "I did not have sexual relations with that woman" lie, along with every other choice Monica clip if Hillary steals the nomination?
Add to that the tons of other scandals, lies, deceptions, half-truths and sleazebag deals the Clintons have wallowed all these years. THEN add the rumors about Hillary & Bill's (seperate) sex lives. Clinton Fatigue will have taken it's toll before the Fall.
Besides, if you're scared of Fox News drink a Jolt Cola or something and move on.
March 26, 2008 9:11 PM | Reply | Permalink
Here's the part that you people who are still huddled in a fetal position because of the last fifteen years do not seem to be able to grasp: Fox News no longer has any influence on broad public opinion!
It's credibility with people who are capable of being persuaded to vote for our side is now zero, flushed down the toilet with that of GWB and neocons. Been that way since Katrina.
The only people who think Fox is important are the Republican PTSD sufferers among Democrats who wet their pants at every scrap of info about a Democrat that could be perverted into a negative commercial (i.e. every scrap of info ever) and its audience, deeply predjudiced white wingnuts. People who think Sean Hannity is an intellectual, Bill O'Reilly is a hero, Michelle Malkin is an important voice for reason and Ann Coulter if funny.
Fox knows this. It gets ever more shrill and insane because that's what its audience wants. It cannot grow its market share into the sane part of the electorate because, doing so would require it to become more sane itself, which, in turn, would alienate its core audience. The wingnutterier Fox's viewer gets, the nuttier Fox gets to service them. This is the feedback loop that has destroyed its credibility.
The 1990s are over. The 00's (ummmmm, so what the hell are we supposed to call this decade, anyway? Anybody?) are practically over. The days when we care what Fox says, except for purposes of keeping track of what the loonies are thinking, are over.
I know that's very disappointing for Hillary now that she's made friends with Murdoch and all the other fabulous people there, especially with her hoping Fox propaganda can save her, but there it is.
March 26, 2008 9:23 PM | Reply | Permalink
Hey if Hillary's negatives take this big a dive against good old sweet naive Obama, what is going to happen when that big baddie Republican Attack Machine focuses all barrels at her?
Just ask'n. I mean I thought she was fully vetted n all.
March 26, 2008 8:50 PM | Reply | Permalink
Did you sleep through the 90s? She's already had both barrels and then some. Of course Obama had to go through that tough campaign against fly-in-whackjob cardboard cut-out Alan Keyes. Made him as hard as tempered steel.
March 26, 2008 9:09 PM | Reply | Permalink
Which is why she's been doing so well during the primary season. And who exactly did she face during her senate runs?
March 26, 2008 9:21 PM | Reply | Permalink
So the $64,000 question is:
If she is so battle tested...
If she is so adept at campaigning...
If she is the Judo Master against the attack ad...
WHY IS SHE LOSING TO OBAMA!!!???
According to your kind, The Clintons are an unstoppable juggernaut the likes of which the Democratic party is rarely graced with. And yet...
WHY IS SHE STILL LOSING TO OBAMA!!!???
Either she isn't as good as you think, Obama is better than you think or some combination of the two.
March 26, 2008 10:21 PM | Reply | Permalink
WHY IS SHE LOSING TO OBAMA!!!???
Let's start with this. She beats Obama in the Texas primary by 4 points. About 3 million people voted in that. But Texas lets the Kewl Kidz vote twice and Obama wins the caucus, where about 1 million people vote again. He comes away from Texas with more delegates than the candidate that kicked his ass when everybody voted. The light may come on in yoour head. Or not.
The DNC strips FL and MI of its delegates for holding their primaries on a day the DNC didn't like but they can't keep some Texans from voting twice? The process is totally fucked up. There are no caucuses in the general election. None. Yet the Dem candidate is being selected by caucuses and delegates from states that we have no hope of winning.
Long live President McCain!
March 26, 2008 11:26 PM | Reply | Permalink
So a win by 4 points is 'kicking ass' in your mind?
Setting that aside, you seem to be saying that Hillary is losing to Obama because she didn't actually design her campaign around the, um, real life reality of what is, in fact, the election structure of the Democratic primary.
So, her losing isn't her misreading reality, but her losing is that pre-existing structure's fault, hmmmm. Kind of like someone who reads all the terms of a contract, then signs the contract and later loses her shirt, can then say it's a faulty contract. Got it.
March 27, 2008 8:01 AM | Reply | Permalink
The ONLY significant finding in this poll
Too bad Bush is termed-out
THAT might be a horse race
March 26, 2008 8:51 PM | Reply | Permalink
Funny comment!
March 26, 2008 9:12 PM | Reply | Permalink
African-Americans were over-sampled for the purposes of having statistical power in some cross-tabs; it doesn't mean that they were over-represented in the aggregate percentages.
March 26, 2008 8:51 PM | Reply | Permalink
This is not a story that is going to go away. Fox News has run stories on Obama and his pastor Jeremiah Wright continuously since the big flap erupted. Obama was forced to respond about it again today when he returned from vacation. He says that the infamous videos and speeches that were flashed across the Internet were taken out of context. That isn't going to satisfy most people, including Republicans. Fox News has found the same kind of blatant racist rhetoric from another pastor who is also a Senator from Chicago, and a pro-Obama superdelegate. Plus another explosive sermon from Pastor Wright, this one in writing, has surfaced from last year.
O you numbskull - Fox News? Who cares? Do you think Democrats or undecideds watch Fox?
Maybe for the entertainment value, but the only people taking it seriously are John McCain's age. If you look at their audience share - which is falling precipitously - their demographic is nursing homes.
March 26, 2008 9:01 PM | Reply | Permalink
Otto, Otto, Otto. I know you folks hope that if you call someone a racist often enough people will start believing you, facts (and your lack of them) be damned. And that probably works for your typical Fox News viewer. But it ain't flyin' here. Wipe the froth off your mouth and give it a rest.
March 26, 2008 9:03 PM | Reply | Permalink
I misread Greg's post....
My apologies
I DENOUNCE AND REJECT myself
March 26, 2008 9:03 PM | Reply | Permalink
The only race where the write-in "None of the Above" wins
March 26, 2008 9:06 PM | Reply | Permalink
Before the Wright controversy, everyone (or at least Clinton) was saying Obama hadn't been tested, vetted. Could he handle the attacks that were going to be thrown against him inevitably in the general? There was a fear (or for Hillary, a hope) that something would come along that would really knock him down. Well something fierce came along, and did knock him down a bit, but he has pretty much bounced back. In a sense one could argue that the whole Wright thing has been positive in that it has proved he can meet adversity and emerge relatively unscathed. And likely what really made the difference was the speech that he wrote himself, delivered without a teleprompt