Shit, what ever will we do if Democrats in places like California and Mississippi start to prefer Obama to Hillary by a slimmer margin!??!

Oh, wait, almost all of these people have already voted..

So, um, who gives a shit?

This is why I thought it was dumb for people to be dismissing "bitter gate" because the polls didn't show anything on Monday. Guess what? Pols drop bad news on Friday for a reason. People weren't paying attention last weekend. When they started paying attention on Monday it looked bad for him.

I expect we will see the fallout from this debate next week. No matter how stupid the first 45 minutes of questions were, Obama should have been prepared for them. This is his 23rd debate. C'mon. And Hillary frankly blew him away in the policy section.

George Bush, on the invasion of Iraq: "Mission Accomplished!"

George Stephanopoulos, on the "debate": "Mission Accomplished!"

And the relevance of these tracking poll numbers is....?
The numbers themselves are not a story, because no meaningful interpretation of them is possible. Do they mean "bittergate" had an impact? Who knows. The pollsters sure as hell don't. And, any pundit who claims to possess interpretive authority on this is full of it. Focus on something more important - remember we still have a war criminal as our Chief Executive.

Look folks, his meltdown in the debate and all the whining proved Clinton should be the nominee.

Need a fighter not a whiner.

Nobody like a whiner.

I believe that if Obama does not agree to debate clinton in north carolina on april 27th or sometime before may 6, this could help clinton win north carolina, because the people of north carolina will feel that they should have had the same chance to hear both of them debate just like other states have....But even if they do debate, i think it could help Clinton because she always does better in debates..... Obama always sounds like George Bush talking....its almost funny:)

anyways, 4 days to go and then they vote in pennsylvania.....yahhhhhhhhhhhho:)

It's relevant because the pundits make it so. And then it becomes the echo chamber, like it or now.

On one hand, we have 3-4 post-or-during-debate polls in PA showing improvement on Obama's part, as well as limited change in Rasmussen tracking. And now, Gallup says he's hurting from it. That means we'll have to wait and see.

So it's going to hurt. It's going to get rocky, and those of us who are Obama supporters need to be ready for it. Because a bad debate is just a bad debate, and if HRC gains in the polls, it just means our team, and our candidate, has to do better, next time, just as Clinton did after her rough debates, and just as Obama did after Wright.

And there's time for that to happen.

Sorry, the cadence is really more like:

Just gotta brush. That. Dirt off ya shoulder.

Yeah, that's more like it.

(pimp walks away...)

:):):):)

You gotta get that dirt off your shoulder.

If you feeling like a pimp, [playa], go on brush your shoulder off,
ladies is pimps too, go on brush your shoulder off,
[playas] is crazy baby, don't forget that boy told you to
get. that. dirt off your shoulder.

You know what pimp stands for don'tcha? Paper in my pocket.

and he's got that, too. He's till got enough to move right into the general.

Damn! Damn! Damn!

I knew this would come back to haunt us.
I have always urged that we stop letting Gallup
nominate our Presidential Candidate. I have always
urged the party to let the voters have a say in the nomination and selection of our nominee.

I say that it is high time that we switch to a States Primaries and Caucus nomination system, instead of letting Gallup select our nominee.

It's not going to drag on - I don't think. Not after Howard Dean said what he did yesterday and then two more high level endorsements today?

I really expect more - I think most of the party hierarchy wants this over with now as badly as we do.

Are they polling nationally, or only in the upcoming states? Because if they polling only in the upcoming states, this is bad news for Obama, but if it's national, then it's clear that Hillary's "kitchen sink" strategy is hurting the party.

This should be over. I think it will be soon. If Hillary had any major superdelegates waiting in the wings to endorse her, I'd think they would have rolled them out by now. I think Obama's the one with the superdelegates on hold. That's WHY the Clintons have been making the electability argument.

Real statistical results do not move 8 percentage points in a few days, if you are measuring a well-defined situation, the methodology is consistently applied, and you are close to the zero-hour of the event. When this does happen, you have to wonder what's happening with the methodology. Something fundamental changed from the prior Gallup test to the current one, but I'll bet it was not the underlying population. Political opinions do not leap around like commodity prices. The disposition of a voting population moves as the event grows closer in time and people have a chance to absorb what they are hearing, but once committed, there is rarely a huge amount of mind-changing happening.

Stealing the nomination FOR the one who has the most pledged delegates, the popular vote and teh most states...riiiight.

Reminder that both Ras & Gallup's tracking typically show a tightening over the week and then it expands a little again once the weekend hits.

Not that it means that his numbers aren't softening a little - not unexpected given bittergate, the tabloid debate questions and his not so sharp performance at the debate.

BUT- I also think it is a temporary blip. How temporary depends on what happens in PA. There is a lot of evidence pointing to Clinton back-lash with all of the negativity both in PA and IN but there are also a lot of undecideds in both states so who knows what will happen there.

I think there is also a growing sense that this needs to end for the sake of the GE and that might make a difference in PA in particular. I posted this before but I think that part of Ohxas was a collective 'wait-a-minute'. Before handing the nom to Obama, voters wanted to see a little more about him - namely any skeletons and handling adversity which I think has been addressed. Now I think voters are ready and feel the need to say 'okay'. If PA doesn't do it first, my newfapalooza prediction is NC & IN will end this.

vandinem - You're way over my head, but I think I see what you mean enough to get what you're saying.

I have learned not to trust any polls. They fucked us big time in '04 and I don't trust anyone's methodology. I don't trust anyone's professed neutrality, either.

Those things are so easily manipulated.

There is no reason for any more superdelegates to endorse Obama before PA votes on Tuesday. I'm sure that quite a few will come out for him afterwards, if Dean has any influence at all. But maybe they'll wait until Obama has a big victory coming out of North Carolina so they can push his numbers over the top on a high note.

Folks: It is a national tracking poll for one day.

Do not let the thread headline fool you.

Hillary Closes To Within Three Points In Gallup National Tracking Poll
By Greg Sargent - April 18, 2008, 1:42PM

We all know that Sargent goes Orgasmic every time Hillary Burbs or Farts.

Now stop and ask yourself this question:

Which candidate is still leading in the latest National Tracking poll.

Take your time and think about it, While Hillary's Sargent at Arms smokes his post orgasm cigarette.

It's very good news for McCain, though.

Si.

I think that was what set Howard off.

I'll tell you who needs to sit down with her: Harry Reid. She's going back to the senate, which means she's going back to work under his supervision.

He controls in a large way just what kind of sessions she enjoys in the next year.

That might not be good protocol, inasmuch as Dean is chairman of the DNC - maybe he feels he should wait - I don't know. I didn't know he was a superdelegate.

I don't know who a third of the are.

Let's not overreact here. As others have mentioned, the reaction to this particular debate was as much a part of the media event as the debate itself, so the verdict's still out on that.

And the breathless conclusion that this points to damage from the debate is kind of strange, actually. Two-thirds of the polling in this latest Gallup was done before the debate. Plus Obama has been dropping gradually in this poll for the last four days, so it seems to me there's evidence that there was something other than the debate already driving that decline.

As disturbing as I find it, I think the argument that the "bitter" thing precipitated this as it got media saturation over time is a much more plausible theory here. Makes more sense than attributing a four-day decline to an event that took place at the tail-end of that period.

I hate saying this because it sounds like I'm such a conspiratorialist, but I'm starting to believe that the national media is pushing the Clinton candidacy and is subtly skewing it's coverage accordingly. I think they're drooling over the thought of 4 years of endless controversy (albeit manufactured) to help their bottom line.

I thought the same thing about Bush in '00. Gore was pretty bland (by scandal-standards that is), and the press knew a Bush presidency would generate headlines.

For the most part, I think Obama is similarly bland, with the notable exception of being the 1st black candidate which is an old story by now. You can't honestly say flag pins, Rezko, and the W.U. will generate the same heat as the crap that will be dragged out against Hillary.

Yes, Hillary got crushed over the Bosnia thing, but otherwise, she's doing alright. The longer the race goes on, which can only happen if Hillary drags it out, the better it is for ratings. So the media, has a vested interest in keeping this thing going. They do so by pulling the hit jobs on Obama like they did at the ABC debate file reports about how if the moons of Saturn cause an eclipse on Jupiter, and the frog population of Borneo shrinks by 3%, Hillary can woo enough super-dels to convert to her and she'll take home the nomination.

A caucus is the will of the people. If a republican voted for Hilary in the Texas primary but not the caucus, they were being a pawn for Rush and only trying to manipulate the result. Only true real democrats participate in the caucus. remember you must state that you are a democrat at the caucus. If you are unwilling to sign a piece of paper at a caucus, like I did in Washington State, then don't go. Its the rules and like anyone is going to hunt you down if you really do not support the dems. There is nothing un-democratic about it the caucus. It has been a practice for a very long time. Just ask those in Iowa if the system they use is wrong. Or perhaps Nevada, who ended up picking Hillary. Its politics 101 to denounce a system that does not come in your favor. Its called spin and everyone knows slick willie and hrc are "pros" at making a pile of crap look like gold.

Weaver is an Aryan Nation Troll(ANT)

He blogs about his hatred of Jews and Blacks.

Why do we and the MSM pretend as though there is an actual contest going on in the Democratic primary race?

Given how delegates are divided up on a proportional basis and the overwhelming movement of super-delegates to Obama since Super Tuesday, the ONLY WAY that HRC wins the nomination is via an Obama meltdown of biblical proportions. Death by a thousand paper cuts (Wright, flag pins, Rezko, bitter-gate) may hurt Obama in the general campaign, but there is no evidence that it will rescue HRC.

Accordingly, for the sake of the party and her own career, we must all implore HRC to get out next WEDNESDAY.

If that bibblical implosion does occur, HRC can always ride in as that proverbial "white-knight" at the Convention in August.

Rasmussen sees post-debate Obama bump
by kos
Fri Apr 18, 2008 at 12:25:04 PM PDT

Rasmussen. 4/17. Likely voters. MoE 4% (4/14 results)

Clinton 47 (50)
Obama 44 (41)

This election poll was conducted Thursday night, the night following a nationally televised debate between the candidates [...]

Obama’s support appears to be a bit softer than Clinton’s at this point in time. Six percent (6%) of Obama voters say there’s a good chance they could change their mind before voting. Only 2% of Clinton supporters say the same.

Overall, with less than a week to go, 9% of Pennsylvania voters remain undecided, 3% say there’s a good chance they will change their mind, and another 12% might change their mind. Among those who are certain how they will vote, Clinton leads 53% to 47%.

Newsweek just put up their new poll, with some interesting numbers on the race:

http://www.newsweek.com/id/132721

The timeline is that "of the registered voters who were surveyed 517 were interviewed after the debate and 692 before. She added that the views of those surveyed remained largely constant."

There is one party of the rich in this country and the Democratic half is self-destructing now and the Republican half soon...

Oh wind, if this be winter, can spring be far behind?

Heard it this week!!!!

And of course, it is just the same thing as if every single one of us Obama supporters had said it, too, cause you are holding us responsible for one person who says she supports Obama, correct?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xq8aopATYyw

people should watch this video on youtube it's shocking it's about hillary

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xq8aopATYyw

people should watch this video on youtube it's shocking it's about hillary

This thing will be over by May 7th. A weak HRC PA win coupled with Obama wins in Indiana and North Carolina will have the supers making their decisions known. This is all over but the crying.

January 20th, 2009: Inauguration Day for The 44th President of the United States of America, Barack Obama.