« DNC Releases New Ad Hitting McCain | Home | Hillary And Obama Exchange Another Volley Of Pennsylvania Ads »

Mason-Dixon: Clinton Ahead By Five In Pennsylvania

A new Mason-Dixon poll of Pennsylvania gives Hillary Clinton the lead for Tuesday's primary, but it's not a big one: Clinton 48%, Obama 43%.

According to the pollster's analysis, "the lead doesn't indicate she's going to win by a large enough margin to make a serious impact on Obama's overall delegate lead."

The poll also indicates that Obama may have had some small success in reaching out to blue-collar voters -- in a very fun statistic, the two candidates are tied at 44% each among beer drinkers.


71 Comments

| Leave a comment

Yeah, but what about the Crown Royal vote?

user-pic

Or the bowling vote?

user-pic

I actually heard a guy on NPR this am talk about the bowlers' vote. I thought he was trying to be funny

I heard David Brooks on the New Hour this Friday:

DAVID BROOKS: Well, on the question -- on the narrow question of the flag lapel pin -- I could care less whether somebody wears it -- I agree with Mark. It doesn't mean anything. That particular question I thought was the weakest of all the possible questions. But as I say, the larger issue is, what kind of guy is Obama? Is he someone who bowls a 37 and doesn't know anything about the way American people actually live, or does he actually get the way we live?

He was not being funny.

http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/politics/jan-june08/sbdebate_04-18.html

What an asshole.

Imagine actually listening to him say it in earnest.

that's because in David Brooks' world only white people count.

user-pic

And were some of them drinking while they were being polled?

user-pic

"the lead doesn't indicate she's going to win by a large enough margin to make a serious impact on Obama's overall delegate lead."

If the results bear this out, Obama has been successful.

Great News. This means with the late independents swinging her way just like Ohio, it will be at least a 15%-20% victory. Obama seems to be crumbling after his lackluster debate. I think people are getting really sick of Obama and Obama supporters doing continuace whining,
Whiny Obama and the whiny bunch, good name for a new band.

Haha, yes, because Obama is the whiner, not Mrs. "Why do I always get asked the first question?!!?!", nice.

And Obama did just fine during the debate, despite the bullshit questions. Hillary would have stomped her ass off the stage if she had been asked question after question like that, holy hell she would have thrown a fit!

Do you people ever not talk out your asses?

Oh, and unless she can pull off 20+% wins in EVERY remaining race, it doesn't really matter now does it? I'll be thinking of you as she gives her concession speech. ;)

user-pic

Are you buffenbargering here?

Are you buffenbargering here?

Excellent new verb!

user-pic

Credit goes to north_aufzoo. See the SNOB post over at the right.

user-pic

Okay. Can we set the brakes on Hillary's Magical Travelling Goalposts at 15%?

user-pic

THIS IS GREAT NEWS FOR HILLARY!!

user-pic

No, no. The correct phraseology is

THIS IS GREAT NEWS !! FOR HILLARY !!

user-pic

Aren't you going to whine about Randi Rhodes?

Unfortunately, Dembillc, Pennsylvania is a closed primary... Democrats only... that is NOT excellent news for Hillary.

careful, you'll make the 'bots blow a fuse!

The problem with this is Obama is still only polling in the low 40's and there are still quite a few undecideds. If he can't get more than 1/3 of them - we are looking at a 10pt+ loss for Obama.
Still better than the 20pts a few weeks ago but...

44% tastes great.
44% less filling.

hey whiny dembilic, it's Democratic only in PA

what's more, independents nationally are favoring Obama

before YOU start whining, please get your facts straight

that's nice the independents are favoring the O in penn - he's still going to lose big time tomorrow! i'll make sure to check in here then to see the sobfest.

"a significant impact in delegate lead" - let's see how PA and NC together impact that delegate lead, currently at around PLUS 170 for Sen. Obama.

In other words, its over and it has been over for a long time, Hillary's supporters are just out of touch with reality, and Hillary doesn't give a shit about the Democratic Party, only herself. It makes you wonder if her supporters give a shit about the Party either.

"the lead doesn't indicate she's going to win by a large enough margin to make a serious impact on Obama's overall delegate lead."

I fully expect her and the media to declare National Comeback Kid Day for her even if she wins by 1%.

Look for it if she wins by one single vote.

I actually agree after watching Ohio and Texas.

Ha ha ha, excellent. Single digits, one way or the other.

See all you DLC chumps in NC for your Great North State A$$ Whooping. They drink real whisky down there, not that Canuck blend s#!t. Esse Quam Videri, y'all.

Anything under 10% is a win for Obama.

I'm still using the 10 point difference as the measuring stick. I don't think it's going to be nearly as close as many of the polls are indicating. I think a realistic best-case-scenario for Obama is losing by 7-points, and given the recent polls lowering expectations for Clinton, I think she would have certain grounds to claim that as a moderate win for her. If it's 10+, it's a big win for her and probably means she'll win Indiana and that the race will continue until the last primary in the very least and possibly the convention.

I really have never understood the fact that anyone even thinks Obama might be under 10% in PA. The southern tier of NY bleeds into PA, and its demographics just favor Clinton so much. I always thought that Clinton should carry PA by at least 15%, although 30% would be better to make any significant dent in Obama's delegate lead. Isn't the fact that Obama contesting here have much more to do with the fact of crippling Clinton in NC and Indiana for a final coup de grace? (I felt like being an elitist today. Yeah, me and Bruce..). I never actually heard hom or any one in his campaign ever talk about actually winning. Thoughts from wiser heads?

"the lead doesn't indicate she's going to win by a large enough margin to make a serious impact on Obama's overall delegate lead."

I hope the Mason-Dixon people are better at polling than they are at analyzing their results. A five-point win would probably not net her more than 2 or 3 delegates. And I don't believe this takes into account the big advantage in delegate allocation that Obama already gets in Philly and burbs. To make "a serious impact on Obama's overall delegate lead" would require a wholesale slaughter in the districts he's about to walk away with.

10 point+ margin of victory for hrc, take it to the bank.

the obama-loving media continues to want to cite any and every poll under the sun and spin those poll results as being dispositively positive for obama, i.e., "if he's behind, well he's behind by what he was 2 months ago"...or "if he's ahead, well, he's maintaining his general support despite recent controversies of [you fill in the blanks] rev. wright...ayers and the weathermen...bitter voters clinging to guns, religion and bigotry."

what the media never does is give equal favorable coverage to clinton's narrowing of poll gaps, or more importantly, cite the huge percentages of undecideds in these polls, the same undecideds that broke decidely for clinton in ohio and texas and new hampshire and california.

so juice yourself up, tpm and obama-loving media everywhere, on your poll coverage. i'm focused on 1 poll and 1 poll only -- the poll from pennsylvania voters on tuesday night.

undecideds will again break for clinton and propel her to the 10+ point margin of victory.

Okay. And if this 10+ point margin of victory happens, how many delegates will she net? 15? Maybe 20?

user-pic

Pennsylvania has 158 delegates. If Clinton beats Obama by 10 points, she picks up 87 delegates to his 71, for a net gain of 16 delegates. If she were to really blow it out and win by, let's say 64 (highly improbable), she'd pick up 101 to his 57. Either way, it's not enough to close the gap, and this is the biggest state left in the race.

Hillary has zero chance of becoming president this election cycle. All she's doing by remaining in the race at this point is hurting herself, the party, and our eventual nominee. I seriously doubt she gives a shit. She seems like a very bitter, selfish person. And an incredibly sore loser.

Ten point "win" is a loss for Clinton. Sorry.

Thank God that My Girl Hil is still ahead after 3 weeks of being outspent 3 to 1 by the Holy One, the Savior.

user-pic

What's most disturbing to me is that you Hillary dead-enders persist in supporting a candidate who can't possibly win, while you slam our eventual nominee. It seems really twisted. Are you a Democrat or not? Because what Hillary and people like you are doing is attacking your own Party. Obama represents the Democratic Party this election cycle. Hillary is doing the Republicans' dirty work for them and people like you are helping her do it.

I only hope you realize what you're doing, but I can't imagine you could, but perhaps I'm wrong. Or perhaps you're a Republican.

You're assuming Clinton supporters aren't closet Republicans, like their candidate.

user-pic

I'm not assuming that any longer. It seems fairly certain that a percentage of Hillary's supporters will vote for McCain when she doesn't get the nomination. They seem to be voting for completely different reasons than I am. They seem to find comfort in business-as-usual. They don't want the system to change. So Hillary, McCain--it doesn't really matter to them. Just as long as they don't feel threatened by change.

I support Obama because he's an insurgent. I sincerely believe him when he says that he wants to upset the power structure in Washington. The reason I believe him is because he has never underplayed the difficulty of doing so. He's never said that it will be easy or that he can do it without help. Hillary is constantly talking about how she'll do this or she'll do that. That, to me, is a sure indicator of an empty promise.

10 point win.....after being out spent 4 to 1....why can't he finish her off. Why won't she just quit. Why won't she just leave him alone. Why, why, why.

user-pic

He can't finish her off for several reasons:

1). If he went completely negative and she somehow won the nomination, it could hurt her in the general. He's said that he's not willing to take that chance. Too bad she doesn't offer him the same consideration. She seems to have absolutely no sense of honor.

2). Hell hath no fury like a Hillary scorned. If he forces her out of the race by employing the sort of tactics she's used against him, there will be major resentment among her supporters. That would not be at all good. The party needs to come out of this race united. And Hillary MUST throw her support behind him and convince her supporters to get behind him as well. He's got the nomination nailed. There's no reason to antagonize Hillary or her supporters. He'll need them on his side soon enough.

3). If he starts fighting dirty, he'll have no case to make with the superdelegates. The reason Hillary lost Bill Richardson and Robert Reich was because she pissed them off by attacking Obama as if she was a Republican. Obama's restraint in this race will put the superdelegates on his side.

Predicting a 10-point win for Clinton in PA is not too difficult. I don't think she'll go over that, though.

As for those asking about Obama's outspending her, well, it's pretty easy to explain why.

(1) He had NO endorsements coming into the state, while the state Democratic Party chairman, the governor, the mayors of the two largest cities, and one of the most powerful reps in Congress (Murtha) all endorsed Clinton. PA is also senior-heavy and Catholic-heavy, both Clinton demographics. If he'd spent equally to her, he'd lose by 20-25. It's worth the millions to try and limit the loss to 5-10 points.

(2) He is spending more because he has more to spend - due to better fundraising and more intelligent spending for the last 4 months. That's not an indictment of his campaign by any means.

(3) The spending here will help for the general election, should he become the nominee. He'll already be well known in a swing state.

It's impossible for Obama to waste money in PA. Even a 15-point win for Clinton won't dent the delegate lead much, thanks to proportional representation. She'll be fortunate to net 10-15 delegates out of the state.

user-pic
He is spending more because he has more to spend.

Precisely. If she had the money to outspend him, she would. Her donations are drying up along with her support. 58% of Democrats now think she's dishonest and untrustworthy. So why would they give her a dime?

It also forces Clinton to have to spend her dwindling war chest in Pennsylvania, meaning she'll have less to spend in Indiana and NC.

Of course any size win on Tuesday will be a rallying cry for more Clinton donors, however they've been calling for money at every turn lately, so you have to believe most willing donors are tapped out, either at the mandated maximum allowable or their own personal limit.

eh? you're on the wrong blog, man. charlie gibson lost the debate, no one else.

gobama

She's kicking ass in other polls by double digits. This thing is not over regardless of what MSNBC and TPM have to say. Remember these polls have always been wrong on clinton's numbers. She has done better than polls indicate.

Hillary 08

user-pic

Here:

http://www.slate.com/id/2185278/

Play with the numbers. Find a way for her to win.

user-pic

Magic ponies will carry Hilary to VICTORY!

user-pic

At the risk of becoming tedious:

The polls are still all over the place. One says HRC by 12 points, another by 5 points, another says they're tied. Most of the polls are going to be wrong. Maybe all of them. So what do they mean?

You know the answer.

Bupkes.

The election's on Tuesday. Sometime Tuesday night we'll get the first numbers that mean anything out of Pennsylvania. Until then, it's all just bupkes.

Peace,
Paul

Very true, however polling numbers affect voter perception, especially if Clinton comes out way over the latest polling numbers as I suspect she will. It will give her reason to discredit all other polling where she comes out behind Barack.

This is true - although polls can be all over the place in both directions.

For example, WI was supposed to be a dead heat, according to polls on the day of that primary.

Basically, the only polls I would trust - aside from the actual election results, of course - would be the campaigns' internal polling. I guarantee you those numbers will be much closer to the truth than anything Gallup, Rasmussen, Zogby, SurveyUSA or any other polling company puts out.

I predict that it will be Clinton by 15 pts. I've stayed with that despite the narrowing poll numbers, and the varying poll numbers.

I hope I'm wrong.

tpmgary- I am with you on that. My sense is 12ish give or take a couple of points. Obama just can't get over the 43/44% mark. He seems pretty solid on that so if that holds HRC would get 12-14 pts maybe minus a couple for misc candidates.
The big question is going to be turnout and what the new registrants are going to do. Lets hope the Obama GOTV effort is intense. Of course there is Rendell and his machine along with Obama's refusal to pay street money and they could cancel out. Which brings us back to 12-14pts.

The debate really hurt him I think. Still would have lost but a good debate performance would have gotten him enough points to get this under 10pts.

Not paying street money was an absolute blunder.

Yeah probably, I admire his prinicipals and it bodes well for the White House but he has to get there first. Ironically, I think some of the things that are hurting him in this campaign are what will make him an effective President.
Most notably his ability to disagree with someone and still find aspects of common ground (Wright, Ayers etc) It will be a necessary temperment both in dealing with the Repubs and in foreign policy.

Short-term, in PA, not paying street money may cost him some votes in Philadelphia.

But just imagine the articles that would have been written if he'd paid the street money.

The long-term Obama primary election strategy has always been about delegate accumulation. They'll limit the damage to maybe 10-15 pledged delegates - without the street money.

Hillary absolutely needs a 65/35 split to make any headway in the delegate apportionment. Most of the polls are seeing a 55/45 win for her, but if it's only a 10-12 point win she isn't going to pick up enough delegates to offset Obama's gains in NC.

I think Obama's organization is better than street money. I don't think he needs it. And those who are comparing the Ohio and Texas results might be surprised...I don't think there will be as many Rush Republicans in Pennsylvania because they might not have been willing to change parties to mess with the vote. (At least I hope.) Those weren't late deciders in Ohio and Texas, those were Republicans. I know many Republicans who voted for Hillary as a joke here in Texas. I expect Hillary will win by around 8%, which with all her establishment support in Pennsylvania is a win for Obama. Then on to North Carolina and Indiana, where he will win both.

Whether she wins by 1% or 20%, you can guarantee that the MSM will play up her victory as "the greatest comeback in political history" for the next 2 weeks until Barack puts her out of business by winning Indiana and North Carolina.

The next 2 weeks will be very unpleasant to say the least.

It's not about delegates at this time - it's about giving Clinton a reason to stay in the race. If she wins by anything more than 10 points and I think that doesn't bode well for Obama's chances in Indiana in a couple weeks time.

Hillary is looking for any glimmer of hope to sell to the super delegates and her supporters so she can take this right to the convention.

The party leaders will deliver Obama the superdelegates to prevent Hillary from taking it to the convention. They cannot afford to lose any House and Senate seats in November, not to mention state level offices. If she steals the election through back room deals the party is ripped apart, too many people will stay home in November, and the Republicans will win the White House and regain the majority in Congress.

If party leaders make a move against Hillary to force her out, her supporters will dig in and virtually secure a McCain in in November. What needs to happen is for Obama win be under 10 points in Penn(latest polls now have him down 13ish), and win in Indiana and NC.

The only way Clinton will bow out now is if her money dries up, and while she seemingly has been against spending her own money, I wouldn't be surprised if she started funding her own campaign if she had to.

She's all about ensuring a McCain win this year, so she can run again in four years time.

They have a bunch of polls listed on the main page. They range from 5pts to 14. The biggest difference among the polls seems to be forcing undecideds to pick a candidate and they lean pretty heavily towards Clinton. I am still crossing my fingers for massive Obama turn out in Philly but not holding my breath. It looks like a 10-15pt win for HRC. Not enough to change the race but enough to keep her in it.
Also, need to keep an eye on the popular vote. While it is a delegate race, the supers are the wildcard and could give it to the popular vote winner.

If it comes down to the Convention, I'd rather see the Supers give it to Clinton, because the nominee isn't going to beat McCain if it drags out that long with the super-delegates having to make the decision.

I have a gut feeling that Pennsylvania will turn out to be a closer contest that most are predicting.

I sense a toss up here and I give Obama a 1 in 5 chance of actually winning it.

If a few hundred superdelegates overturn the will of millions of voters, than the party needs to be taught a lesson. Otherwise, the people give up their voice in the Democratic party.

user-pic

If that happens, I might be out of the political process for good - and I won't be alone. It wouldn't be because "my guy" got screwed. It'd be because someone who the people, by and large, didn't choose would be the nominee. No, thanks, Democrats.

I heard his lethargic sound bite complaining about how Hillay is throwing the kitchen sink at him and the buffet, too. He should be giving her fire and brimstone instead of this somnolent material.

He has got a lot to overcome. The invented-from-nothing "Bittergate", hand-over-heart-for-National-Anthem, Wright, his loose-lipped wife, lapel pins, Islamic name and early contacts, weathermen, and yes, his race. If we wants to win this he has to blast through all that with guns blazing (like he did at Independence Hall), not lazily summarize it.

Leave a comment

Recommended Reader Posts

  • Unwritten...
    by stillidealistic
  • BABIES, RACCOONS AND HEALTH CARE
    by dickday
  • Two Dreamers, by Dorothea Lange
    by Rutabaga Ridgepole
  • OBVIOUSLY, YOU AREN'T A HUNTER.....
    by wvbiker
  • Tsunami Wave: Will Wipe Out Republican Party
    by coonsey
  • holly colorado
    by blumun
  • wooden projects
    by kubaser
  • elemtary school
    by luborum
  • short stories
    by lumacer
  • letter examples
    by bulomar



  • Resources

    The Palin Effect

    GOP Map Of Sleaze

    Tire Swinging

    The Final Debate

    World of Sleaze

    All About Sarah

    The Presidential Debates: Round 2

    The Vice-Presidential Debates: Biden v. Palin

    Critic or Cheerleader The Definitive McCain Iraq Timeline

    The John McCain John Hagee Timeline

    Masthead

    Editor-in-Chief
    Josh Marshall

    Reporter-Bloggers
    Elana Schor
    Eric Kleefeld



    Subscribe to this blog's feed.

    Advertise Liberally
    Share
    Close Social Web Email

    "To" Email Address

    Your Name

    Your Email Address