« Al Franken Pays $70,000 In Back Taxes | Home | Hillary Nabs A Super-Del »

Poll: Hillary Ahead By Eight In Indiana

A new survey of Indiana from Public Policy Polling (D) gives Hillary Clinton a good-sized lead going into Tuesday's primary: Clinton 50%, Obama 42%.

From the internals: Hillary leads 54%-39% among women voters, while Obama has a statistically insignificant 46%-44% edge among men. Other polls have ranged between a similar-sized Hillary lead or a bare advantage for Obama.

From the pollster's analysis: "She may be able to win a strong enough margin Barack Obama is likely to win by in North Carolina. The question then becomes whether a tie on May 6th is enough to keep her in the race."


145 Comments

| Leave a comment

Wonderful...keep the good news coming.

Check out the trend lines in Indiana; if it continues, it will be a big HRC win.

http://www.pollster.com/08-IN-Dem-Pres-Primary.php

LIAR POLL !!!

(insert pounding of fists into carpet here)

HOPEism: The sinking ship is not half full it is half empty.

News flash: "Hope" is not a strategy.


user-pic

Eric - you want to tell me what meaning this poll has?

You want to explain just how a poll between someone who has already lost the delegate count and the nominee is worth one thing?

Welcome to the carnival, everyone.

If this wasn't being constantly pushed, it would finally find it's place - which is not as big ass news.

She can't make up the difference so why are we doing this?

Neither candidate won the delegate count yet, Tena.

The pledged delegate race will end with a small advantage, maybe 100 delegate difference out of 3500 with still hundreds left to go. Basically a virtual tie.

This election will be decided by the Superdelegates, which was the reason they were created.

They will look at a virtual tie between two strong candidates, and make up their minds who will be best suited to beat McCain. That would be Hillary.

There is no such thing as a "virtual tie" when you can count votes.

It should also be pointed out that, a few months ago, Harold Ickes (senior Clinton adviser) pegged 100 pledged delegates as a "significant" lead that would be very hard for superdelegates to reverse.

Of course, this was while it was still all about delegates, and before it was all about popular vote, and even further before it was all about electability.

You can get a poll that supports any position. 40% of the people know that.

"...60% of the time, it works everytime...."

---Brian Fantana

shameful.

she is going to stay in the race, till the end no matter what happens May 6...... after May 6, the other contest favor her......one example: kentucky


I hope she wins both on may 6....make obama look stupid and all his hillary haters.

shameless.

Yup all the way until the end where she will be told she is NOT the nominee.

What a waste of her supporters money.

user-pic

The only one looking stupid, my dear, is you - can possibly write in anything approaching a complete, coherent sentence? Fragmented, jumbled writing is a sign of a disordered mind. You really should see someone about that.

user-pic

No, it just makes her eventual fall that much more spectacular.

It kills me that Clinton supporters can't see this. I'd be dying for her to drop out before it gets any worse, if it were me.

But I'll get pounded by the trolls for that.

Since you are so selfless, I have a suggestion. You can go to Hillary's headquarters in Alexandra, VA or any of her events and threaten to light yourself up with gasoline if she does not drop out. Let's see what happens after that.

Inappropriate.

Hillary needs to stay in until the convention, when we can have a bitter floor debate, splinter the party and have Obama lose to McCain. Won't you feel "avenged" then, Hillary supporters? You can spend the next four years saying "I told you so." That's what you really want, right? Why worry about the Iraq war, $4-a-gallon gas, public corruption and a recession - you get to be "right"!

Supreme Court....

Not Oregon. Not necessarily SD and MT.

user-pic

Dude, I don't hate (or hate on) Hillary. You guys act like this is a sporting event. There's less trash-talking in the Cavs-Wizards series. Grow up, fellas. It's the election, not the Super Bowl.

It's comments like this that turn the so-called discussion section on TPM into the YouTube comments of political commentary.

PPP has not done a good job with polling as far as I'm concerned.

I don't trust.

More GOOD News:


The Rasmussen Reports daily Presidential Tracking Poll for Tuesday shows John McCain attracting 46% of the vote while Barack Obama earns 45%. In a match-up with Hillary Clinton, it’s Clinton 45% McCain 45%

In the race for the Democratic Presidential Nomination, it’s Obama 47%, Clinton 43% (see recent Democratic Nomination results). Daily tracking results are collected via nightly telephone surveys and reported on a four-day rolling average basis. Today’s update shows the race as close as it has been since the Pennsylvania Primary. Results from the past two nights of tracking are even closer. If this tightening continues, it would suggest that the issues surrounding Reverend Jeremiah Wright are having a significant impact on support for Barack Obama. A separate survey found that 36% say a candidate’s character is more important than his specific policy positions. Most, however, are more interested in the policies.

user-pic

I fucking point in a poll with a MOE of usually more than 3 points?

Boy are you grasping at straws.

user-pic
Clinton leads 48-47 with the 14% of voters who described themselves as Republicans.

Operation Chaos in action.

OPERATION CHAOS on HOLD!!!

It seems Hillary is doing well and now he wants to run against Barry-O:


Rush Calls Operation Chaos Pause
April 29, 2008

http://www.rushlimbaugh.com/home/daily/site_042908/content/01125112.guest.html

Well, as long as we're wondering where right-wingers are leaning...

GOP Gives Clinton the Silent Treatment

"From top to bottom of GOP, working assumption seems to be that Democratic contest is over and Obama has won."

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0408/9964.html

I'm glad the GOP's velvet-gloved treatment of Hillary is finally getting some attention.

Velvet gloves my ass! What planet have you been living on for the last 15 years??? That remark is as funny as it is stupid!

Read yesterday's fawning Bill Kristol piece in the NY Times and then you can talk about how funny and/or stupid the comment was.

Ya, right. The POLITICO?? WHat a HACK operation that is.

AND the reason the GOP may be giving Hill the silent treatment and focussing on Anti-Obama ads is because the damaged Obama brand and his radical Rev Wright ties is going to be gold for them in close elections in the South.

Actually, this is not true as of the time you wrote the message I'm responding to.

Rush Limbaugh put Operation Chaos back on this morning, with continued instructions to his listeners to vote for Clinton.

He did say he was considering switching the focus to Obama after the Jeremiah Wright re-surfacing, but saw the punditry react favorably to Obama's presser yesterday. So, he's continuing the operation.

user-pic

I like how Thomas Friedman refers to the McCain-Clinton gas plan. Kinda says a lot about Hillary CLinton.

Oh, and he also describes it as "shameless pandering".

Clinton wants to put a profit tax on oil companies to offset the gas tax. GET IT STUPID!?! That is a tax reduction for poor average folks and a tax hike on rich corporate oil assholes. Sounds like exactly what we need. Too bad your hate has you so confused.

user-pic

Here's a link in the WaPost discussing the gas tax holiday, and the solutions to fund it.

Stay class, Hillary supporters.

http://blog.washingtonpost.com/fact-checker/2008/04/a_holiday_from_gas_prices.html

CT, Thomas Friedman is not called "BoBo" and has pies thrown at him by Liberlas for nothing.

NEWSFLASH: McCain proposes to pay for his gas tax relief out of general funds.

Hillary rightly proposes to TAX THE OIL COMPANIES to pay for relief at the gas pumps.

Obama thinks an extra $20 a week savings is not going to matter much to Americans in the long run. How out-of-touch with a minimum-wage family is that?

user-pic

Let's see what a nonpartisan expert thinks of the McCain-Clinton gas tax holiday:

http://blog.washingtonpost.com/fact-checker/2008/04/a_holiday_from_gas_prices.html

Stay classy, Hillary supporters.

She won another super.

The President of the AFL-CIO.

If the Dems want to win they should encourage Obama to drop out.

w blamed them on the economy so they may want to lose because they are spineless and will have to fight back.

user-pic

He picked up one this morning as well, my dear, and he's about to roll out several more today. Sorry to burst your bubble. He's picking them up at a rate of about 2:1 - at that rate she may reach 2025 by next year sometime LOL! Oh, but by then Obama will have been sworn in as our 44th President.

Sorry dear.

Obama's judgement and credibility was destroyed yesterday.

He will lose many down ticket races and the Presidency if the Dems want to lose.

The Dems may not want the majority or the Presidency.

Too many problems they know they can't solve.

There is not fight in these spineless Dems.

Obama's judgement and credibility was destroyed yesterday.
Hillary hasn't had either for a long time.

whaaaa? you mean speeches can't fix EVERYTHING??? ;)

I'm sorry is that 'getalife'?

If not, it should be....

user-pic

Now honesty, how many times have you said something to the effect of "yesterday was the tipping point tat proved that Obama can't win." I could be mixing you up with somebody else -- but seriously -- I take it that this time Obama is not just "destroyed," but now on Double Secret Probation?

sigh. it's those kinds of comments that will make you look all the most stupid when hillary wins. so you planning your out-of-country move when hillary wins? i know you bots are all so adamant about that...

Its all in the numbers, which she'll never be able to overcome.....


Who's looking 'stupid'?

No, but if she keeps this up and SOMEHOW gets the nomination I'm sitting home. There's no way I'm going to vote for her.

...now way I'm voting for her.

Or, to put it another way, "GOD DAMN AMERICA!!!!"

Agreed. Sen Clinton is disqualified no matter who else is running. She will not get my vote under any circumstance.

Supreme Court, Marioth, remember who gets to pick the next Supreme Court justices HAS to be a Dem..

The Supreme Court will attend to itself. It moves in a vastly different time frame than the other two branches.

I will not trade Obliteration for a SCOTUS justice. There is no moral equivalent.

The U.S. would never recover from obliteration. It amazes me this story has not gotten more play. A sitting Senator threatens 70 million people with erasure, and we would rather rifle through church bulletins for dirt on Obama.

After obliteration lies oblivion where SCOTUS decisions will amount to doodly-squat.

No more lying obliteratti. She will never get my vote.

Pax,
M.

Please put "obliteration" in context.

Hillary put this on the table IF Iran launches a pre-emptive nuclear strike on Israel, our friend and ally in the MIddle East.

During her interview with Keith Olbermann, she also said she was for creating a "security umbrella" for our freinds and allies in the Middle East, not just limiting these policies to Iran or Israel.

I am 100% behind her on this one: Ahmadinejad and the mullahs need to understand very clearly what the leaders of this country intend for the Middle East and our foriegn policy.

Planning, like Obama does, "summits and talks" is not going to deter rogue states from trying to find out by pushing the boundaries just what we will put up with.

This is arrogant blustering of the worst sort. You do not understand that an a

This is arrogant blustering of the worst sort. You do not understand that an immoral aggression can never be "won." It serves no vital American interest to remain in Iraq, and public sentiment backs this up. It is just as immoral to qualify obliteration as not.

You are caught in the fantasy that the U.S. has any business dictating anything to anyone. It is the same denial that leads directly to "nuke em all".

And I will not support it.

Get a grip, Marioth. You've got a bad case of kool-aid poisoning here. Obliteration? Please.

You really think putting McCain in the White House is better than Clinton? You're insane. Certifiably, demonstrably insane.

Freakin' cult. Freakin', chump-ass cult.


Your barbs aside, I will never vote for the neocon Hillary Rodham Strangelove Clinton.

When Hillary wins what? Indiana? I expect she will. Maybe even NC. But that brings her no closer to the nomination. The superdelegates are not going to overturn an elected-delegate lead. It's just not going to happen. Stealing the nomination from someone who won by PLAYING BY THE RULES is a sure disaster come November, and the superdelegates know it.

And Hillary will still be running.

This too will pass.

Hillary may win a few battles...but she has lost the war.

user-pic

Word straight up!

That's been my philosophy for a while. My wife could tell after the PA primary that I was a bit discouraged, but I told her my mood would pass, Obama would stay on message, and that this too shall pass. "But he didn't close the deal!" she said. I replied, that the war is already over, she lost.

Incorrect. The President of the Pennsylvania AFL-CIO. Check your facts before you post them.

user-pic

Hey, nice to hear from you. What've you been up to? Working? Ignoring politics? Learning the rules for seating delegates?

My bad.

user-pic

It is so easy to get ahead in the polls when nobody is attacking you. Neither Obama or the RNC are attacking Hillary. This is clearly excellent news for her.

Obama is in the mist of a tornado. Clinton, McCain, RNC, and now REv. Wright. I can't remeber the last time I seen a candidate get taken to task like this.

user-pic

O it reminds me so very much of McCain and Bush, when Bush engineered that black baby smear.

Except Obama's is self inflicting.

Your avatar is gone.

user-pic

Taken to task, and still standing, dignity intact.

user-pic

I can see it.

Damn that edit page - over and over and over I get error messages when I try to change the gravatar.


Damn blogging software - never works right.

The question then becomes whether a tie on May 6th is enough to keep her in the race.

Nonsense. This question is absurd on its face. I still expect Obama to win both IN and NC on May 6, but I am quite certain that whether she wins one and loses the other or loses both, Clinton will still be in the race on May 7.

Young Mr. Hillary. "More of a man than Rocky Balboa"


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rleUPHX8yfM

Indiana trend lines -- very bad news for BO.

http://www.pollster.com/08-IN-Dem-Pres-Primary.php

user-pic

See comment below. (Colorado Jones).

Those are some bad trendlines for Hillary.

Alternate Headline: Nomination Remains Out of Reach for Clinton

A new poll out today shows that Hillary Clinton falls well short of the 68% support she will need in every remaining primary state just to pull even with Barack Obama in elected delegates. In Indiana she polls at just 50%, a full 18 points short of the support she would need to blunt Obama's insurmountable lead. In North Carolina, she continues to trail Obama with no hope of catching up.

Its all in the numbers...

Barry in '08!

Obama's come back from worse deficits.

I'm heading back to Indy this weekend to rally our peeps. Y'all keep phonebanking and donating and we will deliver for our man.

user-pic

thank you thank you thank you.

In the last 2 weeks I have almost maxxed out on donations to Obama. I threw another twofiddy in last night because it was another matching donation night.

I like it when what I give gets doubled.

I can't travel out of state to campaign, so I so appreciate those of you who are doing that.

user-pic

Two questions might be relevant

1) What is the movement in this poll, if any?

2) What is the polling outfit's history of accuracy?

Obama has already proven his resilience over and over again.

Secondly, if it's a choice between a known liar -- Clinton and a well meaning, trustworthy person who occasionally blunders, but who has been correct on the major policy issues of today -- Obama, well that choice is really simple.

Obama 08

As many people here have pointed out and is worth repeating, these polls are only a way for media to keep the horserace story alive.

Until Hillary gets 70 percent to Obama's 30, they are irrelevant!

jeeeez. There are a good amount of polls that suggest Indiana is closer and some that suggest Obama is ahead.

This thing about posting any poll that has the most shocking numbers is weak.

Obama is a liar. Obama KNEW his Pastor words from the pulit were racist and anti-American BEFORE he announced for POTUS. Fresh evidence of honest Barry-O:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I0n16tLzsAI&eurl=http://redstate.com/

More BS from Mr. Softee Head. Lay off the Metamucil.

On the other hand, we now have proof that the Hillster is a switch. Watch as she gets boned by Patti Solis wearing a strap-on...http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yu_moia-oVI

Oh NO.... He said his pastor was his friend?!?!?


He's done.. this is his (at least 20th) Macaca moment!

We got him now!

Mercy....

its getting quite comical all the poop slinging without much affect in the polling....

After people see Obama's press conference from yesterday I have no doubt the numbers will start swinging back Barrys way again. Just in time for the weekend and next tues.

There is more doo-doo on Obama's shoes.
Clinton will win both states on May 6th.

It's over--for HRC. Barack MUST run as if it's not over at all and fight for every delegate, every state that he can get. But it's over for HRC. The superdelegate news today, Obama's repudiation of Wright yesterday--it's over. The narrative is changing again, despite the media pile-on and the two-front HRC/McCain attack. She may well win Indiana, but it's over.

For anyone who thinks (or posts) this is over, just look at the political betting on Intrade (RCP also has these numbers under Dem Pres poll numbers). These had Obama at around 88% a few days ago and now he's at around 75%, with Clinton around 23-25%. This is where people actually put their money up, not just hype up their candidate on the blogs (talk is cheap, no offense to Obama).

Two observations
1. If you believe BO is a cert, you can make around a 30-33% return on your money in a few weeks (lay out 75, gain 25). Not bad in these days of 2% p.a. interest rates.

2. Clinton's chance is now better than Obama's was a couple of days before the Iowa caucus (according to Intrade). I didn't hear anyone calling for him to drop out so as not to damage the party's chances.

And I think this continual chant of "it's over" just lessens the chance of the party coming together if BO is the nominee. By all means support your candidate but stop trying to win by default. Although thankfully it doesn't look like Hillary is going to be intimidated into dropping out.

Being down 75-25 isn't exactly good news for the candidate who was supposed to have this wrapped up in Feb.

Well it's been obvious for some time that Camp Clinton is not so good with the math....

No more obliteratti.

it shocks me to know end how, rather than actually show you can win the nomination outright by winning votes, the obama supporters here seem oddly bent on denying or dismissing democracy and voting and voter sentiment, and seem more intent on rationalizing arguments that try to justify ending the contest early and discounting the votes of the 9 remaining states + the votes of citizens of florida and michigan.

your guy is a hoopster, right? supposed to be well-skilled in "competition" and "playing a full 40 minutes" and "playing through the whistle." i know he was at unc the other day doing his "every man tour", and i realize unc is the birthplace of the dean smith "4 corners offense" (an oxymoron if ever there was one since there's nothing remotely aggressive or offense-oriented about the stall tactic that is the 4 corners "o"), but not a compelling win to win a nomination/"party mandate", and certainly not a strategy that has any chance of success in the general.

works for me and my candidate, though. while obama sits back believing he's got this "wrapped up" and can "coast to the nomination", my gal is going to just keep winning states and winning votes and making her case to the people the party and the super ds.

we'll see where things end up.

i'm optimistic.

user-pic

No one is discounting the voters in the final nine states.

There just aren't enough of them to make a difference.

Once again, Obama will fall short of the 2025 he needs. That's the "math".

Maybe, but he'll still be closer than Hillary.

Maybe, but he'll still be closer than Hillary.

There's an old saying: Close only counts in horse shoes and hand grenades.

Close doesn't mean squat if The Dear Leader loses NC, because the Supers will see what the grown-ups have known for some time: He's an empty suit with one stale, worn-out, plagiarized speech. (Not to mention questionable taste in friends and advisors.)

W is "all hat, no cattle". The Dear Leader is "all wind, no bag". The grown-ups already know that. It's taking the short bus crowd a bit longer to catch on.

user-pic

The math is that Obama needs only 292 of the remaining 699 delegates to reach 2024.

Hillary needs 427. Not gonna happen.

Bizaare that you think he is sitting around waiting to be coronated....Has he not been campaigning every frigging day from the one end of IN and NC to another?

You can spin it all you want, but she is still losing this thing. Let the remaining states vote, seat the delegates from FL and MI, and you will still be losing. Your spin is showing when you try and get the "votes" counted from those states, your girl agreed to the rules just like everyone else.

Why do you think Superdels have been moving to Obama over the past few weeks, depsite the Wright flare-up? Cuz they know what you can't seem to figure out, it's over.

I love Claire McCaskill and when she says there are "dozens" of supers waiting to endorse Obama, I believe her.

I sense a level of denial among Clinton supporters who believe one can simply convince a super del to go against the will of their voters. You really do not understand what you are asking, and how desperate it sounds. You are asking them to risk their careers, and it's rediculous thinking, epecially if you are interested in expanding the dem majority in Congress.

Because the Clinton brand, even today, is no longer selling. "Change you can Xerox?" Who still xeroxes I'd like to know? Change you can mimeograph?

I want to write the ballad "How the Inter-Webs Done In Bubbuh".

Let all the votes be counted. We shall have our nominee soon enough. No more obliteratti.

Pax,
M.

user-pic

it shocks me to know end how, rather than actually show you can win the nomination outright by winning votes, the clinton supporters here seem oddly bent on denying or dismissing democracy and voting and voter sentiment, and seem more intent on rationalizing arguments that try to claim that because the leading candidate has not won every single state, then we should nominate the candidate that cannot win a majority of states or a majority of democratic voters...

PPP also had Obama by 3 in PA 2 days before the election, so taks this for what it is worth.

I'll tell you hwere this ends up.....

Hillary must win the next 9 states with 70% of the vote... and when she doesn't.... Obama locks up the Democratic nomination for POTUS.

And is elected the next President of the United States!!!

PPP also had Obama by 3 in PA 2 days before the election, so take this for what it is worth.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2008/president/pa/pennsylvania_democratic_primary-240.html

Sorry for the double post, I am a newbie to the posting boards here and tried to put the link in before I sent off the first one.

user-pic

No one called for Obama to drop out before Iowa because the race hadn't even started. Now it's almost over, and it's too late for Hillary to catch up. Still, I fully expect her to continue campaigning through the final primaries on June 3. If she doesn't concede shortly afterwards, then we have a problem.

user-pic

That was in response to zebedee above.

It cannot be said too often: this comment system sucks.

It's clear we're in the middle of some Greek epic. Obama, the young hero, must survive a host of trials and tribulations before his final showdown against the pretender to the throne. So far he's managed to fight to what appears like victory, but isn't complete. First he had to push aside his father figure and now he must go out into the country and persevere against the angry hoards. Only then, can the final confrontation be joined, possibly in Denver. He's showing the stuff everyday to prevail, and will eventually defeat his rival. Then there will be dancing and drinking and feats of strength.

Greek epic? You have got to get over yourselves. Do you actually believe the tripe you write here?

The markets follow CW and are not indicative of anything beyond that. It's been obvious since PA that the media believes HRC's chances have improved. All I'm saying is that there's still no way she can win this. Complacency? Absolutely not. HRC is going to stay in the race no matter what. She would've stayed in even if she'd lost PA, and she'll stay in no matter what happens in IN (frankly, I do think she's going to win here and have thought so all along). Obama needs to keep running hard and to shore himself up in areas that he'll need for the GE. He needs to court HRC supporters more aggressively. I'm just saying that the gloom-and-doom cloud to which Josh alluded yesterday is beginning to dissipate.

I'll say this yet again--even though it is next to impossible for HRC to win the nomination, IF she did, I would support her in the fall. I'm still astonished by the threats and hatemongering from some of the HRC supporters here (somewhat akin to the reports that Bill Clinton is threatening uncommitted D's). And btw, I really hope there's nothing to the Peter Paul vs. Clinton case and the allegations that HRC is on videotape committing criminal conduct. As a Democrat and a progressive, I really do hope that's not true. The media's been so busy obsessing over Wright that they've forgotten about the considerable ethical/legal baggage that the Clintons continue to carry. The GOP will be happy to remind them, should Clinton pull off the impossible. But that's not going to happen.

Still, I'd vote for her. The party, as well as the future of the country, matters much more to me than sour grapes.

Until Obliteration, I might have agreed with you.

But no longer. She will never get my vote. I will not help insert the immoral plank of Obliteration into Dem foreign policy.

"the votes of citizens of florida and michigan"

Look, I'm sorry that both those states ignored the rules and are now paying the consequences, I'm also sorry your candidate agreed to not campaign in those states, or seat their delegates. 13 of your candidates people signed off on the deal. Are you saying Billarys a 'flip flopper'?

I realize she desperately needs them now, but we can't be change'n the rules in the middle of the game now can we?

Leseee...Clinton Super Del MI Gov Granholm signed a law she knew would lead directly to this train wreck. Ditto GOP Gov Crist in FL.

The voters of both states retain the power to eject their governors. Luckily, in Democracy, you are never out, but if you break the rules, you will wait until next time.

The delegates from both states will be seated once the nominee is chosen.

Pax,
M.

Why are HRC supporters so bent on discounting the votes that have already been cast? He's won 30 of the 45 contests we've had so far. HRC agreed with the other D's that MI and FLA had broken the rules and would not count--then she hypocritically kept her name on the MI ballot and started singing a different tune when she realized she was in trouble. (And God! Read Terry M.s' comment from his book about Michigan and 2004...flaming hypocrisy! Can the HRC team EVER follow the rules?) I'm just saying that the media meme that it's a wide-open ballgame is false. Obama will win North Carolina, Oregon, and Montana for sure, and quite possibly 1-2 more in addition. He's going to finish on June 3 with more votes and more delegates. I'm not advocating a "4-corner" (with which I'm quite familiar) at all. He needs to run as hard as he can, because HRC is relentless and interested only in her own political career and nothing else--certainly not the Democratic Party (which will be all but destroyed if she gets the nomination)--or her fellow D legislators (who will be looking at a 1994-style debacle come 2010 if she's elected). He needs to have as much of a lead as possible come June 3. He's going to lose Kentucky and West Virginia by a lot, so he needs to run hard. And he is. He's facing a huge test, but he's coming through and will ultimately succeed.

THere is also another aspect that will play against Obama. Obama has alot of support from college students and they are out for the summer in a couple of weeks. Finals are the next couple of weeks. after that they go home or to summer jobs. No fun rallies with theier buddies. Having worked with many of these students, I know they have a tendency to get up and roaring with thier groups and then schools out and they rarley muster up the effort for thier causes while on break. THere will be several that are dedicated but they will not be there to generate the buzz and get those who are not as dedicated out to vote.

I am hoping that this combined with Hillary's strong support with blue collar workers will give her enough of an edge to take the popular vote. I will not support Obama in the general. THe supreme court be damned. I don't care anymore. I do think its funny though that you keep repeating that Hillary can not get enough delegates but you forget that the only way Obama can is if Hillary drops out. This isn't about saving the democratic party but its about not allowing Obama suppoters to force thier candidate on people just because he is in the lead. I have not voted yet and for the first time in my life I have the opportunity to vote for the candidate of my choosing not the one who was chosen by a few states that have been given that opportunity slimply because some stupid rules.
I don't think its fair that FL and MI do not count because they broke rules that were wrong to begin with. If someone thinks its right to discount these people then explain why the entire schedule is fair to begin with. Why should Iwoa get to vote before KY and every other state. What makes them so special. Maybe if we didn't have this system and have a real election we might get a candidate that more than a bare majority of dems can support. Regardless of how this primary turns out, we will have a candidate that only half the party supported.

Didn't you already post this poll yesterday ?

Didn't you already post this poll yesterday ?

ThomasPaine, the Obama campaign is very aware of school ending...the early-vote operation in the college towns here has been phenomenal. And how can you say "the Supreme Court be damned?" Roe vs. Wade will be history. Women will lose the right to control their own bodies. That's one big reason why I'll vote for HRC if she's the nominee. D's who refuse to vote for Obama if he's the nominee will be selling the women of this country down the river.

I would certainly like to see a better-organized primary system myself. But all camps agreed to the rules, and you can't change them in the middle of the game. Clinton supporter and ally Terry McAuliffe, in his own words about 2004:

>>They thought I was bluffing. But it was my responsibility as chairman to take action for the good of the party, and taking away half their delegates was well within my authority. Now all the presidential candidates were upset. They were getting calls from Iowa and New Hampshire asking them to pledge to come to their states no matter what Michigan did, putting the candidates in an impossible position. The whole primary calendar was in danger of spinning out of control. The candidates kept calling me and asking what was happening with the schedule, and I made it clear that I was not going to let Michigan throw the entire process out of whack. Finally I'd had enough and scheduled a meeting in Carl's Senate office for April 2 to settle this once and for all.

As I was escorted into Carl's office with my staff, Debbie Dingell and Carl's chief of staff, David Lyles, were already sitting there waiting with Carl. Sparks flew when I sad down with Phil McNamara and Josh Wachs and immediately complained about all the leaks to the press, which led to finger-jabbing and shouting back and forth between various people in the meeting. Soon, Carl and I were going at it.
"I'm going outside the primary window," he told me definitively.
"If I allow you to do that, the whole system collapses," I said. "We will have chaos. I let you make the case to the DNC, and we voted unanimously and you lost."
He kept insisting that they were going to move Michigan up on their own, even though if they did that, they would lose half their delegates. By that point Carl and I were leaning toward each other over a table in the middle of the room, shouting and dropping the occasional expletive.
"You won't deny us seats at the convention," he said.
"Carl, take it to the bank," I said. "They will not get a credential. The closest they'll get to Boston will be watching it on television. I will not let you break this entire nominating process for one state. The rules are the rules. If you want to call my bluff, Carl, you go ahead and do it."

So what changed?

Oh for God's sake--a Hillary-aligned group is making voter-suppression phone calls in North Carolina?

http://southernstudies.org/facingsouth/2008/04/facing-south-exclusive-dc-nonprofit.asp

I can't believe a Democratic candidate's campaign is engaging in that kind of tactic. I sure hope HRC denounces it and brings it to an end. We have enough trouble fighting that from the Republicans.

Prove they're a "Hillary-aligned" group. I saw the report, it is slanted and devious.

John Podesta on the board and a couple of other members have worked for Clinton in the past...how can you reasonably say that they're not aligned with Clinton? I don't necessarily believe that they're coordinating with Clinton campaign, but to suggest that they're not trying to help Clinton out is ridiculous.

...how can you reasonably say they're not aligned with Clinton?

Meaning, I suppose, that Rev. Wright is aligned with Obama? By your friends shall we know ye....

Still waitin' for that "idiotic" fool to chime in here.... No luck so far, so I'll fill in for the chump.

THIS IS WONDERFUL NEWS!!!!! FOR OBAMA!!!!!!

interesting. i was always told it also meant someone who is very intelligent and thins faster than most others talk and can write.

bill delyon and shoeless joe mccarthy:

1. please cite for me where the dnc penalty ruling on michigan and florida mentions anything about candidates withdrawing their names from the ballot? don't bother, you won't find it because, as you already know, no such provision exist.

you're candidate and edwards and biden selectively removed their names from the michigan ballot at the behest of iowa who indicated it could/would help those candidates curry political and voter favor in iowa in advance of that caucus.

while you falsely claim that hillary was the only candidate on the ballot, you fail to note that dodd, kucinich and gravel also kept their names on the ballot in michigan.

2. terry mccauliffe in 2004 spoke and his words were heeded. states didn't jump in line, voters were not allowed to go to the polls and cast votes that were certified and registered, and no abrogation of democracy occured.

howard dean clearly doesn't have the same command as dnc chair.

so what we have is a situation where the party either tells 2.2m dem voters, "hey, thanks but we don't/won't count you this go round, but please, come vote again in the general!"...or the party decides to count the votes and apportion the delegates in the same fashion used for all other states in this election...or the party figures out a way to do a primary re-vote in both michigan and florida.

money isn't an issue for the re-votes: financiers have already been identified.

timing wasn't an issue until obama continued to stall (apparently his favorite new campaign strategy), but still might be managed if decisions are arrived at quickly.

and clearly, it's the most fair way to address the concerns of the voters who had no part in the political decisions here and want to participate fully in this historic election, the candidates and their various concerns, and in the best interest of the democratic party and its hopes in the fall.

so tell me, fellas, what's your problem with such an effort?

bdiddy, I have to say that, for two such long and detailed posts, you sure left out a lot of...details. I only have time to respond to the three most egregious omissions you made.

please cite for me where the dnc penalty ruling on michigan and florida mentions anything about candidates withdrawing their names from the ballot?

The pledge all the candidates signed mentions it. The last paragraph says, in relevant part, "...shall not campaign or participate...", referring to any primary that moved up to a date before February 5 without prior DNC approval.

money isn't an issue for the re-votes: financiers have already been identified.

"Financiers"? Oh...you mean, 12 private donors who are all Clinton backers.

Private money cannot fund a public election. Surely you're aware of the problem with allowing this proposal to happen.

Oh, and while you're arguing for Michigan, you could have at least been honest enough to review why another primary will not happen there. It's not about money.

The Michigan Supreme Court ruled the January primary unconstitutional (hence, illegal). They also refused to allow the Michigan Democratic Party access to the Michigan Republican Party's voter rolls. This killed the re-vote, because the state has a law that says voters can't vote twice in a primary season. So, the Democrats need the Republican voter rolls to ensure that no one votes twice. Without those...no re-vote.

and the point is that, unlike in 2004 when terry mccauliffe successfully threatened potential violator states into backing off of their designs, howard dean and the dnc were not successful.

The problem was not created by the DNC. Florida and Michigan knew what the penalty would be. They chose to move up anyway. They did so solely out of a desire to increase their visibility and influence over the primary. (What's ironic is that, if they'd just stayed where they were, they probably would be the deciders now.)

Quit trying to blame Howard Dean. Just like McAuliffe, he spelled out what the penalty would be. Four years after one state tried to strong-arm the DNC, this time two states tried it. They will not prevail.

The DNC has an absolute right (confirmed repeatedly in various appellate courts) to control its primary season and the nominating process. People in FL/MI who are upset about their primaries need to take a long, hard look at their state politicians.

Finally, think long and hard about why these states are floating compromise proposals left and right. They KNOW they violated DNC rules. They KNOW that the RBC and the Credentials Committee will never seat them based on the results of their January primaries.

Florida and Michigan decided to play a high-stakes game of chicken with the DNC - on a one-lane road, no less. They got hit. Whining about Dean's driving, when he blew the horn, flashed his lights and yelled out the window is just inane.

Douglasfactor, you wrote "No one called for Obama to drop out before Iowa because the race hadn't even started. Now it's almost over, and it's too late for Hillary to catch up"

This is taken into account in the 20-25% odds for both Obama a couple of days before Iowa and Clinton now. Anyone speculating knows the time frames and the odds are similar

And is there really no way of indented replies here?

I give the Hillary supporters a lot of credit. They're staying by her side at the station even though her train is no longer in sight.

Another train will be coming their way soon enough; and they'll have to choose whether they get on or stand on the sidelines.

For their sake and the sake of all Democrats, I hope they find a way to meet Obama and his supporters in Denver this August.

I give the Hillary supporters a lot of credit. They're staying by her side at the station even though her train is no longer in sight.

Another train will be coming their way soon enough; and they'll have to choose whether they get on or stand on the sidelines. Or maybe they take a ride on the straight talk express instead.

For their sake and the sake of all Democrats, I hope they find a way to meet Obama and his supporters in Denver this August.

Won't happen. Hillary supporters will NEVER support Barack "Barry" Hussein Obama. Whites over 45 will vote McCain or stay home. Obama is REV Wright only taller and skinny.

Like Barry's supporters, there is no flexibility.

Barry-O is a liar, a manufactured image, full of BS, signifying nothing.

It's funny that alleged Democrats post stuff like this.

Half the Democrats sit home, no matter what, and McCain wins.

Makes me wonder if Operation Chaos doesn't have paid trolls.

bdiddy..... nice long post...

I only have one question for you though.

Did Billary pledge or not pledge? Didn't she along with all the other Dem candidates take/agree to a pledge that if Florida or Michigan held their primary's early that they would not be having their delegates seated....

Yeah or Nay?

Nay. She pledged not to campaign in those states, and she did not.

She also said those states shouldn't count.

In an interview on New Hampshire Public Radio last fall, Clinton explained why she was the only candidate who did not agree to New Hampshire's request that she take her name off the ballot in Michigan.

"It's clear: This election they're having is not going to count for anything. I personally did not think it made any difference whether or not my name was on the ballot," she said.

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=19188859

You are telling only half the truth.

The whole truth is that the pledge used the words "...shall not campaign or participate..." in any state that went before the Feb. 5th primary window start without prior DNC approval.

That's why most of the Democrats pulled off the Michigan ballot - because the pledge said they would not participate.

As for Florida, no one came off the ballot. The reason is because, under Florida state law, you cannot appear on a general-election ballot UNLESS you first appear on a primary-election ballot.

Support whichever candidate you like. But tell the truth - the WHOLE truth - in your support.

People, lighten up!! Last I read, we were all Democrats, and it will work out.

Obama, I am certain, will be the nominee, all will be well in a month or so. Take a xanax.

bill deylon: she and all the dems supported the dnc in its position that if states moved up, they would be penalized.

but i'm pretty sure this was a position staked out by the candidates before it was either definitive or finalized that michigan and florida would not back away from their plans to move forward with early primaries.

and the point is that, unlike in 2004 when terry mccauliffe successfully threatened potential violator states into backing off of their designs, howard dean and the dnc were not successful. and now the party has a huge and potentially catastrophic problem on its hands, a problem which rivals if not dwarfs theoretical problems about supporters of one candidate or the other staying away from the polls if their candidate doesn't win the nomination.

florida voters are now facing 3 national elections in which the handling of their votes for the democratic party are being botched, and in each case, the party itself, by action or non-action, has been a major contributing factor in the botching.

there are truly disaffected tangible voters in florida and michigan and if something doesn't get worked out to recognize their legally recognized votes, the dem party is going to suffer mightily in the fall.

the fall game, remember, is an electoral college game, and if we lose michigan and florida to the republicans because of disaffected voters staying home, we lose the white house, plain and simple.

florida voters are protesting right now on capitol hill about this matter.

so hide behind claims of "changing the rules in midstream" or "unfair" if you like. the claims are hollow and transparent.

support getting a re-vote done in those states and put this matter to rest.

democracy and counting the votes of all those who want to vote and participate is what this party is supposed to be all about.

can't be for it just when it works to your advantage and opposed when it does not.

'can't be for it just when it works to your advantage and opposed when it does not.'

'THEREFORE, I _______________, Democratic Candidate for President, pledge I shall not campaign or participate in any state which schedules a presidential election primary or caucus before Feb. 5, 2008'

Her campaign agreed to the pledge. They knew it would basically take Florida and Michigan out of play...

Its Hillary whom is changing the rules halfway through the ballgame here.

Its not like she didn't have a head start (20 point lead nationally, same with most states).

Americans embrace lies, stupidity, and pettiness. Say what you want about people of color, they believe in taking to the streets and demanding change. In this country, you bend over and see how far the corporate media and Bush and his criminal enterprise can stick it to you. You talk about democracy and patriotism, but the fascists have already taken over. Don't you get it? Wright and Miley have dominated media coverage. This race has been over. The only people benefiting from this is the corporate media and the right wing nuts who are busy making ads to play for the gullible blue collar beer drinkers. They are drawing up plans to attack Iran. Your soldiers are coming back to the sewer formally known as Fort Bragg and you are concerned about an old ass south side of Chicago preacher. Great!

You might want to think about that "the gullible blue collar beer drinkers" bullshit. If you honestly think The Dear Leader can win this thing without them you may want to change your screen name: "notthatstupid" is obviously incorrect.

I'm afraid she's going to do better but just enough to drag the process out even longer. That's all she can hope to do.

It upsets me that people's decision on who they are voting for are so volatile that it changes from day to day. Is it me or the way polls are taken?

It's the polling, and the people both. The thing to remember is that it's not the same people being polled day-to-day, but only a sampling. Even within the margin of error, it's normal for fluctuations to occur. The trend-lines really are the thing to watch, as some have pointed out above.

I want Clinton to get it. I think Obama will get it. If he does, I'll vote for him. I wish the same could be said of the average Obama supporter, but sadly they seem to be more intent on His welfare rather than the country's.


Tell us, please, about the average Obama supporter. Then, please, comment on the polls that say one-third of Clinton supporters would vote for McCain if Obama wins the Democratic nomination (as opposed to one-fifth of Obama supporters who would vote for McCain over Clinton).

I agree that there are a lot of zealous (and over-zealous) pro-Obama (or anti-Clinton) comments all over the Internet. To claim that, somehow, there aren't pro-Clinton (or anti-Obama) comments in the same vein is ludicrous.

To the mathematically challenged Hil supporters. Barack only needs 42% (41.9% for those that do the math) of all votes left to reach the magical number. Sure people can change their minds, but what you people discount is the fact that people don't like the Clintons anymore. People aren't going to change their minds because she is no second option. Don't worry. America will ok.

and don't come at me with Michigan or Florida, because it's nonsense. I know Hillary want to change the rules she's already agreed to and supported. Sounds like a Bush

Reason #700 why I won't vote for Hillary.

Neither Democratic candidate can win if the other candidate's supporters stay home in November. People on either side of this nominating fight need to wake up and quit tossing threats around.

Regardless of who you support, if you truly believe that McCain is better than your candidate's opponent, then you're not voting on the issues - which makes you infinitely more dangerous than any retired pastor or obliteration threat.

Having said that, the superdelegates appear to be of a mind to clear this up in June, which seems to be the logical approach. This thing won't get to the convention, which is really all Democrats should care about.

News Flash: The Supreme Court was lost in 2004. Grab you ankles. I doesn't matter who wins in'08, the Court has turned for a generation.

Leave a comment

Advertise Liberally
Share
Close Social Web Email

"To" Email Address

Your Name

Your Email Address