« Big Third-Party Dem Group Airs First Ad Attacking McCain | Home | Report: "McCain Family Recipes" Cribbed From The Food Network »
SurveyUSA: Clinton Ahead By 16 Points In Indiana Primary
A new SurveyUSA poll of Indiana shows Hillary Clinton expanding her lead over Barack Obama. Here are the numbers, compared to the last poll from two weeks ago:
Clinton 55% (+3)
Obama 39% (-4)
A win in Indiana would go a long way in bolstering Hillary Clinton's plan to keep going with the campaign.
Advertisement















Interesting. Indiana may be about to become a big state.
April 14, 2008 11:46 PM | Reply | Permalink
There's more than corn in Indiana
April 15, 2008 12:43 AM | Reply | Permalink
Eric, you linked to the wrong poll. Your link takes the reader to a governorship poll.
April 14, 2008 11:49 PM | Reply | Permalink
Its fine Obama will get the Colbert bump tomorrow.
April 14, 2008 11:51 PM | Reply | Permalink
Oh really? You actually think that will help this charlatan known as barak hussein obama?
The guy who said he didn't want pregnant women to be punished with babies....
The guy who said middle state people were bitter people who 'cling' to guns and religion and 'antipathy' towards others... cuz they aren't sold on the snake oil salesman known as barak hussein obama?
The guy who said his old grandmother was a 'typical white person' when she made racist remarks against blacks?
The guy who said he didn't need to wear a lapel pin because he was more patriotic than those who wear one?
The guy who's wife said "for the first time in my life i'm proud of my country"
The guy who...
Oh I could go on,... please someone stop me! I can't stop typing@!
Ieeheiaa!!!
LOOLLLLOLLLOLL
chickens comin home to roost now! yeah!
April 15, 2008 12:06 AM | Reply | Permalink
Wow. You act like she's won it already. (The nomination, I mean - not just Indiana.) You do realize that she'll need a lot more than Indiana, even by the margins she's ahead by in this poll.
April 15, 2008 12:14 AM | Reply | Permalink
That was my thought too. She needs to win all these by 20% to really have a chance at the nomination. So far she is not anywhere close.
April 15, 2008 1:27 AM | Reply | Permalink
Be honest, you read Hillaryis44 don't you? Have you thought about questioning the fact that they don't allow any comments except pro Hillary and anti Obama?
April 15, 2008 1:29 AM | Reply | Permalink
If Hillary Clinton somehow manages to lie, cheat and slander her way to the nomination, she'll be running as the representative of a shattered Democratic Party that she and her husband helped to divide. Hillary's attempted murder-suicide will not result in a win for her in November. The only question is, can she ruin Obama's chances as well?
April 15, 2008 8:45 AM | Reply | Permalink
democratic party has acted so stupid and dumb over the last thirty years, they need to be shattered!
April 15, 2008 10:07 AM | Reply | Permalink
Josh, on the front page, has the correct link. Something really weird about this poll, though.......it shows Hillary doing better than Obama among the 18-34 year olds. Hmmm?
April 14, 2008 11:52 PM | Reply | Permalink
Yeah, I thought that was off, too. Seems to me that this margin's a little too healthy for Clinton - it's so far out of the range of what had been reported recently (around 10 points). We'll see.
April 14, 2008 11:54 PM | Reply | Permalink
Who at SurveyUSA owes Bill a favor?
April 15, 2008 1:29 AM | Reply | Permalink
Don't even TRY to figure out Hoosiers. I used to live there. It's like a foreign country.
April 15, 2008 8:46 AM | Reply | Permalink
Go Girl!! Yeeeehiaaa!!
April 14, 2008 11:59 PM | Reply | Permalink
Way to manage those expectations...Go girl! Yieeeaaahhaaalllalalrrgh! 20 point pwnage of Barack HUSSEIN HUSSEIN Osama coming up!!1!
April 15, 2008 9:11 AM | Reply | Permalink
Whether she is up or down in Indiana, Pennsylvania or any place else, I am finished with the Clintons. After this last series of inner party bashing and trashing that she has engaged in, I wouldn't vote for her, ever. I won't vote for McCain, so I don't know what I will do. Also, I have no hope for this country and its position in the world, because we can't even get over this toxic racism in this country. We have a lot of damn nerve going all over the world and forcing our beliefs on any one else. Our house is filled with stench and people who vote against their own best interest in order to preserve the toxic stench. My vote isn't appreciated. Only the votes of blue collar whites who are holding everyone hostage by their bigotry and ignorance and yes, "bitterness!"
April 15, 2008 12:06 AM | Reply | Permalink
now now...
so blue collars middle state people are ignorant bigots! my my my....
Too bad we can't all be elites like you and barry hussein obama.
I guess we just don't know any better. we just sit home and cling to our guns and religion.
LOLLOLLLL
April 15, 2008 12:08 AM | Reply | Permalink
Way to win him back to your side - deliberately misstate Obama's quote, insult him and call him names. What is with people like you? This isn't a damned football game. There's a lot more at stake. Grow up.
April 15, 2008 12:13 AM | Reply | Permalink
that comment was directed notthatstupid, right above my post you devlish looking character!
April 15, 2008 10:09 AM | Reply | Permalink
I think the absolute worst thing about HRCs attempts at dragging things down to her level is the shot of adrenaline it gives her supporters. They pop up on occasion for a little bitter cackling, then disappear whenever HRC overplays it to the point of obnoxiousness, usually after about 3 days.
I might be able to forgive HRC the lies, smears, pandering and slime, but I can't forgive that.
My little corner of Pennsyltucky has voted, but more and more Obama signs are showing up around here.
April 15, 2008 6:46 AM | Reply | Permalink
I don't know about that. From your posts, I'd say you sit at home and cling to a six pack with one hand and your genitalia with the other.
April 15, 2008 8:19 AM | Reply | Permalink
So when Obama made the Annie Oakley reference or made fun of her drinking or said she was using Karl Rove's playbook that's not trashing?
April 15, 2008 2:45 AM | Reply | Permalink
Oh, come on--that was some pretty good-natured kidding, considering the Rove-style garbage she's been throwing at him. She's been asking for it. Obama was just reminding people of how ridiculous she's being. She has, after all, had more than her own share of "elitist" moments. Like the time she insulted women who choose to raise families instead of pursuing a career:
This phony "outrage" over what Obama said is just pure political opportunism from a candidate who's desperate to turn her failing fortunes around. People in Pennsylvania aren't stupid. But apparently Hillary thinks they are.
April 15, 2008 8:55 AM | Reply | Permalink
Wow, that quote got mangled. Here it is again, unmangled:
You know, it's funny that Hillary can stand up in front of a camera and say, "SHAME ON YOU, BARACK OBAMA! SHAME ON YOU!" but if Barack Obama DARES to defend himself from a shamelessly over-the-top attack by Hillary, her supporters think he's crossing a line.
April 15, 2008 9:00 AM | Reply | Permalink
I wish you'd change that avatar. It makes me hungry!
April 15, 2008 3:01 PM | Reply | Permalink
by saying what she did, she opened the door. So Obama is not to defend himself (and have a little fun while he is at it), so that the "wimp" meme can be used on him by the Republicans?
and here's a money quote from today:
April 15, 2008 4:16 PM | Reply | Permalink
notthatstupid,
It is really interesting that every time some good news about Clinton comes out some Obama supporter, such as you now, writes something like "I am finished with the Clintons". What, you were going to switch to her while she was down? Why wouldn't you want to do so now, especially when things are beginning to look promising for her as Obama's candidacy crumbles?
And the name, notthatstupid? you might want to rethink it.
Matthew
http://www.TheProblemWithObama.com
April 15, 2008 12:22 AM | Reply | Permalink
Try, not that stupid as you!
It is really interesting that you have not seen bad news for Clinton.
April 15, 2008 12:54 AM | Reply | Permalink
I actually would have considered voting for her early on. The way they've run their campaign keeps reminding me of what a divisive circus the Clinton years were. Set aside the booming economy (which Bill presided over, but really had little to do with otherwise) and what I remember are the scandals and the in-fighting in losing Congress to the Republicans and losing the White House to Bush.
The Clinton years are highly overrated, and Bill was a pretty crappy president, all things considered. Probably better than Hillary would be, but pretty damn lousy.
April 15, 2008 9:06 AM | Reply | Permalink
GO HILLARY! of course, the obama fans will say this poll is all wrong. ;)
April 15, 2008 12:34 AM | Reply | Permalink
I don't care how accurate SurveyUSA has been this season, that massive swing in the 18-34 demographic is fucking stupid.
I call bullshit. There's no way in hell Obama loses that age group by double digits.
April 15, 2008 12:34 AM | Reply | Permalink
bitter much?
April 15, 2008 12:44 AM | Reply | Permalink
More like incredulous.
What have we been hearing all season from pollsters? The one consistent thing, especially since Super Tuesday, is that Obama and Clinton both have their strong demographics, and those demographics largely haven't budged. Wisconsin and Maine were exceptions in Obama's favor, but by and large you've been able to find a state's demographics and then determine which candidate ought to win it.
And younger voters have been one of Obama's strongest demographics in every state's contest thus far. I refuse to believe Indiana will be exceptional. He even won young voters in Ohio.
April 15, 2008 12:50 AM | Reply | Permalink
Bet young people are out there campaigning instead of sitting by their phones. I expect a big surprise in IN. And it's the good kind =].
April 15, 2008 12:54 AM | Reply | Permalink
young people have land line phones???
April 15, 2008 12:57 AM | Reply | Permalink
Yeah, most people that have a house have a phone. We know that college students are under polled, but there's not that many of them nationwide.
And even in big-student-population states, they tend to vote absentee so it's all awash.
But people 25-40 that have a house usually will have a landline. Let's just hope they're preparing the deal for the signing.
April 15, 2008 1:04 AM | Reply | Permalink
I would not say "fucking stupid," but I agree that the results smell funny to me. S-USA has earned its reputation as an oracle this season, but even they have been wrong on occasion (witness my own state of Missouri). I would have been prepared to see a poll that showed her lead in IN holding, but I am really hard pressed to credit a poll which shows her 1) winning the youth vote and 2) winning Indianapolis (as this poll has it). As such, I am disinclined to set much stock this poll. I will believe that she is winning, but not by this sort of margin.
April 15, 2008 11:30 AM | Reply | Permalink
I don't think of it as her 'plan' to keep on going. I think of it more as her evil scheme to keep on going.
Just sayin'
April 15, 2008 12:53 AM | Reply | Permalink
We have to put away machine politics.
I live in East Chicago Indiana - Steeltown.
- Where the air smells - Bad
- Where it is considered the 7th most polluted region in the country based on USEPA TRI data
- Where The Indiana Harbor is arguably the most polluted waterway in the country
- Where 1/1000 Americans are murdered annually
- Where it is home to extreme poverty
- Where the State’s poorest citizens pay the highest property taxes at 8.43%
- Where the Schools rank last in the state based on Standardized testing
- Where more than 11% of working age Hispanic males are unemployed (controlling for government workers)
- Where more than 20% of working age African-American males are unemployed (controlling for government workers).
- Where Industry no longer hires local residents because they lack the qualifications
- AND where deep-rooted Democrat politics operate
To the credit of most Americans, this is not the America they know. This is a remnant of 19th century Steeltown politics - but it still exists, here on the Southern Shores of Lake Michigan, here in America, and it is strong Clinton territory.
So your damn right I am bitter.
I am bitter towards our Party Elite who utilize these practices to deliver the vote. I am bitter towards State Party Leaders who allow these practices to continue at the region and the local levels. I am bitter towards those who will sit back and blame the local electorate for voting these officials into office, without acknowledging how the practices of machine politics in areas of extreme poverty rapes a community. I am bitter towards National leaders showing up here with back-room deals for the local POLITICAL ELITE.
I am bitter towards the Clintons who came here sixteen years ago promising jobs, universal healthcare, improved education, and a better quality of life. In the end, a lot of local politicians got rich and school kids got a free lunch - That's it. I WANT A CHANGE. I don't want a President showing up in a bars drinking SHOTS with local POLITICAL ELITES and SHOOTING off her mouth about being a hunter.
I’m bitter because we, the people are disenfranchised and our community is becoming more violent, and less educated. The people are becoming poorer, and our neighborhoods are becoming more blighted.
I am tired now.
And I need to find a better life for me and my family…
At some point Blue Indiana needs to grow up and change business as usual.
Sometimes Wonkette hits it out of the park.
April 15, 2008 1:32 AM | Reply | Permalink
Excellent points, T_Frank.
This is what I have said for several months now: Hillary always makes a strong showing in areas with old political machines in them: Los Angeles, Boston, New York (although that is her home state)... and now PA.
In other words, Hillary does well where she can really game the system. It is disingenuous to then turn around and say you are "with the people". She is more ensconced in the old Party politics than Obama and McCain combined.
April 15, 2008 4:07 AM | Reply | Permalink
Take the time to read the crosstabs people.
The points he is losing in his poll largely come out of INDIANAPOLIS.
So even if this is true (not convinced here), it would have nothing to do with the small town remark
April 15, 2008 1:43 AM | Reply | Permalink
This is the trolliest thread ever.
April 15, 2008 2:11 AM | Reply | Permalink
Indiana is a very different state from Illinois. The demographics are different, there are more blue collar workers in % terms and far fewer of that so-called "creative class." I do find it odd that if Obama is not elitist why does the elitist creative class support him so and rank & file Democrats not so much?
April 15, 2008 6:08 AM | Reply | Permalink
factanonverba you dilute yourself -
Indiana is a southern state in the north. The poor, in the Industrial Northwest, see an election year as a revenue source. They expect handouts and Bingos (with televisions and DVD players as prizes) and a lot of "off-the-books" cash. In the last Mayoral election, in East Chicago (population 28,000) the mayor raised more than $500,000 and spent another $500,000 in street money.
Again, this is a place where 28% of households work for the City, otherwise they tend to be unemployed and poor. This is the "Socialist Republic of East Chicago"
I'll say it again, machine politics is raping communities like ours as our POLITICAL ELITE are at the bars inking a deal with Hillary.
April 15, 2008 8:44 AM | Reply | Permalink
Let me point out to my own comment.
The reason the mayor of this small industrial community is able to raise such large amounts of political funds is that East Chicago is home to BP, Mittal Steel and U.S. Steel.
In addition the City recently gave a $3 Billion abatement to BP so they can refine the Tar Sands in Canada.
April 15, 2008 8:52 AM | Reply | Permalink
Odd though that the political machine in Boston was for Obama. Obama had the Governor and both Senators supporting him and he still lost big. In Massachusetts, she beat the machine.
Are all Obama supporters this dense? Honestly think before you write.
April 15, 2008 6:10 AM | Reply | Permalink
You should get your facts straight first. Under Bill Clinton, there was tremendous job growth. The erosion came under Bush.
Jobs did not fall during the Clinton Administration. I went and looked at the Bureau of Labor Statistics for the top 100 US markets under Bush 41, Clinton and Bush 43. Bush 41 led in 12 (Gary, Honolulu, Des Moines, El Paso, Little Rock, Fresno, Seattle, Witcha, Riverside/San Bernardino, Tacoma, Raleigh/Durham, Madison). Clinton led in all the rest or 88. None for GWBush.
Here are numbers for Pennslyvania markets:
Allentown
GHWBush 0.59% Clinton 1.72% GWBush 0.00%
Harrisburg
GHWBush 1.18% Clinton 1.73% GWBush 0.31%
Philadelphia
GHWBush -0.95% Clinton 1.51% GWBush 0.14%
Pittsburgh
GHWBush 1.10% Clinton 1.24% GWBush -0.51%
Scranton
GHWBush 0.42% Clinton 1.10% GWBush -0.75%
Kentucky and Indiana
Gary, IN
GHWBush 1.52% Clinton 1.02% GWBush -0.64%
Indianapolis
GHWBush 2.00% Clinton 2.54% GWBush -0.16%
Lexington, KY
GHWBush 2.26% Clinton 2.97% GWBush -1.61%
Louisville, KY
GHWBush 1.97% Clinton 2.40% GWBush -1.70%
Only Honolulu had cause for economic complaints during the Clinton era, but no one else really did. Those 99 MSAs that increased employment while Clinton was president, ran up a total gain of 15.3 million jobs. Honolulu was the only place to suffer a drop losing a rather paltry 6,100 job over 8 years.
Atlanta’s growth during the Clinton years was breathtaking, resulting in the addition of 632,400 jobs, the equivalent of 79,050 per year. Four other markets gained at least half-a-million jobs: Chicago, Phoenix, Dallas and New York City.
Under Clinton the US had the largest job creation under a single Administration. Clinton’s economic team created more than 22.5 million jobs nationwide. That’s more than were created in the previous 12 Reagan-Bush years. Of the total new jobs, 20.7 million, or 92%, were in the private sector.
During the Clinton years, Las Vegas led the nation in job-growth rate to 7.3%. Austin, Texas was the runner-up at 5.9%. Pennsylvania and Michigan did lag the national average but every market demonstrated a net gain of jobs.
Economic growth under Clinton averaged 4.0% per year, compared to average growth of 2.8% during the Reagan-Bush years. The economy grew for 116 consecutive months, the most in history.
Obama chooses to lump the Clinton economic inter-regnum with GOP reign of terror since 1981 and it is not just flat out wrong that he does so but also rather bizarre since back in January in Reno he had such effusive praise for Reagan. Why do people forget these things?
Obama blames NAFTA and free trade for the erosion of jobs and yet he recently voted for the Costan Rican FTA and the Peruvian FTA. FTAs are not responisble for the loss of jobs generally. It is corporate greed and loopholes including tax benefits. Here is one example from my days on Wall Street. Home Depot CEO Nardelli made a contribution to the RNC and Home Depot two years later gets rewarded with a $48 million tax break by getting an exception to tariffs on Chinese-made ceiling fans.
http://www.citizen.org/pressroom/release.cfm?ID=1600
How many US jobs were lost in that transaction?
Blame Bush, not Bill Clinton. Obama in his comments blamed both Bush and Clinton and that's why many people are furious with Obama. Is this not obvious? In terms of economic stewardship, Bill Clinton did an excellent job.
April 15, 2008 6:20 AM | Reply | Permalink
In absolute terms, the largest growth rate. But not in % terms; in fact rather moderate. See this image. While I know this sounds like a Republican talking point, he also benefitted from a major expansion based on new technology; so it wasn't all Clinton all the time on this. And what can you say about NAFTA and the Friedmanesque economic policies that he facilitated after running as an economic populist? I think it's a mixed bag for the Clintons ... especially for folks in the Rust Belt.
April 15, 2008 3:33 PM | Reply | Permalink
There we go again, one more poll that is irrelevant at this point.
April 15, 2008 6:40 AM | Reply | Permalink
Latest Pennsylvania Quinnipiac poll out today:
Clinton 50. Obama 44. Same numbers as last week.
Pollster says Bittergate has not harmed Obama. Watch for her numbers to drop a bit over the next week as he turns on the charm with voters.
April 15, 2008 7:07 AM | Reply | Permalink
April 15, 2008 7:08 AM | Reply | Permalink
Obama has my vote, and a lot others I know here in Indianapolis.
April 15, 2008 7:09 AM | Reply | Permalink
The math doesn't change, unless she can win every single state by some 20%, it doesn't matter. It doesn't matter if she can win one here or there, she is still over.
April 15, 2008 7:16 AM | Reply | Permalink
factanonverba: You just embarrassed yourself. In MA, Hillary had the endorsements of the mayors of Boston and Worcester and those are the people who control the existing political machines that turn out votes. That's one reason Obama only won Boston 55-45, and not by a much bigger margin.
It's clear you don't know anything about MA politics. In the future, try to have a little knowledge about these things before you start attacking other people.
April 15, 2008 7:22 AM | Reply | Permalink
Let's not lose dight of the main objective: a Democrat in the White House. Period. Let's pull it together and take the unity page from the repugs. Like him or not, Obama will be the nominee. Choke back the disapointment and let's promise to support the Democratic Nominee 100 %.
I know I am.
April 15, 2008 8:18 AM | Reply | Permalink
Seems I have a fat typing finger this morning. Forget dight and think sight.
April 15, 2008 8:20 AM | Reply | Permalink
Wow. If Hillary can keep this pretend momentum going, she may lose the nomination by slightly fewer delegates than expected. That's certainly worth continuing to damage the Democratic Party.
April 15, 2008 8:37 AM | Reply | Permalink
Party unity be damned. For the same reason HRC is undermining Obama right now (i.e. she wants to run in 2012 and can't with an Obama presidency) is exactly why my wife and I will stay home if she pulls the nomination out of Obama's hands via superdelegate/convention shennanigans.
With the GOP teetering on the edge of the abyss, no one will fire the repubs up like a prospective Clinton. And if she does become president via the old Karl Rove political 51-49 tactics, the GOP will see a resurgance, no doubt. I think the GOP will overextend it's anti-Obama tactics in the fall, but not with a HRC campaign, a near plurality of America is ready to hate her to begin with.
People say that the Wright story or "Bittergate" will sink Obama in the general, which is why Hillary should get the nomination. Call me an optimist, but I'd like to think that the American people have more brains than that (then again, we did "elect" Bush twice, so maybe I'm being too hopeful in my thoughts.)
April 15, 2008 9:06 AM | Reply | Permalink
Now, now, Khaine, I'm as die-hard an Obama supporter as they come, but I will still vote for Hillary in November if she somehow manages to win the nomination ugly. As mad and, yes, BITTER as I will be, I'd take Hillary over Walnuts any day, if only for the Supreme Court and other important appointments and the glee I will have watching the Rightards stew in the reality of President Hillary.
This kind of electoral nihilism is wrong coming from Hillary supporters and it's wrong coming from Obama supporters. It only serves to make the party in question look childish. Those Democrats who fall into this trap will have some serious buyers' remorse come January 20, 2009, if they help put Walnuts in the White House. Think about it!
Obama 08
April 15, 2008 9:17 AM | Reply | Permalink
Thank you! And even though I have tracked toward the Democrats the last few election, I'm staying home or voting for the war hero if Obama gets the nomination.
April 15, 2008 9:33 AM | Reply | Permalink
Er, I think you sort of missed my point.
April 15, 2008 10:01 AM | Reply | Permalink
Er no, my reply was to the guy above you. If my reply had been to you, I would have been another indentation level farther than yours. Er, uh, got that?
April 15, 2008 10:22 AM | Reply | Permalink
I'll bite...
stay home if you must. but war heroes don't always make good presidents. and this one's shortcomings are being totally ignored by the press because to them, flattery and being among the in-crowd is everything. 4th estate? Bah!
April 15, 2008 3:37 PM | Reply | Permalink
I can't wait to see how he turns this into a positive. While I agree with what he said, the way he said it was not a positive. Kinda like I might know that I am not good looking, but I don't want to be called ugly.
Suck it up and quite being so sensitive, we have a White House to win!
April 15, 2008 9:13 AM | Reply | Permalink
This is a poor poll, small number and margin of error of 4.2 % -- as in, all the movement in the recorded numbers for both candidates is well within MoE. As in, very possible NOTHING has changed in IN......
April 15, 2008 9:21 AM | Reply | Permalink
It's ironic that the candidate who talks to voters like they're adults is branded "condescending" by his opponents. Someone needs to tell Tracy Flick we're not as stupid as she obviously believes we are.
April 15, 2008 10:12 AM | Reply | Permalink