« AP/Ipsos: Hillary Performing Better Than Obama Against McCain | Home | Poll: Hillary Gaining Ground In North Carolina »
SurveyUSA: Hillary Leads By Nine Points In Indiana
If the Indiana primary could end up being the tiebreaker in the Democratic race, a possibility that Barack Obama alluded to a few weeks ago, the latest SurveyUSA poll gives Hillary Clinton some good news with a nine-point lead -- but on the other hand, Obama is closing the gap.
The numbers, compared to two weeks ago:
Clinton 52% (-4)
Obama 43% (+4)
From the internals: Clinton leads 55%-41% with women voters, and edges Obama 48%-46% among men.
Other recent polls have shown this to be a closer race, or even put Obama narrowly ahead. The state votes next week, in a race that could determine whether Barack Obama sews up the nomination or Hillary Clinton keeps the clock running.
Advertisement
I wonder if this is the last poll SUSA plans to run before IN votes? I would hate to see them spoil such a fine track record by getting it so wrong this time around.
April 28, 2008 1:09 PM | Reply | Permalink
Missouri Voter,
I noticed in someone's post this weekend you had suggested it would be nice to hear either Hillary or Barack say that the party will unite.
I wanted to point out this section from the last debate to you:
Unity 08
April 28, 2008 1:17 PM | Reply | Permalink
Don't forget, too, that this is something that Obama has been saying since the start of the campaign.
April 28, 2008 1:21 PM | Reply | Permalink
Yes, duly noted. And I, for one, believe they both are sincere.
April 28, 2008 1:37 PM | Reply | Permalink
No...I think what Obama's been saying is that I will get all of Hillary's supporters, but she will probably not get all of mine. He's said that on a number of occasions, and I think it was the wrong message to send. And to those who would respond with the simple, "it's the truth," surely it's also true to some degree if Hillary had said that.
Hillary wants the party to be united, whereas Obama is thinking only of himself.
April 28, 2008 1:37 PM | Reply | Permalink
Spare me the nonsense and posturing, please. Once Ickes made public that he plans to make Obama's ties to Wright part of the pitch to supers, the Clinton campaign abandoned the pretense of desiring party unity. I am not trying to make out that Obama's campaign is better, but you will fool no one but yourself in advancing the line that Clinton is selfless concerned for the good of the party.
April 28, 2008 1:40 PM | Reply | Permalink
Yes, but as I said in that very post to which you refer, the problem with that claim is that she is very publically saying exactly the opposite to the superdelegates. It is this talking out of both sides of her mouth that is not helpful to either party. Nobody stands to benefit from slicing the traditional democratic coalition in two and it seems to me that it is hard not to see such an outcome as the likely result of continuing this race through to the convention (or even to the end of voting).
April 28, 2008 1:27 PM | Reply | Permalink
I don't quite see the problem. Obama has made similar statements to the above referenced, yet his campaign also goes around telling American that Hillary cannot bring about the changes needed and that it would be hard for her to be elected because of her "character gap". Aren't they both just playing the same game?
In the end, I suspect the loser will end up either joining the ticket or campaigning vigorously for the other.
April 28, 2008 1:31 PM | Reply | Permalink
Yes. I thought that I was clear about that already, but in case I was not, allow me to restate. It would be very helpful if both could leave off from pointing out the other's drawbacks.
April 28, 2008 1:34 PM | Reply | Permalink
OK, sorry, I must have misread what you were trying to say.
April 28, 2008 1:35 PM | Reply | Permalink
Have SUSA's polls been accurate in this primary season? I can never remember which polling outfits have a good track record and which ones do not.
I REALLY wish TPM would make it an editorial policy to include some brief statement to that effect (good record, so-so, not so good) with each of the numerous polling posts on TPM EC.
Eric?
April 28, 2008 1:29 PM | Reply | Permalink
SUSA's polls have been far more accurate so far this season than any other pollster's.
April 28, 2008 1:35 PM | Reply | Permalink
The comment by Josh on the front page that SUSA's numbers from this poll are essentially unchahged from last week are misleading. The SUSA poll that is cited was commisioned by the MIke Downs operation in Indiana. It used the SUSA operation to collect the information, but was done with questions created by Mike Downs. The SUSA that it needs to be compared with is their previous poll that had Hillary up 16 points. A drop down to 9 points is indeed major movement in Barack's direction
April 28, 2008 1:55 PM | Reply | Permalink
This is before the REV Wright's comments at the NPC DC today... it's the "ordinary white person's" fault. As I noted Clinton would trounce the empty suit in PA, she will do the same in IN and possibly win in NC (or lose under 5%). Obama/Wright 2008!
April 28, 2008 1:10 PM | Reply | Permalink
Obama did say that the aim was to be within 10 points in PA; this goal was achieved and the pledged delegate count went from 171 to 161. And......
April 28, 2008 1:14 PM | Reply | Permalink
Marginal Player,
With your ridiculously offensive (not to mention just plain dumb) graphic, I doubt anyone is going to take you seriously here. Maybe you should go back to hillary hub or wherever the hillary dead enders are hanging out these days.
April 28, 2008 1:19 PM | Reply | Permalink
What's dumb about the graphic? It's obvious that Obama is a Communist. And we should frame all the candidates in hot-button Cold War terminology. So that would mean that Obama is also for desegregation and miscegenation, which I think Marginal has alluded to previously.
Thusly we see that Marginal is being hiply retro.
April 28, 2008 3:52 PM | Reply | Permalink
Let's rephrase, whaddya say? Barack Obama "sews up the nomination" or YOU keep Hillary's clock running. You and the rest of the media.
April 28, 2008 1:11 PM | Reply | Permalink
Oh Tena....
April 28, 2008 1:13 PM | Reply | Permalink
O what?
What?
I must be doing really good today since I'm getting my own personal trolls on every thread.
Thanks for validating my comments. :)
April 28, 2008 1:15 PM | Reply | Permalink
Dear BrooksFan,
You're a very smart and engaging poster. But can't you see what's happening here? Because Barack Obama has not hit back, and has not made his campaign(post 3/4) about anything except hanging on to his lead, he may be about to go into freefall.
The scumbag MSN smells blood and they are going for it.
(And btw, I worked for the guy in NJ, RI and PA. And I'm disgusted by his "float like a butterfly, sting like a butterfly" approach.)
April 28, 2008 1:58 PM | Reply | Permalink
And you're wrong
So?
April 28, 2008 2:15 PM | Reply | Permalink
You just ignore any bad news for Clinton - just like TPM.
what about her internals that show that she has no trustworthiness, no credibility among voters. Why isn't that talked about?
That and the fact that she's already lost. Someone show me how she can possibly make up the delegate gap - realistically.
Not some fantasy - something real. There isn't anything.
What a surprise. She's already lost and the whole page is one poll after another with totally meaningless results.
this is just stupid. It is - that's a fact.
April 28, 2008 2:18 PM | Reply | Permalink
Sadly (as a huge Obama supporter), I think you are quite right. The last several weeks, he has gone into "four corners" mode, and allowed Hillary to hang around much longer than she should have. Originally, I thought this was driven in part by a large swath of soon-to-be-committed SDs that were waiting to announce their support. But, since those haven't materialized in huge numbers, I think his strategy has become very ineffectual. It allows for both the Repugs in this race to contantly bat him about the head, and lessens the impact of his responses (which are weak to begin with, in many cases). I wish he would really start fighting hard -- leaving behind the fallacy that Hillary is a "fellow Democrat" who should not be impugned as strongly as McCain -- so he can better position himself for the GE.
April 28, 2008 4:37 PM | Reply | Permalink
Good news?
He's closing in, Greg. Not falling behind.
Good news. Wow.
April 28, 2008 1:13 PM | Reply | Permalink
Oops, it was Eric on this one. Sorry.
April 28, 2008 1:15 PM | Reply | Permalink
He has to win IN. NC alone wont end it. If he loses IN the media will spin it to say BO has problems with white voters.
He has to end her mini win streak before it ends him. This strategy of "letting the clock run out" is not a good one imo...
IN is a must win!!!
April 28, 2008 1:14 PM | Reply | Permalink
No, it's not. The delegate math is the delegate math, and she's not going to catch him.
Not enough of the remaining undecided superdelegates are going to be willing to go against the majority of pledged delegates.
April 28, 2008 1:27 PM | Reply | Permalink
If Hillary can't maintain her margins from OH and PA in the demographics that she claims are the only ones that countthen her central argument will be falsified.
April 28, 2008 1:14 PM | Reply | Permalink
"Obama gains in Indiana SUSA poll"
That's the real headline.
April 28, 2008 1:15 PM | Reply | Permalink
Not really. He was ahead of her by 5 pts in the last SUSA poll of IN.
April 28, 2008 1:23 PM | Reply | Permalink
That poll was commisioned by the downs center and used a different methodology.
April 28, 2008 1:33 PM | Reply | Permalink
Really? I had not realized that the methodologies were different. That is interesting. In that case, I guess that the "her support is falling" line is not as inaccurate as I have been saying, although given SUSA's accuracy to date, I am not sure that we should be cheered by a poll showing her ahead.
Still, I am sticking to my guns and confidently forecasting a single-digit Obama win in IN.
April 28, 2008 1:38 PM | Reply | Permalink
From what I recall, the key methodology differences where that the closer-margin-poll had significantly more questions (and asked the pres question much further in) and was restricted to registered dems...
Ah, here's the discussion that was up at pollster.com: http://www.pollster.com/blogs/poll_downs_centersurveyusa_ind.php
(excerpts... there were other differences as well)
· The University poll was conducted using “RBS” sample (Registration Based Sample, purchased from Aristotle, of Washington DC), which is what SurveyUSA uses on many, but not all, of its research for non-media clients.
April 28, 2008 3:06 PM | Reply | Permalink
Did you notice that it only has 2% undecided? Isn't that a little low with 8 days left to go? Just wondering, because I seem to recall that PA had a larger undecided with only 2 days left, and in NC the undecideds is much higher than this.
April 28, 2008 1:16 PM | Reply | Permalink
Eric, check your sources. The last SUSA poll in Indiana had her up 55-39.
April 28, 2008 1:16 PM | Reply | Permalink
The tide has turned thanks to Wright.
Its over people, time to unite with the Dem nominee.
Hillary Clinton.
April 28, 2008 1:18 PM | Reply | Permalink
No thanks.
I'll write in Lord Vader before I vote for Hillary. At least Vader has some principles.
April 28, 2008 1:34 PM | Reply | Permalink
This a Dem blog troll.
April 28, 2008 1:38 PM | Reply | Permalink
Yes, you are.
April 28, 2008 2:15 PM | Reply | Permalink
I'll join the others pointing out that this post is really, really misleading.
Eric totally disregards the last SUSA poll, which was done on April 11-13 and which had Hillary up by 16 points.
What today's SUSA poll shows is that Hillary lost 5 points since April 11-13.
April 28, 2008 1:27 PM | Reply | Permalink
I feel like my fingers are going to fall off from re-typing this again and again: Apr 11-13 was not the last IN SUSA poll. The last SUSA poll of IN was released on Apr 19 concerning data from Apr 14-16 (that is, pre-PA) and it showed Obama 5 pts ahead of Clinton in IN.
April 28, 2008 1:30 PM | Reply | Permalink
In other words, this latest poll does not represent Clinton losing 7 pts of support. It shows her gaining 14 pts of support. I do not expect the result to be long lived. These results were collected from Apr 25-27, in the very height of her post-PA adulatory press orgy. Nonetheless, it is simply not accurate to claim that they represent a drop in her support.
April 28, 2008 1:32 PM | Reply | Permalink
Watch North Caroina too.
She will win.
Its over.
April 28, 2008 1:34 PM | Reply | Permalink
Will she win 70-80% in those states?
If not, then it's over.
For Hillary.
April 28, 2008 1:41 PM | Reply | Permalink
http://www.pollster.com/blogs/poll_downs_centersurveyusa_ind.php
April 28, 2008 1:36 PM | Reply | Permalink
Update: Please note that unlike the survey conducted and released earlier this week by SurveyUSA, this poll survey used a different "sample frame" (one based on a registered voter list rather than random digit dialing). I asked SurveyUSA's Jay Leve to confirm and he sent along a detailed explanation (that appears after the jump) of all the methodological differences between the polls and what may or may not explain the differences in presidential preference on the two surveys.
April 28, 2008 1:37 PM | Reply | Permalink
It is interesting that Clinton should lead when one dials random numbers but Obama should lead when one dials only registered voters. I guess that we will see which one comes closer.
April 28, 2008 1:45 PM | Reply | Permalink
Sorry, I don't think that's right.
SUSA did the telephoning polling for the tv station poll you link to but the crunching of numbers was not done by SUSA -- so, it's not an SUSA poll. That's why SUSA does not show the poll you link to on their website. Comparing today's numbers to the poll you link to is apples and oranges.
April 28, 2008 1:36 PM | Reply | Permalink
Indeed, so I gather from Silver Heron's redoubtable link. I guess you are right. We can take this poll as evidence of an erosion in Clinton's support (and post-PA at that). I thank you for catching my mistake.
April 28, 2008 1:44 PM | Reply | Permalink
I hear ya on the fingers falling off typing the same things over and over and over.
And over and over and over...
April 28, 2008 1:33 PM | Reply | Permalink
yeah it seems you might be right, SurveyUSA did do the polling but its listed as a Mike Down poll thus why people are missing it.
April 28, 2008 1:36 PM | Reply | Permalink
7 points, not 5.
April 28, 2008 1:37 PM | Reply | Permalink
Right. My mistake.
April 28, 2008 1:44 PM | Reply | Permalink
The Southern half of Indiana votes very much like Kentucky does.
Hillary should carry Indiana by at least 10%.
History reminder. Indiana is the birth state of the KKK.
April 28, 2008 1:35 PM | Reply | Permalink
She will won North Carolina too.
It is over.
April 28, 2008 1:41 PM | Reply | Permalink
Those chickens you're counting are hard-boiled.
April 28, 2008 1:45 PM | Reply | Permalink
gotalife -
So, we agree:
Whoever loses NC should drop out?
April 28, 2008 1:46 PM | Reply | Permalink
She will won NC?
LOL!
Keep dreaming.
April 28, 2008 2:15 PM | Reply | Permalink
Afraid not. That dubious honor goes to Pulaski, Tennessee.
April 28, 2008 5:30 PM | Reply | Permalink
Greg,
I have never fly-specked your campaign posts, which I enjoy; and I believe there a pretty vigilant chorus here of folks to correct errors that cut against Obama.
But I don't think you're use of the "tie-breaker" line here is quite right -- and since HRC will be leaning on this to make Indiana the ULTIMATE, WINNER-TAKE-ALL showdown (in contrast to her prior view that red states don't matter), it's more important.
The linked Obama quote, at least, does not suggest that he thinks IN will be the "tiebreaker in the Democratic race" -- which would be quite a remarkable statement, buying in to the HRC argument that the race is "essentially tied." What he said is that HRC had an advantage in PA, and he in NC, and that therefore IN was important as a kind of "tie breaker" between those states. It was typical stump talk reminding voters they're important; but not some news making announcement that the Obama campaign has moved away from accumulated delegates as the measure of victory. To hype the "tiebreaker" line is really not accurate, though I'm sure the CNNs of the world will do it.
My 2 cents.
April 28, 2008 1:41 PM | Reply | Permalink
Oops -- see it was your post, Eric, sorry. Point stands.
April 28, 2008 1:43 PM | Reply | Permalink
I'm gonna keep commenting TPM. Please keep erasing. lol
April 28, 2008 1:41 PM | Reply | Permalink
From the link:
"In a Democratic Primary in Indiana today, 04/28/08, 8 days until votes are counted, Hillary Clinton finishes ahead of Barack Obama, according to a SurveyUSA poll conducted for WHAS-TV in Louisville and WCPO-TV in Cincinnati. The results are identical to a SurveyUSA TV poll released 4 weeks ago, on 04/01/08. Clinton led then 52% to 43%, leads now 52% to 43%. Other polls show the contest closer; some polls show Obama ahead. SurveyUSA tracking graphs show movement toward Clinton in the middle of April but offsetting movement to Obama at the end of April."
What gives?
April 28, 2008 1:42 PM | Reply | Permalink
If you look at the internals, it shows that Hillary is only behind a couple points with Independents. This is the group that's supposed to catapult Obama to victory, and the group it's alleged that Hillary can't do well with. I think makes a serious dent in that argument for an Obama's electability. This also shows Hillary's strength.
April 28, 2008 1:43 PM | Reply | Permalink
Somehow the nice people from the left don't get the fact that most American are moderate in their views. Obama should have renounced the REV Wright when he first had the chance. ARG has Obama's lead now at 10% before the REV's NPC speech.
WashPost lead: Obama's Pastor Reignites Race Controversy...Speaking before an audience that included Marion Barry, Cornel West, Malik Zulu Shabazz of the New Black Panther Party and Nation of Islam official Jamil Muhammad, Wright praised Louis Farrakhan, defended the view that Zionism is racism, accused the United States of terrorism, repeated his view that the government created the AIDS virus to cause the genocide of racial minorities, stood by other past remarks ("God damn America") and held himself out as a spokesman for the black church in America.
In front of 30 television cameras, Wright's audience cheered him on as the minister mocked the media and, at one point, did a little victory dance on the podium. It seemed as if Wright, jokingly offering himself as Obama's vice president, was actually trying to doom Obama; a member of the head table, American Urban Radio's April Ryan, confirmed that Wright's security was provided by bodyguards from Farrakhan's Nation of Islam.
April 28, 2008 1:45 PM | Reply | Permalink
Don't forget that in Indiana Obama is outspending Hillary at least 3 to 1, just as he did in Texas, Ohio and Pennsylvania. It really says something when he doesn't win.
April 28, 2008 1:45 PM | Reply | Permalink
He is winning, Moron!
What does it say about Hillary that she's still losing to this guy, despite winning the pop vote of Texas, Ohio and PA?
April 28, 2008 1:47 PM | Reply | Permalink
Reference for claim he outspent her 3-1 in Texas? (a contest he won, of course).
April 28, 2008 1:48 PM | Reply | Permalink
Don't forget that Democrats and independents are outcontributing Hillary supporters by at least 3 to 1.
...1,44,279 voting with their wallets,
LK
April 28, 2008 6:30 PM | Reply | Permalink
Independents or republicans claiming to be independents?
April 28, 2008 1:55 PM | Reply | Permalink
I guess the old saying is probably true, that "AGE AND TREACHERY WILL ALWAYS OVERCOME YOUTH AND SKILL" not to mention hope. When I found out that Obama was running, I mentioned to my wife and daughters that I did not think this country was ready to elect a black man. I thought that I had been proved wrong by millions of voters. I felt my faith in the people of this country renewed. Now, between the media, who claim to be a bystander, hilLIARy's own attempts to destroy this great young man's character by complimenting McSAME, and the short memory of my fellow Pennsylvanians, ala NAFTA, CAFTA, Bill Clinton throwing 100's of 1,000's off social security disability, and all the shame of the CLINTON era, I feel the dream slipping away. I hope I am wrong.
April 28, 2008 1:55 PM | Reply | Permalink
Look, you folks need to get a grip. Obama is not the nominee, Clinton is.
Take a break, get over it, come back and unite with Clinton like the gop did with mcwar.
Clinton is the right choice to try to deal with all the problems.
April 28, 2008 2:02 PM | Reply | Permalink
Welcome to TPM - Totally Polls Memo.
Our new format: Poll results. Nothing but Poll Results.
April 28, 2008 2:09 PM | Reply | Permalink
Two minor (perhaps major) points:
(1) North Carolina is a more delegate rich state than Indiana. (It's a "big" state, and thus more important. Where Have I heard that argument before?)
(2) Indiana is not Pennsylvania. (Minnesota, Iowa, Colorado, Illinois were all Obama landslides. There are elements of these states in Indiana).
April 28, 2008 2:10 PM | Reply | Permalink
"tick, tick, tick, tick...BOOM!!"
keep setting up bars for her to jump over, and our girl will do it. this is what she does. this is what she's always done.
"she can't win?"
just keep on telling yourselves that.
April 28, 2008 2:10 PM | Reply | Permalink
How about that pledged delegate bar?
April 28, 2008 2:34 PM | Reply | Permalink
Please take a long look at the internals--this polls overestimates Clinton. AA vote is only 10%, and he leads by less than he did elsewhere among this group. Furthermore, they're practically tied in NW Indiana--Obama's turf, again, not bloody likely.
I actually think that a lot of Obama voters don't have phones in NW Indiana. Not the cell phone phenomenon--the no phone at all phenomenon. That area is severely economically damaged.
April 28, 2008 2:12 PM | Reply | Permalink
deadalus, that is the most ridiculous explanation for a poor poll result i may have EVER heard. yes, there are wide swaths of indiana where folks just have no phone...right.
you're grasping, dude, and i gotta tell you, it looks kinda pathetic.
April 28, 2008 2:16 PM | Reply | Permalink
Dude - try this on - what difference do polls make now? She has lost and cannot make up the delegate difference. So what difference does a poll make showing her theoretical lead? She has lost - who cares how she polls?
This is one of the most egregiously stupid ongoing arguments of all time.
I'm just really burnt out on the incredible resistance to the truth that is so widespread that it keeps people believing something that is totally impossible.
It's just beyond stupid at this point. All of it. The polls are irrelevant. *heavy sigh*
April 28, 2008 2:24 PM | Reply | Permalink
She has NOT lost.
No matter how hard you spin for your candidate, Tena, the truth is Barack has lost the ability to win this contest outright.
It WILL be in the hands of the Supers, like it or not.
Superdelegates are only charged with selecting the best nominee to beat John McCain, and they can:
a. Change their minds at a moment's notice at any time before teh Convention without having to give any reason or any justification,
b. Change their mind AT the COnvention.
Happened many times in the past.
All this "concern" from Obama supporters about how the witch is tearing the Party apart is just devious nonsense: The fact is the Democratic Party has benefitted tremendously from all the free media attention to our platform, it has energized our base, it has caused a tremendous change in self-ID and registration, and it has opened totally unreachable precicts and districts, like the special Election Childers alomst won outright in Mississippi last week.
The Superdelegates know it, Howard Dean knows it, anyone with a brain knows it.
I feel bad for how wearing it is on our candidates, but I have no doubt we will pull together.
You have any doubts about that?
April 28, 2008 3:10 PM | Reply | Permalink
Okay, well I spent all weekend in Gary Indiana, but I'm sure you're opinion is more informed than mine.
Again, my criticism of the poll was that it obviously inflated Clinton's numbers in NW Indiana. I came up with an explanation for this.
My explanation may be bogus, but the criticism still stands, and others have noted this too.
April 28, 2008 3:34 PM | Reply | Permalink
I'm sorry, I have to rip into your comment again.
First of all, NW Indiana is not a "wide swath". It's one county-Lake county--and it's the second most populous region of the state. It is, by and large, African-American. Second, the poll only reached 628 voters. Let me repeat: 628. That's not a "wide swath" by any measure.
Furthermore, if having a phone is positively correlated to voting for Clinton, then yes, my explanation could be plausible. I think it may be.
April 28, 2008 3:37 PM | Reply | Permalink
Look at how Josh presented this on the front page as opposed to this bozo.
DOWN FROM 16 POINTS from a couple of weeks ago,
Why is is so hard, even if they are HRC supporter, to look at polls with a bit more honesty.
Seriously.
And why haven't these guys rush to mention the Super Del Obama got from Arizona this weekend?
Had this been an HRC one, they would have been throwing a parade.
April 28, 2008 2:19 PM | Reply | Permalink
Come on.
No one has done more for the people of Indiana than Barack Obama.
April 28, 2008 2:24 PM | Reply | Permalink
Look at the Poll Tracker sidebar: I didn't realize Obama was running for governor in North Carolina.
NC-GOV (D)
Apr 28 PPP (D) Perdue 47%, Obama 33%
http://tpmelectioncentral.talkingpointsmemo.com/polltracker/ncgov_d/
April 28, 2008 2:37 PM | Reply | Permalink
The main thing I quibble with is whether an Obama win in Indiana will "sew up" the nomination. It would be nice from a narrative standpoint, but I don't think it really decides anything.
If Obama wins Indiana, Clinton will refuse to drop out and reiterate that she is taking this all the way to the convention. Obama will still have an insurmountable lead in the pledged delegate count and any legitimate measure of the popular vote.
If Clinton wins Indiana, Clinton will refuse to drop out and reiterate that she is taking this all the way to the convention. Obama will still have an insurmountable lead in the pledged delegate count and any legitimate measure of the popular vote.
As for the supers, I really think that most of the "undeclared" supers know who they plan to vote for already, and I doubt the Indiana results will sway them much either way.
I am quickly losing interest in everything going on with this race save super-delegate announcements. The rest is, to paraphrase the bard, a tale told by an idiot (the media) full of sound (Obama) and fury (Clinton) signifying nothing.
April 28, 2008 2:55 PM | Reply | Permalink
I don't buy it. I think if Hillary loses Indiana and NC the argument for her ability to win becomes laughable even buy MSM standards. I predict that a large wave of superdelegates will announce their support just to drive the point home. Maybe I'm too optimistic.
That is of course IF he wins Indiana. I'm getting a bit skeptical. I think he'll lose Indiana by a couple points and we can expect this stupidity to continue for weeks to come.
April 28, 2008 4:13 PM | Reply | Permalink
The Clinton Axis won't drop out until they're mathematically eliminated, and even then they'll keep arguing Michigan, Florida, popular vote, ad nauseum. I'm sorry to say this, because I'm a conservative and a progressive who wants the Bush/Cheney/McCain Axis out of power, but I can't vote for Clinton. In November, I'll either write in Obama's name if he's not on the ballot or I'll vote for Nader, who (for all his faults) isn't trying to destroy his opponent.
April 28, 2008 3:47 PM | Reply | Permalink
husseintenax: aren't you already supposed to be gone from this thread? this seems like your 3rd or 4th proclamation of being "tired" of these "ridiculous arguments" and exchanges, but perhaps i'm in error. frankly, i prefer that you stay, but if you stay, stay and don't keep forecasting your imminent departure. stand on principle, girl!
deadalus: the point is that your comment that there's any poor region in the country other than some rural communities and/or appalachia, people in the u.s., poor and rich alike, have home phone service. service may get disconnected from time to time, but there's no urban center in america not where homes and apartments aren't outfitted for phone service and for which folks take advantage of the service.
the next desperate thing you'll be telling us is that the nw indiana community lacks electricity and tvs and thus hasn't even been able to follow much of this campaign.
April 28, 2008 3:51 PM | Reply | Permalink
will someone from the obama camp explain to me the moral righteousness in arguing against (1) re-voting in michigan and florida to get a full 50 state read on this nomination, or (2) if rejecting #1 above, then counting the votes cast by those 2.2m persons and alloting their delegates in the same manner as every other state's delegates have been apportioned?
to cry unfairness as set forth by the original rules but then not avidly support a re-vote that would allow for accounting for these voters seems morally inconsistent and politically stupid.
why again is it that dem voters in florida and michigan are supposed to be inclined to vote for your candidate in november should he be the nominee if he clearly was the obstacle to having their votes counted during the primaries? i'm just not seeing this.
April 28, 2008 3:57 PM | Reply | Permalink
Nobody in the Obama camp is opposed to revoting in MI. The MI legislature voted against it because they didn't have the time to do it. It wasn't a money availability issue.
Obama's people are against a scenario where first time voters can't vote, and independents who voted in the earlier primary can't vote, which is what was proposed.
April 28, 2008 4:05 PM | Reply | Permalink
So, Indiana is the new 'tie-breaker'. Anyone who actually sees this race as a tie is drinking the HRC kool-aid.
Obama is leading in states won, pledged delegates and the popular vote. Am I missing something?
April 28, 2008 4:12 PM | Reply | Permalink
Unfortunately the MSM is the one that's distributing the kool-aid. Sigh.
April 28, 2008 4:16 PM | Reply | Permalink
I have a hard time believing this poll. If Obama only lost PA by 9pts, it makes no sense that he would do worse in a more favorable state like IN. Granted HRC probably has some post PA bounce but at most we are talking a couple of points.
I wouldn't doubt she has a small lead but I am really not buying 9 pts.
Granted this is the only firm that got CA correct, but they also missed MO by 10pts.
April 28, 2008 4:37 PM | Reply | Permalink
vik n: that's not really accurate. yes, the michigan legislature did eventually vote against the re-vote for the reasons you cite, but that's only AFTER the obama camp rejected agreement terms accepted by all other parties -- the dnc, the clinton campaign, and the michigan democratic party -- and strung out/stalled negotiations on a michigan re-vote to "run out the clock" and get the result that was reached.
but even with those obstructionist efforts, the problem of both michigan and florida will not go away and on may 31st the obama camp will be confronted anew with figuring out a way to get onboard with a re-vote or apportionment of the delegates according to the votes already cast, recorded and certified by the michigan board of elections.
April 28, 2008 4:44 PM | Reply | Permalink