« Obama Publicly Favored Lifting Oversight On Teamsters Back In 2004, Campaign Says | Home | Obama-Backing SEIU Hits Hillary In Tough Last-Minute Iraq Mailer »
Poll: Despite Hillary Gains In North Carolina, Obama Still Ahead By Ten
While Hillary Clinton has been able to trim Barack Obama's once-overwhelming lead in North Carolina, it doesn't look like it will be enough, according to a new survey from Public Policy Polling (D).
The numbers, compared to the previous poll from a week ago:
Obama 53% (+2)
Clinton 43% (+4)Sample size: 870 likely primary voters.
Margin of error: ±3.3%.
From the pollster's analysis: "Hillary Clinton has certainly been able to make inroads as she has contested the state hard, but North Carolina's demographics make this almost an impossible state to win for her."
Advertisement
Comments (123)
So how will Hillary spin a 10 point loss in NC?
May 5, 2008 12:11 PM | Reply | Permalink
She won't have to. The press will. They don't want this to end.
May 5, 2008 12:15 PM | Reply | Permalink
Im going to enjoy watching the spinsters of the MSM tap dance around Hillary's double primary loss.
O, the celestial choir will singing loudly tommorrow night: "It's OVER!!!"
May 5, 2008 12:34 PM | Reply | Permalink
And I'll help the press spin it. I don't want it to end either.
To that point, it's looking like Hillary is going to obliterate Barack in Indiana. Sorry.
May 5, 2008 12:49 PM | Reply | Permalink
(dang it... on a Mac you don't have to click the "in reply" button. on this dang ol' winders machine, you do.)
"Obliterate"? I bet it will be a near tie. That's my realist side talking. Hopefull side tells me Obama will win by a couple points in Indiana.
readytoblow, do you at least see the reality that Clinton will have to obliterate Obama in each state to get the prize?
... and by each state I mean all of the remaining contests?
May 5, 2008 12:59 PM | Reply | Permalink
"Obliterate" is a joke, of course. I just saw Hillary's 12-point lead in today's SUSA poll, however, and I'm trying to strike some balance on this site because TPM hasn't reported it yet.
If all goes according to every other recent contest, Obama won't win IN and it won't be a tie. For him to take IN, he'd have to be 10 points ahead of her in more than one poll by now. He isn't even close.
To be honest, I'm not even looking beyond tomorrow. As Obama would say, Understand this: I want my candidate to do well in Indiana. Is that so wrong? I want it for her so she can save face. And I want it for myself so I can have some hopeful fun for one day.
If she wants to drop out after tomorrow, fine with me. But for today, I'm going to be cocky about her lead there. Don't take it too seriously. I'm just playing.
May 5, 2008 1:33 PM | Reply | Permalink
readytoblow: "I want my candidate to do well in Indiana. Is that so wrong? I want it for her so she can save face. And I want it for myself so I can have some hopeful fun for one day."
I am having difficulty understanding this. Just as I continue to have difficulty understanding how a Clinton supporter as informed as I imagine you are, can continue to support her, given her behaviour and that of her campaign.
When I ask if you would mind enlightening me, I'm not coming from any other place than the one I'm in: the land of bewilderment.
May 5, 2008 4:05 PM | Reply | Permalink
FreeBubba, I hope you see my response to your question.
Thanks for giving me credit for being informed.
I started to read up about Hillary when she ran for my state senator in 2000. Living in Manhattan I had access to the Post, Daily News, Village Voice, NYT, New Yorker, NY Mag, WSJ, everything in print. I don't read unauthorized biographies, but I do read the bad press as well as the good. I try to follow up on controversies and criticisms of her. I don't agree with all of her positions, but I try to understand them. I am not a blind follower.
NYC is a difficult place to live. Like the city and its boroughs, NY politics can be tough, outrageous, sometimes downright brutal. Comes with the territory, I guess.
It's also very liberal. If you can manage the difficulties, the rewards of living in NY are boundless, and the people are the most generous I've ever met.
It's impossible to ignore politics here like you can in other places. After living in the Midwest and South, I moved to NYC in 1996, during the Giuliani admin.
It may be that I've grown used to aggressive, competitive, or combative people after living here 12 years. I consider much of that behavior to be posturing or protective coloration (like my nick). I don't consider political battling to be fatal, maybe because in NY you can get back up after you get knocked down. Giants here get knocked down all the time. Think Donald Trump, Martha Stewart. Eliot Spitzer. Hell, the whole city got right back up after 9/11.
To truly answer you, I'd have to know what "behavior" bothers you the most and why. NY politics may well suit Hillary's overtly competitive personality, but it's a style that can make lots of people uncomfortable. New York itself isn't for everyone. I can certainly understand that.
I appreciate the sincerity of your question, FreeBubba. I hope I have managed to enlighten you a little bit at least?
May 5, 2008 10:23 PM | Reply | Permalink
Thanks for answering. Appreciated.
About NYC, I lived there for a short while in the eighties; far too short; but it remains my favourite city by far, and I've lived in several countries and travelled a bit.
Okay, I get that the sum of Clinton's policy positions satisfy you. Before I answer the question you've asked me, I'd like to follow up on this. Do you consider her positions better than Obama's, and if so, please give me some idea why you do. Be as brief or as long as you like.
To your question about my reference to her behaviour, you being a TPM reader like I, I can't imagine that you don't know what I mean: we read blogs and posts about it every day; not to mention newspaper articles and other-media fare. I make this observation because I'm wondering if you interpret what I think are commonly held criticisms of Clinton as examples of unacceptable behaviour at all. I've been assuming that a Clinton supporter would have the same or similar opinion of this behaviour as I, but perhaps that has been my first mistake. Here I'll give you some examples.
As my retention of details remains what it has always been, inadequate, and because I'm too lazy to dig them up, I hope you don't mind if I give you concepts and assume that you will at least know what I'm referring to.
Overt and covert attempts to inject into the race unresolved racial or social issues (Wright, Ailes) for the purpose of raising doubts about Obama, thus reducing his appeal. This is out of the Lee Atwater playbook. When it is considered that a candidate's (Clinton's) favourable ratings cannot be improved, one attempts to lower the favourable ratings of one's opponent. That one may use lies, innuendo, mere suspicion or speculation, etc. to achieve one's ends is considered relevant only insofar as doing so might cause blowback (unintended, undesired consequence), further raising one's own (Clinton's) unfavourable ratings.
Political pandering. The gas vacation proposals of Clinton and McCain, which are universally panned by economists.
What say we limit ourselves to these two for now and see where we get?
So, I'm curious to know if you approve/disapprove of this behaviour, and why.
May 6, 2008 8:54 AM | Reply | Permalink
"Obliterate" may not be the word Hillary supporters want out in the mainstream...just saying.
May 5, 2008 1:02 PM | Reply | Permalink
joking
May 5, 2008 1:34 PM | Reply | Permalink
http://www.politico.com/blogs/bensmith/0508/Clintont_to_Teamsters_Turn_the_page_on_consent_decree.html
I've obtained audio of Clinton's own endorsement meeting with the Teamsters last March 27, above, in which she similarly suggested that the decree should be lifted.
"The world’s longest consent decree?" she said in response to a question, drawing laughter.
I am of the opinion that based on what I’ve seen over years of observation, this union has really done a tremendous job in turning itself around. That’s my observation. At some point the past has to be opened. If you screw up in the future, that’ll be a new day, right? That’s the way the system works. But you gotta – you can’t go around dragging the ball and chain of the past. And I think that’s true for anybody, any organization, any individual, you know, and so I would be very open to looking at that and to saying, what is it we’re trying to accomplish here? And seeing what the answers were because at some point turn the page and go on.
May 5, 2008 12:12 PM | Reply | Permalink
Thanks Liam.
May 5, 2008 12:13 PM | Reply | Permalink
Liam, come on. Greg is the "Decider". He's already determined that this "news" is not newsworthy for us lowly Election Central readers. How dare you undermine his decision? ;)
May 5, 2008 12:24 PM | Reply | Permalink
Breaking:
Movie deal announced.
Title: THE DETERMINATOR
Starring: HILLARY'S SARGENT AT ARMS
May 5, 2008 12:36 PM | Reply | Permalink
LOLOLOL! ;)
May 5, 2008 1:07 PM | Reply | Permalink
Any thoughts on her chances to seat Michigan and Florida her way? I am so upset about this. It is like giving in to a child's temper tantrum.
May 5, 2008 12:15 PM | Reply | Permalink
Maybe Florida based on the "voting", but Michigan no way....expect some kind of compromise to seat the delegates in a way that won't help Hill very much....even if she gets the delegates from those that voted for her, she would have to conced the "uncommitteds" to Obama, and that would leave her with a net gain of very few delegates.
May 5, 2008 12:19 PM | Reply | Permalink
Are you talking about Monster Inc.s so called nuclear option?
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/05/04/clinton-camp-considering_n_100051.html
Fat chance, Obama will have more members on the credentials committe than she will and the deciding votes will be picked by Chairman Dean. Let's not forget Dean has no love for the Clintons.
May 5, 2008 12:20 PM | Reply | Permalink
Yes, that was the article I read. The journalists make it sound like a viable option. She must think it is, that is what is bothering me.
May 5, 2008 12:26 PM | Reply | Permalink
No, it is not a viable option. It is just another Clinton pipe dream.
Other Clinton pipe dreams:
1) President Hillary Clinton
2) Obama giving up and taking the VP slot
3) A stain-proof blue dress
4) The Gas Tax Holiday
May 5, 2008 12:29 PM | Reply | Permalink
The same HuffPo article says
political analyst Larry Sabato of the University of Virginia said: "Wow. The nuclear option will yield nuclear winter for the Democratic Party."
May 5, 2008 12:30 PM | Reply | Permalink
Wasn't PPP waaaay off in PA? I think we ought to take these numbers with a grain of salt (along with ARG & Zogby)...
May 5, 2008 12:20 PM | Reply | Permalink
Yes, but they are based in North Carolina.
With early voting being so prominent in NC, I expect a double digit win for Obama.
May 5, 2008 12:42 PM | Reply | Permalink
i cant wait for this nomination process to end. it is really getting annoying now.
May 5, 2008 12:25 PM | Reply | Permalink
I have no crystal ball and no one will ever mistake me for the latter-day Tiresias, but I am going to go on record predicting a 12 pt (+/-2) victory for Obama in NC. That is, if he wins by something between 10 and 14 pts, I will consider myself to have predicted correctly and if not then I will have been wrong. I am also going to predict an Obama win in IN by 3 pts (+/-2). In other words, I expect him to win by double digits (real double digits; not 9.2 rounded up to 10) and to squeak out a narrow win in IN.
May 5, 2008 12:26 PM | Reply | Permalink
Greg- Great minds think alike. I said the exact same thing to my GF last night. NC- O +12; NC: O +2. Considering that we have generally been negative about Obama in any give primary election, at least over the last 2 months, I hope our thoughts are significant.
I'd like to see some on-the-ground thinking. Not many of those kinds of diaries around on dKos, today, at least.
Explanation for my Indiana thinking: gut feeling. It feels like Wisconsin, media-narrative-wise and evidence-wise. Plus Zogby HAS to get one of these right sometime, right?
Of course, our point of view plays nicely into an "Obama locks it up with two wins on May 6th" media narrative, no? Even a close Obama loss in IN (1-2 points) I think would be decisive in the long run for him.
May 5, 2008 12:31 PM | Reply | Permalink
Zogby has him up by 2 pts in IN right now, while SUSA has her up by 12 in IN right now. Needless to say, this is a worrisome development, given the respective track records of each outfit. Everyone remembers when SUSA predicted Clinton to win CA by 10 pts while Zogby predicted Obama to win CA by 13. Needless to say, when Feb 5 rolled around and Clinton won CA 52% to Obama's 42%, everyone (rightly) hailed SUSA as a prophet and Zogby as a joke.
However, the exact reverse situation prevailed in my own beloved Missouri. Zogby predicted a narrow 3 pt Obama win while SUSA predicted an 11 pt Clinton landslide. In the end Obama won MO 49% to 48%. In other words, Zogby did really well in MO while SUSA was off by a country mile.
So, is IN more like MO or more like CA? I would not pretend to know enough to answer that question, so we will just have to wait and see. My gut, however, likes the idea that Zogby will redeem himself on this one. Maybe it is just because MO and IN are the only two states where I actually went door to door, but they seem similar enought to me that I am predicting similar outcomes.
May 5, 2008 1:10 PM | Reply | Permalink
You may not be a prophet, but you seem a smart lad, what think you of Hillary's actions should tomorrow unfold the way you say? Will she say that the states don't matter? Well she bow out? Well she sacrifice a small child on the alter of Rexawall, the Great And Powerful God of Pandering?
May 5, 2008 12:32 PM | Reply | Permalink
I would really love to believe Genghis' astute analysis in the reader recs right now, but I am afraid that I do not. I think that Clinton will lose both and still insist that she is going to keep on going. Indeed, I am increasingly finding myself expecting to see this race drag on well past June. I expect to see Clinton's people contrive a million different formulations of "the popular vote" to present herself in a favorable light (with MI/FL but not IA/NV/ME/WA, only counting "large" states, only counting swing states with primaries, etc) and continue making pitches to the supers (including supers who have publically backed Obama) in an attempt to shift the numbers between now and Denver. It brings me no joy to say this, but it is what I predict.
May 5, 2008 12:51 PM | Reply | Permalink
I'm expecting that, as with Pennsylvania, we'll get a result that meets expectations and creates no big waves. Maybe Clinton by 5 in Indiana and Obama by 10 in NC.
May 5, 2008 1:04 PM | Reply | Permalink
What does Obama's leaked memo say about IN and NC? That's been the most accurate analysis yet.
May 5, 2008 1:15 PM | Reply | Permalink
The spreadsheet has Obama winning both - NC by 12%/7 delegates and IN by 7%/6 delegates. Actually, Obama's spreadsheet was part of the reason why I am predicting IN for Obama. Not one of his people's win/loss predictions post super Tuesday has been wrong yet.
May 5, 2008 1:24 PM | Reply | Permalink
Thanks. Googling that was proving more difficult than I thought.
May 5, 2008 1:30 PM | Reply | Permalink
I sincerely hope you are right on your predictions and cannot wait to see how this pans out tomorrow night!
That said, I personally remain skeptical about a BO win in IN. As much as that would pretty much seal the deal and shut the traps of the MSM pundits, I'd rather brace myself for a HRC win there. My gut tells me ('cause why listen to those pesky elite opinions) to expect this primary to last until the bitter end of 6/3/08.
May 5, 2008 12:36 PM | Reply | Permalink
Is it hard to play the bagpipes blind? (All connotations accepted)
May 5, 2008 12:50 PM | Reply | Permalink
Not really, although I should imagine that marching would be a good bit more problematic.
May 5, 2008 12:53 PM | Reply | Permalink
PPP did well in every state other than PA. They're still a good pollster. Given they were by far the best pollster in the *other* Carolina, I'd give them benefit of the doubt. Obama by 15, going by SC spreads.
May 5, 2008 12:27 PM | Reply | Permalink
Totally off topic but does anyone else think that the Pollster.com graph to our right suggests the shape of a dodo bird?
May 5, 2008 12:28 PM | Reply | Permalink
Yes, and I do not like it mathematically or metaphorically.
May 5, 2008 12:43 PM | Reply | Permalink
I think that, as the great sage and all-around classy guy James "Cajones" Carville, recently acknowledged, she really needs to win both states tomorrow just to keep going.
After tomorrow, there just aren't enough delegates on the table for her to demonstrate the catastrophic loss of support for Obama that would be her only argument with superdelegates reluctant to sway the race. After tomorrow, she no longer has a real opportunity to demonstrate the fundamental shift that she needs.
She could win KY, WV, and PR and even pick up some delegates there, but those contests are supposed to favor her demographically.
On May 20, the day of OR and KY primaries, Obama is nearly certain to surpass the 1627 pledged delegate, representing a majority of pledged delegates under the operative DNC rules. After that point, it becomes impossible for superdelegates to support her without openly associating themselves with the idea that an agressive "overturn the pledged delegate count and/or change the rules on MI/FL" strategy. Most of them won't want to do that.
May 5, 2008 12:29 PM | Reply | Permalink
I predict that no matter what happens, Senator Clinton will find some convulted justification to stay in the race.
I'm willing to put money on this one.
May 5, 2008 12:31 PM | Reply | Permalink
I won't take that bet.
I wonder how her campaign is doing financially.
May 5, 2008 12:34 PM | Reply | Permalink
Yeah, when do those FEC reports come out for April?
May 5, 2008 12:39 PM | Reply | Permalink
FEC reports quarterly, I believe. Have to wait for July 20th.
May 5, 2008 12:42 PM | Reply | Permalink
Really? I must be thinking of the wrong thing, then. Don't the campaigns usually release the amount of funds raised on a monthly basis?
May 5, 2008 12:53 PM | Reply | Permalink
They were quarterly last year, during the election year they come out monthly. I believe they have until the 21st to file their complete financial records.
However they usually report fundraising totals after the end of the month -- curious that none of the campaigns are releasing those numbers this month. I would think the Cinton camp would be particularly anxious to tout her prowness after her supposed $10MM day.
May 5, 2008 12:58 PM | Reply | Permalink
That is what got me wondering.
Even during that 10 M dollar day she had 15 M in debt (including the 5 M she lent the campaign.) So how much has she raised? Has she lent herself more money?
May 5, 2008 1:04 PM | Reply | Permalink
Why are the Election Central crickets chirping about the Clinton campaign's decision to try to steal the nomination?
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/05/04/clinton-camp-considering_n_100051.html
May 5, 2008 12:35 PM | Reply | Permalink
Pure spin on your part. It is Obama who is trying to steal it by not allow the voters of FL and MI to be counted. Unify indeed.
May 5, 2008 12:42 PM | Reply | Permalink
Do you lie on your own will or does Hillary pay you to do it ?
May 5, 2008 12:52 PM | Reply | Permalink
Odd, as soon as gotalife disappears you show up.
Insufferable little troll twit.
May 5, 2008 12:55 PM | Reply | Permalink
Now that is funny!
May 5, 2008 1:13 PM | Reply | Permalink
Don't quit your day job.
May 5, 2008 1:26 PM | Reply | Permalink
Because the Obama camp isn't making an issue out of this.
May 5, 2008 12:45 PM | Reply | Permalink
Look above, I was just asking the same thing. It has me very worried and upset. After 2000, I don't trust anything anymore. Did you see where Scalia, by the way, in reference to 2000, said get over it?!
I will never get over it.
May 5, 2008 12:46 PM | Reply | Permalink
I'm not worried.
May 5, 2008 1:15 PM | Reply | Permalink
Because Greg and Eric are the "Deciders" and obviously this was deemed a non-issue for everybody here.
May 5, 2008 12:53 PM | Reply | Permalink
Did PPP ever make a note that Penn's demographics made it almost impossible for Obama to win? Maybe they did, but I don't think so.
May 5, 2008 12:40 PM | Reply | Permalink
Whiner.
May 5, 2008 12:43 PM | Reply | Permalink
bawk bawk bawk bawk..............
May 5, 2008 12:48 PM | Reply | Permalink
The sound of Obama the Chicken.
Watchout, here comes the Colonel!
May 5, 2008 1:11 PM | Reply | Permalink
Well it is another critical primary. With a 10% spread Clinton can rightly call anything closer as beating expectations. And on Wall Street stocks shoot up when that happens. Same will happen for Clinton.
Anything less than a 10% loss for Clinton is pure gold. If she wins NC also wins in IN it is the death of the Obama campaign.
May 5, 2008 12:42 PM | Reply | Permalink
Gee, I didn't see any posts before Pennsylvania saying the same thing. You utter hypocrite. Obama cut her lead in PA down to 9.2% and you Hillary supporters were crowing about how horribly he did. God, y'all make up the rules as you go along - just like she does.
May 5, 2008 12:58 PM | Reply | Permalink
Blah, blah, blah, blah.
May 5, 2008 1:12 PM | Reply | Permalink
You are truly the master of witty repartee.
May 5, 2008 2:23 PM | Reply | Permalink
Neck snapping spin!!! "anything less than a 10 point loss will be pure gold in NC for Clinton".
Ha!
May 5, 2008 1:06 PM | Reply | Permalink
So, let's say Obama by 10 in N.C. Hillary by 4 in Indiana. The pressure on her to drop out will increase--somewhat. She'll bring up Michigan and Florida again, even though it won't make much of a difference in the pledeged delegate count--Obama would still win. The Clintons don't seem to care about the argument about destroying the party--at least in the short term. I'd say they'll stay in until June when it becomes clear the superdelegates have mostly shifted to Obama. It's hard to drop out when you're still winning elections. The Clintons will do anything right up to the point of being humilliated for no gain. After the last primary, there's no Hillary has the momentum narrative to keep going forward.
May 5, 2008 12:43 PM | Reply | Permalink
B.O WILL BE VP NOT PRESIDENT
May 5, 2008 12:43 PM | Reply | Permalink
If we agree, will you promise to turn off your caps lock key and start using punctuation?
May 5, 2008 1:01 PM | Reply | Permalink
In other words, NC is black.
May 5, 2008 12:49 PM | Reply | Permalink
Otto, what was the point of that comment?!
May 5, 2008 12:51 PM | Reply | Permalink
He's a jackass. The state's only about 22% African American, by the way.
May 5, 2008 12:55 PM | Reply | Permalink
Otto is the duly annoited ambassdor to TPM from the Ku Klux Klan.
May 5, 2008 1:01 PM | Reply | Permalink
There are also a lot of educated folks in the Research Triangle, and those who are educated do swing towards Obama. I'm not sure why you think this is only about race...
May 5, 2008 12:52 PM | Reply | Permalink
Because otto does not think with the big head.
May 5, 2008 1:02 PM | Reply | Permalink
Otto, you're a real dick. Nice job your girl did with that demographic huh? She went from about 45% support to less than 10%. The NY Times was correct - free fall is the correct term for her loss of that segment of the Democratic party.
May 5, 2008 12:57 PM | Reply | Permalink
Carol is taking the gloves off!
Look out, Trolls, your executioner has arrived.
May 5, 2008 1:09 PM | Reply | Permalink
Fear not Otto. President Obama will emancipate all we poor oppressed white men.
May 5, 2008 12:57 PM | Reply | Permalink
"Obliterate"? I bet it will be a near tie. That's my realist side talking. Hopefull side tells me Obama will win by a couple points in Indiana.
readytoblow, do you at least see the reality that Clinton will have to obliterate Obama in each state to get the prize?
May 5, 2008 12:57 PM | Reply | Permalink
...yeah, forgot to click that damn button. Reply to readytoblow way up above.
May 5, 2008 1:02 PM | Reply | Permalink
While Ralphie Parker, a true Hoosier, was having a very hard time persuading his parents to buy him a Red Ryder BB gun,
Back in Pennsylvania, Hillary Rodham was scaring off the bad guys with the weapon that her Paw gave her; her trusty Elitist Mauser 66. Next time Hillary put her Elitist Mauser 66 to good use was when she Obliterated a nest of snipers around Tuzla Airport in Bosnia.
May 5, 2008 12:58 PM | Reply | Permalink
the polls indicates 84% of the black voter to Senator Obama to 11% for Senator Clinton.
I sense it would be more like 90% for Senator Obama. I believe he got 90% in PA.
And in PA, he had The mayor of Philadelphia campaigning for Senator Clinton...So my sense, that he will do better than 10% overall.
I don't think they have taken the new registers into consideration.
I believe the early votes will favor Senator Obama in both Indiana and North Carolina
May 5, 2008 1:01 PM | Reply | Permalink
Anyone that wants to help Obama, there is still time to make phone-calls to Indiana and NC. Go to Barackobama.com. Also, don't listen to the polls, go vote everyone, cause every vote counts, look what happened in Guam- he won by 7 votes!!! I don't see Obama winning Indiana by double-digits. I talked to voters there and I think any poll that says that is off the mark. Hopefully, it will be close, but I think the media may try to build up Obama to have Clinton win Indiana....
May 5, 2008 1:04 PM | Reply | Permalink
and also when you look at the Survey USA, they give over 20% of the black voters to Senator Clinton, so you can not take these numbers seriously...
Senator will get around 90% of the black voters in Indiana...
May 5, 2008 1:05 PM | Reply | Permalink
Reverse Bradley Effect?
May 5, 2008 1:28 PM | Reply | Permalink
There are lots of undecideds and even GOPS who are interested in Obama, but leary. These folks may end up breaking for Clinton, but I talked to them and they are afraid to take that jump for Obama but I hope that they do join us. Obama is trying to unite us as Americans and make life better for all. We need to put our differences as people aside and come together as a nation for the good of this country. Have faith and hope!
May 5, 2008 1:06 PM | Reply | Permalink
Obama has common-sense solutions, experience and integrity. He will tell us the truth, the hard truth at a time we need to hear it.
May 5, 2008 1:07 PM | Reply | Permalink
Oh, you must be one of those earnest, idealistic and fair minded Obama-bots! Can't you see this is a sandbox, where only hair pulling and whining are allowed? Take your hopeful rhetoric and reasoned opinions elsewhere!
May 5, 2008 1:12 PM | Reply | Permalink
If Hillary's keep going up at the same rate she'll over-take Obama ten days after the election . . .
May 5, 2008 1:09 PM | Reply | Permalink
Yes, she will overtake him. Thanks for the support.
May 5, 2008 1:14 PM | Reply | Permalink
SUSA has Clinton up by 12pts in IN. While I usually put a fair amount of stock in SUSA, I am skeptical on this one. IN is a lot like MO and WI and they were pretty far off in MO (Clinton +11). Of course they got it right in CA so maybe Clinton is doing better than expected. Still, as I have said in other posts, there is a huge ground game going on in IN so I would be really surprised it she did better here than in PA.
May 5, 2008 1:14 PM | Reply | Permalink
Indiana is nothing like Wisconsin. Wisconsin has always been a very progressive state, and Indiana has been the exact opposite. Indiana is much more like Kentucky than it is Wisconsin.
Indiana is the birth place of the KKK. I expect Hilllary to win by double digits in there.
May 5, 2008 1:20 PM | Reply | Permalink
"I expect Hilllary to win by double digits in there."
Well, something we agree on!
May 5, 2008 1:35 PM | Reply | Permalink
Indiana is the birth place of the KKK. I expect Hilllary to win by double digits in there.
May 5, 2008 1:40 PM | Reply | Permalink
It is alot like WI in demographics, although more conservative. However, the northern IN area is technically part of the Chicago Metro area and Obama has a good ground game. She will clean his clock in the southern parts of the state but overall it will be a closer contest than 12 pts.
May 5, 2008 2:03 PM | Reply | Permalink
echo
echo
echo
May 5, 2008 2:06 PM | Reply | Permalink
Two brief responses:
1) I am not really sure that it is accurate to say that IN is the birthplace of the KKK. The first KKK was founded in Na