« Lanny Davis Jabs Obama On Wright (Updated) | Main | Multimedia Delights From The Atlantic » Gallup Daily Tracking19 Mar 2008 04:52 pm The first time Hillary Clinton has led outside the margin of error. A reflection of Obama's week. Nothing more, nothing less. Obama has never been the overwhelming favorite of Democrats; Clinton has never been the overwhelming second choice. Ten percent of the party seems to vacillate. And every poll I've seen of Dems who've voted already suggests that Obama has an edge over Clinton.
Comments (33)
Thank you for putting these numbers in perspective before other outlets start turning them into a self-fulfilling prophecy. 
Thank you for putting these numbers in perspective before other outlets start turning them into a self-fulfilling prophecy.
Marc: how dare you question his Obamaship's ascension to the throne! Have you at long last no sense of decency, Ambinder? I'm on the verge of picking up my obamarbles and leaving!
However the same can and should be said about Clinton she's been less than electable for weeks. Her throw the kitchen sink and dredge things out of the sewage pipes tactics have shown what kind of President she'd be. She's a fighter all right fighting all the wrong fights for all the wrong reasons. Might be the reason McCain is up 7-9 points over both Democrats.
LOL, Amblinders. I guess I was just hallucinating when I thought I heard the Obama Campaign talking on and on about "Hillary's 20 point lead in the polls" prior to Iowa.
Rasmussen has him up 5 in their daily tracking poll. We'll have to see what things look like a week from now when this Wright business is off the air and the next gotcha story comes up.
And this thing is back to a state-by-state race. No more "national primaries" on the slate. But I still say Hillary wins when the DNC caves and seats the delegates from MI and FL. http://www.political-buzz.com/
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=72B3tUAqpo4 Hillary's latest tv ad for Pennsylvania. She is running this in 4 different media markets. How effective is this ad? This theme seems to be Bill's idea, not Hillary's.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=72B3tUAqpo4 Hillary's latest tv ad for Pennsylvania. She is running this in 4 different media markets. How effective is this ad? This theme seems to be Bill's idea, not Hillary's.
"And this thing is back to a state-by-state race. No more "national primaries" on the slate. But I still say Hillary wins when the DNC caves and seats the delegates from MI and FL." Perhaps you are a bit confused on the mechanics here. The DNC *can't* cave. Howard Dean is an avowed defender of the rules and the exclusion of those who broke them. The Rules and Bylaws Committee is made up virtually entirely of his supporters, and the more general committee meeting in July is made of up those plus a near-even split of appointed members by both candidates. Thus, it is a mathematical impossibility for either committee to seat the delegates, and that is the only way by which the DNC can do so. Since new elections are out as both states lack the state house/senate support to pass any plan, the only other option on the table AT ALL is a 50/50 or similar compromise, which would not count the popular vote. Such an arrangement obviously does not affect the race at all. Of course, if Hillary stumbles upon the good grace to concede after Indiana, as the superdelegates will no doubt lean on her to do, the delegates from the contested states will of course be seated in full and no disenfranchisement will occur. Either way, the race is over.
These are daily tracking polls... and the Gallup poll shows Clinton tracking up and Obama going down the last three days... It may be a trend. Do not get too excited over the latest Rasmussen results (Obama 47 - Clinton 42)....The Rasmussen tracking poll results are reported on a "four-day rolling average basis"... and "The reason for today’s Obama bounce is that Friday night’s results have rolled out of the four-day sample. Following the initial media frenzy over Pastor Wright, Friday’s results were the SINGLE WORST NIGHT (my emphasis) of polling for Obama since the Primary Season began." (Rasmussen) Better to wait to see if there is a trend forming on Obama's behalf or if it was just an anomaly.
Hillary's latest tv ad for Pennsylvania. She is running this in 4 different media markets. How effective is this ad? It's devastating. But it certainly has nothing to do with the Clinton campaign. It is a sign, though, that popular discontent with and questioning of the Obama campaign is beginning to gather force. Watch for the GOP to begin doing everything in their power now to help Obama.
The DNC *can't* cave. Howard Dean is an avowed defender of the rules and the exclusion of those who broke them. Don't be absurd. The DNC most certainly can change its mind if enough pressure is brought to bear, or if legal action is threatened, or if not allowing those two states to meaningfully participate in the nomination process imperils the eventual nominee's chances in November. Dean is not a dictator. He's just a party bureaucrat. And an increasingly unpopular one at that.
What amazes me in the media is how often the polls can be wrong, and yet the media still keeps going back to them like gospel. It's like the pundits; they are often wrong, yet the media has no memory when it comes to their own. So sure some polls may have meaning...but really, who knows? The track record suggests that you cannot really trust the polls on a consistent basis.
Reuters is also showing renewed strength for Senator Clinton: http://www.reuters.com/article/newsOne/idUSN1824791220080319
Dean is a dolt. All the rats who managed to scrabble off his Hell Ship have clambered up the sides of the Unthinkable Barack Obama, and are merrily enjoying the good life, while steaming through that iceburg with Jeremiah Wright sitting on the tip.
MARC YR BLIND (ER)...JUST YESTERDAY, EVEN AFTER THE DEBACLE OF 'UNCLE' WRIGHT I READ THAT OBAMA HUSSEIN (MUSLIM OR CHRISTIAN)???? BLACK OR WHITE??????? WAS THE DEMOCRATS' FAVORITE.
MARC YR BLIND (ER)...JUST YESTERDAY, EVEN AFTER THE DEBACLE OF 'UNCLE' WRIGHT I READ THAT OBAMA HUSSEIN (MUSLIM OR CHRISTIAN)???? BLACK OR WHITE??????? WAS THE DEMOCRATS' FAVORITE.
MARC YR BLIND (ER)...JUST YESTERDAY, EVEN AFTER THE DEBACLE OF 'UNCLE' WRIGHT I READ THAT OBAMA HUSSEIN (MUSLIM OR CHRISTIAN)???? BLACK OR WHITE??????? WAS THE DEMOCRATS' FAVORITE.
MARC YR BLIND (ER)...JUST YESTERDAY, EVEN AFTER THE DEBACLE OF 'UNCLE' WRIGHT I READ THAT OBAMA HUSSEIN (MUSLIM OR CHRISTIAN)???? BLACK OR WHITE??????? WAS THE DEMOCRATS' FAVORITE.
MARC YR BLIND (ER)...JUST YESTERDAY, EVEN AFTER THE DEBACLE OF 'UNCLE' WRIGHT I READ THAT OBAMA HUSSEIN (MUSLIM OR CHRISTIAN)???? BLACK OR WHITE??????? WAS THE DEMOCRATS' FAVORITE.
MARC YR BLIND (ER)...JUST YESTERDAY, EVEN AFTER THE DEBACLE OF 'UNCLE' WRIGHT I READ THAT OBAMA HUSSEIN (MUSLIM OR CHRISTIAN)???? BLACK OR WHITE??????? WAS THE DEMOCRATS' FAVORITE.
MARC YR BLIND (ER)...JUST YESTERDAY, EVEN AFTER THE DEBACLE OF 'UNCLE' WRIGHT I READ THAT OBAMA HUSSEIN (MUSLIM OR CHRISTIAN)???? BLACK OR WHITE??????? WAS THE DEMOCRATS' FAVORITE.
MARC YR BLIND (ER)...JUST YESTERDAY, EVEN AFTER THE DEBACLE OF 'UNCLE' WRIGHT I READ THAT OBAMA HUSSEIN (MUSLIM OR CHRISTIAN)???? BLACK OR WHITE??????? WAS THE DEMOCRATS' FAVORITE.
MARC YR BLIND (ER)...JUST YESTERDAY, EVEN AFTER THE DEBACLE OF 'UNCLE' WRIGHT I READ THAT OBAMA HUSSEIN (MUSLIM OR CHRISTIAN)???? BLACK OR WHITE??????? WAS THE DEMOCRATS' FAVORITE.
MARC YR BLIND (ER)...JUST YESTERDAY, EVEN AFTER THE DEBACLE OF 'UNCLE' WRIGHT I READ THAT OBAMA HUSSEIN (MUSLIM OR CHRISTIAN)???? BLACK OR WHITE??????? WAS THE DEMOCRATS' FAVORITE.
Of course, if Hillary stumbles upon the good grace to concede after Indiana, as the superdelegates will no doubt lean on her to do, the delegates from the contested states will of course be seated in full and no disenfranchisement will occur. That's if she loses Indiana. Given the latest poll out of North Carolina, this should be a concern... Obama had the chance to end this in Texas on March 4th, and that loss was a real disappointment. But he's in serious trouble if Clinton wins in either North Carolina or Indiana.
Obviously, he didn't have a chance to end this in Texas since he won in Texas and it didn't end. Chuck Todd said on MSNBC tonight that there is basically zero chance Clinton finishes with the lead in pledged delegates or total popular votes. Chuck Todd seems to me to be the guy who is least swayed by the moment. This thing is over, and has been at least since Wisconsin.
jbryan, Based on delegate count he did end it in Texas.
This thing is in no way over. Let's say she wins in PA by 15-20% as polls currently show. She picks up anywhere from 22-32 delegates. Lets say she goes on to win in IN, NC, WV, KY and Puertor Rico. A NC poll today showed him up by 1 so a win for her there isn't out of the question. Lets even say he wins but it's close(within 10) By June 3, he's up by 125 delegates or so. Meanwhile, polls consistently show Hillary doing better vs McCain, polls show Obama losing OH, PA, FL, MI and MO, and all by comfortable margins, polls show his support among whites vs McCain to be around 40% or below and his support among Hispanics to be similar, national polls show Hillary and him pretty much tied or even have her ahead, the Wright stuff hasn't gone way and meanwhile names like Bill Ayers and Frank Davis have become household names, I could go on This is nowhere near over. It's only just beginning
"super delegate", Even in that rather optimistic scenario (of course that scenario is only optimistic from a diehard Clinton loyalist's perspective, as opposed to from the perspective of someone who would want the Democratic nominee to actually win the general election), Obama wins the nomination. That is because Clinton won't get the net of 126 among the superdelegates she would need on the strength of marginal advantages in head-to-head polls. This, of course, is one of the many silly things about the Clinton loyalists' bitter-end theories. Clinton's superdelegate margin is already down to around 35, and perpetually shrinking. The idea that margin will suddenly balloon to the necessary numbers on the strength of highly contestable electability claims simply isn't grounded in reality, and indeed is contradicted by the trend ever since Super Tuesday.
By the way, the dead-ender arguments are particularly silly when you break down the remaining superdelegates by type. At this point Clinton's dwindling superdelegate lead is almost entirely dependent on the big leads she started with among DNC and "distinguished party leader" superdelegates. Meanwhile, Obama now has a net advantage among elected official superdelegates, and likely will have a net advantage among "add-on" superdelegates (thanks in part to winning so many more states). The very bad news for the Clinton dead-enders is that of the remaining 340 or so uncommitted superdelegates, well less than half (under 160) are DNC and DPL superdelegates, and more than half are elected officials or add-ons. So, the notion that the remaining superdelegates will suddently start committing to Clinton in the necessary numbers if she loses the pledged delegate contest by triple digits really is ridiculous, even assuming Clinton's electability arguments could somehow halt the current superdelegate trends.
|
Subscribe to this blog by Email Twitter || On Facebook || QIK Live Channel  Recent Posts
Monthly Archives
|
Copyright © 2009 by The Atlantic Monthly Group. All rights reserved.
| 
Today's Rasmussen's tracking poll
March 19: Obama: 47 Clinton: 42
Posted by Ed | March 19, 2008 5:12 PM