Clinton 55, Obama 39
It is funny that they are putting out polls in the event that there is a do-over in FL.
Posted on March 7, 2008 11:21 AM
The stupid thing is that people want them to spend up to 25 million to come up with the same result.
IN the Jan 29th primary,Clinton got 50%, Obama 33%. If you split the rest you come up with the numbers above.
A redo would be a collosal waste of mooney. if Obama really thinks he can win and really cares about the poor or health care or whatever else he should tell them to let the results stand.
There is no reason for a redo.
Posted on March 7, 2008 11:34 AM
Both names (plus John Edwards) were on the ballot. Obama even campaigned there even though it was in direct violation of the DNC agreement. Florida voters are not dumb- they keep up on the national news and are well aware of the campaigns. A 'do over' is just a collosal waste of money. I agree with s.b.- if Obama cares anything about the poor and how that money could be used otherwise, and if he's not just your average politician only looking out for himself, he'll accept the vote count as is.
Posted on March 7, 2008 11:46 AM
LOL this argument is hilarious. If Obama cares about the poor he should let the results stand? What kind of disconnect of logic is that? Florida and Michigan need to pay for this since they clearly violated the rules. You break the law you get fined. It's like cheating on a test you paid to take. If you take the test again you gotta pay again. Florida and Michigan legislators who put themselves in this quagmire to begin with have to think about this since its their fault.
Posted on March 7, 2008 11:55 AM
I agree, they should let the results stand. Those two state broke the rules, the consequences were clearly laid out before they made that decision.
Also, Obama didn't campaign, but Hillary did hold a rally there the night of the vote, because she got laughed out of South Carolina. This poll should be the same as the other vote - it shows votes based on name recognition, and not when both candidates campaign there. We see what the difference between those two things by looking at the Texas and Ohio votes. Yes Hilllary still won, but the difference went from more than almost 30% to 10% in Ohio, and something more than 20% to 4% in Texas. Hillary still won both, but because every vote counts (and not just who gets more than 50%, that 1 in 5 voters change their minds after seeing both people campaign there is significant.
Posted on March 7, 2008 12:07 PM
I absolutely give FL to Hillary and the vote will probably reflect the Ohio results with a 10 pt spread, but what a waste of money and time to split the delegates 55-45, the delegate movement will result in Hillary moving but not catching up. Michigan however is a completely different story, in that state he could actually win so if its worth doing a primary over anywhere it would be Michigan as the outcome of the first primary may very well change.I would love to see a michigan poll right about now.
Posted on March 7, 2008 12:31 PM
Florida (and Michigan) defied party rules. They were explicitly told delegates would not count. End of story. No redo. Clinton 0, Obama 0.
DNC clearly can not seat delegates. For the DNC to agree to honor any redo for a state which intentionally broke the rules is absurd.
That voters are disenfranchised, well that is tough. States said to DNC --- screw you, and now the day of reckoning in here and the DNC needs to say to the two states --- screw you. Any other scenario makes a total mockery of the DNC authority. Only 2 states intentionally violated the rule --- they should get zero consideration.
Posted on March 7, 2008 12:35 PM
Who cares about the rules - the DNC should care about winning the next election. Michigan and Florida are both swing states - according to SurveyUSA Obama loses Florida by 2 points and wins Michigan by 1. On the Democratic side Clinton wins Florida handily but is tied in Michigan.
There are 44 electoral college votes up for grabs there (way larger than the predicted margin for Obama and Clinton over McCain).
Can you change the rules in the middle of a contest? Sure you can - the DNC has no inherent need to promote fairness. Primaries should be about selecting a candidate that can win the next election - and election that will include Michigan and Florida. Obviously they need to get both camps to agree on a solution, but leaving out Michigan and Florida is idiotic.
Posted on March 7, 2008 12:38 PM
Go Hillary! The voters should not be disenfranchised by the actions of party insiders.
Posted on March 7, 2008 12:45 PM
Lets look at the facts:
Hillary held a fund-raising rally there which was legal.
Obama had ads run in the state which is a grey area because CNN and MSNBC's coverage from Mobile, AL hits coverage in the panhandle of Florida. Nationwide coverage also naturally hits Florida.
The rules Florida and Michigan violated were signed for a year ago. The DNC has a written contract that they clearly broke. This is why the court case against the DNC failed.
Now for the issue of disenfranchisement this result rests on the shoulders of the legislators and states themselves. The DNC has reiterated that they will not fund and not count the results of their primaries.
I cannot see EVEN with Obama agreeing to a revote, re-primary, or whatever do-over possible the DNC funding this project. The DNC is barely in the black in funds and even a mailer election (3-6 million dollars) will bring them in the red.
Now my opinion: I honestly see the wash option becoming more possible. 50-50 split will seat delegates, not effect the outcome, and cost no money.
Posted on March 7, 2008 12:50 PM
It's obvious most of you are quite biased for one or the other candidate. Most of you that is. The reality is if everyone gets their vote in, Michigan, Florida and you and me and the like. You can't determine who is going to win by what until it actually happens. Obama's dog and pony show may prevail. And Clintons school yard lecture's may prevail. The primary schedule still to come, and the voters from Michigan and Flotida being counted Either candidate still has a shot. Not to mention the 'supers'. They can vote either way regardless. Not to mention over one third of them keep changing their minds. So you if you want to wash this or wash that. Why even go through the process. We have a threshold of delegates for a reason. And until some one is mathematically out, they have every right and a duty to those who did voted for them to carry on.......
Posted on March 7, 2008 1:09 PM
All your wishful thinking in the World wont stop the fact that MI & FL will revote and Hillary will win again just as she did before. Obama's falling apart at the seams, he lost his top advisor last night - this is going South on him in a BIG HURRY.
Posted on March 7, 2008 1:18 PM
John.....put your helmet on kid! You are going to be late.....the short bus is outside waiting to take you to school!
Posted on March 7, 2008 1:50 PM
I wonder, will there be any actual discussion of the poll numbers?
Posted on March 7, 2008 1:54 PM
I wouldnt want to demean you, Im quoting fox news just this morning who reported this lady as His TOP Advisor. So if Im wrong - I blame it on them.
Chris on the other hand - Its always interesting to see that our "EVERY CHILD LEFT BEHIND PROGRAM " is working in full stride.
Posted on March 7, 2008 2:01 PM
Michael, we can (and probably will) speculate on turnout and margins for weeks/months, but I'd guess that the early splits are a bit too high. HRC didn't win either Ohio or NJ by 14% so my crystal ball doesn't have the number staying that far apart. Also, PA is closed so the 2.5M seems a bit high. There were only 3.9M reg'd dems last fall, and while I expect that to have increased by 10-20%, >50% turnout in a primary would be pretty amazing. It could happen, but I don't expect it.
Beyond PA, NC is the last big state and it seems to be BO favorable (he did pretty well in VA and SC). That would partially counter HRC's gains in PA.
Posted on March 7, 2008 2:14 PM
Andrew S. you need to get the facts straight.
Fundraising events were permissable under the rules,with regards to Florida, campaigning was not. Running a TV ad is a "gray" area? Please!
Posted on March 7, 2008 2:19 PM
Um... Karen if you look at my post I said Hillary's fund raising WAS permissible.
Now running a TV ad in MOBILE, ALABAMA that hits the TV watchers in the corner of the panhandle of florida as a clear violation... well I would say that that is Grey. If he had run it in Pensacola, FL that would have been a different story. When you buy national TV AD coverage it will naturally hit every state. You can't tell them to exempt states or small market areas that spill across borders (Think Kansas City, Missouri or Minneapolis TV hitting western Wisconsin). YOU CAN'T PREVENT IT. That is the fact. This is how TV AD markets work. If you have ever lived in a major city next to another state you'll notice this. I remember being in Trenton, NJ one time and getting news and AD coverage for Connecticut.
Posted on March 7, 2008 2:43 PM
But this number shows that people do not know who Obama is! That's all.
Posted on March 7, 2008 4:06 PM
I don't mind that we have to do it all over again,as long as we have a primary,and the winner take all. Go Hillary 08!
Posted on March 8, 2008 12:50 AM
Obama did not campaign hard in FL. The ads shown there were part of a national ad campaign inwhich FL could not be separted out.
Also, as far as FL stats goes, Clinton won the state on early voting ballots that were cast before anyone knew who Obama was. If you read the exit polls you will see Obama did better than Clinton on the day the votes was taken.
Posted on March 8, 2008 9:56 AM
It is so undemocratic to say that the voters of FL & MI have to be punished for the DNC sanctioning over the decision of FL and MI democratic leadership, not the voters. FL votes should be honored since all names were on the ballot, and none campaign there (Clinton was there AFTER the primary). MI should do a replay.
Posted on March 8, 2008 6:17 PM
If Clinton win Pennsylvania, Clinton win the nomination because it proves that only clinton can beat McCain. Obama only can win caucuses. I think there is no caucuses in November election.
Posted on March 8, 2008 11:34 PM
This has nothing to do with the poll analysis...and how it would mirror any legitimate election poll (which likely woiuld have different rules).
The DNC will NOT allow the Michigan or Florida delegations to be seated without some sort of penalty, however. I suspect that the Florida and Michigan camps won't come up with the money...and the DNC will not want to waste money.
So what would be a fair penalty, to make sure that party leaders don't violate agreements they had already made...and push Primaries further and further back in time to where they occur a year before the National Election?
Simple. Seat all of the States Elected Delegates (requiring Michigans' Non-Committed slate to either vote for Obama or another candidate other than Clinton ). But ban the Superdelegates from the States and require that any State party official be banned from sitting as an elected delegate. If they came near the Convention center I'd have them arrested for trespassing! Regular delegates okay...party hacks from Florida or Michigan...not!
This would smack down the party hacks who created this fiasco, and perhaps being persona non grata from the convention would make any future party hacks think twice about ever doing it again.
Posted on March 10, 2008 6:58 PM
Comments: (you may use HTML tags for style)
Please be patient while your comment posts - sometimes it takes a minute or two. To check your comment, please wait 60 seconds and click your browser's refresh button. Note that comments with three or more hyperlinks will be held for approval.
Please email us to report offensive comments.
See our comment policy here. Note that we require commenters to share their email address via Typekey. We will never share your email address with anyone without your explicit permission.
MAP - US, AL, AK, AZ, AR, CA, CO, CT, DE, FL, GA, HI, ID, IL, IN, IA, KS, KY, LA, ME, MD, MA, MI, MN, MS, MO, MT, NE, NV, NH, NJ, NM, NY, NC, ND, OH, OK, OR, PA, RI, SC, SD, TN, TX, UT, VT, VA, WA, WV, WI, WY, PR