Pennsylvania 4/12 through 4/14
Clinton 54, Obama 40
SurveyUSA Blog Post: Is Clinton-Obama more like Rendell-Fisher? More like Specter-Hoeffel? Or more like Bush-Kerry?
time for mark to jig that down jag on his PA graph.
Posted on April 15, 2008 11:05 AM
My prediction: Clinton by 5-15%. But the comment system seems to be eating my comments.
Apologies if anyone sees this more than once.
Posted on April 15, 2008 11:06 AM
Obama gains 4 points in 1 week per SUSA. More proof that the "bitter" comments are much ado about nothing.
Posted on April 15, 2008 11:45 AM
i say clinton 6-10. doesn't really matter though. this was done over a month ago. it's just been dragged on so the clinton camp can employ their friends/workers with donors' money. why actually give that money to races that are winnable by other dems against repubs in the fall? hmmm, maybe hillary is a repub after all. sure is acting like one.
Posted on April 15, 2008 11:46 AM
most people haven't even heard of the bitter comments.....
Posted on April 15, 2008 11:47 AM
I'm growing more skeptical of SUSA - compared to their last, this one shows Clinton losing 2 points, and Obama gaining 2 points.
And while they say they interviewed 1600 - I don't see the actual sample size. Are their methodology and crosstabs publicly available? I'm just seeing their client's newspaper article. Was this an omnibus poll?
Also, this poll is doing HRC no favors. If she does break into double digits next Tuesday, it will be old news.
Posted on April 15, 2008 12:15 PM
downtick to an uptick? there never should have been a downtick. clinton hovered around 50 by all the reputable pollsters for some time. everything was within the moe. obama just gained a bit (30 to 40) in his support.
I go back to my original argument:
Clinton wins by more than 15% - Huge win for her, gives her fuel to carry on
Clinton wins by 10%-15% - This was expected. She keeps on going, but it doesn't affect much of the rest of the primary - except that it drags on and she limps along.
Clinton wins by 5%-10% - Surge for Obama, press calls him Teflon, Clinton fundraising continues to dry up more than now - superdelegates increase their number of endorsements for Obama at a quicker rate.
Obama keeps her under 5% or he wins - The pressure will be on Clinton to be graceful for the next few contests, to "do a Huckabee". Mend fences, talk nice about Obama, She stays in with a skeleton campaign until West Virginia which she wins then concedes on an upnote.
Posted on April 15, 2008 12:30 PM
no way thatch - Clinton will be in it until PR. Then she will concede after the supers back obama. she has no class or loyalty to the dems now - she is in fact a de facto repub as huffington wrote today. her political career is over, she's just too stupid to know it. how's it go - "ding dong the witch is dead".
i almost feel sorry for her......almost...
Posted on April 15, 2008 12:38 PM
LOL - "the real truth." Huffington - an authority on politics? Objective? Her blog is nothing but an angry front for Obama. Say anything on their against Obama and suffer. I have friends who were banned for just contesting their vitriolic supoort of him.
Anyway, I think it is completely naive to suggest that Clinton's political career is over. There is one simple reason: without Clinton's endorsement of Obama at the convention, her large support will not fall in step. He already risks losing them. If Clinton does not "make good" with him in August, then it's Kennedy/Carter all over again. It's interesting to hear Obama's supporters act as if destroying Clinton helps their cause. All it does is alienate her supporters. According to most pollsters, Obama loses more Clinton support than vice versa.
Posted on April 15, 2008 1:37 PM
Out of the four "endings" I propose - only one shows she would withdraw before PR, the last one. And, if you are Obama - that is the one you are working for. It is, in the end, the best way - diplomatically, for both candidates and the democratic party - in my opinion.
Posted on April 15, 2008 1:57 PM
The_Real_Truth (such an ironic name): Don't feel too sorry for Hillary. She's not only the most admired woman in the world and "opened the door" for women in future presidential elections (after 230 years), she's received far more votes from actual Democrats throughout the primary season, she's won almost all the big states, and her demographic support is stronger among the groups any Dem needs to win the White House. (Do you realize a presidential candidate can win 99% of the African American vote and only carry the District of Columbia?). So she'll get the "last laugh" when Obama loses (and be able to say, "See, I could have taken on the Republicans"). So she'll be well positioned again in 2012 (when McCain is 76 and had mediocre first term). You should feel sorry for Obama, America, and future viable black candidates. Because he couldn't wait until he was ready, he's going to lose the election badly and the media will say "America just wasn't ready for a black President". When in reality we just aren't ready to elect someone with so little real substance or experience that the national media didn't bother to scrutinize until it was too late. What the Republicans and 527's do to Obama this Fall will make what they did to Dukakis and Kerry seem like a cake walk in comparison. Just watch. At least McCain isn't too bad.
Posted on April 15, 2008 4:13 PM
Ohhh, Patrick - still BITTER are you, about donating to Billary's doomed campaign of lies? There, there, it will all be over soon. Hush now, the end is near.
Funny, since we ARE on a polls website, let me just link to some polls that refute ALL your bogus claims.
Yup, that's right, I believe the kids would say "You just got served, biiaach!"
Posted on April 15, 2008 4:57 PM
Reading some of the posts here is like watching cars approach two tool booths at the Pennsylvania Turnpike. In front of one booth is a long line of cars. The other booth has no one waiting. As the cars exit the turnpike almost everyone gets in line. The tool booth less traveled remains empty. So it is with most of the comments I have read (including the national media and the 95% comment by Charlie Cook). See a line and get in it.
Does anybody really think that Obama can survive a catastrophic loss in Pennsylvania? Such a loss would make clear several things: First, that he cannot win a contested large state primary. Second, that his appeal to white voters are limited to the educated and affluent. Last, and most important, that he is not vetted and cannot take a punch. The Graveyard of the Democratic Party is littered with the headstones of glass jawed candidates.
Despite the daily ramblings of Chuck Todd about delegate counts, the nomination will not be determined by pledged delegates. It will be decided by the perception of who is the best general election candidate. My guess is that many Democrats are secretly starting to worry about the electability of Mr. Obama. A crushing defeat in Pa. could strike a mortal blow to his campaign. Mr. Obama may end up winning Pa. or making it very close. In which case he will be the nominee but I think the chances of a large loss are greater. Democrats may be crazy but we are not stupid. More than anything we want to reclaim the White House. If Obama, outspending Clinton by 5 to 1, can't compete in Pa. maybe it is time for him to drop out for the good of the party.
richard, are you high or just a hillbot?
Let me give you the stats:
Contests to date:
Obama : 30
Clinton : 14
And let me shoot down your bogus "big state primary" and PA "argument" with 1 link:
Be sure to look at PA - Obama crushes McCain there - so who cares how he does against Clinton. He can lose 99-1 for all I care. He changes the electoral map that will benefit down-ticket DEMS everywhere. What does that mean - MORE CONGRESSIONAL SEATS!!
No, the supers will uphold the popular vote leader, the contests won leader and the leader of pledged delegates. If they don't, and stupidly vote for Hillary - she will lose in a landslide come November.
Maybe you should get the facts before you post so you wouldn't end up looking like so uninformed.
Posted on April 15, 2008 5:09 PM
You are suggesting there is a significant chance that Hillary won't endorse Obama if he wins the Democratic nomination?
Posted on April 15, 2008 5:25 PM
no one is secretly questioning Obama's "electibility" -- that's just what Clinton wants you think. Seriously. She and her surrogates beat it into your head everyday and the media just follows along like a stupid lap dog. Nobody is questioning his electibility. Polls do not support this logic. But Clinton needs to keep making that argument because SHE CANT MAKE ANY OTHER ARGUMENT. So she WANTS people to think that Supers are "considering" his electibility so that she can actually convince VOTERS that, since supers are doing this, you should too. DO you see the logic? If you step back from the fray it makes savvy political sense. You fell for it. So it shows that her approach is "somewhat" successful.
Posted on April 15, 2008 7:38 PM
Truth: There are plenty of legitimate arguments to make for Mr. Obama but trotting out the total number of states won isn't one of them.
Mike: The Superdelegates are looking at the same data as everyone else. Obama has significant weakness amongst working class whites, older voters and Latino's. If he can attract these voters, let him prove it in PA. If not, I don't think he can win in Novmeber. As Harris and Vandehei said the Clinton's truly believe that Obama will be an electoral disaster. Many other Democrats think the same thing. I agree with them.
Posted on April 15, 2008 9:04 PM
you make valid points, and polling (both election results and these telephone polls) does indeed show that Obama has yet been unable to successfully court "white working classers." But, what is unclear is if they hold an anti-Obama sentiment or a pro-Clinton sentiment, and whether Clinton's arguments against Obama have influenced them, or if it is Obama himself who turns them off. These are all arguments that supers and voters need to consider.
But you will have to admit that supers are really not "considering" this because overturning the "will of the people" as it has been termed (admittedly by Obama supporters) is going to be first and foremost on their minds. Clinton is trying to change that storyline by pushing the Obama's electoral "disaster" thing.
Just remember one thing -- Obama's electoral disaster is probably not as bad as Clinton's considering she polls lower in a lot of swing states. Her only advantage right now seems to be Florida, which can be more than made up in CO, NM, IA, etc. So let's not be too hasty to label Obama an "electoral disaster" and instead work on electing a Democrat to the WH by helping convince those working class whites that Obama is the right choice instead of tearing him down all spring. We can thus avoid electoral disaster.
Posted on April 15, 2008 11:28 PM
I did not say she would NOT endorse him, but they have to "pay" for the endorsement. Sorry - but that's how politics works. Clinton will get something in order to unify with him in the end. I do not think it will be a VP position, but she will come out looking really good and probably securing some protection for those who supported her. If that does not happen, then she will only tepidly endorse. My response was really addressing the politically naive idea that the Obama supprters in the party should celebrate and plot the demise of Clinton. Without her, Obama loses a lot of support. How does that help him?
Posted on April 16, 2008 9:08 AM
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