Obama 48, Clinton 42... McCain 53, Huckabee 27, Paul 11
Clinton 44, Obama 42... McCain 62, Huckabee 19, Paul 8
UPDATE: More links
Houston Chronicle story
Crosstabs: TX Dems, Reps, OH Dems, Reps
Damn you ZOGBY!!!!!!
Posted on February 29, 2008 10:45 AM
Posted on February 29, 2008 10:47 AM
Posted on February 29, 2008 11:00 AM
zogby, lol, oh remember James Zogby, a supporter of Obama, You got alot of nerve to come back out after you predicted Obama would win by 13 pts, lol, stupid bitch.
Posted on February 29, 2008 11:02 AM
His polls truly are crap but do you honestly thinking he's purposely rigging them to Obama's benefit? Nobody ever won a delegate based winning the Zogby poll. If anything it raises expectations for Obama and allows Hillary to claim a "comeback victory" or that momentum is shifting back to her.
I'll grant you that the poll is probably worthless but I don't think it shows bias, just bad polling.
Posted on February 29, 2008 11:16 AM
Zogby is a good pollster. The reality is the Hillary is loosing. She's run a horrible campgain. She is not want the country wants right now and the Clinton's need to go gently into that good night.
Posted on February 29, 2008 11:25 AM
I agree Zogby is a good pollster, maybe the best, but he like everyone else gets it wrong from time to time. Time will tell, but I do think Obama is going to edge Clinton in Texas.
Posted on February 29, 2008 11:29 AM
Gallup to me seems to be the best followed b surveyUSA. Zogby seems to be towards the bottom, he has an obvious bias in this election and therefore cannot be trusted with accurate polling.
Posted on February 29, 2008 11:34 AM
I admit it, I'm a Zogby fan. This primary season, however, he's been just lousy. What can I make of this poll? My hunch is to trust that John knows he's been lousy, too, and he's making adjustments. But we never do get crosstabs, at least without paying for them.
Maybe that's what I admire about Zogby - he makes us pay to figure out if he's any damned good. :-)
This poll sounds about right to me, but there are too many variables at work. The early voting is so huge and rather unpredictable. I don't have as many friends in Texas as I do in Wisconsin (where my 12-point Obama prediction turned out to actually be low).
Thanks, John, keep up the good work. We'll assume it's good, that is. :-)
Posted on February 29, 2008 11:36 AM
I'd like to point out that the majority of the last several polls (post WI) for TX show either a statistical tie with a slight Obama edge or an actual significant Obama lead. TX is obviously still close, but most of the other previous states with this pattern were Obama victories.
I don't think there's been a poll yet for Ohio with Obama over Clinton, although the gap has narrowed a lot over February. The momentum is obviously in Obama's direction, which is both poll and reality based, but Clinton appears to still have a lead in OH.
If the election were being held tomorrow I'd wager that Obama wins TX by 52-48 to 53-47 and loses Ohio 49.5-50.5 to 48.5-51.5. Of course, there's still the weekend.
And finally, I'd like to compliment the people who run this site for a great job, and also call for some moderation to start taking place on the comments.
Posted on February 29, 2008 11:43 AM
Even digg-stle self-moderation would be helpful.
Posted on February 29, 2008 11:47 AM
If I'm not mistaken Zogby had Obama up 13 points in both NH and CA just days before voting. Both of which were key losses for Obama.
Posted on February 29, 2008 11:52 AM
Lol, if you believe that Zogby isn't biased then I'd have to suppose you believe that Santa Clause really exists. He has no credibility in my book and amognst many circles.
Posted on February 29, 2008 11:57 AM
True, but all the polls were wrong about NH. Due to the Demographics of TX vice NH, I do think this poll is somewhat accurate. It works both ways..these same polls had Obama winning Virginia and Wisconsin by only 5-10 pts and look what happened there.
"If I'm not mistaken Zogby had Obama up 13 points in both NH and CA just days before voting. Both of which were key losses for Obama."
Posted on February 29, 2008 11:59 AM
Zogby was off by:
14% in California
12% in New Jersey
How is any good? His brother works for Obama
Posted on February 29, 2008 12:09 PM
Can any of the people who claim Zogby has an Obama "bias" explain to me how that helps Obama? I will grant you that he has a horrible track record but bias is something altogether different.
Posted on February 29, 2008 12:24 PM
No Zogby was off by 22% in California. They had Obama up by 12%, he lost by 10%. That has to be done on purpose. They oversampled SF and undersampled LA and hispanics.
I would call it propaganda, not polling.
Posted on February 29, 2008 12:28 PM
That propaganda sure was helpful. The Zogby California poll gave the impression that Super Tuesday was a surprise comeback for Clinton. The reality was that it was a huge setback for her on a day she was supposed to end the race. Unquestionably those inflated poll numbers hurt Obama. Hillary should be paying him--he's their best tool in playing the expectations game.
Posted on February 29, 2008 12:41 PM
Posted on February 29, 2008 1:10 PM
All the polls were off in California, due to the early voting.
Look at the past few primaries Obama was won by a significantly higher margin than what the polls said.
Again, and for the last time for people who have a hard time with delegate Math -
IT IS OVER!!
Posted on February 29, 2008 1:15 PM
Rasmussen has a new Ohio poll out, which sort of backs Zogby:
Clinton 47%, Obama 45% (Clinton +2)
Posted on February 29, 2008 1:53 PM
Fox just released a new poll for OHIO:
Clinton 46, Obama 38.
Although I don't think this poll is correct, I am glad it shows Clinton ahead by a wide margin. The last thing Obama needs is for pollsters and media to raise expectation for him in Ohio and for Hillary to claim a come back even if she loses Ohio.
Posted on February 29, 2008 3:30 PM
The bottom line here is that even at best case for Obama, they are close in Texas and he's behind in Ohio, RI & Penn - There is NO knock out punch for him here. Like a prize fight, this is going the full 15 rounds with the decision announced at the Brokered Convention in August !
Posted on February 29, 2008 6:23 PM
>>All the polls were off in California, due to the early voting
Breecer, I know that you are just a troll and that we shouldn't encourage them, but you should at least be corrected from time to time.
Actually, Zogby was off because he had Hispanic voting way off. He showed them tied in CA, an absurd "result." Hispanics favored Hillary 2-1, and showed up at 30% of the electorate in CA. Early voting was NOT why Zogby was off. If so, explain why SUSA had the end result of +9.5? How did they manage to get it correct? Hispanic vote.
Posted on February 29, 2008 7:15 PM
While I have favored Hillary, and subjected myself to daily insults online from Obama supporters because of it, I disagree with your assesment.
She has to win, even if by one vote, in both TX and OH to move forward. I love Hillary, but I'd like to see here concede if she doesn't win both.
Posted on February 29, 2008 7:21 PM
All of you conspiracists out there who think these polls are 'biased' don't comprehend that an enterprise in the business of undertaking polls must be objective, or their product is of no commercial value to its users/buyers. And, if the poll is worthless -- which it would be if driven by bias -- that enterprise would quickly go out of business. Granted, of course, pollsters make mistakes, but I'd bet there're honest mistakes, not preordained results generated by particular agendas. Forget your conspiracies. Have some understanding of basic economics, please.
Posted on March 1, 2008 9:10 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