are coming to realize Hillary is the stronger candidate in so many ways.  She can beat McCain, and she can get policies enacted as president.

Well, SUSA does indeed push leaners harder than just about any other pollster.  That's one reason their day-before polls are so accurate, and also one reason why their 6-weeks-early polls aren't nearly as valuable: they show the landscape to more static than it really is.  

As I wrote in a diary about this poll:

For reference, this is SUSA's poll of South Carolina taken just under 6 weeks before their Democratic primary:

Clinton: 41
Obama: 39
Edwards: 17

A month and a half is a long time... I don't know if it's really dawned on any of us just how long it is.  i do believe that Obama starts at a real disadvantage in the state.  I do think Clinton is likely to win.  But I don't believe it will be by anything close to 19%.

I think it is a victory if Obama cuts it to under 10...or enough for him to cover with N.C. and Indiana.

...and six weeks is a looong time in politics.  He doesn't have to win PA to win the nomination, but he does need to close that gap.  I'm confident that he'll do precisely that.  

Does anyone know if there are debates scheduled for PA?  

Holy crap!! That'll make the primary season a tight race again and ... oh... wait... no it won't.

BO is going to go into the convention with more delegates, more states, more popular vote, and probably more EC votes on the SUSA map.  The SDs aren't going to reverse that.  

PA may make you feel a little better about losing, but that's all it can do.  Sorry.

6 weeks, folks, 6 weeks.

Another lame post.
Look at the Pollster trends over the last 6 months.
Clinton has had a +/-20 point lead average for most of that time.  Recent trends show that lead to be cut in half.

Consider this:
In the 30 day cycle leading up to every state contest thus far, Clinton has lost points and Obama has gained points.  What does that tell you?

in Ohio too?  Obama was able to close the gap to close to even but lost ground the last weekend because of all his problems.

6 weeks is a VERY LONG time.

I wouldn't be surprised if Obama closed the gap withing single digits by the time the primary happened.

But Obama has consistently faced deficits just as large, and in most cases, LARGER 6 weeks out from actual voting.

He closed the gap almost entirely in Texas.   He got it down to 10 points (though admittedly - saw it also GROW to 10 points from what looked like 5) in Ohio.

It's a big number - and for a change, the trendline isn't good.

But I'm hardly freaking out about this....

I'm more concerned with tonight's contest - and hoping that Obama can crack the 65% barrier that might cause a 3-5 additional delegate swing into his favor.

Given that PA is 4/22 --- I think we've got plenty of time to dissipate a 19 pt. deficit.... especially when one considers that even a 19 pt PA win isn't going to chip much more than what.... maybe 15-20 delegates? off Obama's 100-150 delegate lead.

show him so far behind right now.  Thus if he makes it single digits than he can declare victory.

Please. For one thing this pol suggest that Clinton will win 80% of the white vote. Do you really think Clinton will win 80% of the white vote in Pen? I don't. Not by a long shot.

It's going to be longer for Clinton, since once again her campaign's very survival requires a blowout win.  After today, she won't have the state to herself, as she did when she effectively conceded Mississippi.

Sure.

HRC has the Philly mayor and Philly machine behind her.

When it comes to urban areas, never underestimate what the local ward/block/precinct apparatuses can do for you.

He's got plenty of obstacles to overcome.

The good news -- even the worst number Obama probably could do in PA (let's say a 20 pt loss) -- doesn't really make that large of a dent in Obama's 100-150 delegate lead.

There just aren't that many states left... and HRC needs a string of 20 pt. wins...

Though the faux-horserace meme being pushed is amusing.

6 weeks is an eternity.  I think the FL pseudo-primary was 6 weeks ago.  
He can narrow the gap to about 6-8 points, and the rest depends on fate.  Is there a major Clinton gaffe or scandal?  Does Obama go on a foreign policy tour of Asia, Europe and Israel and get some media props?  Is there a major superdelegate endorsement like Edwards, Gore, Murtha or Casey?

He needs to narrow the gap in order to have a shot at winning both NC and IN two weeks later, or else the media narrative will be about Clinton's "resurgence".

Before you guys here at 'Operation Hope For Hillary' get too excited, you might consider--

First, Hillary has to pray that after Mississippi the superdelegates don't start to pull the trigger for Obama and put an end to this thing before we ever get to Pennsylvania.

Second, Obama is likely to have a very good day in North Carolina, which is another large, delegate-rich state.  I expect that his margin of victory there will be at least as wide as HRC's anticipated win in PA.  So, delegate-wise, she isn't going to be a lot better off no matter what happens.

And further, the North Carolina primary is two weeks after Pennsylvania, so that stops Hillary from generating any perception of momentum.

Number-wise, it's over.  As many posters all over the blogosphere have indicated, HRC can only win if the superdelegates hand it to her.  And I don't see any way for that to happen while we preserve Democratic Party unity.

That's not a bad hurdle given Obama's history.

Doesn't she have to win every state from here on out by 25% to have shot at a lead in the pledged delegates?  She isn't even getting that in PA?!?  Yikes!  She has her work cut out for her.

Seems this poll is reflecting the wild enthusiasm people have for Hillary in PA. Is there a rating somewhere of polls showing which ones are most accurate? I've heard that Zogby is pretty inaccurate.

The interesting dynamic for PA is that the "CiC threshold" argument -- Clinton's most persuasive remaining argument, as of last week -- was thrown out by none other than Ed Rendell, who proclaimed on national TV that Obama is qualified to be president.

Anyone want to guess how many times that is going to show up on PA TV, if Clinton tries to push the "not ready" argument there?

Obama does worst among low-information voters. Six weeks is a lot of time to get some information out there.

It's a good starting point for Obama.  We will be enjoying watching it melt, and ready with quick responses to the frenzied last-minute smears that Clinton will surely launch somewhere around April 20.  For us 19 points mean we will likely win. :)

up to Pennsylvania's primary on the 22nd. First will be April 15th (where are those tax returns Hill?) folowed by April 25th's trial date setting for her, Bill, AND Chelsea regarding the $2 million dollar Hollywood "gala" (ahem... Senate seat fundraiser) event. That should make for some Clinton family fun time! RUN FROM THAT PROCESS SERVER'S SUBPOENA, HILL... RUN!!! LOL!http://www.peterfpaul.com/2008/02/21/bil ls-fraud-trial-delayed-hillary-says-proc ess-server-must-catch-her-for-deposition /

Obama started opening offices in PA this/last weekend. His Bethlehem campaign office opened on Friday.

Obama's campaign effort is pays out primarily on the ground. This is why Clinton often by 20% 6 weeks out (before his staff arrive on the ground) but find herself fighting to win a few days before the vote.

My guess is that, like most other state before it, Hillary and Obama will be fighting to top each other. I still think PA is not in the bag for Hillary. It's still a jump ball.

6 week-out polls are almost as bad as the November match-ups we keep seeing when it comes to Obama and Hillary.

Okay Jonathan. Hillary Clinton has a 19 point lead, according to what most of us agree is the most credible polling outfit in the nation. Fine. Whoopee.

This is the baseline number for Hillary Clinton, before either her campaign or Obama's has done a significant amount of campaigning in the state. It's also the margin she needs to STILL HAVE on election day.

I can't tell you how many times in this race we've seen Clinton start off with a 20-point lead a few weeks from the election, only to eek out a slim 5-point victory. That's not a "big win" in this context, and attempts by Clinton supporters to spin it as such will not go unchallenged.

In this context, if Clinton wins the state by less than 15 points, Obama supporters and the media have the right to ask why she is bleeding support, and whether voters are having a crisis of confidence in Hillary Clinton's campaign.

If you want to cite this number as proof positive of overwhelming early support for Clinton, then we're going to hold you to it and ask "well, what happened to all that early support" when the ultimate margin of victory ends up much closer than this.

I'll ask again.

Are we all comfortable setting 19 pts as the "over/under"?

I'd like to see a clear sense of where the goalposts are for this contest....

We're not gonna play the whole "little Tuesday" game again where one week it's 20 pts wins in both states, then it's just wins in both states, then it's just a win in Ohio, then it miraculously means Obama must win all 4 states.

Sooo... 19 points sound fair?

It's Clinton territory.  Demographically, it's right in her wheelhouse.  It's shares a LOOOONNNGGG border to her home state.   She's got the governor, the mayor of the largest city, and I suspect without bothering to verify, a major advantage among PA SuperD's generally.

SUSA has proven itself to be, hands down, THE most reliable pollster this cycle.

I'll accept 19 pts at the number Obama needs to be beat.

Can all Clinton supporters please agree that this is where the goalposts are?

19 pts.

Agreed?

Some quick Math Tells me that that would be a 25 Delegate cut into Obama's, likely, 153 delegate lead at the point.

If Florida revote, with slightly wider margins for her than last time, she can pick up 30 delegates...

But it is pretty unlikely she can cut it under 100 delegates at this point, and I think even her folks would acknowledge this PA lead will not hold at 20.

Clinton has been done for 7 states now. Obama keeps gaining and gaining. Before Wyoming Clinton needed to win ALL states by 65%. She failed to do that in Wyoming so now it's just a question of how much she will lose by. When she does win Obama usually ties her delegate take, but when Obama wins it's by double digits so his lead keeps growing. If Obama wins Mississippi then they will each have won three states each for March but Obama will end up with more delegates for the month...again. The Obama camp has it locked up.

In my opinion (I'm an Obama supporter).  but so what?  there are some states that favor Clinton.  Here she is making this big deal about winning a handful of states that are as favorable to her as any.  It would be like saying that because Obama crushed Clinton in his most favorable states this has some larger meaning.  

Let's get the narrative straight. Clinton has to win Pa 65-35 to get the 50 delegates she needs to make it a contest with Obama. 60-40 isn't enough since she barely lays a glove on him. Clinton has to work incredibly hard to expand this lead or she loses. Facts are facts.  At this point, all one has to do is do the math.

win and we need to get B.O delegate lead to less than 100, do well in popular vote, and hopefully that will be enough to show S.D HRC is better nominee, they'll flock to her, and B.O will lose on First Ballot at conventions?  I hope so, though It is a bit of a long shot....

Does this mean that if she wins by less then the headline number above it's a defeat?

great! and down here in another state that'll matter in the GE, florida, obama's behind by 16. funny- that's about what he lost our primary back on january by - 17 points. coincidence? i think not. no wonder he's trying to split the delegation 50-50.

hmmm, I'm going to guess Clinton by 12 in PA when it's all said and done.

The good thing about this race is how aggressively both campaigns have been at getting Indy's to register. I read that 3.9 million voters are Democrats, 3.1 million are GOPers and 1 million are Indy.

This race has the potential to register tens of thousands of more Democrats, increasing that lead over the G.O.P. more so.

Lord knows, sober minds have tried and tried again to explain this to the Obama folk, but they simply refuse to comprehend.

I am a lifetime Ohioan and lifetime Democrat.  

My native state has gone to the winner of presidential elections for nigh on a century.  

Both GOP nominee John McCain and Democratic candidate Hillary Clinton both noted on primary night last Tuesday, "as Ohio goes, so goes the nation."  And so it does.

Any truly dispassionate Ohio voter knew long ago that Obama had not a prayer in Ohio.  

Yes, he sliced Clinton's twenty point lead in half, but that is not sobering for any Democrat realizing that on election night, he lost 83 of 88 counties--in a state in which Hillary Clinton and John McCain are far more preferred than ever can be Obama.

If Senator Obama loses in a double-digit landslide in a primary in which he outspent Senator Clinton four to one, had the backing of all but two of Ohio's newspapers, and blanketed ads across all networks for two weeks, how then can he possibly compete against John McCain here in the fall?

Ditto with Pennsylvania.  

I do not care if Obama spends a billion and crowds the state with out-of-town fawning hordes, he still will not carry Pennsylvania, whose dynamics are very similar to neighboring Ohio's.

If one properly accords delegates to Michigan and Florida (everyone voting in both those state knew very well whom they were voting for), then the ONLY major state primary outside of his own Illinois that Obama has prevailed in is Missouri--which was a veritable squeaker and in which both candidates ended up with the same number of delegates.

Thus, going into the convention, assuming Senator Clinton carries Pennsylvania and is properly accorded her primary wins in Florida and Michigan(four million actual ballot voters and not bused-across-the-state caucus-goers!), it is SHE who would have the greater number of delegates, and SHE who alone represents the lion's share of blue state and bell-weather state (Ohio and Florida) wins.

Whereas Senator Obama has many more state wins, but nearly all Red State and Fringe State (such as Minnesota, Wisconsin, Maine, and Washington--hardly bedrock Democrat) wins.

There will be no caucuses come November, and nearly every state is winner-take-all.  The candidate carries the whole state, even if by one vote.

With her current state primary wins alone, Hillary Clinton would have enough general election electorals, and Barack Obama wouldn't be anywhere close.  It is not the number of states, but the populous ones which determines electoral success in presidential elections.

Nor is actual primary and caucus popular vote totals a compelling factor.  

In 2000, Al Gore won the popular vote by several hundred thousands, but still (shenanigans aside) lost the election by virtue of a few hundred votes in Florida.

The Super Delegates will have this dilemma:  choose the popular, inspiring Obama, who attracts large crowds of normally apathetic young people, cross-over indies and GOPers, and a naturally devoted base of fellow African-Americans, but whose wins are largely from Red and Fringe states; or the durable Clinton, a former First Lady, whose wins are from largely blue and key bell-weather states.

The question then becomes, whose road map to the White House is more valid?

Bill Clinton proved that core blue states and some key bell-weathers are more than enough to break the GOP lock on the electoral college.  He was elected twice on that strategy.

But Howard Dean's (and Obama's) fifty-state strategy in a presidential election has no evidence of success.  There is no compelling reason to believe that whatever Obama's strengths, Red States won't remain very Red come November.  Such as today's Mississippi, for example.  And likewise Saturday's Wyoming.  Both states have been reliably Republican in general election presidential contests for decades now.

And, as there is a social moderate in John McCain on the GOP side, one cannot take for granted blue states.

The bottom line is the real line, not the fantasy of Dean and Obama strategies: Hillary Clinton has bested both John McCain and Barack Obama in her blue state and Ohio and Florida wins--whereas Obama has come in a distant third.

As an Ohioan, I knew six months ago not only the outcome of the primary here, but even the point spread.  It wasn't rocket-science; it simply has to do with knowing one's state.

And I know and warn, that if it is Obama verus McCain in Ohio in the fall, Obama will be blown away.  

One does not need to examine any opinion polls that might say otherwise.  The hard-core reality is, that if a major candidate can't do better than carry five of eighty-eight counties against his rival in a primary, he's already a gone-er come here in a general election match-up.

I would argue that the same holds true for Florida, where Obama is little liked among Latinos, Asians, Jews, older and otherwise bedrock Democrats--and who would far more likely gravitate to the moderate John McCain.

So, with Ohio and Florida already gone from his column, what can Senator Obama rely upon?  That the traditional blue states, most of which are Hillary-loving, will naturally gravitate toward him?

Don't bet on it.  Again, for many a Clinton voter, McCain is far more respectful of Hillary than ever was Senator Obama--and McCain, again as a social moderate, far more palatable than ever was George Walker Bush.

Truth be told, the Clinton tandem (and Bill and Hillary will always a political tandem) proved that their methodology could deliver the White House twice, whereas no precedent exists for the Obama/Dean strategy incorporating both Fringe and Red States.

I believe that the more sage, sober (yes, indeed, older minds) will prevail among those Super Delegates.

In the end, the instinct to go with the tried and proven is far more compelling than harnessing passions toward a path with no discernable successful outcome.

Hillary will prevail in Pennsylvania, much as she did Ohio, and her genuine primary wins in Florida and Michigan will be reflected.

And she shall become the first woman President of the United States.

The 19% lead will slowly but surely dwindle away, until 3 days before the primary, some polling outfit shows BO with a 2% lead.

HRC will then win by 4% in the most incredible comeback ever, proving that

A) PA counts
B) Only HRC can win PA in the general

She'll pick up a few delegates, and the media will once again wonder why BO can't "put away" HRC, despite the fact that his delegate lead will be larger after PA that it was after TX/OH/RI/VT.

BO will then go back to increasing his delegate lead in contests that don't count, and we'll do this again next time a state with demographics that favor HRC comes up.

You read it here first.

The youth vote will come out for Hillary and the black vote will be just as strong as it was in 2000 and 2004. Hillary can and will beat McCain. If any Obama supporters believe that we need change in Washington, they'll vote for Hillary because she's the most likely to actually be able to achieve it.

Obama has absolutely no record in his political career of doing any of the things he talks about in his campaign speeches. There's just nothing there. All talk, no action.

Hillary has an excellent record that demonstrates she's true to her word.

He's won more than 40% of the vote in almost every contest (with the exceptions of Ark. and Okl.)  Is there any reason to think that he will do worse in Pa. than he did in NY (40%)?  Doesn't make sense to me.  

Sounds like an outlier.  

55 to 39.  Even IF she equals these expectations in April, she still won't acheive much in the delegate battle, but if she fails to MEET these expectations, then I assume we will all be talking about how she FAILED to meet them and that Obama has eaten into her lead? Moreoever that Obama has wounded her?

The funniest thing in that poll summary is the way they break down "age".  They group people as "younger than Obama", "older than McCain" and "In between".

Dear Gunslinger,

You get it. The Clintons HAVE to take PA 65-35 to have a chance. That's the bar. The sooner we all
realize this the better. Everyone -- no matter what the side -- needs to know the score. No matter what attempts to spin it on either side, this is the Realityland narrative. If the Clintons get 60 -- not enough.  20 delegates will not cut it.

Hillary can have a 50 pt lead in Penn. and it still wont matter, the media likes to build up this false hope of a Hillary blowout win in PA. just to make an Obama win even more powerful, please stop this slow bleed.  We all know Obama will close that gap in PA., and then surprise, surprise...guess who wins North Carolina, and guess who has the momentum again.  Good Grief, I'm getting dizzy with all this spin.  

But if BHO loses PA by 20 points, he will lose the nomination (inspite of the current MATH)... because it will mean that most demographics are deserting him.

The most shocking thing from this poll is that he is losing amongst all groups except for blacks.  He is even losing amongst the young.

If he loses PA in this fashion, then he will also lose NC and IN, probably by large margins.  The superdelegates will throw the election if that happens.

Actually a 50 percent lead will do it!  65-35 that's the number. Anything else anyone is selling? -Tell him or her to get on their bicycle and spin.

Obama never faced a serious challenge in Illinois. Of course he won Latinos and whites in Illinois, the alternative was ALAN KEYES! Obama's campaign always fails to mention that. If Obama is the nominee he will LOSE Florida, Ohio and Pennsylvania. He will also lose the Southwest and Rocky Mountain states to McCain and McCain will also win the South. Please tell me how Obama gets to 270 Electoral votes? It doesn't matter if he does better in red states than other Democrats he has to WIN them to get their electoral votes.

Both Clinton and Obama have an about equal chance of winning the GE. You could flip a coin. I am of the old fashioned opinions that the person with the most points when the game runs out wins.  That's why I am a little bit focused on the 65-35, since that's a very steep ladder to climb. But who knows?
We might learn the Obama is an alien from outer space. We might learn that Hillary is a new Manchurian candidate. If you had told me that Eliot Spitzer -- with his incredible smarts and wonderful wife -- had a thing for $1000
an hour hookers, I would have been gobsmacked

This has been a strange year.

Too bad for Hillary Pennsylvania is only one state.

Too bad for Hillary Obama will still be well ahead after Pennsylvania even if this poll is right.

Too bad for Hillary she's got dinosaurs like Geraldiine Ferraro making racist statements (which of course might be popular among some of her less enlightened supporters).

She's running a terrible campaign which serves only to weaken the Dems in the fall.

Everyone agree Obama will not win PA. That is the benchmark. As a Obama supporter, its tending that. But no way will he lose by 19%! in the night. He has to lower expevtations, raise Hillary's and go out into the rural parts of the state just like he did in IA. People will love him, when they see him. No big rallies, just door to door, council hall stuff, that will do the trick.

The way In see it is that, just like he puts IA in play in GE. Let him do his magic in PA and he will benefit from that in the GE.

Dear Mike101,

Of course I am no expert. -- I just read a lot, e.g. Dan Balz in Monday's Washington POST Politics Blog

Balz: If Senator Clinton were to win Pennsylvania with 60 percent of the vote, she would cut another 20 delegates off Obama's margin. If she won 65 percent, it would be just short of 50. So margins matter. Obama remains in the driver's seat on the pledged delegates, which is a powerful advantatge. She's playing catchup and the rules of the game -- proportionality -- are a huge help for Obama.
get on your bicycle.

"Obama has a lot of ground to make up before he makes this a competitive race in the next nominating contest after today's primary in Mississippi"

Are you on drugs? Obama is leading nationwide in the polls both against Clinton and McCain and has the majority of delegates.

http://www.pollster.com/08-US-Dem-Pres-P rimary.php
http://www.pollster.com/08-US-Pres-GE-Mv C.php
http://www.pollster.com/08-US-Pres-GE-Mv O.php

I guess this sort of thinking is why the still-behind Hillary thinks that she gets to offer Obama the vice-presidency.

One word: Hubris.

So, I suppose this is not a "boutiqe" state like Wyoming or Vermont?  She can win this one, so they won't criticize the voters.  

Also, as pointed out elsewhere, she's going to have to win PA and every other state here on out to have a shot at having a majority of the pledged delegates.  And, unless she does, she WILL NOT get the super delegates behind her at the convention.  

pride cometh before the fall!

Obama was 17 points behind in Texas, and he overcame that within 3 or 4 points.

Its very plausible that Obama will cut this lead down to 10 points or so in the next 6 or so weeks. We've seen it before. And with a 10 point margin of victory, it's hard to see how Sen. Clinton will get either the popular vote or delegate vote she needs to make up enough ground to really challenge Obama.