Updated--Both Natl. Polls: Clinton Closing Gap!! [graph]

by Zebra01, Tue Apr 01, 2008 at 01:44:43 PM EST

Updated 4/1/08 3:49pm EST: While it's true that the national tracking polls have declined in relevance as all eyes watch upcoming primary states -- the results this week from Gallup and Rasmussen national tracking polls among likely Democratic voters are important, in my opinion, because they demonstrate (especially to super delegates) that half of Democratic voters still want Hillary Clinton as their President despite the continuous glorification of Obama in the MSM and despite her recent Bosnia gaffe. And in Pennsylvania, contrary to Todd's front-page story, I see the 12-point SUSA lead for Hillary in a positive light (see below.)

Hillary has recovered!!

Hillary supporters should be delighted to see the net 6-point gain in 2 days shown by the Gallup daily tracking poll among likely Democratic voters.  It's now 1 point from being in the MOE:  O49:C45.

Rasmussen Daily Tracking Poll shows an even closer race, now within the margin of error at O46:C45, representing a 4-point net gain for Clinton in the past 2 days.

In other interesting polling news, 58% of Democrats would like to see Obama as Hillary's VP, where 42% of Democrats would like to see Hillary as Obama's VP. (see Gallup link above.) Could this reflect the view that Hillary should be at the top of a joint ticket?  Perhaps Gallup should have asked the baseline question of do you want to see these two on a unified ticket?

Here's Gallup's analysis:


Lopsided Willingness to Embrace the Opponent

The reason for the disparity is that a relatively small number of Obama supporters -- just 29% --favor Obama choosing Clinton as a possible running mate. Seventy percent say they'd rather he choose someone else. In contrast, a majority of Clinton supporters -- 53% -- would want Clinton to choose Obama for vice president if she is nominated.

Bottom Line

Former New York Gov. Mario Cuomo, among other Democratic Party elders, has recently argued that the only way for Democratic voters to come together in the fall will be for the two candidates to come together on the Democratic ticket.

Last week, Gallup reported that Obama supporters are more likely to remain loyal to the Democratic ticket in the fall than are Clinton supporters if their respective candidates aren't nominated for president.

However, according to the vice presidential preferences reported here, party loyalty and party unity are not one and the same. Most Obama supporters may be willing to bury the hatchet and vote for Clinton for president, but they don't seem eager to embrace Clinton as Obama's running mate for the sake of party unity.

In any event, seems like a Clinton/Obama ticket would be a definite winner!

In state news, SUSA shows a whopping 2:1 lead for Clinton in Kentucky and a 12-point lead in Pennsylvania, down from a 19-point lead 3 weeks ago, reflecting Obama's recent presence in the state and the fact that this survey was conducted during the height of bad publicity for Clinton.  Following national trends, expect to see her lead grow in Pennsylvania this week.  SUSA analyzes Penn. results:

Clinton continues to dominate among voters focused on the economy, the No. 1 issue, and health care, considered the No. 3 issue, according to the survey.

Obama has gained ground but Clinton continues to lead among voters focused on Iraq, the No. 2 issue.

And here is the impressive graphic for SUSA's Kentucky primary survey:

Let's give a collective shout out of gratitude for the fine folks in blue grass country!




Tags: hillary clinton, presidential polls, obama (all tags)

Display:
Permalink :: 76 Comments :: Post a Comment


Re: Both Natl. Polls: Clinton Closing Gap!! [grap (1.75 / 4)

so wait? polls are correct again?

seriously the whole if polls are bad for Hillary they don't count, and if they are good then they count thing is getting confusing.

if you have to wait to see the results before you know if they count or not....

I just....maybe we need an offical diary that will track which polls HRC supporters say count and which don't and you guys can update it so we know when polls count and when they don't


Obama said, as Bill beamed. "Thank you, President Clinton."
by TruthMatters on Tue Apr 01, 2008 at 01:50:29 PM EST

Heh. (2.00 / 1)

seriously the whole if polls are bad for Hillary they don't count, and if they are good then they count thing is getting confusing.

Bingo.

But meanwhile, until we have polls showing that Hillary is going to rack up the 20%+ victories she needs everywhere just to pull even, I rest easy at night. Obama's candidacy is fundamentally stronger than hers, and a poll blip doesn't change that.

Oh boy. Here come the talking points :-)


"This election is not about ideology, it's about competence." -Michael Dukakis
by MBNYC on Tue Apr 01, 2008 at 02:02:55 PM EST
[ Parent ]

heh-heh (none / 0)

!


by earthoat on Tue Apr 01, 2008 at 04:14:48 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Obama is weaker on many progressive issues - so... (2.00 / 2)

I get the feeling that many Obama supporters are either right of center, or they are willing to sacrifice on many traditionally progressive issues in order to see 'someone new' in Washington?

I just don't understand the logic here, because by all accounts, Bill Clinton's presidency was an exceedingly popular one, in which ALL SEGMENTS OF THE POPULATION did well, unlike the current 'economic boom' (/sarcasm)

So, people would be giving up a LOT, in terms of their day to day quality of life and cost of living, just to have a new face in Washington, even though many people - perhaps even most of us, just can't AFFORD that.

New faces are for TV weather shows, not the Presidency..

Are people just not looking beyond the surface, or what?

>Obama's candidacy is fundamentally stronger than hers, and a poll blip doesn't change that.


Universal healthcare IS a core Democratic value
Comprehensively cover 100%, not only the healthiest 80%
by architek on Tue Apr 01, 2008 at 04:20:05 PM EST
[ Parent ]

I was so surprised - shocked really (2.00 / 1)

when I read how much President clinton was disliked on say DK.  and disliked is a mild word.  Why hadn't this come out before?  I did well financially during his presidency - helping me to survive now with my 401(k).  I knew the Republicans around me hated him but all these Dems hated and continue to hate him.  The posts were vicious.  It's not healthy for the country to have all this bad kharma floating around.

Well, good luck to us all - since we are entering precarious financial waters.  And Goolsby doesn't fill me with confidence.    


by Xanthe on Tue Apr 01, 2008 at 05:41:41 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Have you read this? Obama blew Edwards endorsement (2.00 / 1)

at least, according to New York magazine..

But now two months have passed since Edwards dropped out--tempus fugit!--and still no endorsement. Why? According to a Democratic strategist unaligned with any campaign but with knowledge of the situation gleaned from all three camps, the answer is simple: Obama blew it. Speaking to Edwards on the day he exited the race, Obama came across as glib and aloof. His response to Edwards's imprecations that he make poverty a central part of his agenda was shallow, perfunctory, pat. Clinton, by contrast, engaged Edwards in a lengthy policy discussion. Her affect was solicitous and respectful. When Clinton met Edwards face-to-face in North Carolina ten days later, her approach continued to impress; she even made headway with Elizabeth. Whereas in his Edwards sit-down, Obama dug himself in deeper, getting into a fight with Elizabeth about health care, insisting that his plan is universal (a position she considers a crock), high-handedly criticizing Clinton's plan (and by extension Edwards's) for its insurance mandate.


Universal healthcare IS a core Democratic value
Comprehensively cover 100%, not only the healthiest 80%
by architek on Tue Apr 01, 2008 at 09:53:44 PM EST
[ Parent ]

I saw Elizabeth on Morning Joe - (none / 0)

yes, I've taken to watching it lately - he has toned down - but that will change of course.

Elizabeth as any good politician - said in essence don't believe everything you read.  

she was also a good advocate on behalf of us - remember us (before the Candidate wars) - and healthcare - putting it pretty straight as to McCain's healthcare plan.    


by Xanthe on Wed Apr 02, 2008 at 09:53:30 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Foreign Policy (2.00 / 1)

What issues is Obama more conservative on?  In my book his foreign policy is what puts him to the left of Clinton.  His willingness to speak with foreign leaders, his unwillingness to support a preemptive strike against a country that posed no threat and his unwillingness to support efforts to characterize the Iranian army as a terrorist organization set him apart (and to the left of Clinton).  Care to suggest she is more liberal on these issues?


by DreamsOfABlueNation on Tue Apr 01, 2008 at 09:52:19 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Hillary Clinton is NOT the person you are (none / 0)

making her out to be..

These issues are all complicated, and you are insulting all of our intelligence with your attempts to distill them down into one or two lines of anti-Hillary rhetoric..


Universal healthcare IS a core Democratic value
Comprehensively cover 100%, not only the healthiest 80%
by architek on Tue Apr 01, 2008 at 09:56:23 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Hillary Clinton is NOT the person you are (2.00 / 1)

Believe me I understand the complexity of the issues at hand.  I am more than willing to debate with you the merits of voting for the Iraq War etc. if you would like to try and argue that such a vote makes Hillary more liberal than Obama (the point of the post).  For the interests of brevity, so that I don't have to write a novel anytime that someone claims Hillary is more liberal than Obama, I choose to simply point out the things that she has done that -- on their face -- seem like more conservative actions.  Saying they are complicated does not excuse them away or somehow make them acceptable to a movement progressive. I'm sure that many of the issues about which you think Obama is more conservative are also "complicated".


by DreamsOfABlueNation on Tue Apr 01, 2008 at 10:02:36 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama is weaker on many progressive issues - s (2.00 / 1)

It's always interesting to me when people make this argument about the economics of the Clinton administration. I'd ask you to look at who Obama's economic advisers are. That's right, the very people who worked for Bill Clinton (Robert Reich).

There is no guarantee that a Hillary presidency will repeat the economic success of her husband's presidency. In fact, it looks even less likely given the fact that the people advising Obama are the very ones who helped engineer that prosperity.

Finally, I have to say this: it is not 1992. Things are FAR WORSE than they were then. I think Hillary would be a good president, but I just think Obama has a much better chance of winning in the GE. I also worry about Hillary (as someone who voted for her for the Senate). Her work on health care was a disaster. I've also recently read reports that she argued against intervention in Rwanda (early on, when lives could have been saved) because it would detract attention from her health care initiative. Whether those accusations are true or not, I do remember the disastrous way she handled health care (preventing us from even debating the issue nationally for 15 years). I think it's a mixed bag with either of these candidates. I honestly think Obama has a better chance. But that's just my two cents.


by DrPolitics on Tue Apr 01, 2008 at 10:33:50 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama is weaker on many progressive issues - s (none / 0)

i agree. Obama obviously has a better chance with help from the media and DNC leaders backing him, but I believe Hillary is stronger on the issues. I voted for her, I will vote for her again if I have the chance. the fact is Im disappointed on how her campaign has been run, man she needed to fire some of those retards in charge along time ago. Shes got some identity problems going on. Shes the fighter, the victim, the establishment, the underdog, or the liar; depending on how you look at it and how much you hate her. Personally, she is the fighter to me but whatever. Obama has the better chance and maybe with some better policies he could clinch it.


--++++Stay Gold, Ponyboy!++++--
by amde on Tue Apr 01, 2008 at 10:54:45 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama is weaker on many progressive issues - s (none / 0)

Besides how many more "internet booms" will there be to boost the economy like during the 90s.

I think Bill gets a bit too much credit for all the economic success of the 90s.  I'm not saying he hurt, but he isn't the cause or the reason that the 90s were such a boon.


John McCain believes "Women shouldn't have a choice."
by jturn17 on Tue Apr 01, 2008 at 10:55:33 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama is weaker on many progressive issues - s (none / 0)

well circumstances like the internet boom can be attributed to one man

------Al GORE.

after all he did invent the internet hahaha, all joking aside: so searching through some of my amer. pol. books i found this.

[presidential success may depend less on personality than on circumstances under which the newly elected come into office. presidents become 'great' only when political circumstances allow them to]

circumstances like high gas prices, downing economy, a war,UHC, & domestic distress all spell 'greatness' for our next prez.


--++++Stay Gold, Ponyboy!++++--
by amde on Tue Apr 01, 2008 at 11:43:55 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Where did you read about Rwanda? (none / 0)

Was it Brit's posts here?  Because those posts could be debated.  

You know on the healthcare issue - she was a novice in DC and the opposing party fought it tooth and nail. They were particularly vicious. I have to say though - I should research this.  anyone know of a document or a good book or articles that places the blame on Hillary alone (a Dem source hopefully) instead of a mix of situations.  You know you read she mishandled the healthcare issue on the blogs over and over and over and you believe it without making an effort to tease out other arguments, other strands.  It was, you must admit, a really new concept, a complex one, and one the Republicans would abhor.  Look at Sen. McCain's healthcare proposal - more of the same - personal responsibility.

Hillary is now being held responsible for the Iraq War (huh, what happened to bush?), the deaths in Bosnia, and our healthcare system.  Wow - it takes a village, doesn't it?

Still, your two cents is as good as mine - and I hope they don't take those pennies out of circulation.  I support HRC but would certainly vote for Obama.  Frankly, I don't know who would have a better chance.          


by Xanthe on Wed Apr 02, 2008 at 09:14:17 AM EST
[ Parent ]

They Matter This Week (2.00 / 4)

These polls are signficant because they both show that Obama could not sustain his big lead, which Gallup at at 10 points for one day.  They show that Dems are STILL evenly divided in their preferences for these 2, even as the media continues to glorify BHO. They show that these 2 consistently weave in and out of first place.  The polls show super delegates that half of Dems, at least, still want Hillary even though her negatives have consistently been over 50%.  They show that people don't select a president based on how "favorable" the person is.  They want Hillary because of her creds with the economy, health care, and as Penn. SUSA shows, ability to get us out of the war.

That's why these polls are important.


by Zebra01 on Tue Apr 01, 2008 at 03:25:43 PM EST
[ Parent ]

the new math (2.00 / 0)

"The polls show super delegates that half of Dems, at least, still want Hillary"

half of Dems, at least?
how do you get that from 45%?


the time to rise has been engaged.
by catchaz on Tue Apr 01, 2008 at 04:24:41 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: the new math (none / 0)

Learn your math. It's call rounding. You sound idiotic by just posting what you just posted. In general terms, half of Democrats want Clinton and half of Democrats want Obama. Simple.


Restore America's Strength.
by RJEvans on Tue Apr 01, 2008 at 09:26:15 PM EST
[ Parent ]

rounding or lying? (none / 0)

it's called lying.

Clinton will never again get half of the Dems support, those days are gone forever.


the time to rise has been engaged.
by catchaz on Wed Apr 02, 2008 at 01:05:04 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Both Natl. Polls: Clinton Closing Gap!! [grap (2.00 / 2)

our fighter will win. Yes we will! I think PA will be back to 20+ points for her soon, NC will be close and IN will be a small gain for her, but than she will win big in WV & KY.


Welcome to a Landslide without white Working class, Latinos, Women, Seniors and holding-on sweeties
by engels on Tue Apr 01, 2008 at 01:50:45 PM EST

NC and Indiana (2.00 / 2)

If Obama wins North Carolina and Indiana, will you acknowledge he is rightfully the Dem nominee? Or does he have to got through a superdelegate fight too?


Rrrinnggg... Time to change the government.
by Carl Nyberg on Tue Apr 01, 2008 at 02:00:10 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: NC and Indiana (none / 0)

I think that Hill will win PA by 10+ pts, Indiana is a toss up but the entire clinton family have made multiple stops there over the last 2 wks and her turnout has been great. I believe that obama has only been there 1 xs.

If she wins PA by 10pts, that will spill over to IN. I'm tipping iN to Hill and giving NC to Obama.

KY.WV to Hill. Montana to Obama, and probably Oregon but Bill has really mean making a stay in OR>


by shark on Tue Apr 01, 2008 at 03:45:09 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: NC and Indiana (2.00 / 1)

Okay, let's look at what's a certainly plausible scenario, along the lines of what you're suggesting here.

Hillary wins PA by 10.
Obama takes NC by 16.
Hillary takes IN by 2.
Obama takes OR by 10.
Hillary takes WV and KY by 24.
Hillary takes PR by 8.
Obama takes MT and SD by 18.
Guam splits.

So, this is, on the whole, about what you'd project right now, shading a little toward Hillary.  Unallocated Add-Ons should split 41-35 for Obama, under this scenario.   Using the Forbes tracker, I count the results of this to be:
Obama 1950 - Clinton 1824 under this scenario with 250 uncommitted supers.

Obama would need 75 of the 250 to ratify his delegate lead to secure victory: 30%.  Clinton would need 201 of the 250 to vote to overturn the delegate lead: 80%.


by Rorgg on Tue Apr 01, 2008 at 04:16:46 PM EST
[ Parent ]

One thing that IS consistant.. (1.50 / 2)

is that the MSM and both camps of her opposition NEVER FAIL to underestimate, trivialize and attempt to marginalize both Hillary Clinton AND her support.

If you look at the predictions, and then what has actually happened..


Universal healthcare IS a core Democratic value
Comprehensively cover 100%, not only the healthiest 80%
by architek on Tue Apr 01, 2008 at 04:23:45 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: One thing that IS consistant.. (none / 0)

I'm sorry... is this relevant in any way to what I wrote?


by Rorgg on Tue Apr 01, 2008 at 05:14:43 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: NC and Indiana (none / 0)

no IN for you, sorry - see today's SurveyUSA. i think it will be tie in pledged delegates after June


Welcome to a Landslide without white Working class, Latinos, Women, Seniors and holding-on sweeties
by engels on Tue Apr 01, 2008 at 06:31:47 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: NC and Indiana (none / 0)

"A tie in pledged delegates"?

Please calculate the percentage of victories Clinton will need in each contest to pull this off.  Arrange it in the most likely scenario.

Before you get snippy like in the other thread, I've already done my homework on this, I know exactly what it will take.


by Rorgg on Tue Apr 01, 2008 at 08:49:32 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: NC and Indiana (none / 0)

Clinton will not win the pledged delegates. This Clinton supporter knows so. HOWEVER, she is well in the realm of possibility of winning the popular vote. I think people remember a little election between a man named Gore and a man named Bush. Do Democrats really want to do to their own what the Republicans did to Gore?


Restore America's Strength.
by RJEvans on Tue Apr 01, 2008 at 09:29:25 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: NC and Indiana (none / 0)

"HOWEVER, she is well in the realm of possibility of winning the popular vote."

The problem with this is that it will help lead to civil war in the party, if it hasn't already. Let's say you are right (and I do not have any numbers at my finger tips to verify your claim that she even can do this at this point -- it seems unlikely, but I will concede the point). So, Obama wins in pledged delegates, Hillary wins the popular vote. How do you count the popular vote? Does it include the caucuses, which are not included in the current popular vote totals? Hillary then argues that she "won" the popular vote, even though Obama won the delegate race (which has been the only barometer of winning the nomination in the past). What happens then? Do the supers go with her? What happens to Obama's constituents if this happens? Even if you like Hillary and want her to win, do you think this would be good for the party? I just don't think this is good for any of us (regardless of the candidate any of us supports). I honestly think we need to heal from all of this, not create greater division.


by DrPolitics on Tue Apr 01, 2008 at 10:43:08 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: NC and Indiana (2.00 / 1)

The problem is there's a reason why both parties use delegates and not popular votes to determine the nominee:

EVERY STATE HAS DIFFERENT VOTING PROCEDURES.

Some have same day registration.
Some have open primaries.
Some have close primaries.
Some have semi-open primaries.
Some have early voting. Some don't.
Some begin voting a month prior. Some a week.

This means that some states' voters become more important because more of them are allowed to vote in certain circumstances.
    - e.g. new voters in same day registration states will have an easier time voting than non-same day registration states.
    - States with fully open primaries will have more voters than closed primaries.  Why should open states have more votes than a closed state just because of state party procedures?

That's the reason they use delegates.  Because it's based off percentages of the votes in each state.  Thus keeps it a more uniformed process than by judging off popular vote.


John McCain believes "Women shouldn't have a choice."
by jturn17 on Tue Apr 01, 2008 at 11:03:47 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: NC and Indiana (none / 0)

Exactly.  The biggest thing of the whole situation to remember is that the primary season is NOT an election.  It's a process by which the party picks its candidate.  And using various methods of voter eligibility and various types of contests gives more detailed and useful information than any blanket election would.

That's why there are democrat-only primaries and open caucuses and everything in between.  They all are a measure of a candidate's strength, just not all the same way.  And the delegate distribution also plays a part in weighting that as well as weighting the electoral picture.

This system isn't perfect, but it didn't come about by accident.  Why not use what it can tell us instead of cursing it for not being what it isn't: an election.


by Rorgg on Wed Apr 02, 2008 at 01:01:40 AM EST
[ Parent ]

it means that primary process is a HUGE fraud (none / 0)

Dean and DNC failure is clear now:
they did no scrap caucuses & open primaries;
they did not scrap early primaries;
they did not establish one national day for primaries;
they did not allow direct voting for NATIONAL candidate: one democrat - one vote!
Instead they using  delegates and superdelegates which are absolutely bad substitute for Direct Vote.
Welcome to a Landslide without white Working class, Latinos, Women, Seniors and holding-on sweeties
by engels on Wed Apr 02, 2008 at 07:43:05 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: it means that primary process is a HUGE fraud (none / 0)

Wow.  Way to completely bypass the point of what I wrote.

Can you acknowledge that while the primary contest is not an election, that there is a reason that it's not an election and it gives a richer assessment of candidate strengths than the other does?

Now, past that point you can make the case that the only consideration for the party's selection of its candidate should be the breadth of low-commitment support from party-registered voters only without significant impact from campaigning.  Because that's what you're implicitly doing here.

And I don't think that's an easy sell.


by Rorgg on Wed Apr 02, 2008 at 10:08:28 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: NC and Indiana (none / 0)

SurveyUSA just said C52-O43, so IN goes to Hillary to.


Welcome to a Landslide without white Working class, Latinos, Women, Seniors and holding-on sweeties
by engels on Tue Apr 01, 2008 at 06:29:46 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: NC and Indiana (none / 0)

Five weeks out?

Oh yeah. Obama's never come back from a 9 point deficit with five weeks to go.


by Rorgg on Tue Apr 01, 2008 at 08:50:09 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: NC and Indiana (none / 0)

I will acknowledge him as the nominee when either one of the two things happen:

1. He gets enough delegates to clinch the nomination
2. HRC drops out

Sparing either of these, he is not our nominee


by bluestatedude on Tue Apr 01, 2008 at 08:45:44 PM EST
[ Parent ]

dKos Diary (none / 0)

I had posted a dKos diary about this. Click on the link.

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2008/4/1/1 32052/3217


by gaf on Tue Apr 01, 2008 at 09:46:43 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: dKos Diary (2.00 / 1)

browser blocks the daily kooks, sorry. If you have a sane blog, get back to us on that.


by Newport News Dem on Tue Apr 01, 2008 at 10:20:09 PM EST
[ Parent ]

And delighted we are! (2.00 / 3)

Now, if the voters in PA will deliver their state for our gal, everything will start to look alright.

On to Denver!


Grumpy, reluctant, sore-losing, unhappy, irritable Hillary supporter for Barack Obama 2008
by DemAC on Tue Apr 01, 2008 at 01:52:58 PM EST

President Hillary Rodham Clinton !!!! (2.00 / 2)


by earthoat on Tue Apr 01, 2008 at 04:19:46 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Great! (2.00 / 1)

What, was I asleep and Hillary went and won 16 more states and received 600,000 more votes and caught up with Obama???  


by lion king on Tue Apr 01, 2008 at 01:57:48 PM EST

Wonder what kind of garbage CNN and MSNBC (2.00 / 2)

will pull up now that their Tonya Harding ploy fizzled?


by earthoat on Tue Apr 01, 2008 at 04:18:14 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Great! (none / 0)

Not until the empty suit allows the voters and voice of MI and FL to be heard.

Absent that, he would be an absolute fraud as our nominee and I don't have to support a fraud and coward.


by Newport News Dem on Tue Apr 01, 2008 at 10:22:56 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Pollster.com (none / 0)

What's Pollster.com say? Nationally?  Indiana? Oregon? Pennsylvania? North Carolina? West Virginia?

If Obama gets the most delegates will you support him as the nominee?


Rrrinnggg... Time to change the government.
by Carl Nyberg on Tue Apr 01, 2008 at 01:58:22 PM EST

Re: Pollster.com (none / 0)

whoops, my comment just above was intended as a reply to you.


by Newport News Dem on Tue Apr 01, 2008 at 10:24:25 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Clinton Closing Gap!! [graph] (2.00 / 1)

And the upward trend it the ticket! (pun intended)
:)
by LindaSFNM on Tue Apr 01, 2008 at 01:59:17 PM EST

You know where that comes from? (none / 0)

From the talk that she should drop out. It produces a rallying effect.

That said, that's not enough to push her over the top, and this bounce should cease within a few days.


"This election is not about ideology, it's about competence." -Michael Dukakis
by MBNYC on Tue Apr 01, 2008 at 01:59:47 PM EST

Re: You know where that comes from? (none / 0)

Actually it's probably more of a natural regression to the mean, which is extremely common in statistics, especially in a race that's been this close and heavily contested.

It might have to do with the dropping out, but I doubt it.  When numbers get to the extreme as Obama's did when he was +10, he has no where else to go but down.


John McCain believes "Women shouldn't have a choice."
by jturn17 on Tue Apr 01, 2008 at 11:08:29 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Both Natl. Polls: (2.00 / 2)

I'm starting to think the trend pollster.com was talking about is correct.  The two just seesaw depending on the time of the week.

In the end though, I wish all supporters would stop jumping for joy over the daily tracking polls.  It really is not signifigant unless the lead holds.   Some thought Obama might have it this time, but it appears not to be, at least for now.  I'm going to do my best to not jump to any conclusions from polling until I see some truly steady results.


by njc2b5 on Tue Apr 01, 2008 at 02:14:31 PM EST

Re: Both Natl. Polls: Clinton Closing Gap!! [grap (2.00 / 1)

I'm guessing that on Jan. 20, 2009 when Obama is being sworn in, some people will be citing a poll which shows Hillary is closing the gap.


Hillary: "Her dishonesty is actually honest." -- yellowdem1129
by Kobi on Tue Apr 01, 2008 at 02:17:52 PM EST

Re: Both Natl. Polls: Clinton Closing Gap!! [grap (2.00 / 1)

Excuse me but it was just a few days ago when Obama supporters were declaring victory because Obama had a 10-point lead in the Gallup poll. I would not be surprised if Obama is planning a run against our President, Hillary Clinton in 2012.


Restore America's Strength.
by RJEvans on Tue Apr 01, 2008 at 04:11:35 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Both Natl. Polls: Clinton Closing Gap!! [grap (none / 0)

You're excused. I believe in pity for the delusional.


Hillary: "Her dishonesty is actually honest." -- yellowdem1129
by Kobi on Tue Apr 01, 2008 at 04:31:00 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Both Natl. Polls: Clinton Closing Gap!! [grap (none / 0)

That's nice.
I believe in pity for the ignorant.
"Fear not the path of truth, for the lack of people walking on it" Bobby Kennedy
by Narrowback gal on Tue Apr 01, 2008 at 08:29:13 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Both Natl. Polls: Clinton Closing Gap!! [grap (none / 0)

Self-pity, that is.


Hillary: "Her dishonesty is actually honest." -- yellowdem1129
by Kobi on Tue Apr 01, 2008 at 08:53:27 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Both Natl. Polls: Clinton Closing Gap!! [grap (none / 0)

give up another $5 cup of Starbucks latte whatever and send it to Elmer Gantry (D-IL)


by Newport News Dem on Tue Apr 01, 2008 at 10:27:15 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Both Natl. Polls: Clinton Closing Gap!! [grap (none / 0)

.


Hillary: "Her dishonesty is actually honest." -- yellowdem1129
by Kobi on Tue Apr 01, 2008 at 11:21:58 PM EST
[ Parent ]

yippee (2.00 / 2)

Great news for Hillary!


by inFlorida on Tue Apr 01, 2008 at 02:24:22 PM EST

Penn is for Bowlers! (1.66 / 3)

I agree, Hillary will climb in Pennsylvania now that she's weathered the bad publicity.  A 12 pt. lead from SUSA in the middle of possibly her worst campaign week is a huge silver lining.  I bet she's already back up to 15 pts., especially after Obama's bowling gaffe which, rather than showing him as a rollicking blue collar sport, showed that he's a fragile elitist!


by Andiclimber on Tue Apr 01, 2008 at 02:34:00 PM EST

Re: Penn is for Bowlers! (none / 0)

GREAT ... and I bet the Cardinals will win the next 3 World Series ...
Easy, Peter Pan, fantasies are for kids.
'The only people for me are the mad ones, desirous of everything at the same time, the ones who never yawn or say a commonplace thing ...'
by stryan on Tue Apr 01, 2008 at 03:29:48 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Penn is for Bowlers! (none / 0)

??


by Zebra01 on Tue Apr 01, 2008 at 03:34:06 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Penn is for Bowlers! (none / 0)

Not sure about elitist.... Yuppie prick for sure...


by Newport News Dem on Tue Apr 01, 2008 at 10:54:45 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Both Natl. Polls: (2.00 / 1)

I think that VP data shows that most Dems want HRC at top of the ticket.  It would be interesting to know how many total people want them both on the same ticket.

I am recommending this diary to try to even out the Rec. list on polling diaries.


by Potter on Tue Apr 01, 2008 at 02:38:30 PM EST

I would not get too excited (none / 0)

Tuesday is Clinton's high day of the week, http://www.pollster.com/blogs/day_of_wee k_effect_in_gallup_d.php, Friday is Obama's high.  The Tracking polls follow a pronounced week-by-week pattern of Clinton Highs on Tuesday (It is because the weekend results underreport the under 40 vote) followed by a 5 or so point drop through Saturday.  It is likely she is just as far behind, if not further, than last week's.  You have to compare Tuesday to Tuesday last tuesday was 47-45 for Obama.


Bring Back MyDD - Just say No to Rec'ing Candidate Diaries.
by CardBoard on Tue Apr 01, 2008 at 02:38:54 PM EST

I hate to continue to tear of Gallup (none / 0)

but the VP question is poorly done.  It cannot be said that because Obama is a higher VP preference that people would like an Clinton-Obama ticket... It likely means that more of his supporters  would like to see him on Clinton ticket IF he does not get the nomination.  And, Clinton supporters are happy to except that.

While Obama supporters would rather not see her on the ticket, meaning that she underperforms him in the hypothetical.


Bring Back MyDD - Just say No to Rec'ing Candidate Diaries.
by CardBoard on Tue Apr 01, 2008 at 03:05:08 PM EST

Re: Both Natl. Polls: Clinton Closing Gap!! [grap (2.00 / 0)

I love the wording of the diary - Clinton is one point away from being in the margin of error with Obama.  I don't think I've ever heard a poll finding being described that way.  Very creative!


We care about politics because we know politics matters for people's lives and opportunities.
by politicsmatters on Tue Apr 01, 2008 at 03:16:21 PM EST

Re: Both Natl. Polls: Clinton Closing Gap!! (2.00 / 2)

thank you!


by Zebra01 on Tue Apr 01, 2008 at 03:26:57 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Or the "fudge factor" (none / 0)

that the MSM likes to take advantage of..


Universal healthcare IS a core Democratic value
Comprehensively cover 100%, not only the healthiest 80%
by architek on Tue Apr 01, 2008 at 04:26:35 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Both Natl. Polls: Clinton Closing Gap!! (none / 0)

Is a poll like this going to be posted every day?  Jesus, people, it's a daily tracking poll.  Each candidate is going to have good and bad days.  50.1% of voters support one candidate, 49.9% support the other.  Guess what - they'll be fairly close in the end, even if the polls temporarily hover towards one extreme or another.


by rfahey22 on Tue Apr 01, 2008 at 03:37:39 PM EST

Re: Both Natl. Polls: Clinton Closing Gap!! (2.00 / 2)

I was motivated to do this diary because there was a diary on the Rec. list boasting about the new Rasmussen poll results for BHO in Pennsylvania (even though SUSA later came out with a PA poll that blasted Rasmussen out of the water.)

So, that's why.


by Zebra01 on Tue Apr 01, 2008 at 05:11:15 PM EST
[ Parent ]

So much diary (none / 0)

For a one-day burp in the polls. "Trend" Number 5,104,942,618 of the primary season has been declared. Oy vey. May G-d smite down all and I mean all poll diaries.

PS: Here are some spare exclaimation points!!!

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Take as many a you need.  I am here to help.


Take your fear and shove it, it ain't workin' on us no more.
by Quicklund on Tue Apr 01, 2008 at 03:53:36 PM EST

Re: Updated--Both Natl. Polls: Clinton Closing Ga (none / 0)

"I get the feeling that many Obama supporters are either right of center, or they are willing to sacrifice on many traditionally progressive issues in order to see 'someone new' in Washington?"

I respect your "feeling."
But to dismiss the Obama victories so far...
...and casually dismiss supporters?
You don't know ME..so please quit quoting me.
You do may not know me...but like you, I have confidence...I have been arrested 5 times protesting Bush's WAR since 2003...I believe your oppositions has led to at least one arrest..tell ya what...let's exchange links...I am Drew ..but not from Boulder..from Denver...I know all you Clinton folks have expressed your outrage on the streets and jails of your community..and not just here...
Give me YOUR link where you were willing to...ah..do anything but to post here...
here is me...
Fuck Bush...then and NOW
http://www.denverpost.com/news/ci_409955 7
sorry...I forgot..being arrested might...just might fuck up you precious resume...


"If you want to end war and stuff, you gotta sing loud"...Arlo Guthrie
by nogo war on Tue Apr 01, 2008 at 05:12:11 PM EST

Re: Updated--Both Natl. Polls: Clinton Closing Ga (none / 0)

so now its wrong to have "hope" for hillary. whats wrong with some of you here. why do you always have to be such downers towards clinton supporters when they are just trying to show some love. and vice versa. Both sides need to give it a rest. Dont badger people for holding on to their beliefs and liking their candidates.

always gotta be bringing some one down to make yourself feel better.  


--++++Stay Gold, Ponyboy!++++--
by amde on Tue Apr 01, 2008 at 06:04:45 PM EST

Re: Updated--Both Natl. Polls: Clinton Closing Ga (none / 0)

I agree 100%.
I don't go on Obama diaries and trash him there; why the need for some to come into Hillary diaries and trash her here?
I just don't read the Obama diaries- because I know they will annoy me. I'd recommend that to the Obama crew who just can't seem to help themselves from making snarky comments on this diary.
I already had to leave DK because of the harassment. I refuse to let it happen here.
"Fear not the path of truth, for the lack of people walking on it" Bobby Kennedy
by Narrowback gal on Tue Apr 01, 2008 at 08:35:21 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Updated--Both Natl. Polls: Clinton Closing Ga (none / 0)

I agree. I wish we could stop being so confrontational with each other. I am trying, you know, I really am. I think we have to counter all of the negativity (from every side) and try to focus on what we have in common, and what we all want to create. Even though I am not for Hillary, I have voted for her in the past and do see that she would be a good President. And I am trying to remind myself of that as we all go through this process.


by DrPolitics on Tue Apr 01, 2008 at 10:50:30 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Congratulations KENTUCKY! (none / 0)

With this poll, and the VERY LARGE graphic in this diary, it is clear that Kentucky has emerged as one of the few significant states.

CONGRATULATIONS KENTUCKY!

I guess this means that the road to the White House goes directly through Kentucky.

Any state, even small states, are significant, if they goes for HRC in the primaries. Go Kentucky.
by xtrarich on Tue Apr 01, 2008 at 10:42:35 PM EST

re (none / 0)

Can BHO get to 2024 delegates without the supers? Will  he get those in the remaining contests? If not then its up to the supers and/or the convention. BHO is NOT the nominee


by rossinatl on Wed Apr 02, 2008 at 12:56:46 AM EST


You are not logged in.

In order to post a comment, you must be logged in. If you have a member account, please log in to comment.

If not, you can make an account right here. It's quick and free.

Login
Username:

Password: