Indiana Poll & Obama expectations

by Jerome Armstrong, Thu May 01, 2008 at 05:54:19 PM EST

The lastest poll from Indiana piles onto the narrative that Clinton is pulling away with it in the state, leading now 55-45 over the 5-day poll. Look at the trend with men:

On the first day of the survey, Clinton held a 2 percent lead -- 45 percent to 43 percent, despite a 20-point lead for Obama among male respondents. Each day, more respondents supported Clinton.

By the last day of polling, Clinton took 4 percent lead among men -- 45 percent to 41 percent -- representing a staggering 24-point swing.

Over the four days in which the survey was conducted, the controversy involving the Rev. Jeremiah Wright, Obama's former pastor, swelled.

"In that window, he dominated all the political news in the presidential race," said Jeff Lewis, TeleResearch CEO. "In that period of time, Obama's lead among men went from a 20 point lead on Friday ... to a four point lead for Sen. Clinton."

Looking through the poll pdf, here's how that played out overall:



If Clinton closes the deal with a majority of the undecided voters, she'll come out of Indiana with a double-digit victory. In a poll of polls since the 25th, Clinton leads by 8 percent, 49 - 41. That looks even better than OH and PA did for Clinton, five days out from the primary.

One thing that should be also noted is that if Clinton wins Indiana, it will become the first defeat, post-Feb 5th, that goes against what the Obama spreadsheet predicted [correction, Obama's spreadsheet predicted that Clinton would win Maine].

Here's the Obama spreadsheet expectations for May 6th:

Indiana
Obama   53
Clinton 46

North Carolina
Obama 53
Clinton 45

Going further, Obama's spreadsheet forecast that the deficit against Clinton in WV will be 12%, in KY it will be 14%, and that Obama will win OR by 5%, MT by 9% and SD by 15%, concluding with Clinton winning PR by 9%.




Tags: 2008 election (all tags)

Display:
Permalink :: 123 Comments :: Post a Comment


Re: Indiana Poll & Obama expectations (none / 0)

My expectation is that they split IN and NC. That prevents Obama from ending the race now, but that would be fine for him anyway.  He keeps picking up superdelegates at a higher rate than Clinton* and because NC is larger, could gain more delegates from Tuesday even if Clinton's win in IN is larger than his in NC.

*superdelegates today: http://thepage.time.com/2008/05/01/thurs days-super-battle/


We care about politics because we know politics matters for people's lives and opportunities.
by politicsmatters on Thu May 01, 2008 at 05:57:21 PM EST

Re: Indiana Poll & Obama expectations (none / 0)

I'd agree he likely wins NC with 90% of the black vote but if he only squeaks in and she wins Indiana isn't that going to give you a moments pause? Probably not.


by ottovbvs on Thu May 01, 2008 at 06:12:49 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Indiana Poll (none / 0)

No, because this is May and the GE is six months away.  Six months ago HRC has a huge lead and was seen as inevitable.


We care about politics because we know politics matters for people's lives and opportunities.
by politicsmatters on Thu May 01, 2008 at 06:15:44 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Indiana (none / 0)

I wouldn't be happy about him losing Indiana, unless it was very very close.  But in the grand scheme of things, it probably won't matter.  But we will see.


by ProgressiveDL on Thu May 01, 2008 at 06:52:18 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Indiana (none / 0)

Well I wonder what the press will say if Hillary wins in Indiana.  Didn't Obama say that that state would be the "tiebreaker".


by handsomegent on Thu May 01, 2008 at 07:28:03 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Indiana (none / 0)

The expectations have been reset.


We care about politics because we know politics matters for people's lives and opportunities.
by politicsmatters on Thu May 01, 2008 at 08:12:38 PM EST
[ Parent ]

LOL unless Indiana is worth 500 delegates... (none / 0)

it's no tiebreaker.


by ksquire on Fri May 02, 2008 at 09:15:12 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Indiana Poll & Obama expectations (none / 0)

One thing that should be also noted is that if Clinton wins Indiana, it will become the first defeat, post-Feb 5th, that goes against what the Obama spreadsheet predicted.

And how many pundits have done better than that?


We care about politics because we know politics matters for people's lives and opportunities.
by politicsmatters on Thu May 01, 2008 at 05:58:26 PM EST

Re: Indiana Poll & Obama expectations (2.00 / 1)

or 2nd if he loses NC as well...


by DTaylor on Thu May 01, 2008 at 05:59:34 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Indiana Poll & Obama expectations (none / 0)

/And how many pundits have done better than that? /

Me, for starters.

I've not been wrong on a single state.

I even had Clinton's win to the decimal place in PA (posted here in predictions thread).


by reggie44pride on Thu May 01, 2008 at 07:24:54 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Indiana Poll (none / 0)

Congrats!  


We care about politics because we know politics matters for people's lives and opportunities.
by politicsmatters on Thu May 01, 2008 at 08:13:20 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Indiana Poll & Obama expectations (2.00 / 2)

Obama is clearly losing the demographics war.

Not clear if DNC wants to win or pander to Obama youth though...


by DTaylor on Thu May 01, 2008 at 05:58:40 PM EST

Re: Indiana Poll & Obama expectations (2.00 / 1)

I have hated from the beginning (or SC at least) that this primary season was going to be all about demographics and little else, but there you go.  Apparently it's still 1963 in America.

Anyway, if we are playing that way, Obama's demographics may secure him the nomination in June, but not the WH.  There are not enough African Americans and college graduates in America to defeat McCain if he dominates the working class vote nationwide.  Hillary may have a chance in hell of recapturing some Reagan Democrats, while Obama has no chance at all, not anymore.


No politician ever lost an election because he underestimated the intelligence of the American public. - PT Barnum, paraphrased...
by jarhead5536 on Thu May 01, 2008 at 06:16:00 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Then McCain is the next President (none / 0)

Because the Dem SDs will not go for Hillary.  If they did, it would end the Democratic Party and they know that.


by Carcas on Thu May 01, 2008 at 07:39:02 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Then McCain is the next President (none / 0)

If they don't it ends the Democratic party.

As soon as voting is over Hillary will publish the vote totals for PARTY MEMBERS.

Expect her lead there to be 1,000,000 or more.

You can't veto a party mandate like that with GOP crossover.

Obama isn't the Democratic party member's choice.


by DTaylor on Fri May 02, 2008 at 02:02:34 PM EST
[ Parent ]

I am sorry to post this here, but no one is paying (1.00 / 4)

any attention.

Jerome, go ahead and delete this but you do know there are over 30 members who thing you are intentionally trying to purge them from the site.

The groupthink is that it was an attack on Obama supporters, if that was the intent than you failed as there are maybe 2-3 Clinton supporters too.

Is this really where you want the site to go?

If it is a factor of buggy software, I suggest investing in a more updated and robust blog product.


Unable to rec or rate

Read this: http://www.mydd.com/story/2008/5/15/1427 30/254

by GeorgeP922 on Thu May 01, 2008 at 05:59:10 PM EST

Re: I am sorry to post this here, but no one is pa (2.00 / 1)

and further to that point Jerome,   you have scores of members SAYING that the purge was intentional and very welcome.

Is that true?


Unable to rec or rate

Read this: http://www.mydd.com/story/2008/5/15/1427 30/254

by GeorgeP922 on Thu May 01, 2008 at 06:00:16 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: I am sorry to post this here, but no one is pa (2.00 / 1)

There are people on both sides that are banned every day here. They break the guidelines and pay the consequence, regardless of whom they support. Quit dragging the threads off-topic.


by Jerome Armstrong on Thu May 01, 2008 at 06:18:43 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: I am sorry to post this here, but no one is pa (none / 0)

Im not dragging anything off topic

And Im not talking about banned users, Im talking about having trusted user status but not being able to REC or rate.

Look at the 4 threads covering this.

You have members saying YOU did this on purpose.

Then there are others claiming other admins are blaming some glitch, caused when your staff deleted a post that made the rec list.

Alot of people think anyone who recced that was banned.

This is serious stuff Jerome, and if you had a email address I would send it there.

Why don't you just delete this comment, and then go in to those threads.

Once again, this has nothing to do with banned members.  Obviously the fact we are posting proves we are not banned.


Unable to rec or rate

Read this: http://www.mydd.com/story/2008/5/15/1427 30/254

by GeorgeP922 on Thu May 01, 2008 at 06:23:43 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: I am sorry to post this here, but no one is pa (none / 0)

you can email him at the contact us link at the bottom of the page.  But i've tried that before.  Doesn't seem to work.


by reggie23 on Thu May 01, 2008 at 06:27:02 PM EST
[ Parent ]

topic is Indiana poll. (none / 0)


by 4justice on Thu May 01, 2008 at 09:40:46 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: I am sorry to post this here, but no one is pa (none / 0)

Jerome, I didn't even post anything yesterday until my rec/rating powers were taken away.   How did I break the guidelines.  Can you please explain?


by reggie23 on Thu May 01, 2008 at 06:25:20 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: I am sorry to post this here, but no one is pa (none / 0)

Jerome,  Thank you for restoring my rec/rating powers.


by reggie23 on Thu May 01, 2008 at 07:05:50 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: I am sorry to post this here, but no one is pa (none / 0)

I am one of those 30+ Obama supporters who have unceremoniously lost ratings privileges.  I have posted over 150 comments since beginning of March - some terse, others jocular, but always representing myself, my values and candidate with integrity.  Quite frankly, it HAS been tough to keep the tongue-in-cheek at a minimum, with so much hate, innuendo and character assassination happening on this site.    Fine - his blog, his rules.  But I will continue to post and respond to the malice and hate directed at our eventual nominee, Barrack Hussein Obama.
Like it or not - the SD's are not overturning the will of the people, even if she has shaved his lead to 50 by June 3.  
They risk losing their second largest voting bloc (AA's), and the energy of the under 30 vote ... do they risk destroying the party in which they do business?  I think not ... neither does Mr. Andrews, the former head of the DNC.  

'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 Thu May 01, 2008 at 07:17:30 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Indiana Poll & Obama expectations (2.00 / 2)

I said it before and I'll say it again. If Hillary blows Obama away in Indiana (and ESPECIALLY if she keeps him from winning in NC by about 10), she has an extremely good chance of getting the nomination.


by vcalzone on Thu May 01, 2008 at 05:59:37 PM EST

Re: Indiana Poll & Obama expectations (none / 0)

The polls this week reset expectations.


We care about politics because we know politics matters for people's lives and opportunities.
by politicsmatters on Thu May 01, 2008 at 06:01:37 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Expectations always change (none / 0)

Of course the expectations changed! It happens as undecideds and leaning voters make up their minds. Still doesn't change whether he failed to win them over. It's just playing it out as it goes. Hillary's big win in PA was not up to expectations, but Obama needs to win over the voters that crushed him in PA very badly. A big win with AAs in NC and a loss in every other demographic would be very bad.

Don't get me wrong, I want him to win, I think he has the best chances in November against a likable (perceived) moderate. But he's gotta step up his game.


by vcalzone on Thu May 01, 2008 at 06:08:44 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Obama expectations (2.00 / 1)

Basically, he took a nose dive in North Carolina and now expectations are that it will be close.

Up 25 a few weeks ago, clinging to mid single digits today.

He coughed up a lead faster than the Sox in 86!


by reggie44pride on Thu May 01, 2008 at 07:27:20 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Indiana Poll & Obama expectations (none / 0)

Agree.


by christinep on Thu May 01, 2008 at 06:35:20 PM EST
[ Parent ]

The only way Hillary gets the nomination (none / 0)

is if she wins North Carolina.

After Wright, the media's expectations for Obama has been lowered.  They are expecting him to lose Indiana and to win North Carolina in single digits.

A game changer is if Hillary won North Carolina and Indiana.

Another game changer is if Obama wins North Carolina and Indiana.

I think they will split and this primary season just continues.


by puma on Thu May 01, 2008 at 06:35:54 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Indiana Poll & Obama expectations (none / 0)

How?  She can win 70/30 the rest of the way, and the SD's STILL are not going to give her the nomination because it overturns the perceived will of the people.  Our primary does not take into account popular vote.  He is the pledged delegate winner, the rules of our game.  

Have we not learned ANYTHING since 2000?  


'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 Thu May 01, 2008 at 06:55:52 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Obama expectations (none / 0)

Have we not learned ANYTHING since 2000?

We have.  The person with the most votes doesn't always win.

Will of the people = what you want it to be.


by reggie44pride on Thu May 01, 2008 at 07:28:36 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama expectations (none / 0)

Sure .. she wins the popular vote .. when IA, NH, NV - and all other caucus states - dont track true popular vote metrics.  Popular vote has NEVER been an indicator for the winner in a DEM primary, regardless if you agree or not agree with the process.  It is dumb ... it is flawed ... and illogical ... but they are our rules.  


'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 Thu May 01, 2008 at 07:36:52 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama expectations (none / 0)

I include all of the caucus results.  I exclude Michigan.

That puts her down roughly 300,000 votes, a total I believe she will make up by June 3.


by reggie44pride on Thu May 01, 2008 at 07:46:12 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama expectations (none / 0)

Apologies, Reg - I dont think the FL popular vote is going to work.  You see, FL broke the rules.  It is unfortunate ... it is unfair that a REPUB-led state congress and a REPUB GOV has that much power over the DEM nominating process ... but they broke the rules.  
The DNC rules committee will see to that come May 31 so we all can move away from that talking point.  
I don't see how you make a convincing argument when caucus pop vote is an inconsistent voting metric state-to-state.  

'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 Thu May 01, 2008 at 07:59:42 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama expectations (none / 0)

FL broke the rules

Unfortunately, so did Obama:

http://blogs.cqpolitics.com/trailmix/200 8/04/where-the-dem-rules-really-lea.html


by reggie44pride on Thu May 01, 2008 at 08:03:27 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama expectations (none / 0)

Hillary broke those same rules the night of the FL primary ... a 'victory' speech in a state that had no bearing on the nomination.  That tidbit seemed to be overlooked by the CQ.    
Look, this sits poorly with me as well.  My issue ... and an issue with the DNC, or so what I have read, is the candidates agreed not to run their campaign in MI and FL.  If these rules were contested pre-IA, I would agree the votes should stand and be counted.  It became an issue when one candidate needed those votes to count to win the primary.   TO repeat ad nauseum, it is like changing the rules in the middle of the game.   Unfair and not right, just likethe Supreme Court ruling in 2000 to uphold FL GE popular vote count.  

And - to speak to your popular vote argument, President Carter spoke again today on the pledged delegate count as the sole deciding factor to whom the SD's owe allegiance.   That count, and that count alone, is the will of the people.  Undemocratic, arguably; unfair, no way.  The rules are set, those are how we play.  


'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 Thu May 01, 2008 at 08:28:44 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Indiana Poll & Obama expectations (none / 0)

Wright may cost Obama Indiana, but the media is wearing this thing out. By the time the general comes around, the media will need a fresh whipping boy.

Can you say John McCain?


Voting for John McCain is not God bless America.
by SFValues on Thu May 01, 2008 at 06:00:58 PM EST

Re: Indiana Poll & Obama expectations (none / 0)

The GE audience is very different from the primary audience. If Obama cannot put Rev. Wright behind him with Democrats in the primary then he will have a very big problem to deal with in the general.


by souvarine on Thu May 01, 2008 at 06:12:01 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Indiana Poll & Obama expectations (none / 0)

I agree.

But is the media going to cover Wright until November, or will they want to talk about something new?

They've been covering Clinton and Obama for what seems like a lifetime, and now they'll have to savage the only one left to go after. That, of course, being McCain.


Voting for John McCain is not God bless America.
by SFValues on Thu May 01, 2008 at 06:14:54 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Indiana Poll & Obama expectations (none / 0)

They'll talk about something new, but Obama's interaction with Rev. Wright will be the subtext of every new story. Just as Bill Clinton's relationship with Monica Lewinsky is the subtext of most Hillary Clinton stories. The difference is that half the country embraces Hillary Clinton in reaction to that story, while only a small portion of the country is willing to defend Rev. Wright and how Obama handled him.

The press may occasionally give McCain a hard time, but they will never really go after him. In 2000 George Bush had to use some very hardball ground politics to get negative stories about McCain out, the press refused to attack him.


by souvarine on Thu May 01, 2008 at 06:52:51 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Indiana Poll &expectations (none / 0)

You've got a point, but that was the 2000 John McCain. I think the 2008 version won;t get the same treatment, but I could be wrong.


Voting for John McCain is not God bless America.
by SFValues on Thu May 01, 2008 at 08:06:49 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Indiana Poll & Obama expectations (none / 0)

It amazes me that anyone can say that. Wright is on his way out as we speak and even if I'm wrong there is a limit to how long even the lowest form of media can flog this. If you're really honest there isn't mush else they can go against Obama with. So you want Hillary because Obama can be swiftboated? I guess you think they won't do it to her or maybe you think she just has no skeletons in her closet and the Right doesn't have a bunch of ads ready to go against her if they should be so lucky as to have her to run against. And maybe you think those conservatives are not so rabidly against Hillary any more. I feel sure if Hillary is the nominee we will be seeing a McCain presidency and conservativer Supreme Court justices. Thet really scares me.


by Becky G on Thu May 01, 2008 at 06:35:13 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Indiana Poll & Obama expectations (none / 0)

Next: Rezko & Ayers ... judgment questions again.


by christinep on Thu May 01, 2008 at 06:37:39 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Indiana Poll & Obama expectations (none / 0)

Wright just threw into relief Obama's problems with the core Dem voters. You'd have rather found out in the general presumably.


by ottovbvs on Thu May 01, 2008 at 06:15:34 PM EST
[ Parent ]

I agree that Wright is wearing itself out (none / 0)

Less coverage of it today.  After the primary, it will be on to something else.


by puma on Thu May 01, 2008 at 06:37:09 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Indiana Poll & Obama expectations (2.00 / 3)

The myopia of Obama supporters crowing about "teh Math" borders on self-parody. They are actively trying to change the subject of his lack of electability in November by bragging about how he'll beat her for the nomination, as if that's a good thing.

The Obama campaign is based on hatred of the Clintons. Beyond that they got nothin'.


by Jim J on Thu May 01, 2008 at 06:02:13 PM EST

Re: Indiana Poll & Obama expectations (none / 0)

We got more delegates, popular votes, money and states.

Unless someone can prove to the party beyond a shadow of a doubt that Obama can't win in November, we've also got the Democratic nominee.


Voting for John McCain is not God bless America.
by SFValues on Thu May 01, 2008 at 06:05:19 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Indiana Poll & (2.00 / 1)

Most likely to happen as of today. And you're likely going to lose. Not that that matters just so long as your candidate is the nominee.


by ottovbvs on Thu May 01, 2008 at 06:17:11 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Indiana Poll & (none / 0)

Really? And how do you figure, oh great mind? Either one of them will beat McCain, if only based on the fact that McCain has hit a ceiling of about 44-45, and I doubt will improve much on that. Second, Obama has had his roughest two weeks of the campaign. He'll still win NC, and he's even in national polls with HRC. Plus more delegates, more votes, more states, etc.

The Dem nominee has about a 60 percent chance of being president. Obama has a chance to reshape the electoral map. Clinton is hoping to better execute the Kerry strategy.

I take Obama.


by jbill on Thu May 01, 2008 at 06:30:18 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Three-quarters right. (none / 0)

delegates, popular votes, money and states.

Three of four isn't bad.

Clinton will finish in June with more votes.

She will net about 300,000 more in the final contests.  She will not need to even include Michigan to claim she won the popular vote.  Just Florida, where Obama was on the ballot and campaigned*.

http://blogs.cqpolitics.com/trailmix/200 8/04/where-the-dem-rules-really-lea.html


by reggie44pride on Thu May 01, 2008 at 07:32:14 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Three-quarters right. (none / 0)

A couple of commercials vs. 15 years of name ID?

Obama would have cut that lead down, his ability to do so in every state where he trailed has proven that.

If Florida is her only means to the nomination, then this thing is over.


Voting for John McCain is not God bless America.
by SFValues on Thu May 01, 2008 at 08:05:15 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Indiana Poll & Obama expectations (none / 0)

I don't hate the Clintons. I used to be a Clinton supporter and switched to Obama in January.


We care about politics because we know politics matters for people's lives and opportunities.
by politicsmatters on Thu May 01, 2008 at 06:08:49 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Indiana Poll & Obama expectations (2.00 / 2)

I have nightmares lately that Obama's supporters are so wrapped in the historic nature of Obama's campaign that winning the nomination will be enough for them, and the fact that they lose the WH in November will be dissapointing but OK, validating their perception that America really isn't ready for a black President.

BTW, Clinton's campaign is groundbreaking and historic too.  Her supporters, however, know that the nomination is not an end unto itself.


No politician ever lost an election because he underestimated the intelligence of the American public. - PT Barnum, paraphrased...
by jarhead5536 on Thu May 01, 2008 at 06:19:43 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Indiana Poll (1.00 / 1)

No but they justify every bullshit tactic as a means to an end...can't have it both ways.


Congratulations Steny Hoyer! Our 2008 Chickenshit Leader Of The Year!
by RockvilleLiberal2 on Thu May 01, 2008 at 06:22:44 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Indiana Poll & (none / 0)

You're projecting what you think other people think - never a good idea. Believe me we want to see Obama as president. I believe Clinton is the Republican's dream candidate because she's the only way they can win the GE.


by Becky G on Thu May 01, 2008 at 06:39:20 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Indiana Poll & (1.60 / 5)

Obama would lose in a landslide if he is nominated. Have you ever heard of electoral college. Do you know that the GE is not a caucus where moveon.org can not arm twist?


You may not agree with What I say but don't forget I am a Democrat
by indydem99 on Thu May 01, 2008 at 06:54:36 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Indiana Poll & (none / 0)

Troll rated for an unsubstantiated slander of moveon.org


by ProgressiveDL on Thu May 01, 2008 at 06:58:57 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Oops (none / 0)

Technically libel since it's written.


by ProgressiveDL on Thu May 01, 2008 at 06:59:27 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Indiana Poll & (2.00 / 1)

I am trying to make a point.Arm twisting is legal and acceptable in a caucus. Have you ever been to caucus? Sounds like you have never been!


You may not agree with What I say but don't forget I am a Democrat
by indydem99 on Thu May 01, 2008 at 07:09:21 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Very True (none / 0)

I don't have to caucus, because my states have always had primaries.  I think caucuses are bad because they make voting harder.  But the rules (for now) are the rules.  Let's change it by 2012.

But I haven't seen any proof of "arm-twisting" by moveon.org at caucuses.  If you know of some, link to it and I will be openminded about it.


by ProgressiveDL on Thu May 01, 2008 at 07:24:33 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Very True (none / 0)

Agreed.


You may not agree with What I say but don't forget I am a Democrat
by indydem99 on Thu May 01, 2008 at 07:34:46 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Indiana Poll & (2.00 / 1)

LOL @ not even knowing what slander is and another LOL @ being so sensitive to moveon.org

Are they your church?


by reggie44pride on Thu May 01, 2008 at 07:33:21 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Ok (none / 0)

Well, LOL at not reading down one more comment to see that I corrected my point about libel/slander.  

I'm only sensitive to moveon.org to the point that they support liberal Democrats and the original comment was an unsupportable claim that they cheated the caucuses for Obama.

They are not my church, because church is for people who believe in a god.


by ProgressiveDL on Thu May 01, 2008 at 07:41:32 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Ok (none / 0)

I never would have pegged you as an agnostic or athiest.


by reggie44pride on Thu May 01, 2008 at 07:47:06 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Ok (none / 0)

Haha, I can't decide if that's serious or the snarkiest comment ever.  Either way, kudos!  :-)


by ProgressiveDL on Thu May 01, 2008 at 08:59:37 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Indiana Poll & (none / 0)

This is fear mongering, bro.  
This race will be determined in IA, NV, CO and OH.  Three of those four states (IA, CO, NV) will vote blue in November.  OH ... I just dont know the way the wind will shift in that state.   Personally, I cant imagine OH voting REPUB in November, for the mere fact their economy is an absolute mess.
'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 Thu May 01, 2008 at 06:59:56 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Indiana Poll & (none / 0)

Only Hillary could win OH. NV+CO+IA=21, OH=20. sen Obama wan CO and IA Hillary won NV and OH. Neveda is a neighboring state of Arizona and CO and McCain is very popular there.

First rule.

Never Underestimate your enemy!


You may not agree with What I say but don't forget I am a Democrat
by indydem99 on Thu May 01, 2008 at 07:15:43 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Indiana Poll & (none / 0)

That is exactly what Repugs want you to think.


You may not agree with What I say but don't forget I am a Democrat
by indydem99 on Thu May 01, 2008 at 07:25:41 PM EST
[ Parent ]

And (none / 0)

Our distaste for her unilateral support for Israel.
Our desires for a comprehensive education transformation.
Our desire for a different foreign policy.
Our focus on a candidate that 50+% of the country doesn't hate.

by ProgressiveDL on Thu May 01, 2008 at 06:57:09 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: And (none / 0)

What in the world do you mean by "unilateral support for Israel"?


by NJ Liberal on Thu May 01, 2008 at 10:58:30 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: And (none / 0)

She has vowed to obliterate Iran if they attack Israel and when asked about Israel's incursion into Lebanon, she said "I fully support Israel's right to defend itself."

That's all well and good, but while supporting that invasion, she also denounces Hamas.  I understand that.  Hamas is a terrorist organization because they target civilians.  But why is that when Israel hits civilians in Palestine or Lebanon, it is "collateral damage"?  

I support Israel's right to exist.  I really dislike Hamas.  I dislike Syria.  I dislike Iran and I hate Ahmadinejad.  But I also want the next president of the US to put serious pressure on Israel to withdraw settlements from the West Bank.  And I also want the next president to put pressure on Israel to stop blockading the West Bank.  All I want is a nuanced perspective that puts pressures on both sides.  Hillary only wants to pressure Israel's enemies.


by ProgressiveDL on Thu May 01, 2008 at 11:15:14 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Almost fair enough (none / 0)

When Israel hits civilians in the occupied territories or in Lebanon (there is no such place as Palestine), it is almost always a result of targeting terrorist installations (usually rocket launchers) which have been "strategically" placed in civilian areas. Hamas (and it's ilk) seem to have no problem using their children as human shields.

The Israeli army has taken many more casualties that it had to in order to minimize the collateral damage.

The very big difference here is that Israel does not deliberately target civilians. The terrorists do so regularly, and make no apologies for it.

All I want is a nuanced perspective that puts pressures on both sides.

The concept of nuance is lost when you blow up a busload of civilian children, and your fellow Palestinians dance in the streets, don't you think?

As for the Iran comment, perhaps looking at a fuller quote would help:

"In the next 10 years, during which they might foolishly consider launching an attack on Israel, we would be able to totally obliterate them," she said.

"That's a terrible thing to say but those people who run Iran need to understand that because that perhaps will deter them from doing something that would be reckless, foolish and tragic," Clinton said.

Note that she did not vow to do anything.


by NJ Liberal on Fri May 02, 2008 at 01:10:19 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Almost fair enough (none / 0)

Ok, but why is it our job to protect Israel as if it was American territory (which is what vowing to respond to an attack on Israel with a counterattack is), when we ignore Darfur, Tibet, Ethiopia, Chechnya?  I understand that we like to pick and choose the places we do and do not care.  I just do not see Israel as any more important than those other places.

I also don't think there will ever really be a deal in the Middle East, and I think Hamas is a big part of that problem.  But I also don't understand Israel's idea that if they put pressure on the people it will somehow turn them against Hamas.  When has that ever worked in history?  All it does is turn the entire populace against you.


by ProgressiveDL on Fri May 02, 2008 at 09:57:39 AM EST
[ Parent ]

I think that Obama will lose Indiana (none / 0)

by a lot more than predicted. The key factor will be the new voter ID laws, which will drop turnout among African-Americans and the very poor, both of which are key Obama groups.


John McCain
by MILiberal on Thu May 01, 2008 at 06:03:20 PM EST

Re: I think that Obama will lose Indiana (none / 0)

I hope not because of this. That is not the way to win anything imho. I think Sen Clinton will win, but it should NOT be because of lowered turnouts.


by Marvin42 on Thu May 01, 2008 at 06:24:45 PM EST
[ Parent ]

She would probably have won anyways (none / 0)

But I'm guessing this will cost Obama around 5 points. So I expect a margin around the lines of Pennsylvania.


John McCain
by MILiberal on Thu May 01, 2008 at 07:13:50 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: The Obama Family - (2.00 / 1)

Can have a nice vacation in the Rocky Mountains after the convention.


by johnnygunn on Thu May 01, 2008 at 06:06:15 PM EST

Re: Indiana Poll (none / 0)

You know, this may hold. But trends sometimes reverse.

After Iowa, Obama pulled into the lead in NH. And then he lost the state.

I don't know what's going to happen on Tuesday and, as an Obama supporter, of course I'd wish for better poll numbers for him now. But my crystal ball is broken and I have experience enough to know that trends can change, so who knows?


We care about politics because we know politics matters for people's lives and opportunities.
by politicsmatters on Thu May 01, 2008 at 06:18:54 PM EST

Re: Indiana Poll (none / 0)

NH was different.  In NH Clinton had a double digit lead and Obama caught up in the last week, and then two game changers happened.  

1) The single most dishonest mailer of the campaign was sent out by the Clintons, and

2) the media jumped the shark attacking her for being human.  

Those two events turned the tide in NH, and I don't see anything similar happening to turn things in Obama's favor in IN.  So, unfortunately, he's going to be forced to limp to victory in June.  Our party sure does suck sometimes.



Lost rate and rec for issuing a '1' to a trollish comment. The troll, not so much.

by map on Thu May 01, 2008 at 06:27:49 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Indiana Poll (none / 0)

Ad do any of us know what might happen between today and Tuesday?


We care about politics because we know politics matters for people's lives and opportunities.
by politicsmatters on Thu May 01, 2008 at 06:29:43 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Indiana Poll (none / 0)

After watching the last two months where all of Obama's wins were downplayed and all his loses were exhagerated by a media that is absolutely salivating for a convention floor battle... yeah, I can say that nothing good for Obama is on the horizon.



Lost rate and rec for issuing a '1' to a trollish comment. The troll, not so much.

by map on Thu May 01, 2008 at 06:33:58 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Yes, our party does suck sometimes (none / 0)

As a Clinton supporter, I've been saying that most of this primary season.  


by lombard on Thu May 01, 2008 at 06:34:50 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Indiana Poll & Obama expectations (none / 0)

So this means that we can expect Hillary Clinton to win Indiana in the general election too right?


by wengler on Thu May 01, 2008 at 06:22:44 PM EST

This state poll echoes exactly (none / 0)

what i saw in yesterday CBS/NYT poll.

In that poll, only 29% Americans think or feel that Senator Obama is very patriotic. 46% feel that he is somewhat patriotic and 22% feel that he is not patriotic.

Meanwhile, 40% of the American people feel that Senator Clinton is very patriotic. 47% feel she is somewhat patriotic, and only 11% think that she is not very patriotic.

This is not good for Senator Obama. I am very worried to be honest. When only 29% feel that he is very patriotic, one has to worry a bit. These numbers should be in the low-upper 40s. I remember in the worse moment of the 1988 campaign and despite Bush senior relentless attacks and making fun of Dukakis patriotism every day for months, Dukakis still had a low 40s the very category. American would not vote for someone that they do not feel like he is patriotic. This is the lowest and easiest test that any candidate has to pass. It shouldn't even be a worry at all.

I am afraid that Senator Obama has been framed in the mind of many people as someone not that patriotic.

Senator Obama needs to boost his numbers and quickly. He does not have choice. He's got to do it.

The idiot-shit-head of Wright hurt Senator Obama pretty badly. I feel like he just took away all his aura and made him look like normal politician, just another one like many others.

I think the future polls should focus on what frame the American people are using to see and analyze Senator Obama. Forget about whether or not he can beat McCain. It really does not matter if he is framed negatively.

If Senator Obama is losing men (and we have to wait until May 6 to be certain about the trend), we are in a serious fix.

Let's hope this will change by May 6.


by likelihood zero on Thu May 01, 2008 at 06:26:15 PM EST

He has also been framed as weak (none / 0)

And Americans don't like weaklings, either (at least not outside of the wimp wing of the Democratic party).


by lombard on Thu May 01, 2008 at 06:32:16 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: He has also been framed as weak (2.00 / 1)

Well, i think Bill is right when he says: strong and wrong better weak and right.

Look i support Senator Obama (my primary passed already) but these numbers are quite frankly worrisome and spell trouble.

We have to take into consideration that he has not been seriously attacked by the Republicans. They have yet to run a serious attack ad on him...i am worry to be honest with you. I was there in 1988 and worked in that campaign. I did stats for the campaign and what i see now, let us just say is not good.


by likelihood zero on Thu May 01, 2008 at 06:40:18 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: This state poll echoes exactly (none / 0)

Did Wright take the "aura" away, or did Obama do it by himself? An interesting ?


by christinep on Thu May 01, 2008 at 06:42:55 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: This state poll echoes exactly (2.00 / 1)

If Clinton doesn't win 70% of the votes on both IN and NC it will be a practical loss since that's what she needs to gain meaningful ground on Obama.

Anything less just gives her an excuse to keep the farce going.


If Democrats don't stop the Clinton/Bush Dynasty now, who will and when?
by ClintonBushDynasty on Thu May 01, 2008 at 06:51:26 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Obama's campaign spreadsheet (none / 0)

had them losing Maine so it won't be a big deal if they lose Indiana especially after Obama's worst week in his campaign with the Wright crap.

I think if Obama just wins North Carolina by >5%, it will be considered a win.


by puma on Thu May 01, 2008 at 06:29:58 PM EST

I think that Obama will win Oregon (none / 0)

by double digits.  Hillary doesn't do so well in Western states.  Oregon is very ANTI-WAR and their economy is pretty good comparing to the mid-West.  They also get their own gas so their gas prices are lower.

If Obama talks anti-War there than he will win Oregon by double digits.


by puma on Thu May 01, 2008 at 06:31:59 PM EST

Re: I think that Obama will win Oregon (none / 0)

make those expectations go higher and higher!


by reggie44pride on Thu May 01, 2008 at 07:36:08 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Indiana Poll & Obama expectations (none / 0)

At this point, I think margin of victory isn't that big a deal.  A double digit win in Indiana for HRC would be nice, but if not, it's fine.  She simply needs to win, and in all likelihood, she probably needs to pull off the double.  If the campaign starts to feel that she's pulling away, I wouldn't be surprised if she spends the last few days in North Carolina (actually, she might already, I have no idea what the schedule is).

I am a HRC supporter, but right now, she needs the double, or she needs an Edwards surprise nod, if not before the primary, then afterwards.  If all she gets is Indiana out of this, the dynamics probably don't change enough for SD's to change their mind.  A double, though, and preferably, a double and Edwards, might be enough to forcibly change the dynamics in the situation.


by toonsterwu on Thu May 01, 2008 at 06:32:40 PM EST

Re: Indiana Poll & Obama expectations (none / 0)

Wright lost the white votes for Obama.

He can't win the general.

Clinton will.

If the Dems want to win this time, its a no brainer.

President Hillary Clinton.


by gotalife on Thu May 01, 2008 at 06:33:36 PM EST

Re: Indiana Poll & Obama expectations (none / 0)

Last time I checked the Obama spreadsheet is a lot more accurate that Jerome (Clinton is going to win Maine and stop a landslide in Washington) Armstrong.

But it is not 100% accurate.  Regardless, Obama is not going to lose.  The superdelegates are not going to abandon him, and Florida/Michigan are not going to be sat in a way that determines the nomination.

Any mention otherwise is the biggest fairytale that I've ever heard!


by tom32182 on Thu May 01, 2008 at 06:36:09 PM EST

Fairytaleland (none / 0)

Yay, fairy tales!

How about pansy tales? North Carolina-style.


Obama-Clinton: The New Glory of America
by Zeitgeist9000 on Thu May 01, 2008 at 06:45:47 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Indiana Poll & Obama expectations (2.00 / 1)

We've still got some time folks, so I think it's premature to stick a fork in Obama at this point.  Also, I would note that for all of Jerome's "Obama is tanking" posts of late, Senator Clinton's path to the nomination still remains decidedly up hill.  A point I have yet to see Jerome concede.  

Also, just as a reminder, I remember some guy named Clinton losing a bunch of states in the Spring and Summer of 1992...I didn't follow the GE, but I assume he must have lost the nomination battle to President Brown.    


by HSTruman on Thu May 01, 2008 at 06:38:44 PM EST

Re: Indiana Poll & Obama expectations (2.00 / 1)

I supported Brown in '92!  I thought he could win in a three-way.

I often have remarked on Clinton's chances, when they said there was a 10% chance, I said she'll take it, and then went up to 15% after PA, 20-25% chance now. She still has to fundamentally alter the race in a way that no one can deny.

Anyway, I don't really know of a correlation to the '08 Dem primary, it isn't '92.


by Jerome Armstrong on Thu May 01, 2008 at 06:47:52 PM EST
[ Parent ]

We Agreed in '92 Anyway! (none / 0)

I was a Brown supporter in '92 as well, so we have that in common.  I wonder if he really would have won the GE if he'd won the nomination.  Honestly, if he was the D and if Perot hadn't dropped out for awhile, we really might have ended  up with a President Perot.  A lot of "ifs," obviously, but still crazy to think about.

I must have missed your statements about Clinton's odds -- so thanks for restating that.  In light of the odds you just cited, I agree that my '92 reference isn't particularly on point.  :)  


by HSTruman on Thu May 01, 2008 at 07:34:24 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Bad memory (none / 0)

I remember some guy named Clinton losing a bunch of states in the Spring and Summer of 1992

The only spring primary Clinton lost to Brown was Connecticut (which he lost by something like 1%).


by Shawn on Thu May 01, 2008 at 07:49:25 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Totally irrelevant (2.00 / 1)

If Clinton doesn't win all the remaining contests with 60%, she doesn't have a chance.  In fact, she hasn't had a chance since February.


by Chango on Thu May 01, 2008 at 06:52:11 PM EST

Correction - 69% (none / 0)

eom


by Chango on Thu May 01, 2008 at 06:52:50 PM EST

Keep spinning it your way Jerome (none / 0)

First, why not more attention on Hillary's pandering and stupid gas tax related recommendation. Will she do anything to win?
Most people are not that sophisticated and will ignore the fact that every economic pro thinks it's a stupid idea. It's beautiful in its Machiavellian amorally expedient way. I hope there are enough of you guys that have the integrity to focus on that.
It's far more relevant than Wright is....

Then too, why did you exclude the Rasmussen poll results, 5% not 10%?

The one you cite is the one with the biggest Clinton lead.

I think he will lose Indiana. The media is doing Hillary's work for her, you included.

When it comes to integrity some of you guys smell as bad as Fox.

He will lose Indiana, probably by 5-6 percentage points.
He'll win North Carolina by 9 or so.

The delegate count will keep moving him closer.

And this assumes he won't do anything spectacular during the next few days.

Give it up Jerome.

Mark


by markpsf on Thu May 01, 2008 at 06:56:28 PM EST

Re: under the bus (none / 0)

we have just watched Obama throw his spiritual mentor under the bus. Obviously he had no hesitation in throwing his grand mother under the bus. Obama is the ultimate machine politician from Chicago. He is capable of doing whar ever to win. I like that. That is a great qualification for a politician.


You may not agree with What I say but don't forget I am a Democrat
by indydem99 on Thu May 01, 2008 at 07:32:22 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: under the bus (none / 0)

What?!?  He didnt throw him under the bus when he needed to, pre PA.  Dude bent over backwards to accommodate.  He distanced himself when Wright acused him of being a politician ... when in fact, his actions spoke in opposite.


'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 Thu May 01, 2008 at 07:39:17 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Indiana Poll & Obama expectations (none / 0)

With all due respect to Senator Obama, he will lose WV by at least 60-40 and KY by at least 60-40.

Everyone at MyDD knows this, from Jonanthan Singer to Matt Stoller to everyone.


by TheBlueWarriors on Thu May 01, 2008 at 06:58:03 PM EST

Re: Indiana Poll & Obama expectations (none / 0)

What's that line about lies, damned lies, and statistics?


If Democrats don't stop the Clinton/Bush Dynasty now, who will and when?
by ClintonBushDynasty on Thu May 01, 2008 at 06:58:58 PM EST

Re: Indiana Poll & Obama expectations (2.00 / 1)

I'm very pleased with the trends we're seeing. Thanks for the excellent post, Jerome!


by Nobama on Thu May 01, 2008 at 06:59:32 PM EST

Re: Indiana Poll & Obama expectations (none / 0)

The trends are solid, if Clinton wins IN by 8-10 and loses NC by 4-6 will it make a difference?


by TheBlueWarriors on Thu May 01, 2008 at 07:07:43 PM EST

Re: Indiana Poll & Obama expectations (none / 0)

My honest opinion and guess?  Probably not.  People will pat her on the back and say, great moral victory, but my best is, in all honesty, all it'll do is extend it, while maintaing the current atmosphere, namely, HRC needing Obama to trip.  Now, a double (and preferably, a double plus Edwards and his 19 delegates that likely will follow his lead, followed with a big Kentucky win) would shake things up and change the dynamics, IMO, to the point where she can charge ahead without hoping that Obama falls.

Tough situation for HRC.  I hope she can pull it out, as I think she could do truly great things for this nation, and for the party and liberalism, but it's a tough, tough world.


by toonsterwu on Thu May 01, 2008 at 07:17:37 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Indiana Poll & (none / 0)

I'm not sure I totally agree although I do believe that as of today's he's the probable nominee. If she wins big in Indiana and he hits about 10% in NC but it's the usual 90%+ black vote, there is going to be nervousness. She's going to win KY and WV by a mile, not a lot of delegates but it's going to highlight the electability issue again. Ickes' memo which is entirely self serving is also all too accurate. I'm a Hill guy but I've essentially resigned myself to him getting the nod but I'm totally convinced he's going to blow it because of the demographics in a bunch of must win states and the lack of any compensating opportunities in say the south should he fall in places like OH and PA. It all depends on McCain's campaign, if it's good he's going to roll over him. Because of all the emotion the Obama fans don't even want to think about any of this but they are burying their heads in the sand. He's won by a brilliant bit of strategy that of leveraging not very representative caucuses, the dems screwed up apportionment system and an ethnic vote in certain southern states. None of this applies in the general. I'm consoling myself with the big wins in house and senate. Of course if he loses his career is over other than soldiering on in the senate. He's a very talented guy but he's not ready to be president and so if I a diehard dem think that what are indies in OH going to think.        


by ottovbvs on Thu May 01, 2008 at 08:58:34 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Indiana Poll & Obama expectations (none / 0)

Clinton finally found the message that WORKS for her. She's the fighter! for the little guy, he's the snobby elistist who uses big words. This is how Gore put Bradley away in 2000...

"I wanna fight for you"

"Stand and fight"


by rossinatl on Thu May 01, 2008 at 07:36:46 PM EST

Re: Indiana Poll & Obama expectations (none / 0)

Obama's the elitist... hmm, dude paid his college loans off three years ago.  That smacks of blue blooded elitism ...


'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 Thu May 01, 2008 at 07:40:16 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Obama expectations (none / 0)

Elitism has little or nothing to do with how much money someone has. Elitism is an attitude.


by ryeland on Thu May 01, 2008 at 08:25:18 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama expectations (none / 0)

I disagree with the Obama is an elitist sentiment.  I just dont think so ... he is educated, he is well spoken and measured ... and doesnt pander unnecessarily to the least common denominator.  Like a gas tax holiday ... wow, now THAT smacks in the face of the all things enviromentally progressive.  


'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 Thu May 01, 2008 at 08:34:54 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Indiana Poll & Obama expectations (none / 0)

Obama's not an elitist and I say that as a hillary guy. However, he is perceived as being out of touch with the bulk of trad dem working and lower middle class voters. And as we all know perception is reality. This is the 500 pound gorilla in the room and the Obama stalwarts don't even want to think about it.    


by ottovbvs on Thu May 01, 2008 at 09:03:35 PM EST
[