One of the ways that the Democratic campaign could end almost immediately is that Hillary Clinton could get polled to death. If the tracking polls over the next couple of days reveal a significant bounce for Barack Obama, that will signify that the electorate has made its choice and is prepared to move onward to the general election.
On that front, the news from Rasmussen is good for Barack Obama. He leads Hillary Clinton by 8 points over the four days of their tracking poll, but by 11 points in the two days of interviewing since the North Carolina and Indiana primaries were completed. In the 14 tracking polls that Rasmussen released in the interval between Pennsylvania and North Carolina, Obama had led Clinton by an average of 3 points.
EDIT: One unrelated point that's probably not worth a post unto itself. The Obama campaign has one more vulnerability in this race, which is that the results of West Virginia are going to be much worse than most of the media seems to understand. We're talking a 25-point loss if he has big momentum coming out of North Carolina. That's on a good day. On a bad day, he could lose by 40-50 points. Congressional Districts throughout the Appalachians that are similar to West Virginia have gone to Clinton by 2:1 or 3:1 margins.
As such, the Obama campaign will have to fend off one last bad (though almost certainly not terminal) news cycle. And therefore, I'd expect them to hold back any truly huge superdelegate endorsements (Edwards, Gore) until that time. This is not based on any inside knowledge; it's just too logical a strategy for things to proceed any other way.
5.09.2008
Rasmussen: Obama leads Clinton by 11 since North Carolina victory
@ 9:40 AM
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
15 comments
This is really a fantastic site! Congratulations on all you do.
Are you planning to make a prediction for WV, KY or OR? Like everyone else, I think this race is over, but... I look at horseraceblog at realclearpolitics.com, and I notice how much of WV and KY are made up of appalachian counties. What happens if Clinton wins WV by 290,000 votes? (Or am I asking about an impossibility - like, what if Hillary Clinton sprouts wings and learns to turn water into oil?)
I'm not Poblano, but I think a margin of that size is practically speaking impossible.
WV now has 665,000 registered Dems, and 156,000 registered independents, both of which can vote in the primary. Even there is 50% turnout for the Democratic primary, and Hillary wins 75% of the vote, she'll still win by "only" 205,000 votes.
I've been saying how potentially devastating West Virginia and Kentucky are going to be. They won't save Hillary but they'll look really bad on their face just the same.
If Hillary wants to be VP and force the issue, dropping out right after West Virginia and Kentucky would be a good strategy for her. She could point to the outcome because it will be her going electability argument writ large.
I would be curious to see poblano do a demographic prediction like what he did for IN and NC for WV and KY (and OR too!) just to demonstrate the drubbing that can be expected for Obama there.
If Obama could even manage the losing margin in KY and WV that Hillary got in VA and MD he'd have massively outperformed expectations there.
Poblano is right that the media has not caught on to the fact that Obama will be creamed in WV. They seem to think 10-20, instead of the likely 30-40 point loss. It's also a problem because it plays directly into the Clinton narrative that Obama cannot win white voters. But, I'm reasonably optimistic that it will not make that much of a splash. When Obama won Louisiana after Super Tuesday and Mississippi after Texas/Ohio by huge margins, the media hardly paid attention. Kentucky is also a problem. Fortunately, however, Oregon is the same day and a good win there will negate the Obama-can't-win-whites narrative and show it for what it really is--Obama has a problem winning whites in former slave owning states. I'm sure everyone can draw their own inferences as to why that may be the case.
Slaveholding in West Virginia was a pretty minor thing.
I'd phrase the problem as two subsets of white voters that will be a challenge to reach.
First, folks in geographically remote, economically depressed Appalachia. There, you're dealing with wariness of strangers and intellectuals as well having limited experience with racial diversity. I think that if Michelle Obama spent a long time visiting and listening, many of those folks would decide she came from people who "were not afraid of hard work" and that her husband was worth a close look--but that time isn't available in the next two week. West Virginia's mostly that, while Kentucky's 40% that.
Second,there's polarization like South Carolina or Mississippi, where white and black folks who live in adjacent neighborhoods see themselves as having different interests. Another 30% of Kentucky, mainly to the west, is like that.
And then, add two quirks to our geography.
Kentucky's got only one big and one middling city, plus the conservative suburbs of Cincinnati, so it's rare to balance our rural patterns.
Plus, Kentucky is the one of the 10 whitest states in the country. In other southern states, you can make multi-racial coalitions that win elections. Here, even though we have serious white progressives, that kind of coalition is harder to build.
Please, think of Kentucky as having the same range of folks you meet other places, but in different proportions.
And please remember that, if you understand what Obama was trying to say about bitterness in Western Pennsylvania, you could square it and not yet be close to what's happening in our eastern hills and in West Virginia. Winning people with that experience will not come easy, but real action on major Democratic policy initiatives can do it over time.
I wonder whether west virginia turnout will be heavy or light. This will be interesting to see whether we get record levels when it is just Hillary.
If Obama gets less than 15% of the vote in any district, he gets no delegates from that district. If he should have a particularly bad day and get less than 15% statewide, he could end up with zero pledged delegates from that state.
APRIL FUNDRAISING will also trump news out of West Virginia. It's already May 10th and we haven't heard a word about Obama's fundraising for April yet. I suspect that he had another very good month, and is waiting until after the disaster that is West Virginia until announcing fundraising results in order to inject some positive news into the news cycle.
Reasons why April was a good fundraising month:
1. Nearly 200,000 NEW contributors in April (he had 218,000 new donors in March)
2. A larger base of EXISTING contributors have likely donated again, (almost 1.3m existing donors as of Feb 28; 1.45m on April 30th; 442,000 total donors in March )
3. Events that generated outrage or enthusiasm from donors to donate again:
* The ABC debate debacle
* His Pennsylvania loss
* anobamaminute
* Rev Wright spouting his mouth again
* end-of-the-month fundraising drive - tshirt and poster giveaways
* Jean Weiss in NC
4. Hillary had to loan her campaign another $5m (plus $1.4m in May)
The media is overlooking more than just a WV blow-out. Not only could Clinton see 30-40% margins in WV and Kentucky compared to a 10-15% loss in Oregon, the raw turnout in WV and Kentucky could overwhelm Oregon. WV (closed primary) has 652,000 Dems and 160,000 independents eligible, Kentucky (closed) has 1,622,000 Dems, while Oregon (open) has only 740,000 Dems. The last closed primary, PA, saw 59% of eligible voters participate. Even after lowering this to 50% for KY and WV and raising this to 66% for Oregon because of historically higher turnout, it is easy to imagine Clinton netting 150,000 votes out of WV, 300,000 out of KY, and losing only 75,000 in Oregon. Add an expected Clinton win in Puerto Rico, where 2 million vote in governor's elections, and Clinton could earn a popular vote victory without relying on Michigan or even Florida. SD and Montana would have a negligible impact regardless of turnout. If this happens, would anyone expect the candidate who won the popular vote to politely stand down?
Darren,
This is not a popular vote contest. To quote some of the braintrust of the campaign you're shilling for:
It's the delegates, stupid. And Hillary is losing that, handily.
Take the popular vote logic back to hillaryis44 where it belongs.
情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,
^^ nice blog!! thanks a lot! ^^
徵信, 徵信社,徵信, 徵信社, 徵信, 徵信社, 徵信, 徵信社, 徵信, 徵信社, 徵信, 徵信社, 徵信, 徵信社, 徵信, 徵信社, 徵信, 徵信社, 徵信, 徵信社, 徵信, 徵信社, 徵信, 徵信社, 徵信, 徵信社, 徵信, 徵信社, 徵信, 徵信社, 徵信, 徵信社, 徵信, 徵信社, 外遇, 抓姦, 離婚, 外遇,離婚,
徵信, 外遇, 離婚, 徵信社, 徵信, 外遇, 抓姦, 徵信社, 徵信, 徵信社, 徵信, 外遇, 徵信社, 徵信, 外遇, 抓姦, 徵信社, 征信, 征信, 徵信, 徵信社, 徵信, 徵信社, 征信, 徵信, 徵信社, 徵信, 徵信社, 徵信, 徵信社, 徵信, 徵信社, 徵信社, 徵信社, 徵信, 外遇, 抓姦, 徵信, 徵信社, 徵信, 徵信社,
^^ nice blog!! ^@^
徵信, 徵信, 徵信, 徵信社, 徵信社, 徵信社, 感情挽回, 婚姻挽回, 挽回婚姻, 挽回感情, 徵信, 徵信社, 徵信, 徵信, 捉姦, 徵信公司, 通姦, 通姦罪, 抓姦, 抓猴, 捉猴, 捉姦, 監聽, 調查跟蹤, 反跟蹤, 外遇問題, 徵信, 捉姦, 女人徵信, 女子徵信, 外遇問題, 女子徵信, 徵信社, 外遇, 徵信公司, 徵信網, 外遇蒐證, 抓姦, 抓猴, 捉猴, 調查跟蹤, 反跟蹤, 感情挽回, 挽回感情, 婚姻挽回, 挽回婚姻, 外遇沖開, 抓姦, 女子徵信, 外遇蒐證, 外遇, 通姦, 通姦罪, 贍養費, 徵信, 徵信社, 抓姦, 徵信社, 徵信, 徵信公司, 徵信社, 徵信, 徵信公司, 徵信社, 徵信公司, 女人徵信, 外遇
徵信, 徵信網, 徵信社, 徵信網, 外遇, 徵信, 徵信社, 抓姦, 徵信, 女人徵信, 徵信社, 女人徵信社, 外遇, 抓姦, 徵信公司, 徵信社, 徵信社, 徵信社, 徵信社, 徵信社, 徵信社, 女人徵信社, 徵信社, 徵信, 徵信社, 徵信, 女子徵信社, 女子徵信社, 女子徵信社, 女子徵信社, 徵信, 徵信社, 徵信, 徵信社, 徵信, 徵信社, 徵信, 徵信社, 徵信, 徵信社, 徵信, 徵信社, 徵信, 徵信社,
艾葳酒店經紀招兵買馬!!
徵專業的酒店經紀,想要去打工的水水,想要短期酒店小姐,打工兼差,酒店兼差,日領,兼差,現領,兼職,酒店上班,酒店打工,假日兼職,兼職工作日領,
等相關服務 幫您快速的實現您的夢想~!!
酒店經紀人,
菲梵酒店經紀,
酒店經紀,
禮服酒店上班,
酒店小姐兼職,
便服酒店經紀,
酒店打工經紀,
制服酒店工作,
專業酒店經紀,
合法酒店經紀,
酒店暑假打工,
酒店寒假打工,
酒店經紀人,
菲梵酒店經紀,
酒店經紀,
禮服酒店上班,
酒店經紀人,
菲梵酒店經紀,
酒店經紀,
禮服酒店上班,
酒店小姐兼職,
便服酒店工作,
酒店打工經紀,
制服酒店經紀,
專業酒店經紀,
合法酒店經紀,
酒店暑假打工,
酒店寒假打工,
酒店經紀人,
菲梵酒店經紀,
酒店經紀,
禮服酒店上班,
酒店小姐兼職,
便服酒店工作,
酒店打工經紀,
制服酒店經紀,
酒店經紀,
菲
梵,
Post a Comment