Over at Raising Kaine, teacherken references a new poll (.pdf) out of Wisconsin that shows Obama up 50%-39%. It also shows Obama leading among whites, blacks, independents, and Republicans. It shows Obama winning in every age group except the over 65 crowd.
If Obama wins in Virginia, Maryland, and DC today, and wins in Wisconsin and Hawaii next Tuesday, that will make him 10-0 in caucuses and primaries since Super Tuesday. Even including pledged Superdelegates, and before we count the results from today, Obama now has a six delegate lead. And, as Chris Bowers notes:
Over the past thirty days, Obama has won significantly more endorsements from super delegates than Hillary Clinton. According to Democratic Convention Watch, on January 13th, Clinton led Obama 183 to 74 among super delegates. Currently, according to Democratic Convention Watch, Clinton leads Obama 224 to 132 among super delegates. If these numbers are accurate, it would mean that over the past thirty days Obama has received the endorsement of 58 super delegates, while Clinton has received the endorsement of 41. At this point, the only reason Clinton leads among super delegates is because of endorsements that took place before any voting or caucusing began this cycle.
But, she cannot depend on her Superdelegates to maintain their loyalty. Asked if the Superdelegates might overrule the will of the people and nominate Clinton:
Elaine Kamarck, a senior DNC official and super delegate herself, told me Thursday that it would never happen. “Super delegates are cowards – we would never do that.” This, by the way, from a woman who has endorsed Hillary Clinton.
Of course, the Clintons realize they are now behind the eight ball.
Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton and her advisers increasingly believe that, after a series of losses, she has been boxed into a must-win position in the Ohio and Texas primaries on March 4, and she has begun reassuring anxious donors and superdelegates that the nomination is not slipping away from her, aides said on Monday.
Even winning Texas and Ohio will probably not be enough:
“She has to win both Ohio and Texas comfortably, or she’s out,” said one superdelegate who has endorsed Mrs. Clinton, and who spoke on condition of anonymity to share a candid assessment. “The campaign is starting to come to terms with that.” Campaign advisers, also speaking privately in order to speak plainly, confirmed this view.
Several Clinton superdelegates, whose votes could help decide the nomination, said Monday that they were wavering in the face of Mr. Obama’s momentum after victories in Washington State, Nebraska, Louisiana and Maine last weekend.
Some said that they, like the hundreds of uncommitted superdelegates still at stake, might ultimately “go with the flow,” in the words of one, and support the candidate who appears to show the most strength in the primaries to come.
To call out one animated BooTrib reader, I don’t think Arthur Gilroy’s ‘sophisticated’ view of American politics will be vindicated. The Clinton machine better pull out an upset win tonight or February 12th, 2008 is going to be remembered much like April 14th, 1912. That’s the day the RMS Titanic hit an iceberg. It sank the next day.
Since I’ve already seen Hillary weep for success and state that in NH she found her voice, I’m thinking she’ll have to use that voice and burst into song ala the Unsinkable Molly Brown to fill her lifeboats.
No. She’ll past the 3s a charm. What will the 4th tear-up be called.
For those who thought the shakeup in Hillaryland wasn’t a shake-up – Solis Doyle, top Latina was not fired, she became a senior adviser; read this
Inside the Clinton Shake-Up
– Joshua Green
How Hillary’s campaign managed itself into a ditch–and how it might get itself out
I know I posted the link yesterday, but B-Serious gives us food for thought in What if the Roles were Reversed?:
There’s more stuff over there, you have to go read it even though you, I and B-Serious knows what would happen:
You know it.
If all goes well tonight, the same thing will happen to Clinton. She probably has enough good will to last until March 4th. But she is not on pace to win those contests anymore. It would be a stunning reversal of momentum and the only reward for Ohio and Texas Democrats would be a clusterfuck at the convention. They won’t do it.
I look at the David Shuster thing and realize that beyond the wrongheadiness of David’s remark, we’re seeing Hillary play that card to leverage every minute bit of play she can get. For a person who has seen every member of her family attacked and says she/they can withstand it, she’s not choosing to presidentially take the high road, but to ask Shuster to be kicked down the road for her benefit.
So, when do WE start to stand up for Shuster and say here’s a guy that has demonstrated the ability to do a superb job but has done a really stupid thing. We’ll stand up for the guy but make it clear we won’t tolerate the misstatement? Just askin
Thanks for the link, fabooj. I may have to drop in there once in a while just to see what I’ve been missing.
Both MSNBC and CNN are running her ad for free on their so-called blogs. Hell, MSNBC even provides a transcript!
Yeah, and I’m still waiting for Obama’s one hour documentary with Lester Holt on MSNBC.
Since Sat., I send an email to MSNBC asking about the air times for the hourlong biopics on the other candidates. Funny, I haven’t gotten a single reply back.
After Shuster’s ‘pimp’ remark, MSNBC is playing nice.
Already, crowds are lining up and it’s only around 3:40 p.m.
I think this staid white state has got O Man fevah.
Me, I am getting ill. Yes, stress and chills and fever have caught up with me. As much as I wanted to see the O man tonight, I’ll have to watch him on TV, NBC Channel 15, Madison, covered up and nursing a cup of lemon-laced tea, chased with aspirin.
Since I’ve been sick 4 times in the last 3 months, I definitely feel for you. Get some rest.
If she manages to win Virginia in spite of all the negative media narrative – that would be a disaster for Obama.
But now VA is very interesting to me. What I posted earlier:
but definitely a momentum stopper. It would be best if she had strongly contested it and he won. If she stays away mostly and he wins, that’s fine. But if she mostly stays away and he loses? Not good.
I think he’s going to win it but not by as much as the polls say. I have no reason for thinking that. It’s just what I think.
I went to the polls in Winchester Va. a glance at the total voter sheet showed 172 Dem. primary voters to 139 Repug primary voters. Republicans outnumber Democrats at least 2 to 1 at that polling place. I gather this from reading previous results. So I have to wonder about crossover voting by Repugs. You know they want to see Hillary in the Fall. They can beat her. I’m very nervous.
Has anyone seen anything about the repugs urging this? I hope its just Obama motivating the masses but Tweety and his type will spin the hell out of a loss in Virginia. Its scary it feels like a setup. I’m very paranoid by nature though.
yes, some Republicans are voting for Clinton because she is perceived as the weaker general election candidate.
However, as should be obvious, many more Republicans and independents will be voting for Obama because they prefer him to Hillary than voting for her because she is weak. Strategic voters are rare compared to sincere voters.
In other news, this is funny:
“Women for Obama” counters Hillary’s “Go Girl Go. Be Yourself.”
Obama is out-campaigning Clintons. Texas may surprise.
Can you imagiune Dick Morris wrote this? He reverses himself.
Obama, the Democratic Nominee? Yes He Can!
BTW in VT Obama has raised over $400,000. comparied to Hillary’s $47,000. Heard on VPR Vermont Public Radio
Another possibility: Hillary’s preparing to spin Obama’s victory in VA as “He’s only winning because Republicans are voting for the weaker candidate”.
Hey Boo-
Any thoughts on what your Bone-headed Governor has been saying?
And Rendell is not my governor, but that’s an incredibly stupid and racist thing to say, and it demeans his own constituents on top of it. What a buffoon.
well, Steve, it’s par for the course for both Rendell and the Clinton campaign. Obama’s voters don’t work, they’re all on the dole, and white people are all racists so you have to vote for the white person. Are you tired of it yet?
Sigh. Tell me again who I’m supposed to vote for if the choice is McCain or Clinton?
As you recall I’ve been tired of it for a while:
LINK
Ah, the Huckster makes a point in words the common man can understand:
I’m now picturing Hillary in dungarees with oil on her face and hands saying – yep, this old jalopy of a country will take you another 100,000 miles – in whatever direction it is that you’re going.
The common man may also understand that cars haven’t used carburetors in WELL over a decade. In other words, Huckajesus’s metaphor is much like his social views : completely out of date and useless in the modern era.
Finally some polling out of Ohio so we can hopefully start to watch trend lines.
The only number in there that is worth anything right now imo is the polling among those who have already voted and Hill leads 51-47. That’s closer than I would have expected.
said one superdelegate who has endorsed Mrs. Clinton, and who spoke on condition of anonymity
we have no reason to suppose this superdelagate exists anywhere other than the reporters imagination.
Is this what it has come to? Accusing Patrick Healy of making up anonymous quotes? That’s truly desperate, Alice. I mean, yeah Jayson Blair made up quotes. They worked for the same news organization. It could happen.
I’ve been expecting Wisconsin to turn, and I regard it’s turning as significant. Polls up till recently had shown Clinton in the lead, although many of them were from the time period when Clinton enjoyed the frontrunner status, which was partly enhanced by constant media reports touting that status.
Like Maine, Wisconsin has a large blue collar population, which is who the Clinton campaign has been claiming as its own.
There are many reasons to question this narrative, even though demographic breakdowns seem to support it. Much of this phenomenon is an artifact of the process. For instance, Clinton’s support among Hispanics has been attributed to name recognition rather than a race effect. Traditional Democratic demographic groups, such as Hispanics and ‘blue collars,’ are the last to turn.
Admittedly, I’m still sorting through the sources for many of these demographic breakdowns, which reveal crucial aspects of the story. Reliance on demographics from caucus state voters, which also show a strong differential effect favoring Obama, would tend to strongly accentuate an income effect, thus furthering the appearance of a Clinton advantage with lower income groups. Reliance on previous results, which, although now in the bank, presumes a static nature to these groups’ allegiance. Recent national polls show an Obama lead over Clinton, and this has flipped from a week a ago. Some of this should be an indication of the Obama campaign’s inroads into blue collar groups, which is also indicated by the Maine results. A Wisconsin victory would be a further indication that this is happening.
One final thought — California is a story that hasn’t been adequately explained. 2.3 million votes were known to have been cast early, and some estimates placed the early vote totals as high as half of the eventual total. Obama appears to have pulled even on election day, up from about 20 points down just a week or so before election day there. The early vote component of the California vote represented a snapshot of Clinton’s earlier lead, since the votes were cast during that time frame. Early returns showed a substantial Clinton lead, an indication that the early votes were being counted first. That large margin, which existed at the time the race was projected as win for Clinton with about 24% of the counties reporting, fell dramatically throughout the evening as votes from election day were added in.
Despite the fact that some independent voters throughout CA were told that they couldn’t vote in the Dem. primary or were given Rep. ballots, we’re not allowed to talk about it. These reports came in from all over the state and the one thing everyone says is, “It seems that precinct training was inadequate in some cases.”
In LA County with our stupid double bubble issue, there are less than 50K votes that will not counted. From today’s LA Times:
I don’t see how they can not determine voter intent. If someone marked the name of a Democratic candidate, clearly they wanted to vote Democratic. Independents, or “nonpartisan” voters were to receive a Democratic ballot. The same ballot I got. Even I was confused about the bubble when I got to the booth and I had been reading about it for 3 days before the election.
My husband’s name had been purged from the voter rolls, so he was allowed to vote provisional. He wasn’t even given a Dem. ballot at first and he had to ask for it 3 times before he got one. Even still, no one told him to mark the extra bubble and I had forgotten to tell him before hand. He voted for Obama and one should be able to assume that since he didn’t mark any of the other 9 names, that that’s who he was voting for.
Sigh. But we’re not talking about it.