By Big Tent Democrat

PPP has Barack Obama leading by 3 in Pennsylvania. To call this an outlier is an understatement. It is the only poll that has Obama ahead. PPP seems intent on making a name for itself in Pennsylvania, one way or another.

More . . .

By Big Tent Democrat

Obama supporter Publius writes (see also yep, Josh Marshall putting up his hands to cover the sun:

Other bloggers have, however, made the logical jump that Judis leaves largely to implication. I usually leave linking to "Big Tent" Democrat to John Cole, but here's what he said over at TalkLeft (unclear though whether he was talking only for him):

Obama can not win beer track white working class voters, women, seniors or Latinos. This is why Hillary is more electable in PA, OH, FL and MI.

Florida, perhaps, but both Clinton and Obama will have struggles in the other states versus McCain. More to the point, the fact that Clinton is preferred to Obama among this bloc of voters within a Democratic primary is not strong evidence that she'll do significantly better versus McCain in the general.

I should be glad I suppose to get the "Florida perhaps" concession. But I am struck by the strange argument, I have heard it before, that how a candidate does in a primary with a demographic has absolutely no predictive power as to how a candidate will do in the general election with that demographic. Imagine this argument in reverse - Obama will not do better than Clinton in turning out and getting African Americans to vote for him in a general election. Or college educated white males. Or the vaunted "youth vote." If I wrote that I would rightly be ridiculed by these same "Creative Class" bloggers. But let's set aside the obvious unsoundness of Publius' argument. Let's look at polls on the flip.

There aren't too many silver linings for Hillary Clinton in this ABC News/Washington Post national poll. (Full poll results here, pdf., Washington Post article on it is here.)

The poll, out today, is a national one. It finds Democrats believe Obama should win the nomination and is more electable in November.

The silver lining: The views of those polled on superdelegates:

Only 13 percent of Democrats say superdelegates should support whoever’s won the most regular delegates in primaries and caucuses – a count in which Obama’s ahead, and seemingly likely to stay so. Instead a plurality, 46 percent, say superdelegates should support the candidate who’s won the most popular votes, a tally in which Clinton still has hopes. And 37 percent say superdelegates should go with their own sense of which candidate they think is best.

In other words, if Hillary does well in the remaining states, and she should, at least in PA, Indiana, West Virginia, Kentucky and Puerto Rico, a whopping 87% of those polled don't think it's a problem for superdelegates to vote according to either the popular vote total or their conscience instead of by the pledged delegate total.

More...

Speaking at a meeting of the Newspaper Association of America in Pennsylvania today, Hillary Clinton outlined the agenda, if elected, for her first 100 days in office:

Clinton’s prospective 100-day agenda included the start of a troop withdrawal from Iraq and submitting a budget to Congress that rolls back some of President Bush’s tax cuts.

She also promised to “shut down Guantanamo” and “disavow torture,” as well as sign bills Bush has vetoed to expand federal embryonic stem-cell research and broaden government-supported health care to millions of lower-income children who now go without.

She said:

In short, starting from day one, the Bush-Cheney era will be over in name and in practice.

More...

I caught the intro to Countdown with Keith Olbermann announcing that Obama's ahead in Indiana and Hillary's lead is gone in PA.

I changed the channel. Is it too much to ask that cable news and talk show hosts like Olbermann at least fairly report the news before they put their spin on it? How could he not mention the multiple dueling polls?

Starting yesterday, Big Tent Democrat and I catalogued every poll (other than daily trackers) in the states yet to vote regardless of results. First the results, then our analysis. We didn't cherry pick and report only those we agree with or that favor one candidate or the other. Examples:

• The LA Times/Bloomberg Poll on PA, Indiana and NC (Hillary by 5, Obama by 5, Obama by 13 respectively)
• Survey USA: KY (Clinton up by 36)
• Survey USA PA: Clinton Up By 14
• Quinnipiac and Rasmussen PA: Clinton Up By 6 and 9, respectively.

More...

By Big Tent Democrat

The LATimes/Bloomberg polls of PA, IN and NC are out. The results are strikingly at odds with most existing polling:

The [PA]survey found the New York senator leading Barack Obama by just 5 percentage points in Pennsylvania, which votes next Tuesday. Such a margin would not give her much of a boost in the battle for the party's nomination.

What is more, the poll found Clinton trails Obama by 5 points in Indiana, another Rust Belt state that should play to her strengths among blue-collar voters. In North Carolina, an Obama stronghold, he is running 13 points ahead.

(Emphasis supplied.) This poll is bucking the CW in all 3 of those states. Waiting to see some internals from this poll to give you some meaningful analysis. Strategic Vision has Clinton with a 9 point PA lead, up from a 5 points lead a week ago.

Got the Internals. LATimes appears to have made a strange choice in its methodology - it has included independents in a closed primary. In addition, it appears to have failed to poll for Republicans in Indiana, which I believe is a completely open primary. More . .

By Big Tent Democrat

Matt Yglesias writes:

Now if you'd said on March 5 "looks like Clinton will win Pennsylvania by about 12 points" most people would have said "sounds about right . . . [Obama's likely] failure to fully close the gap was not only predictable but widely predicted weeks ago based on Pennsylvania's age structure, educational attainment, and African-American population.

Of course I agree. I have been writing "demography is political destiny" for quite a while now. It was just as true in Mississippi, South Carolina, Georgia, etc. It will be just as true in North Carolina on May 6 - Obama will win by double digits.

But of course that is also the problem - Obama can not win beer track white working class voters, women, seniors or Latinos. This is why Hillary is more electable in PA, OH, FL and MI. The question is, as John Judis discusses, what does this mean about Obama's electability in November? The "creative class" has never taken this argument seriously, even applauding such idiotic Obama moves like blocking revotes in FL and MI. Instead, the standard "creative class" response is along the lines of Brad DeLong's insulting post. Alienating Clinton voters is seemingly a goal now.

By Big Tent Democrat

Via Kevin Drum, an expression of concern about alienating women:

Not so long ago, it was possıble for women, particularly young women, to share in the popular illusion that we were living in a postfeminist moment. . . . Then Hillary Clinton declared her candidacy, and the sexism in America, long lying dormant, like some feral, tranquilized animal, yawned and revealed itself. Even those of us who didn’t usually concern ourselves with gender-centric matters began to realize that when it comes to women, we are not post-anything.

The egregious and by now familiar potshots are too numerous (and tiresome) to recount. A greatest-hits selection provides a measure of the misogyny . . . It was hardly a revelation to learn that sexism lived in the minds and hearts of right-wing crackpots and Internet nut-jobs, but it was something of a surprise to discover it flourished among members of the news media. The frat boys at MSNBC portrayed Clinton as a castrating scold, with Tucker Carlson commenting, “Every time I hear Hillary Clinton speak, I involuntarily cross my legs,” and Chris Matthews calling her male endorsers “castratos in the eunuch chorus.” . . .

Will the "creative class" notice? Do not hold your breath.

(199 comments) Permalink :: Comments