New Ohio Poll: Hillary 46%, Obama 38%

A newly released Fox News Ohio poll (pdf) of likely Democratic voters in Ohio has Hillary ahead of Barack Obama 46% to 38%. The margin of error is + or - 4%.

CNN takes a look at the "poll of polls" in both Ohio and Texas.

Two "poll of polls" calculated by CNN show competitive races in both Texas and Ohio. The Texas "poll of polls" of likely primary voters shows Obama at 48 percent, Clinton at 44 percent, and 8 percent unsure. In Ohio, Clinton has 47 percent, Obama has 40 percent, and 13 percent are unsure.
The "poll of polls" includes: [More...]

The Texas "poll of polls" is an average of five surveys conducted February 22-28: Fox News/Opinion Dynamics, Reuters/CSPAN/Houston Chronicle/Zogby, Belo/Public Strategies, American Research Group, and CNN/Opinion Research Corporation.

The Ohio "poll of polls" is also an average of five surveys conducted February 18-28: Fox News/Opinion Dynamics, Reuters/CSPAN/Houston Chronicle/Zogby, American Research Group, University of Cincinnati "Ohio Poll" and Quinnipiac Poll.

Obama's edge is in money for advertising.

Both campaigns are spending millions of campaign dollars in Ohio and Texas in the run-up to Tuesday's primaries. In the last two weeks, the Obama campaign has aired more than 11,000 television ads in Texas, costing nearly $5.4 million, while the Clinton campaign aired over 8,000 ads, costing over $3.3 million, according to TNS Media Intelligence/Campaign Media Analysis Group. The Obama campaign has also outspent the Clinton camp in Ohio over the last two weeks. Over 5,400 Obama ads costing nearly $2.6 million have aired in Ohio, compared with 3,500 Clinton ads costing nearly $1.4 million.

If you want to help Hillary compete in the ad war, here's where you go.

Update:: A new Pew Center poll says Obama has lead but he also has problems.

< Delegate Narratives | Obama on the Difference Between Him and Hillary >
  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft

  • Display: Sort:
    I don't think it changes the averages much (5.00 / 1) (#8)
    by Shawn on Fri Feb 29, 2008 at 10:50:27 PM EST
    But tonight's Belo Poll has Clinton slightly ahead again. It also shows her forty points ahead among Hispanics.

    Of course, I fully expect Zogby to have Obama leading 58-39 or something like that.

    Zogby did release a poll today (5.00 / 1) (#12)
    by fuzzyone on Fri Feb 29, 2008 at 11:39:16 PM EST
    Obama 48
    Clinton 42

    Clinton 44
    Obama 42

    I did not mention it above because, well, its Zogby.


    That was last night's poll (none / 0) (#14)
    by Shawn on Sat Mar 01, 2008 at 12:02:15 AM EST
    He should have another one out later tonight, if it isn't out already.

    When Pollster.com posts its' state charts, I always calculate what the results would be minus Zogby and ARG.


    belo (none / 0) (#16)
    by bigbay on Sat Mar 01, 2008 at 12:18:10 AM EST
    I think they are tinkering with things to draw eyeballs. Last  night, it was Obama in the lead.

    Maybe because (5.00 / 1) (#11)
    by Jeralyn on Fri Feb 29, 2008 at 11:29:27 PM EST
    he did so much better in January. She didn't make a push for raising money from small donors online until mid February.

    Interesting poll notes (5.00 / 2) (#17)
    by CognitiveDissonance on Sat Mar 01, 2008 at 12:43:36 AM EST
    The notes to the Pew Center poll that Jeralyn mentioned in the update has some interesting notes. Here is something very telling:

    Overall, 20% of white Democratic voters say they would vote for McCain if Obama is the Democratic nominee. That is twice the percentage of white Democrats who say they would support McCain in a Clinton-McCain matchup. Older Democrats (ages 65 and older), lower-income and less educated Democrats also would support McCain at higher levels if Obama rather than Clinton is the party's nominee.

    I've seen this same note in a number of other polls, which belies what Obama keeps claiming about all of Hillary's voters supporting him if he gets the nomination. I know from talking to many people that won't be so. Older people in particular don't want a complete neophyte in control of the country, even if they have to hold their nose and vote for McCain. There is also the disturbing tendency of many Obama supporters to throw women and older voters under the bus that doesn't sit well. There is also a lot of anger at the way Florida and Michigan have been treated. I don't see a pretty road ahead of us if Obama is the nominee, and I haven't even mentioned how the press will turn against him if that happens.

    So if Clinton win OH by 8 points (none / 0) (#1)
    by riddlerandy on Fri Feb 29, 2008 at 10:16:54 PM EST
    and Obama wins TX by 4 points, where does that leave things?  What do the uncommitted Super Delegates and Edwards do at that point?  How does Bill Clinton retract his statement that she needs to win both states to continue to be viable?

    There will so much spinning on both sides we will all be dizzy.  

    spinning doesnt count (none / 0) (#19)
    by Tano on Sat Mar 01, 2008 at 02:09:23 AM EST
    delegates do.

    If she loses Texas, there is probably no way she could possibly avoid actually falling further behind in pledged delgates overall, for the day - given he will probably win a real blowout in VT (dont laugh, he will prob gain more on her there than he will lose relative to her in OH).

    With the pledged spread around 150 or so now, if she falls further back, then it seems impossible for her to be close even if she got the FL and MI delegates somehow.
    She is only up 40 or so by now in superdels. There would have to be massive movement to her of superdels for any prayer, and that just would not happen. Not after him beating her in TX.


    New Rasmussen Poll (none / 0) (#2)
    by fuzzyone on Fri Feb 29, 2008 at 10:18:43 PM EST
    Hillary 47
    Obama 45

    Obama 48
    Hillary 44

    Trend lines are bad for her in both states

    Major caveat:  I think a lot of the pollsters are baffled as to what the turnout is going to look like so I don't know how much any of this means.  Presumably the trend lines mean something, but I have no idea how much.

    I detest not being able to see crosstabs (none / 0) (#4)
    by RalphB on Fri Feb 29, 2008 at 10:30:38 PM EST
    Unless (none / 0) (#6)
    by flyerhawk on Fri Feb 29, 2008 at 10:41:36 PM EST
    you like the results.

    No even if I don't like (none / 0) (#9)
    by RalphB on Fri Feb 29, 2008 at 11:05:48 PM EST
    the results, I still like to know where the data came from.  :-)

    turnout (none / 0) (#15)
    by bigbay on Sat Mar 01, 2008 at 12:16:24 AM EST
    I really think it's about Hispanic turnout in Texas. She needs it at 40% or so to win , which would be shocking.

    I don't think the Obama supporters realize that (none / 0) (#3)
    by athyrio on Fri Feb 29, 2008 at 10:25:54 PM EST
    if Hillary drops out, the GOP and media will turn their guns fully on Obama and it won't be pretty...You might need Hillary as the buffer....Think about it....

    I'd rather have her as a defender if I were him. (none / 0) (#13)
    by halstoon on Fri Feb 29, 2008 at 11:41:25 PM EST
    If the poll of polls is not off topic.... (none / 0) (#5)
    by Oje on Fri Feb 29, 2008 at 10:32:58 PM EST
    I wish they had demographics included in the Fox  report. I have been clicking to review the pollster.com polls for Ohio and for Texas, and firms like ARG, SUSA, and Rasmussen are projecting that 55%-60% of primary voters in Texas and Ohio will be under the age 50.

    The exit polls for 2008 consistently show that voters under 49 hardly amount to 40% in state after state. Here is New Mexico (37%)and Louisiana  (42%). State after state is like this, including the comparable Florida. The highest voter turnout among the under 50 crowd is California, at 50%, but Texas is not nearly the college/university state that California is (and Hillary competed among youth there).

    I find it problematic that these polls are oversampling or overweighting sample of the under 50 voters (who favor Obama) by something like 25% to 50%, while then undersampling or underweighting the over 50 voters (who favor Clinton) by something like 20% to 33%). That kind of miscalculation can easily produce a 5-10 percentage point swing to Obama and from Clinton.

    An explanation from.... (none / 0) (#7)
    by Oje on Fri Feb 29, 2008 at 10:49:15 PM EST
    Pollster.com says that SUSA does not use voter weights, just census weights.

    "Keep in mind that SurveyUSA's approach to likely voter modeling is comparable to that used by Iowa's Ann Selzer, in that they do not make arbitrary assumptions about the demographic composition of the likely electorate. As SurveyUSA's Jay Leve explains, they "weight the overall universe of Texas adults to U.S. census" demographic estimates, then they select "likely voters" based on screen questions and allow their demographics to "fall where they may."

    So, it is their likely voter model that overestimates participation by people under 50, and underestimates participation by people over 50. That does not explain the other polls though that have the same overestimate (unless they have adopted the SUSA model because of its previous accuracy).


    Not sure what difference it makes (none / 0) (#18)
    by Maggie on Sat Mar 01, 2008 at 12:44:47 AM EST
    but you need to factor in the demographics of the state in question before drawing conclusions about whether a given age-group is 'over-sampled'.  Texas is a relatively young state.  I don't know if that's enough to account for the difference you are pointing to, but you need to bear it in mind.  (Florida, by contrast, is relatively old).

    Zogby's latest poll from Texas (none / 0) (#20)
    by diplomatic on Sat Mar 01, 2008 at 03:34:56 AM EST
    According to Zogby the dart thrower, Hillary may have stopped Obama's momentum in Texas for now, with a "strong" day yesterday that has her making up some ground.

    Here is an excerpt:

    Clinton had a big day Friday in the Zogby call center, leading Obama by double-digits in the Texas survey. She retains a significant lead among Hispanic voters there, a key demographic in the Democratic primary.


    The latest poll shows:

    Clinton 43%
    Obama   45%

    Previous poll was showing:
    Clinton 42%
    Obama   48%

    trending Hillary...

    the real Ohio numbers (none / 0) (#21)
    by p lukasiak on Sat Mar 01, 2008 at 07:22:41 AM EST
    the Ohio Fox poll cited above shows that Hillary has a 38% to 31% lead among "mind made up" voters, A one point lead among "leaning" voters (7% to 6%) with 16% for others/undecided.

    The number from the latest fox poll in texas, where they have Obama up by three points (48% to 45%), shows them tied (at 37%) among "mind made up" voters, and a two point lead for Obama among leaners (10% to 8%) with 7% for others/undecided.

    In other words, while both states remain up for grabs, Hillary's lead in Ohio is far more "real" than Obama's lead in Texas.  

    The problem is (none / 0) (#22)
    by andrewwm on Sat Mar 01, 2008 at 08:09:53 AM EST
    she has to win both states. A small-medium win in Ohio and a loss to Obama in Texas (even a squeaker) and she's done, no question about it.

    We'll see (none / 0) (#23)
    by Marvin42 on Sat Mar 01, 2008 at 09:00:13 AM EST
    Honestly I no longer pretend to know, or listen to anyone who pretends to know, what will happen tomorrow in this race. And I am saying that regardless of who is ahead, whether I like it or not, etc.

    Only delegates matter ... (none / 0) (#24)
    by cymro on Sat Mar 01, 2008 at 10:12:22 AM EST
    ... not states. And until one candidate has a plurality, the race will continue. There is no reason for either candidate to withdraw before the superdelegates votes are actually counted, which will not happen until the convention, probably after the ticket has been worked out.

    Other arguments are just spin.