Mason Dixon PA Poll: Clinton 48 Obama 43

By Big Tent Democrat, Section Elections 2008
Posted on Sun Apr 20, 2008 at 08:28:04 AM EST
Tags: (all tags)

Share This: Digg!

By Big Tent Democrat

The McClatchy Newspapers, MSNBC and Pittsburgh Post-Gazette poll conducted by Mason Dixon polls PA at 48-43 Clinton. This is similar to M-D's Ohio poll, which had Clinton up 4. Clinton won Ohio by 10.

Key finding - "Obama pulled just 33 percent of the white vote, but 83 percent of the black vote." Roughly using my SUSA conversion calculation, this gets me to a 56-44 Clinton win.

Chuck Todd's take:

So what happens on Tuesday? Well, let's take a look at the undecided vote. Going inside the poll's demographics, one finds the highest undec. totals in the more rural parts of the state; that's not good news for Obama. In the so-called "T" region of the state (i.e., almost everything between Philly and Pittsburgh), Clinton leads 51-37 with 11% undecided; this is one of the few demographic groups sporting double-digit undecided.

. . . So while the poll shows Clinton with a narrow lead (and arguably a narrowing lead), the clues inside the numbers indicate this is her race to lose and that her lead could expand. Should this race end up as close as this poll indicates (i.e. 5 points or less), then this means many of these undec. potential Clinton voters decided to stay home; If the come to the polls, she could see her lead climb to over 5 points. . . .

< HuffPo Clinton/Move On Report Comes Under Fire | Electability Again >

Legal

Nothing on this site should be construed as legal advice. TalkLeft does not give legal advice.

TalkLeft is not responsible for and often disagrees with material posted in the comments section. Read at your own risk.

TalkLeft's DMCA Infringement Notice Policy

Mason Dixon PA Poll: Clinton 48 Obama 43 | 69 comments (69 topical)

Readers Must Login or Create an Account to Comment

Also, Hillary might get (5.00 / 1) (#18)
by andgarden on Sun Apr 20, 2008 at 09:02:53 AM EST

a bumber croup of delegates with so much of the white vote. This will be the impact of the Republican racial gerrymander.

Can you talk about that more. (none / 0) (#20)
by Big Tent Democrat on Sun Apr 20, 2008 at 09:04:23 AM EST

I keep hearing that there will not be a big delegate swing. OF course it comes from the usual suspects so I am skeptical.


Essentially, Democrats (5.00 / 3) (#25)
by andgarden on Sun Apr 20, 2008 at 09:17:03 AM EST

like 40% black districts, and Republicans like 60% black districts, for obvious reasons. Well, in 2001, the Republicans had exclusive control over the current map.

District 1 is about 60% black, and district 2 is about 50% black. other than that, only districts 13 and 14 have appreciable black populations, but no where near a majority. You can get the exact figures for all o the districts here.

I don't remember exactly how many delegates each district gets, but Hillary is pretty close to the 2/3 mark in lots of them. Assuming the demographics hold.


Pennsylvania should be like Texas (none / 0) (#42)
by solon on Sun Apr 20, 2008 at 09:58:54 AM EST

According to CQ Politics the delegate allocations for Pennsylvania seems like Texas, where the congressional districts in which Senator Obama will win will be worth more than the districts Senator Clinton will win. CQ Politics argues that Clinton will only net 3 more than Senator Obama from the Congressional Districts. In considering all of the delegates from Pennsylvania, Clinton may net 25 from the four types of delegates (congressional districts, at large, PLEO, and Supers) in the state.

But, it is unlikely Clinton will make her case to the Super Delegates through the pledged delegates, just the popular vote.


I suspect that in many of those districts (5.00 / 1) (#47)
by andgarden on Sun Apr 20, 2008 at 10:08:46 AM EST

Hillary will get one more delegate than CQ predicts. With barely any blacks, she stands a very good chance of hitting 65% in every district west of Paoli, with the exception of 14, which is inner city Pittsburgh.


: The remaning questions (none / 0) (#57)
by solon on Sun Apr 20, 2008 at 10:46:28 AM EST

revolve around how many people vote on Tuesday and what for whom will the new Democrats (those who registered this year) vote.
It will be very surprising if Obama wins, those these factors may adjust margin of victory for Senator CLinton.
As for the proportional design, it seems that in Penn. and Texas, the goal is to reward those who vote Democrat election after election. it certainly leads to a few surprises.

Another reason to change (none / 0) (#46)
by RalphB on Sun Apr 20, 2008 at 10:07:11 AM EST

the silly allocation schemes used by democrats for the delegates. Allocating by population would be so much more (small d) democratic.


don't they usually explain away their... (5.00 / 2) (#26)
by white n az on Sun Apr 20, 2008 at 09:19:05 AM EST

variance in their polls to the actual results as all the late breakers go for Hillary?

OK, then a whole lot of late breakers will have broken for Hillary as long as you ignore Survey USA who probably has had this right all along.

: Survey USA (none / 0) (#31)
by nell on Sun Apr 20, 2008 at 09:24:25 AM EST

Are they planning to release one last poll before the primary?

I went to the Hillary Campaign Stop (5.00 / 5) (#37)
by Mrwirez on Sun Apr 20, 2008 at 09:33:33 AM EST

last night. In the POURING DOWN RAIN at 10:00pm in Mckeesport PA. There was probably 3000-4000 people, soaked to the bone. Most of the over 65+ people had left. It was a lot of women, white men, and Penn State at Mckeesport campus younger people. Amazingly in a town like Mckeesport only a handful of minorities. The list of politicians speaking was amazing though. Governor Ed Rendell, Allegheny County Executive-Dan Onorato (The County Pittsburgh is in), long time Congressman Jack Murtha, Lieutenant Governor Catherine Baker Knoll. Hillary was pumped up, even after her long day and the weather conditions, she came out to shake our hands. Nothing like a political rally, we really had a ball.....

GOOOOO Hillary!!

: GOOOOO Hillary! (5.00 / 1) (#39)
by Militarytracy on Sun Apr 20, 2008 at 09:37:33 AM EST

I predict that Hillary will win by 10+ (none / 0) (#1)
by myiq2xu on Sun Apr 20, 2008 at 08:31:24 AM EST

because the OFB are yammering that she needs to win by 20.

They only set the bar that high because they are worried she will get close to 15 points as a winning margin.

My feeling is "run up the score Hillary - remove all doubt."

: Margin (none / 0) (#43)
by Athena on Sun Apr 20, 2008 at 10:01:43 AM EST

I've had a gut sense of 12-13 points.

Polls (none / 0) (#2)
by Dave B on Sun Apr 20, 2008 at 08:36:30 AM EST

The only poll I care about is the one on Tuesday. I don't like getting my hopes high, so I'll choose to believe it's close...

On another note, I can't believe how Axelrod can with a straight face be so negative while claiming that he's being positive. Glad at least Tim called him on it. Axelrod gives me the willies.

the polls interest me (none / 0) (#5)
by miguelito on Sun Apr 20, 2008 at 08:47:01 AM EST

only in their patterns. We've all noticed how the polls are so "off" this primary. I think it must have something to do with the Rove style campaign and the MSM attack on the Clinton campaign. My feeling is that when she is up, and expected to win, the polls have come out and said he was up, winning by couple points or constantly gaining. I just think of Cali, TX, OH, NH and quite a few others. Polls make news, and when people see him gaining, the might see momentum and try to join a winning team or movement. The false polls are at least trying to perpetuate themselves. That or I need one of those shiny hats.


Yeah. (none / 0) (#8)
by rooge04 on Sun Apr 20, 2008 at 08:50:21 AM EST

The whole "bandwagon" effect. People hop on the winning team if the polls show him/her winning. I've seen it happen every time with this primary. NH, CA, NV, TX, OH, and now PA.


Bandwagon (none / 0) (#22)
by Kathy on Sun Apr 20, 2008 at 09:13:45 AM EST

explains why people tell surveyors they think Obama will win, but believe Clinton would be the better candidate.

His whole campaign is built on sand. OH, TX, PA...let the waves come crashing down!


: Is that what the exit polls showed? (none / 0) (#51)
by IndiDemGirl on Sun Apr 20, 2008 at 10:26:25 AM EST

I thought it was the opposite?

I am sorry (none / 0) (#21)
by magisterludi on Sun Apr 20, 2008 at 09:08:27 AM EST

but he does look a bit like Snidely Whiplash.


: Or reaching back a little further.... (none / 0) (#36)
by Pianobuff on Sun Apr 20, 2008 at 09:32:27 AM EST

He does resemble the carpetbagger in "Gone With the Wind", no?

Axelrod = Mark Penn (none / 0) (#40)
by Mrwirez on Sun Apr 20, 2008 at 09:46:17 AM EST

I really dislike both of them.


My prediction (none / 0) (#3)
by andgarden on Sun Apr 20, 2008 at 08:39:06 AM EST

There is no scenario where Obama can break 45% of the vote overall.

I agree (none / 0) (#4)
by Big Tent Democrat on Sun Apr 20, 2008 at 08:42:05 AM EST

I have been doing the math on the demos and I am now hard pressed to how he keeps it within 5.

My floor now is 8 for Clinton.


Funny you should say that (none / 0) (#6)
by andgarden on Sun Apr 20, 2008 at 08:47:33 AM EST

because I've had 9 points in the back of my mind as the number below which Hillary will probably have to get out of the race.


Man you two luv the game (none / 0) (#9)
by Militarytracy on Sun Apr 20, 2008 at 08:51:11 AM EST

I wish I had that sort of fascination with it all because sometimes this stuff just makes me feel tired. Worst president ever! Husband in Iraq! Grueling primary, but reading the "figurings" of you two does at least distract me.


The game has become simple (none / 0) (#10)
by Big Tent Democrat on Sun Apr 20, 2008 at 08:52:31 AM EST

The demos drive everything.


How come they didn't drive us out of (none / 0) (#13)
by Militarytracy on Sun Apr 20, 2008 at 08:54:11 AM EST

Iraq ;)? Different vehicle?


They did help reelect GWB. . . (none / 0) (#16)
by andgarden on Sun Apr 20, 2008 at 08:55:50 AM EST

: funny kid (none / 0) (#34)
by Militarytracy on Sun Apr 20, 2008 at 09:27:57 AM EST

Because The Pols Decided To Go Against The Polls n (none / 0) (#17)
by MO Blue on Sun Apr 20, 2008 at 08:57:29 AM EST

BTD-- (none / 0) (#23)
by Kathy on Sun Apr 20, 2008 at 09:14:42 AM EST

what's the top end of Obama's white vote? There was a discussion about it the other day, and then I got distracted and forgot where it was. I thought O had never gotten over 40% of the white vote except in WI. How wrong was I?


Very wrong (none / 0) (#24)
by Big Tent Democrat on Sun Apr 20, 2008 at 09:16:47 AM EST

In Iowa, CA, Virginia and many other states, Obama WON the white vote.

In MOST states, ESPECIALLY the big contested states, Obama's white voter ceiling has been in the 35-38%.

He has gone as low as 27% among white Dems (in Ohio.)


Correction (none / 0) (#27)
by Big Tent Democrat on Sun Apr 20, 2008 at 09:19:31 AM EST

Hillary won white in CA by 46-45.


And there aren't enough latte liberals (5.00 / 1) (#28)
by andgarden on Sun Apr 20, 2008 at 09:21:06 AM EST

in PA or IN for that to happen again.


: Nope (none / 0) (#52)
by IndiDemGirl on Sun Apr 20, 2008 at 10:29:04 AM EST

But of course I'm not a latte liberal, and my husband and I will be voting for Obama in Indiana in the primary. Of course we will vote for Hillary in the GE if she is the nominee.

Also (none / 0) (#30)
by Big Tent Democrat on Sun Apr 20, 2008 at 09:21:57 AM EST

Obama has depended on white independents for the bulk of his white vote. White dems have never voted by more than 35% for him.


35% cap on white voters (5.00 / 1) (#33)
by Kathy on Sun Apr 20, 2008 at 09:27:35 AM EST

means that closed primaries are an even bigger problem for him.

Someone, somewhere, has to be looking at these numbers with a cold eye and should be coming to the realization that Obama has a huge electability problem. BTD, you pointed this out when Miss. confirmed the demographics. All of the positive media in the world is not going to change this. Do you really think that Obama could surmount this cap in the ge against McCain?

If Clinton has shown one thing to us this primary season, it's that she keeps fighting no matter what. Even with the press in full force against her, she still keeps popping back up.


I would bet he does (none / 0) (#62)
by Mrwirez on Sun Apr 20, 2008 at 11:34:27 AM EST

NOT get 30% of the white vote here in PA. I am in the electricians union and I know of only three Obama supporters on a job site of 1000 construction workers. In Fact the white people I know around Pittsburgh are mad as hell at him and voting Hillary. That lint flicking amongst other things has just not resonated well here. He really does seem like a black snob. PA dems are mostly blue collar working class, for the most part. I TRULY believe Hillary by 14%. I am no expert though.


: union (none / 0) (#66)
by bigbay on Sun Apr 20, 2008 at 12:07:07 PM EST

you should post more...we don't get much 1st hand blue collar perspective on the blogs

well, you don't have to say "very" wrong (none / 0) (#32)
by Kathy on Sun Apr 20, 2008 at 09:25:24 AM EST

maybe slightly wrong? Would it kill you to sugar coat a little?

Okay, but, PA is a contested state, so saying that O has a white voter problem in contested states would be accurate, right? And, as we know, the contested states are the key states to win the election, ergo...

(and that's what I meant before when I was wrong, so now I am right. Haha!)


Yes (none / 0) (#35)
by Big Tent Democrat on Sun Apr 20, 2008 at 09:29:21 AM EST

Even more than that, in Ohio, the state most like PA imo, Obama lost white Dems by 70-27.

IF it is that bad, clinton wins by 20.


: from your lips to PA's ears (none / 0) (#38)
by Kathy on Sun Apr 20, 2008 at 09:34:03 AM EST

Ha. You had best (none / 0) (#49)
by oculus on Sun Apr 20, 2008 at 10:16:52 AM EST

look elsewhere for sugarcoating.


but-but-but... (none / 0) (#50)
by Kathy on Sun Apr 20, 2008 at 10:23:06 AM EST

he loves me best!


Andgarden wins, hands down. (none / 0) (#53)
by oculus on Sun Apr 20, 2008 at 10:40:26 AM EST

Of course, he "gets" all that polling data stuff.


if you cut me... (5.00 / 1) (#54)
by Kathy on Sun Apr 20, 2008 at 10:41:37 AM EST

do I not spread rumors that you are an angry hermaphrodite?


: Is that the same as a centaur? Seen way (5.00 / 1) (#55)
by oculus on Sun Apr 20, 2008 at 10:43:07 AM EST

way too many of them here.

heh (none / 0) (#14)
by andgarden on Sun Apr 20, 2008 at 08:54:48 AM EST

So, below 9 (none / 0) (#11)
by MichaelGale on Sun Apr 20, 2008 at 08:52:37 AM EST

ok. thanks


Win (none / 0) (#56)
by sas on Sun Apr 20, 2008 at 10:45:45 AM EST

by 9 and get out of the race?

So winning by 9 is losing?

What spin. Winning is winning is winning.


Yes, winning is winning (none / 0) (#59)
by IndiDemGirl on Sun Apr 20, 2008 at 11:13:07 AM EST

If she wins by 1 vote, she can claim she won the state. But she is behind in the pledged delegate count the margins are important. She can't win states by 5/6 points and catch up with him. That isn't spin, that's reality. Plus in the remaining primaries there are states that look like wins for Obama.


True (none / 0) (#61)
by cmugirl on Sun Apr 20, 2008 at 11:22:16 AM EST

But right now, he looks to only win 2 of the last 10.

That doesn't say strength to me.


: That may be true (none / 0) (#63)
by IndiDemGirl on Sun Apr 20, 2008 at 11:44:04 AM EST

but "strength" is another argument - one that will be debated by the supers. I was just making the simple point about the margins of wins being important when trying to play "catch up."
And I assume you mean NC and OR for his column. Though I wouldn't be too sure who will win Montana, SD and is it Nebraska. I haven't heard too much about them. Even my state Indiana, while certainly more likely for Clinton, isn't a sure thing for her. And again, ONLY speaking of the pledged delegates, she'll need a big margin in Indiana to offset NC.
Again, the supers will decide on strength after all the primaries are done and they may agree It sure is going to be exciting, yes?

Is that enough (none / 0) (#7)
by MichaelGale on Sun Apr 20, 2008 at 08:49:12 AM EST

or is the 8 too little? Does she have to win by double digits still?

What I want you to do is tell me that a win is good even if it is single digits.


8 is a floor (5.00 / 1) (#12)
by Big Tent Democrat on Sun Apr 20, 2008 at 08:53:11 AM EST

As I said above, my rough SUSA calculation makes it 56-44.


Thanks (5.00 / 1) (#15)
by MichaelGale on Sun Apr 20, 2008 at 08:55:16 AM EST

I'll think the 56-44 too. :-)


: I like even numbers so I am going (5.00 / 3) (#19)
by FlaDemFem on Sun Apr 20, 2008 at 09:04:07 AM EST

to root for 60-40..hehehe. Wouldn't that be a blow to Obama's ego?? Personally, I hope she grinds him into dust...figuratively speaking, of course.

Q to BTD re college vote (none / 0) (#29)
by Munibond on Sun Apr 20, 2008 at 09:21:09 AM EST

I keep hearing/reading that there is a large student population in PA that accounts for much of the last minute Dem voter registration. Do you think this is insignificant from a polling standpoint or might it be something that differentiates PA from OH?

From (none / 0) (#58)
by sas on Sun Apr 20, 2008 at 10:50:08 AM EST

what I have read here in PA, the student vote is about even clinton/obama. He doesn't have that vote by much if at all.


: Wouldn't that indicate she (none / 0) (#68)
by waldenpond on Sun Apr 20, 2008 at 01:11:07 PM EST

is cutting in to one of his key demographics? One of the reasons I can't wait to see the Penn results is to see if either cuts in to the others demographics. Obama is out trying to meet the elderly and working class (ignoring his base a little). Clinton staying with her base and trying for the youth at Universities etc.
Two days of nail biting....tick,tock :)

How will these demographics play in the GE? (none / 0) (#41)
by barryluda on Sun Apr 20, 2008 at 09:49:12 AM EST

When BTD says:

Obama has depended on white independents for the bulk of his white vote. White dems have never voted by more than 35% for him.

I gather this means that white dems prefer Clinton over Obama while white independents are more favorable toward Obama. In the GE, how might this translate should Obama win the nomination?

I can't imagine that the white dems -- other than those on this blog :) -- will go with McCain over Obama. At least I'd like to think that won't happen. Or, as I keep wondering, since the demos are driving the democratic primary, how will they (or will they) drive the GE? If they do, does that mean -- as my father fears -- that Obama doesn't have a chance since all of the repubs go for McCain in a GE, while the same demos that have the democrats split between Clinton and Obama will drive a split in the democrats between Obama and McCain?

the problem will not be (none / 0) (#44)
by Kathy on Sun Apr 20, 2008 at 10:03:44 AM EST

dems voting McCain, but dems who stay home. This is the same thing that hurt both Kerry and Gore: they could not energize the base.


: Dems who stay home.... (none / 0) (#69)
by Rainsong on Sun Apr 20, 2008 at 04:40:01 PM EST

.. I call them members of the Great American Apathy Party, with a strong "Rather Watch The Game" faction dominating it, but they never got up enough energy to register for it, as they were too busy watching the game.

Polls have indicate that 23% of Clinton (none / 0) (#45)
by MO Blue on Sun Apr 20, 2008 at 10:05:14 AM EST

supporters will not support Obama in the GE. 18% of Obama supporters wouldn't back Clinton. There was a poll a few months back indicating a third of each candidates supporters wouldn't back the nominee if it was their nominee.


Independents (none / 0) (#48)
by RalphB on Sun Apr 20, 2008 at 10:09:49 AM EST

probably will have no problem voting for McCain. They're almost his natural constituency, by reputation at any rate. Depending on Independents to elect a democrat this cycle is a very bad idea.


: Quite a few polls (5.00 / 1) (#60)
by americanincanada on Sun Apr 20, 2008 at 11:16:55 AM EST

have shown that against McCain, Obama bleeds indys.

Too many demos Obama looses (none / 0) (#64)
by DaleA on Sun Apr 20, 2008 at 11:45:23 AM EST

The groups that do not find Obama attractive seem to be: Latinos, Asians, Pacific Islanders, Native Americans, Gays and Lesbians, white non college, working class white. With the Wright revelations, probably add Jews to the list. How can a Dem who is not strong with these groups get elected?

: Hope! (none / 0) (#65)
by Kathy on Sun Apr 20, 2008 at 12:05:42 PM EST

After reading Chuck Todd (none / 0) (#67)
by Lil on Sun Apr 20, 2008 at 12:51:47 PM EST

I found myself wondering if anyone really believes there will be less than 2 million voters, or am I just buying into all the hype about the excitement building for Tuesday? Also, is it automatic that the more turnout the more it favors Hillary, or would it favor Obama?