home

SUSA NC Poll: Obama By 5; Ras NC Poll: Obama By 14

In the latest SUSA NC poll, Obama's lead is down to 5 (More on the flip on the SUSA poll. In the latest Ras NC poll, Barack Obama maintains a healthy lead, though down from his previous 23 point margin. The demographics are the political destiny again:

The demographic results in North Carolina are similar to the dynamics seen nationally and in most primaries—Clinton leads by fifteen points among White voters while Obama leads 80% to 11% among African-Americans. Clinton does well among White Women and older voters while Obama leads among those under 65.

We can figure out the crosstabs based on Ras' turnout model:

Fifty-six percent (56%) of survey respondents were women and 44% men. Sixty-four percent (64%) were White, 33% African-American, and 3% some other racial heritage. Ten percent (10%) were under 30 and 55% over 65.

By my math, Ras has whites splitting 52-37 Clinton, assuming a 50/50 split among the 3% of the vote that is neither white nor African American. That leaves 11% of the white vote undecided and 9% of the A-A vote undecided.

On the SUSA poll, it is about white flight from Obama:

Based on polling results, white voters are key. Since January, Clinton had led among Carolina whites by 14, 19, 17, 22 and 23 points. Now by 31 points.

More from the crosstabs - Clinton leads with whites by 61-30 (61% of the vote), Obama leads with A-As, 88-11 (33% of the vote).

By Big Tent Democrat

< N.C. Governor Mike Easley Endorses Hillary Clinton | Clinton Going On Bill O'Reilly's Show >
  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft


  • Display: Sort:
    Survey USA shows NC closing (5.00 / 4) (#2)
    by andgarden on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 10:39:03 AM EST
    No crosstabs, but WTVD sez:

    With one week until votes are counted in the May Primary the 10-point lead that Barack Obama has had for two months is halved, to now 5 points - Obama 49%, Clinton 44%, according to SurveyUSA's 7th tracking poll, conducted ABC11 Eyewitness News.

    In the last four polls, over the past two months, Obama has led by 10, 8, 10, and 9 points. Based on polling results, white voters are key. Since January, Clinton had led among Carolina whites by 14, 19, 17, 22 and 23 points. Now by 31 points. In the Triangle, Clinton is up 9 points, week-on-week; Obama is down 3; a net swing of 12 points to Clinton.

    Among unaffiliated voters, Clinton has overtaken Obama for the first time in 2008, though the difference is small and within the sub-group's margin of sampling error. The two tie among moderates. Obama leads slightly among liberals. Clinton leads slightly among conservatives.

    44% Clinton
    49% Obama
    4% Other


    3% Undecided


    If that (none / 0) (#6)
    by Ga6thDem on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 10:43:21 AM EST
    number for the triangle is right, then Obama is in trouble in NC.

    Parent
    I don't believe it, actually (5.00 / 1) (#9)
    by andgarden on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 10:44:12 AM EST
    but if it's true, then it means that latte liberals are deciding that Obama could be unelectable.

    Parent
    even Latte drinkers can get a clue (5.00 / 1) (#31)
    by TeresaInPa on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 10:55:22 AM EST
    if you wack them over the head often enough.

    Parent
    Eyyyyy ... no need to smack the family here ... (5.00 / 1) (#62)
    by Ellie on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 11:07:47 AM EST
    I don't mean the relations but the lattini.

    This campaign really IS getting ugly!

    Parent

    Why don't you believe it? (none / 0) (#27)
    by LarryInNYC on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 10:53:33 AM EST
    My concern would be small sample size in such a (geographically) small part of the state.  Otherwise I don't see why this info wouldn't be as reliable as any other SUSA results.

    Parent
    Mostly sample size (none / 0) (#35)
    by andgarden on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 10:56:57 AM EST
    I'll have to wait for crosstabs, but I think (5.00 / 1) (#51)
    by thomphool on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 11:03:27 AM EST
    you're misreading that part.  It's not saying that Clinton is up 9 on Obama in the research triangle, it's saying she is up 9 on her previous numbers in the area, and Obama is down 3 from where he was last week, for a net swing of 12 points in her favor.  Last week, Obama was up 54-34 in Raleigh region in their tabs.  I think this is saying they now have it at 51-43.  We'll have to wait and see though.  That region is also 50% of the vote in their turnout model, so sample will be about 350 (if their sample is the same size as before).

    Parent
    Still (5.00 / 1) (#73)
    by AnninCA on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 11:16:43 AM EST
    That's the trend we saw in PA.  Her numbers on college educated and beyond 4 year college really took a leap.

    That's cutting into his base.

    THAT is fabulous news.

    Parent

    Thanks (none / 0) (#92)
    by Ga6thDem on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 11:26:16 AM EST
    for the reply. What you are saying seems more likely.

    Parent
    The story is off their website (none / 0) (#98)
    by Jeralyn on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 11:29:58 AM EST
    link doesn't work.
    I can't find anyone else reporting it.

    Parent
    It is a real number (none / 0) (#116)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 11:43:55 AM EST
    They jumped the gun in posting it.

    I'll e-mail you the page.

    Parent

    Yep (none / 0) (#15)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 10:45:39 AM EST
    SUSA Crosstabs (none / 0) (#23)
    by The Maven on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 10:49:40 AM EST
    are available, however, for their last North Carolina poll released a week ago, so it's probably reasonable to figure that the compositional makeup of their polling respondents is very similar, since SUSA presumably wants to be able to compare apples to apples.

    Parent
    Kos diary on NC polls (none / 0) (#148)
    by Josey on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 12:36:30 PM EST
    doesn't even mention SUSA poll.
    His deception is shameful!


    Parent
    You go, andgarden and BTD. Where would (none / 0) (#158)
    by oculus on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 01:00:47 PM EST
    the rest of us be w/o you two?

    Parent
    I don't (5.00 / 1) (#4)
    by Ga6thDem on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 10:40:12 AM EST
    see the dates on when the poll was taken. If everyone was polled before yesterday then I would like to see a post Wright poll. Anyway, the downward trend for Obama is interesting.

    The weekend it seems (none / 0) (#12)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 10:45:19 AM EST
    before the Wright world tour? (5.00 / 1) (#61)
    by Capt Howdy on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 11:07:34 AM EST
    interesting

    Parent
    Are voters memories so short they (none / 0) (#159)
    by oculus on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 01:02:16 PM EST
    will forget what Wright previously sd. and buy his "it's just politics° schtick?

    Parent
    This poll does not reflect (5.00 / 1) (#5)
    by litigatormom on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 10:42:47 AM EST
    the latest Wright flap, or the Easely endorsement. Not sure when a poll will come out that reflects these events.

    Still, its a big lead for her to overcome in just a week.

    SUSA has it within 5 (none / 0) (#11)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 10:45:02 AM EST
    Yes (5.00 / 1) (#18)
    by litigatormom on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 10:47:05 AM EST
    My prior comment was before you added the SUSA numbers.  A five point lead, according to the most reliable polling outfit, that doesn't reflect Wright or Easely, is a very disturbing development for Obama.

    Parent
    I don't see how he loses (5.00 / 4) (#22)
    by andgarden on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 10:49:22 AM EST
    NC is to Obama as PA was to Hillary, and then some. It's a question about margins now.

    Parent
    Hey, I just said that on another comment! (5.00 / 6) (#26)
    by Marvin42 on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 10:50:35 AM EST
    You stealing my thoughts? Give them back! :)

    Parent
    Those numbers look good for Hillary! (5.00 / 1) (#8)
    by Prabhata on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 10:43:59 AM EST
    She starts close to 30 (SUSA) or 33 (Rass) in the negative because of the AA vote. The movement is the most important right now, and it's going in the right direction.  It would be a great accomplishment if she can cut into the AA vote.

    She will not (5.00 / 1) (#13)
    by andgarden on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 10:45:20 AM EST
    The only way she can win is if NC produces MS demographics. I find that unlikely.

    Parent
    I didn't say she would take majority AA (5.00 / 1) (#28)
    by Prabhata on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 10:54:05 AM EST
    If she can increase her percent of AA vote, it would be a great accomplishment.  She's losing the AA vote in the 80 - 90 percent.

    Parent
    She won't get the vote but (5.00 / 1) (#32)
    by Jim J on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 10:55:36 AM EST
    I think the AA vote will be slightly depressed in NC. We already saw it happen somewhat in PA.

    Parent
    I dunno. . . (5.00 / 2) (#38)
    by LarryInNYC on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 10:58:11 AM EST
    the media frenzy over Wright, if viewed as an attack on African Americans in general (as Wright is trying to make it) could have the effect of energizing the black vote as well.

    Parent
    When you are getting 80-90% already (5.00 / 1) (#54)
    by BarnBabe on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 11:04:14 AM EST
    There is not a whole lot more to energize.

    Parent
    Not matter of increasing. . . (5.00 / 1) (#65)
    by LarryInNYC on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 11:08:39 AM EST
    his percent of the black vote but rather increasing the percentage of the black vote in the total turnout.  At 80 percent of the African American vote, a net 5% change in the black / white voting ratio gives Obama a net of several points of margin.

    Parent
    OK, see your point (5.00 / 1) (#70)
    by BarnBabe on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 11:12:38 AM EST
    Being in Penna, when the regerstration stopped a month before the primary, no new voters could be added. You are saying there could be new voters to the polls as you can still register in NC on the same day. BTW, why can't these states all coordinate a bit more to eliminate confusion.

    Parent
    Doesn't even need to be. . . (none / 0) (#83)
    by LarryInNYC on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 11:22:18 AM EST
    new registrants -- it could simply be an increased turnout among those already registered to vote.  Primary turnout is often lower than general election turnout and if the idea begins to circulate that one needs to vote for Obama to support the black church (in Wright's formulation) that could have an energizing effect.

    Or it could depress the turnout, or (most likely) have little effect.  I'm not making a prediction -- there are few things I know less about than racial politics in North Carolina (or, really, anything at all about North Carolina).

    Parent

    State (none / 0) (#112)
    by AnninCA on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 11:41:59 AM EST
    rights.

    We're a republic, not a direct democracy.

    Parent

    I understand about State rights (none / 0) (#152)
    by BarnBabe on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 12:50:09 PM EST
    But maybe since this is a National primary, rules could be different every 4 years and then we would all be on the same page. They manage to do it for the Presidential election.

    Parent
    No (none / 0) (#157)
    by AnninCA on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 12:55:59 PM EST
    we can't.

    the media creates an aura of a direct democracy, but every single precendent and practice is absolutely does not.

    That goes for the crime situation.  It drives people nuts when one state has one standard and another has a different stand for say, "insanity defense."

    But we are a republic, not a direct Democracy.

    And there are pros and cons, of course.

    China attempted direct.  Didn't work very well.

    A republic offers real voice in a lot of ways.

    Let's not be silly and throw out the baby with the bathwater.

    We have a real history of success in resolving differences with our system.

    Let's have a bit of faith.

    Parent

    It Could Add To Turn Out (none / 0) (#64)
    by BDB on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 11:08:28 AM EST
    Which, given Obama's margins, every point up in turnout is a point up in vote.

    Parent
    LOL* (none / 0) (#76)
    by AnninCA on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 11:18:44 AM EST
    Are you known as one who quietly points out the obvious in real life?

    :)

    Parent

    on energizing the base (5.00 / 1) (#129)
    by christinep on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 11:59:00 AM EST
    Your comment about a strategic attempt to energize Obama's base in North Carolina may be spot on.  I have been fascinated by the timing of both Wright's and Clyburn's very emotional, provocative comments.  I have also been focused on what that might mean for an energized base in NC and in Indianapolis.  

    Parent
    That Could IMO Be A Two Way Street (none / 0) (#74)
    by MO Blue on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 11:16:49 AM EST
    While the Wright debacle may energize some of the community, it is possible that some of the community may be a little put off by Obama's lack of support for Wright the couple of days.  

    Parent
    That's true. . . (5.00 / 2) (#119)
    by LarryInNYC on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 11:44:48 AM EST
    I'm not trying make a prediction -- I know nothing about North Carolina.  Just trying to point out that  for every speculation that X will happen there's reasonable speculation that the opposite will happen as well.

    I see a lot of irrational exuberance from Clinton supporters in this thread and I'd guard against it at this point.

    Parent

    Agree About Exuberance (5.00 / 1) (#144)
    by MO Blue on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 12:26:31 PM EST
    I remain skeptical about the 5% poll based on demographics of the state. Lot of new variables churning around in the political environment and no one knows what the fall out will be. If Clinton can keep this from being a blow out for Obama, it is a positive even if this poll is wrong.

    Funny, HRC supporters have become more Hope and Change focused than Obama's lately only in a very different way.

    Parent

    Only works if Obama hadn't tossed Wright aside (none / 0) (#118)
    by ineedalife on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 11:44:38 AM EST
    They're voting for Obama, not Wright. Since Obama threw Wright off the cliff yesterday angry AAs might react by withholding their vote.

    Personally I think AA patience with Wright may be waning. Keep your eye on the prize. They initially rallied around Wright assuming he would go gracefully into the night. But with his refusal to play ball, he now gets what he deserves.

    Parent

    black vote and Wright (none / 0) (#143)
    by kempis on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 12:21:01 PM EST
    I don't know.... I think it's probably hard to predict Wright's effect on the AA vote. Rather than circling their wagons, a lot of Obama's AA supporters are mightily POed at Wright. And some are equally POed at Obama for getting so entangled with Wright. If the Wright business has disenchanted 15-20%, turnout could be lower than anticipated. I think it's possible that black folks' reading of Obama's "bitter/cling" remarks may have depressed  the AA vote in PA a little.  

    Remember, before Iowa, the African Americans were divided between Clinton and Obama. Electability matters. If Obama's electability seems compromised by Wright or other factors, it may be too painful for some to invest much hope that Obama will be the nominee, and therefore some of the enthusiasm for him among AA voters may be depressed. (And typing that does not make me happy. I worry about the effect on African Americans, especially the young, if Obama isn't able to convince the superdelegates that he is more electable than Hillary. That's going to be terribly painful. Of course, if Hillary can't be the nominee, that's going to be terribly painful to a lot of women, too. Either way, the Democrats are going to break hearts when they select a nominee.)

    And then, maybe the AA vote won't be depressed at all post-Wright, and I don't know what I'm talking about--always a possibility. :) It's going to be really interesting to see the exit polls in both NC and Indiana and find out what sorts of impacts the events since PA have had on the race within different groups.

    Whatever....It occurs to me today that Hillary Clinton may yet be the nominee. In fact, my original dream ticket may yet come to pass: Clinton/Obama. Oh, wouldn't it be fun to see how Pelosi dances around that one?

    :)

    Parent

    Did anyone hear about (none / 0) (#172)
    by Benjamin3 on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 03:08:59 PM EST
    the emergency e-mail the Obama camp sent out last night to it's entire list?  It said something like:  Everyone drop what you're doing and get to NC fast, by bus, plane, whatever.

    Anyway, sounds to me like they got some bad internals and went into crisis mode for NC.  If that's the case, then maybe the SUSA is for real.

    Parent

    Given some prominent African Americans (none / 0) (#162)
    by oculus on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 01:06:57 PM EST
    quit Trinity due to Wright's statements, do you think this is a likely rallying cry?

    Parent
    She will continue to close in that range (5.00 / 1) (#34)
    by andgarden on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 10:56:04 AM EST
    unless Obama drops out or some black leader (Jessie Jackson?) says loudly and publicly that Obama can't win. And I'm not even sure that would change anything.

    Parent
    Reducing (none / 0) (#42)
    by AnninCA on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 11:00:41 AM EST
    the AA vote to even 80% would help!  LOL*

    Parent
    Susa (5.00 / 1) (#14)
    by AnninCA on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 10:45:29 AM EST
    may be optimistic, but this is a horserace!  WooHoo!

    I think it will go down (5.00 / 1) (#16)
    by Saul on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 10:45:48 AM EST
    before the election.  The resurrection of the Wright controversy has not been fully factored in yet.  I think the Gallup poll will also go up for Hilary before the election.  I think NC will be not as great a victory for Obama as initially stated and I think it will be single digits.  

    I would love (5.00 / 2) (#19)
    by DaytonDem on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 10:47:29 AM EST
    to win NC, but I have read countless times that African Americans make up 38% of the Democratic primary vote. No amount of flak from Rev. Wright will take his percentage below 90% of the AA vote. He wins by 10 at least imho.

    Don't have to win (5.00 / 3) (#24)
    by Marvin42 on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 10:50:04 AM EST
    If it ends up in a 5% win for Sen Obama it will be a bad night for him. I am starting to think it is becoming his version of PA.

    Parent
    Less than 10 is a bad night (5.00 / 4) (#45)
    by BDB on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 11:01:06 AM EST
    With these demos, it would take a substantial loss among whites or some erosion in his AA base for him to win by less than double digits.   A 5% win wouldn't be merely bad, it would be terrible.  A loss would, of course, be devastating.

    Parent
    I Would Be Thrilled With Anything 10 Or Under (5.00 / 1) (#102)
    by MO Blue on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 11:33:22 AM EST
    Based on the demographics of the state it would highlight how weak his support is among demographics other than the AA community.

    Parent
    if a close political confidant (none / 0) (#120)
    by Salo on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 11:45:34 AM EST
    turns out to be lunatic (for real) a day before the poll is published--the real damage has not yet been factored in.

    Although if I were a clitnoite i'd stick with the 10% thing.

    Parent

    I am (5.00 / 1) (#131)
    by madamab on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 12:02:35 PM EST
    just biting my nails until June, personally.

    I believe Obama is unelectable no matter what happens in the primaries, so I'm not really going with any percentage. I'm praying to the Giant Green Lizard (my deity of choice) that the SD's make the right decision.

    Parent

    If he only wins NC by 5 (5.00 / 1) (#30)
    by ruffian on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 10:55:01 AM EST
    he is in deep trouble. His main argument so far has been that he gains ground as he goes on.  this would be the first definitive sign that the tide has turned.

    (I see Clinton's decisive win in PA as a sign of that too, but I know that is arguable)

    NC being "too close to call" (5.00 / 1) (#36)
    by ccpup on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 10:57:21 AM EST
    on Election Night is nothing but bad news for Obama.  It feeds into the very recent and subtle, but surprisingly present, Media narrative that his candidacy is now weakened and he's unelectable in the GE against McCain.

    Too win by 5 points or so in a State which should, by all rights, be a blowout for him doesn't in any way, shape or form help him at this point -- crunch time with the SDs paying very, very close attention -- in the race.  

    With a just barely win in NC, it becomes increasingly difficult to argue you're more electable than your opponent when you're outspending her and she still manages to prevent you making in-roads into her core demographics while taking nibbles (even bites!) out of yours.  I don't even think Axelrove could make that argument with a straight face let alone buy his own spin.

    Would not want to be in Camp Obama today.

    Too close to call (5.00 / 2) (#40)
    by Lil on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 10:59:27 AM EST
    which means the networks would call it for him within 30 seconds.

    Parent
    Does anyone know how exit polls are affected (5.00 / 1) (#124)
    by ChuckieTomato on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 11:48:55 AM EST
    by early voting? Yesterday approx. 170k people in NC had voted. How is there any way to get an accurate exit poll to even call a race like this with maybe 250-300k early votes?

    Parent
    Yes (4.00 / 1) (#49)
    by AnninCA on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 11:02:46 AM EST
    but I refuse to feel one bit sorry for him.  He shot himself in the foot.

    Why anyone with aspirations for the presidency would connect with Rezko, Ayers, Wright, et al, is simply beyond me.

    Why would he think that would fly?

    His super delegates who jumped to him too early must be red-faced right now.

    Parent

    PA was too close to call (none / 0) (#71)
    by independent voter on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 11:12:40 AM EST
    per the news shows for an hour and a half after polls closed.

    Parent
    exactly (none / 0) (#146)
    by kempis on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 12:29:28 PM EST
    ....it becomes increasingly difficult to argue you're more electable than your opponent when you're outspending her and she still manages to prevent you making in-roads into her core demographics while taking nibbles (even bites!) out of yours.

    Well-said, and, as you point out, it's important always to keep in mind at this point in the race that Obama is loaded and outspending her like crazy. Her PA was impressive, but it's purely gobsmackingly so when we consider that she was outspent, what?, 3-1? Amazing....She beat him with both hands tied behind her back. Hillary is a candidate with high negatives, baggage, no money, and bigshots like Leahy publicly calling for her to quit, and still the voters of PA clearly preferred her to Obama. Pretty awesome.

    Parent

    she's setting this up (none / 0) (#169)
    by ccpup on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 02:00:31 PM EST
    to be the Political Comeback of the Century.   Imagine the shock when -- down and out and outspent for the majority of the Primary Season with the whole DC Establishment literally screaming for her to drop out for "Party Unity" -- she ends up winning the Nomination and the Presidency!

    No worries about her ability to handle the stress of being CiC after that, that's for darn sure.

    Parent

    if 5% is real (5.00 / 3) (#39)
    by Capt Howdy on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 10:59:18 AM EST
    Clinton could win.
    get your mind around that!

    I can't believe it! (5.00 / 2) (#43)
    by pie on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 11:00:47 AM EST
    5%.  That's huge if it holds.

    I don't want to get my hopes up, but, yes, she could win.  

    Parent

    Indiana (5.00 / 1) (#55)
    by AnninCA on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 11:05:12 AM EST
    was, I thought, the race to watch because she comes from behind.  No more "She blew a 30 point lead!" storyline.

    But this......this is a real "hope and a prayer."

    Hail Mary

    And God Bless Reverend Wright.  :)

    Parent

    Hillary should run a Giants commercial in NC (5.00 / 2) (#86)
    by Manuel on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 11:22:46 AM EST
    Winning NC would be like that late pass in the Superbowl.

    Parent
    HAHAHAHAHA (5.00 / 2) (#90)
    by madamab on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 11:25:04 AM EST
    that's a great idea.

    That was one crazy SuperBowl. Never count a New Yorker out! LOL

    Parent

    Never Remind Southerners You're a New Yorker (5.00 / 3) (#103)
    by BDB on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 11:33:28 AM EST
    Not if you want to win.

    She'd be better off running a Razorbacks commercial.

    Parent

    Hmmmm... (none / 0) (#117)
    by madamab on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 11:44:22 AM EST
    guess I never thought of that. ;-)

    Parent
    Pig (none / 0) (#135)
    by AnninCA on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 12:09:51 PM EST
    sooooooooooooooieeeeeeeeeeeeee!

    (I grew up there.)  :)

    Parent

    me too (none / 0) (#166)
    by Capt Howdy on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 01:21:38 PM EST
    still have a home there

    Parent
    send it over to Hillary HQ. I'm sure they will lis (none / 0) (#149)
    by thereyougo on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 12:46:00 PM EST
    to you. They read us don't they BTD ?

    that would seem like great new slogan to counter
    Obama's new one something about a the American dream.

    Parent

    That would be amazing (5.00 / 3) (#77)
    by madamab on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 11:18:59 AM EST
    but I agree with some others that an Obama loss would be unprecedented at this point.

    Still, this has been one of the most up-and-down campaigns I've ever seen. Ya never know!


    Parent

    Oh... (5.00 / 3) (#80)
    by AnninCA on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 11:21:34 AM EST
    Frankly, a single digit loss keeps the momentum going Hillary's way.

    A slight win?  He's toast.

    She wins?

    It's over.  Bring out the champagne.

    Parent

    From your mouth (5.00 / 1) (#87)
    by madamab on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 11:24:09 AM EST
    to the DNC's ears! :-)

    Parent
    It also keeps (5.00 / 3) (#106)
    by Iphie on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 11:36:51 AM EST
    his potential gains in the popular vote down -- depending on how she does in IN, and if he wins by single digits in NC, she retains the possibility of overtaking him the popular vote by a decisive margin.

    Parent
    My brain did a little pee-pee dance of excitement (5.00 / 1) (#81)
    by Ellie on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 11:21:59 AM EST
    ... when I went there and I reeled my mind back immediately.

    Smart of HRC to lay off Wright (for now) and other Obama cluster bombs he dropped on the terrain.

    (5 pts; Wow, just wow.)

    Parent

    pee-pee dance (5.00 / 1) (#100)
    by Capt Howdy on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 11:31:31 AM EST
    coffee on the keyboard.


    Parent
    Me, too, Ellie (5.00 / 1) (#107)
    by AnninCA on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 11:36:53 AM EST
    I can tell because my posting has risen like we're chatting!  LOL*

    Man, this is fun!

    Parent

    based (none / 0) (#41)
    by Capt Howdy on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 10:59:55 AM EST
    on his past underperformance

    Parent
    my question is (5.00 / 1) (#59)
    by TeresaInPa on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 11:07:05 AM EST
    what happens if African American voters do not vote at 90 percent for Obama?  What if he loses IN and NC?  Are we going to continue to allow this race to be about supposed racism of white people?
    Personally I think the Obama camp decided to use race and it has come back to bite them in the butt.  We really need to move on from this.  White voters are not rejecting him because of race, not if they were willing to support him to begin with.
    It is very possible that people think he is not a good candidate, not ready, can't handle the pressure etc...

    but (5.00 / 1) (#68)
    by Capt Howdy on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 11:11:04 AM EST
    you can bet that will not be the CW if he loses.
    it will have been denied to him because of  his race.
    every cable news station will tell you so.

    Parent
    They key is increasing the rural vote (5.00 / 1) (#89)
    by ChuckieTomato on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 11:24:56 AM EST
    as a larger percentage of the electorate. if that happens it won't matter that AA population accounts for 38% of the dem. primary. 1.2 million independents may also vote in this primary which will help hillary

    Parent
    Maybe, maybe not (5.00 / 1) (#93)
    by andgarden on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 11:26:38 AM EST
    Historically, one of the hardest groups to turn out have been rural southern blacks. I would imagine that Obama is working on that group now.

    Parent
    which hillary is doing great with. the numbers i saw for the turnout was great for WNC and eastern NC. independents which decide late are also overwhelmingly white which should be good for hillary. if the white vote increases as a larger percentage then the AA turnout will be offset

    Parent
    and the governor's endorsement should help (none / 0) (#147)
    by kempis on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 12:35:19 PM EST
    According to info from Taylor Marsh, Mudcat Saunders says this governor is wildly popular among the bubbas. (I can say "bubbas" like Mudcat--with affection--because my people are rural Alabamians, by the way.) He's a well-liked, NASCAR-driving, huntin', fishin', rural populist whose endorsement really can sway rural whites in the state.

    Parent
    Obama (none / 0) (#138)
    by AnninCA on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 12:17:20 PM EST
    is up against the same barriers as Hillary was in attempting to win over the AA vote after SC.

    Ain't gonna happen.

    Parent

    you know I keep thinking about this (none / 0) (#153)
    by thereyougo on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 12:50:29 PM EST
    and while I know some bought the line of
    unity hope, yada yada...

    some are asking the same questions we are.

    It would be nice to have a black president but
    like GWB if we have get an idiot to replace the previous, then the choice is a no brainer. Hillary of course (-:

    Parent

    Wright hasn't helped Obama, (5.00 / 4) (#67)
    by pie on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 11:10:45 AM EST
    but I'll bet his refusal to debate is hurting him.

    Makes him look weak and not confident, something that would give voters reason to doubt his viability.

    it would not be so clear that he was (5.00 / 4) (#75)
    by TeresaInPa on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 11:17:17 AM EST
    afraid to debate if it weren't also so clear that she does much better in debates.

    Parent
    The refusal to debate (5.00 / 3) (#99)
    by madamab on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 11:30:25 AM EST
    could have contributed to the Governor's endorsement of HRC.

    I read on TalkLeft last week, I believe, that the debate would have brought in about $300,000 of income to the state.

    Parent

    what is it kos would say? (5.00 / 2) (#79)
    by sancho on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 11:20:56 AM EST
    23 point benchmark lead for Obama. Anything below 20 in NC is a clear loss for him. :)

    If Hillary was "down" 20+ points (5.00 / 1) (#82)
    by reynwrap582 on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 11:22:02 AM EST
    Then she can pull an Obama and claim a victory if she only loses by 10.  Frankly, if she does better than a 12 point spread and wins Indiana by 5 or so, I see her ending up with the nomination.  Especially if PR goes strongly her way.

    No, no, don't get your hopes up again, David.

    So... if Obama wins by less than 10%... (5.00 / 2) (#84)
    by dianem on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 11:22:29 AM EST
    ...then he loses the election, right? That was the rule that applied to PA for Clinton, it seems only fair that Obama should have to live with the same rules. It will be astonishing if Clinton can come within 5 points of Obama in NC. Two weeks ago that seemed impossible.

    Several weeks ago, Bill Clinton said that if Hillary wins NC, then she will win the primary. At the time it seemed impossible that she would win NC. Now... it doesn't seem impossible. How could the Democratic Party justify selecting Obama when his approval is so low that he can't even take NC by a significant margin?

    This poll is raising my expectations (5.00 / 1) (#96)
    by ajain on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 11:29:30 AM EST
    I am still sticking with she-needs-to-lose-by-10 meme.

    It's become Obama vs Wright (5.00 / 2) (#104)
    by ivs814 on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 11:34:26 AM EST
    I think Wright coming out like he did is a challenge to Obama for the affections of the AA and in that battle I think that it is becoming quite clear that Obama will throw anyone under the bus including the AA community.   Wright's intention may be to make AA's take a step back and wonder, what's in this for us.  Obama has delivered nothing to that constituency and has time and time again not felt the need to even show up at forums that address their concerns.  No one wants to be taken for granted; not Wright and maybe now not AA's.  

    That he came out like this before NC may be Wright's way of showing who really speaks for AA's and it's becoming quite clear that from his view from under the bus, it ain't Obama.  

    My google (5.00 / 1) (#122)
    by AnninCA on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 11:48:16 AM EST
    forays landed me in a truely African American activist site, which is now my fave.

    They aren't happy with Obama.  The latest article is "Four Years of Irrelevance."

    The article points out, rightly, that Obama never once was asked by the AA community to promise anything.

    This is a hard-nosed AA activist group, and they aren't swooning.  They know...politicians are politicians.  You get your promises up front or not at all.

    His own behavior indicates he "hoped" AA's would understand that he had to distance himself from them while still raking in 90% of the votes.

    I will always say that he blew it, really, in SC.  When he played the race card, he behaved just like Wright does from the pulpit.  He used fear as his weapon.  Michelle is less savvy, so she actually spelled it out.  Then the stories of how he got Hillary's AA SDs to jump came out, complete with tales of harassment.

    I said right then:  Stupid move.  He only had to show he was viable, and he would have gotten those votes without the club.  Now, he's turned himself into the AA candidate, with all that could bring in the future.

    And so, we're here.

    Parent

    I figured (5.00 / 2) (#127)
    by madamab on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 11:55:26 AM EST
    that this would happen.

    The article points out, rightly, that Obama never once was asked by the AA community to promise anything.

    Obama only got his high percentage of AA voters by going totally negative, racially, on HRC. I think it was a short-term solution that Axelrove hoped would gain him so many victories that she would drop out.

    She didn't, and now Obama is having to live with the consequences of his strategy.

    Parent

    The Black Agenda Report? (5.00 / 1) (#130)
    by BDB on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 11:59:28 AM EST
    An excellent site, not just for election stuff.  Good media critique and raising issues, like the mineral rape of the Congo, that aren't part of the MSM but should be.  It definitely has a viewpoint, but that's what makes it such an interesting website.

    Parent
    Black Agenda Report (none / 0) (#137)
    by AnninCA on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 12:12:51 PM EST
    http://www.blackagendareport.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=576&Itemid=1

    It's a very small blog, but obviously very activist - oriented.

    Parent

    Oh thanks....... (none / 0) (#145)
    by AnninCA on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 12:28:49 PM EST
    I'm so way not "cool."  Heck, I didn't know the pansy remark about Rocky was a big deal.

    But I liked that site.

    Maybe I'm not as "uncool" as I imagine!

    Parent

    Tavis Smiley was irked no end about his dissing (none / 0) (#109)
    by thereyougo on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 11:40:43 AM EST
    him, and instead wanted to send Michelle.

    Someone posted a story about Michelle wanting to go to a photo op having to do something with the AA community and Hillary was invited but Michelle was not allowed.

    Parent

    No! (none / 0) (#140)
    by felizarte on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 12:18:40 PM EST
    This is a validation of the correct initial strategy of Barack Obama.  He correctly assumed that he could not win the nomination by being the Black Candidate:  simple democraphic analysis.  He knew that if he were the Black Candidate, that automatically makes him Not the White Candidate.  He wanted to run Post white and black era.  But Michelle basically removed thata veneer by saying, "The black community just does not get it" and comments from some in the media and the AA community that asked, "Is he black enough?

    When Hillary won New Hamshire and So. Carolina was next, Barack had to run as the Black candidate to stop Hillary's momentum.  The outcome of the nomination was decided in So. Carolina.

    Now we are seeing the flipside of So. Carolina in North Carolina where the whites are a majority.  Obama by being touted as the black candidate basically encouraged white voters to vote their own candidate who is white.  And Hillary is the only one left.  If Edwards was still in the running, perhaps the outcome will be different.  But now, the die is cast.

    Parent

    well, Obama's changing the signs they pass out (5.00 / 1) (#105)
    by thereyougo on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 11:36:13 AM EST
    at the rallies. Now its Reclaiming the American Dream. Guess he's trying to shift gears but its stuck in first gear. Sorry for the snark.

    He's getting hit hard for all angles.Seems the pastor's comments are not helping his polls numbers with this news.

    I'm hoping the polls stay down (5.00 / 2) (#108)
    by cmugirl on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 11:39:26 AM EST
    You know what the media narrative will be if it gets closer - Hillary couldn't deliver when she was only 5 points down and she lost by [10 or whatever]. I would prefer that the polls show her down by 15, and if she can come back within 5, it will be a huge blow to Obama.

    Dean on what would make Dem's loose in Nov (5.00 / 2) (#123)
    by Salt on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 11:48:42 AM EST
    and I disagree with completely, he balmes the candidates Clinton trying to force her to drop in June with his newest poor excuse of why the Btch needs to go and thats that going to the convention with both candidates is what will make Dems loose in Nov.  The root cause of a Nov. lose, no matter how he attempts to re point the narrative is his arrogant blunder of stripping Fla and Mich of all their delegates making up rulz as he went, and providing Obama a momentum boast, along with his ole 60's social justice grievance platform to reemerge as the face of the Party, a boast Obama had not earned as candidate, no other reason.  All demographic divisions that are now steeled against each other spring from this self inflicted betrayal of trust by Dean, Pelosi, Kennedy, and Clyburn as Party Leaders.  Blaming their mistake  on Clinton is beyond depraved.

    Hopefully the downstream States can turn out like it was a General election a pull the Party fate out of Dean's hands.


    Well, after all this wanting Hillary (5.00 / 1) (#125)
    by Militarytracy on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 11:54:01 AM EST
    to be the nominee I still find myself grieving today while looking at the SUSA stuff.  I didn't want Obama to win the nomination to all that chanting and hoopla with not much real discussion of issues and not much tangible discussion about exactly what he was going to do and what I could expect out of him. I'm really not enjoying watching Hillary pulling ahead because of all the chanting and hoopla of some egomaniac whacko extremist reverend though either.  I just wanted issues discussed so I could say see....Hillary is clear and more decisive in dealing with Iraq and the economy, real healthcare solution well worked out, she doesn't mince words about women issues and gay issues and I know exactly where she stands on CHOICE, but no - that's not to be my destiny.  No crying in baseball so I'm shuttin up now.

    You said (5.00 / 2) (#128)
    by pie on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 11:56:39 AM EST
    Hillary is clear and more decisive in dealing with Iraq and the economy, real healthcare solution well worked out, she doesn't mince words about women issues and gay issues and I know exactly where she stands on CHOICE, but no - that's not to be my destiny.

    You may not be hearing this, but I'll bet the voters in NC and Indiana are.  We'll certainly hear it if she's the nominee.

    Parent

    substance, or the lack thereof... (5.00 / 1) (#160)
    by jackyt on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 01:03:57 PM EST
    I think what may be happening is that Obama's veneer has been scratched and voters are seeing that his core is hollow. He has had lots of opportunity to get down to the nitty gritty on policy, but has not done it. Hillary has. And there isn't anything in her past that we don't know about. Now that Obama's past is being scrutinized, fairly or unfairly, there is nothing for him to point to and say, "Look, these are my accomplishments... this is how I will perform my duties as C-in-C".

    With Hillary WYSIWYG. Now voters are beginning to realize that, with President Obama, the same could be true. And there is just no there there!

    Parent

    Why, just today, the Int. Herald Trib. (5.00 / 1) (#163)
    by oculus on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 01:11:45 PM EST
    says Dean insist one candidate drop out after all the primaries are completed in June so the party may "heal."  He doesn't say which candidate should do so.  Truly aggravating.

    Parent
    Come on Oculus (none / 0) (#167)
    by Militarytracy on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 01:29:55 PM EST
    You are too smart to not get the fact that Dean has already subtly shown us his a$$.  And he subtly ran his own drawers up the flagpole.  They were subtly flying there for awhile but now he realizes he must get his drawers down off that flagpole as subtly as possible and start covering his a$$ with them because things for Obama have gone very very wrong in a very short time.

    Parent
    I know, I know. I just found it amusing (5.00 / 1) (#168)
    by oculus on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 01:53:12 PM EST
    he wouldn't name names for a change.  Glad to report some sisterly Hillary Clinton supporters amongst our group today, to whom I reported this news.  They sd., of course, Obama should drop out and blamed his demise on The Rev Wright.

    Parent
    I confess to also finding (5.00 / 1) (#170)
    by Militarytracy on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 02:01:08 PM EST
    Mr. Dean enjoyable to watch since Monday a.m.  It's the little things in life that make it wonderful.

    Parent
    Still a woman's prerogative to cry in baseball? (none / 0) (#173)
    by BackFromOhio on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 07:34:13 PM EST
    I am with Militarytracy.  As much as I would like to see Hillary be the Democratic nominee, my heart went out to Obama today.  Rev Wright, someone Obama held in high personal (if not political) regard sabotaged him at a critical moment in the campaign, and I dare say that it took courage for him to sever all ties.  I found especially poignant Obama's admission that he obviously did not really know who Rev Wright was all these years.  Yes, politically, this was an "admission against interest" in that it shows judgment in need of correcting, but on a personal level it took courage.  How many people do you know who can admit they are wrong, no less in such a public forum.  Let's give credit where credit is due, and work to elect Hillary (assuming you support her), for the right reasons.  

    I take my cue from Lanny Davis who, last night on CNN, went out of his way to say how much he respected Obama, but feels that Hillary is the stronger candidate.

    Just because the pro-Obama bloggers appear to exhibit much disdain for those who don't share their views, doesn't we we who support Hillary should stoop to their level.

    Just sayin.....

    Parent

    Obama's daily remarks on Wright?! (5.00 / 1) (#126)
    by MarkL on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 11:55:25 AM EST
    The Wright stuff---again??

    During his stump speech at a NC townhall, Obama announced he would have a major press conference after the speech.

    Please, let his dog Checkers be ok!

    I think he will hit her over "pansy" (none / 0) (#132)
    by ajain on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 12:05:08 PM EST
    I think he is going to paint her as an anti-gay candidate. I just have a feeling. If he would do that then that would be gutsy.

    Parent
    OMG (none / 0) (#134)
    by madamab on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 12:08:23 PM EST
    That would be incredibly stupid.

    It wasn't even HRC that said it, and the Governor didn't call a real person a pansy, he called a made-up character a pansy.

    Not to mention that Obama doesn't have a great record on gay issues.

    Parent

    Josh Marshall says the (none / 0) (#142)
    by MarkL on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 12:19:56 PM EST
    Obamaphants are panicking:

    Winter (Spring, Summer and Fall) of Their Discontent

    As I've mentioned before, one thing running TPM affords us is a barometer, a unique window into the collective minds of the different candidates' supporters. Those most apt to hit the panic button are often those most ready to hit the send button. So it's important not to over-interpret the evidence. But we do seem to have come to some sort crisis of confidence for a number of Obama supporters. It all seems to have come together in the last few days, even the last 48 hours. Certainly Pennsylvania has something do it with it; and I think Rev. Jeremiah Wright's new kick Obama in groin-athon is playing a big role too. Perhaps yesterday's SurveyUSA poll showing Obama still markedly behind in Indiana is somewhere in there as well. There's very little I've seen from this admittedly fragmentary sample that shows Obama supporters buying into the critique of Obama, more a sense of exhaustion and frustration or fear that he can't get the onslaught to stop or isn't responding to it vocally or forcefully enough.



    Parent
    I hope he does try that... (none / 0) (#139)
    by americanincanada on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 12:17:49 PM EST
    it will backfire in a huge way. HUGE. Hillary's glbt supporters are as rabid as any other...I should know, I am one of those supporters.

    He needs to be very careful wading into the GLBT stuff given his own record during this campaign. Hillary has not hit him on all that but will if he opens the door.

    Parent

    Not gutsy but stupid (none / 0) (#164)
    by standingup on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 01:11:55 PM EST
    After he gave Donnie McClurkin the keys to the bus in South Carolina to run over gays?  I don't think that will go over well at all.  

    Parent
    McClurkin (none / 0) (#165)
    by cawaltz on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 01:12:42 PM EST
    He'll come off as even more of a politician. I daresay the gay community will remember that he used McClurkin in SC and was more than willing to toss the gay community under the bus.

    Parent
    Maybe the big news is that he will take (none / 0) (#141)
    by Anne on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 12:19:01 PM EST
    more than 8 questions...

    Seriously, he's trying to cut into the amount of time the media is featuring Wright, trying to push the Easley endorsement off the "front page," perhaps following some of Rove's advice, even.

    What he has no control over, though, is how the various outlets will cut and paste his presser with audio and video of everything else that is going on - welcome to Hillary's world!

    I'm sure the SUSA poll, along with their own internal numbers, have the entire staff in panic mode, and I think they are unprepared for it; they have to know that if Obama does not win NC, or wins in the low single digits, that it may be close to being over for him - all his arguments go out the window, and I have to think at least some number of SD's who have already announced for Obama may be edging toward the door.  Once that starts, I think it could be a stampede.

    Seatbelts, everyone - this is one heck of a flight we're on!

    Parent

    SUSA rings true with me (5.00 / 1) (#136)
    by Raven15 on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 12:10:59 PM EST
    I'm in NC, volunteering for HRC, and I am encouraged by my conversations with people. Obama has the upper hand with his usuals--AAs, college kiddies, highly educated libs--but everyone else is in play. Obama seems like much less of a fresh face who people kind of drift to along with prevailing winds. There's some Obama fatigue, I'm hearing more skepticism, and people are switching on their BS detectors more than before. Clinton will win over many if not most of these folks who also have an open mind about her.

    she won more post grads in PA (none / 0) (#150)
    by dotcommodity on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 12:48:47 PM EST
    I think the highly educated are waking up...

    Parent
    I think the Governer's endorsement... (none / 0) (#1)
    by Marco21 on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 10:37:59 AM EST
    may clip this to single digits. I'd love it to be super close, but I think Obama is a lock for sure.

    Indiana is the prize May 6th.

    I think the governor's endorsement (5.00 / 2) (#20)
    by delacarpa on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 10:47:58 AM EST
    is a huge win for Clinton and this SUSA poll Obama up by 5 was taken before the endorsement and Wright hadn't had his say. I think after today it could be a tie by election day.

    Hillary could pull it off.

    Parent

    I don't. (none / 0) (#3)
    by sweetthings on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 10:39:29 AM EST
    The constant of this primary has been that demographics are destiny. No amount of money or endorsements seems to shake that basic equation much.

    Parent
    operation chaos (none / 0) (#7)
    by beyondalldoubt on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 10:43:39 AM EST
    I think all Hillary supporters can agree that Rush Limbaugh's Operation Chaos is the sickest thing in the world. How dare he undermine the process, our Constitution, our rules, and our laws.

    Its just like Rush telling people who think somebody is guilty to lie to try to get on a jury to vote guilty.

    Its SICK and theres nothing "moral values" about it!

    Um (5.00 / 2) (#10)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 10:44:44 AM EST
    so you do not like GOP voters now?

    Parent
    To be fair (5.00 / 2) (#21)
    by Marvin42 on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 10:49:19 AM EST
    I have to agree that I like crossover voters, but NOT ones that want to disrupt democratic primary process. I never believed most GOP crossovers would vote for Sen Obama in the fall either, but to cross over for no reason other than to disrupt is wrong.

    But I am NOT convinced this is having any real impact, its just a PR stunt by Rush. Its getting him more attention than it is having impact.

    Also I think people are underestimating republican women who may be cross over to support Sen Clinton.

    Parent

    Agreed (5.00 / 1) (#56)
    by BDB on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 11:05:34 AM EST
    It's terrible, but I'll wait to see if it has any effort.  He tried the same thing in Texas and I believe post-election analysis showed no evidence that it had much, if any, effect.  

    Parent
    Republican (5.00 / 2) (#110)
    by AnninCA on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 11:40:46 AM EST
    women are definitely the hidden secret weapon in this race.

    White men are coming on board with Clinton.  She convinced them.  Frankly, the tough primary has helped her.  They now believe she's the strong one.

    But Republican Women are the true Independent voters.

    They won't vote for Obama because his tax plans are unacceptable.  It's tax and spend old-style Democratic party stuff.  Won't fly with that group.

    They are definitely fed up with their own party.

    She has not offended them in the slightest on morality issues, which that group is big on.  Obama has.

    She's the logical choice, even if they smile at the dinner table and say nothing.

    They will pull the lever for her in the Fall.

    Parent

    Republican (none / 0) (#111)
    by AnninCA on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 11:40:47 AM EST
    women are definitely the hidden secret weapon in this race.

    White men are coming on board with Clinton.  She convinced them.  Frankly, the tough primary has helped her.  They now believe she's the strong one.

    But Republican Women are the true Independent voters.

    They won't vote for Obama because his tax plans are unacceptable.  It's tax and spend old-style Democratic party stuff.  Won't fly with that group.

    They are definitely fed up with their own party.

    She has not offended them in the slightest on morality issues, which that group is big on.  Obama has.

    She's the logical choice, even if they smile at the dinner table and say nothing.

    They will pull the lever for her in the Fall.

    Parent

    Rush (5.00 / 1) (#17)
    by AnninCA on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 10:46:50 AM EST
    is Rush.  He just yaps.  He likes to take credit for all kinds of silly stuff and loves it when the Dems acknowledge him as a real force.

    He's just an entertainer.

    Parent

    C'mon, stop giving credit to Rush (5.00 / 1) (#25)
    by Prabhata on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 10:50:09 AM EST
    A few people will vote for HRC because Rush says, but not enough to change the dynamics.  Most who switch from Republican or unaffiliated to Democrat and vote for HRC or BO do it because they feel strongly about their choice.  I've never done it, but if there was a Republican candidate, a real right wing, who had a chance of becoming the nominee, I would do it.  I'd want to stop that candidate from having an opportunity of becoming president.

    Parent
    Question (none / 0) (#95)
    by cmugirl on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 11:29:29 AM EST
    Does ANYONE listen to Rush anymore?  I don't even know Republicans who do.  I know he must have some listeners, because he is still on the air, but who is listening to him?  

    I think Obama supporters give Rush way too much credit and power.

    Parent

    I think it's funny (5.00 / 1) (#46)
    by kredwyn on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 11:01:10 AM EST
    in a "let's see if we can have an effect" kinda way...similar to the Dkos "Vote Mitt" campaign in MI.

    Ultimately I don't think that either has a real effect...but both are prety good at claiming success regardless of whether or not there was anything to claim in the first place.

    Rush was claiming a success even though HRC's polling was strong in PA for a whole lot longer than Operation Chaos's involvement.

    Parent

    Was it ok to do it in Michigan? (5.00 / 3) (#48)
    by BarnBabe on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 11:02:33 AM EST
    When Kos advocated for the Dems to vote GOP for Mitt, it was ok? One of the reasons BHO did not want a Michigan revote because these Dem's
    vote would not count as they voted Republican first. I thought it was a cheap idea then.

    Parent
    How About All Those Dems For A Day Fliers (5.00 / 1) (#69)
    by MO Blue on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 11:11:56 AM EST
    put out by Obama's side? Seems Obama's supporters were just fine with that.

    Parent
    Waiting for BTD to address this issue. (none / 0) (#161)
    by oculus on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 01:03:59 PM EST
    And still waiting.

    Parent
    come on (5.00 / 1) (#121)
    by AlSmith on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 11:45:55 AM EST
    "Sickest thing in the world"? You probably shouldnt be voting if you are so lacking in perspective.

    And a political party's primary has nothing to do with the Constitution.

    Parent

    Didn't Obama win the Republican (none / 0) (#97)
    by eleanora on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 11:29:34 AM EST
    votes in Texas, Ohio, and PA?

    Parent
    in PA the exit polls asked if you (none / 0) (#155)
    by dotcommodity on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 12:53:29 PM EST
    were a registered Democrat or Republican?

    ...and as of January:
     were you a registered Democrat or Republican?

    less than 2% were R in Jan/Dem now.

    Parent

    It won't work anymore, as it did in WI (none / 0) (#113)
    by Cream City on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 11:42:10 AM EST
    even before Rush began his bandwagon.  Here, it was local conservative blogs and print media reminding Wisconsin Repubs of their long tradition of crossing over to mess up the Dem primary.  And here in Wisconsin, it worked -- but that was more than two months ago.  It wouldn't work in Wisconsin now, with so many gaffes since by Obama.  I doubt it will work anywhere now.

    Plus, in straight-ticket states -- Wisconsin is not one -- it's important to see if there are other races on the ballot that keep Repubs on their side. I think I read that there are on the NC ballot.

    Also important to see ballots cast so far -- and NC reports almost 200,000 absentee ballots already cast in NC (almost all online in the state with the research triangle).

    Parent

    AA turnout could be slightly depressed (none / 0) (#29)
    by Jim J on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 10:55:01 AM EST
    This happened, incrementally, in Philadelphia, a very small downtick which nonetheless did contribute to his shellacking in PA.

    A similar failure to run up the score in N.C. would bode very badly for him.

    Downtick in Philly from what? (none / 0) (#47)
    by andgarden on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 11:01:30 AM EST
    I think Obama got almost every black vote in Philly that he could have gotten.

    The reason he didn't carry Philly with 75% is that LMC whites voted en masse for Hillary. That's half the reason why his Rendell 2002 strategy didn't work. (The other half is that the suburbs were split, instead of being solid for Obama).

    Parent

    Wasn't there something (none / 0) (#114)
    by bjorn on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 11:42:29 AM EST
    about street money that depressed the Philly AA turnout just a little?  That may not translate to NC.

    Parent
    Again, you'd need to show (none / 0) (#115)
    by andgarden on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 11:43:53 AM EST
    how it was depressed. You'd be hard-pressed to find a better Philly turnout in recent memory.

    Parent
    "downtick" (none / 0) (#133)
    by christinep on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 12:06:50 PM EST
    The downtick was in the turnout actuality (not in the percentage of AAs voting for Obama.) As I recall, this downtick (or, at least, not the expected "uptick" from previous years) began to happen in some of the major cities in Texas.

    Parent
    Hillary might do as well as in TX (none / 0) (#33)
    by Prabhata on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 10:55:44 AM EST


    Wow. If Clinton actually wins both NC and IN?!? (none / 0) (#44)
    by Exeter on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 11:00:51 AM EST
    Obama is in a world of hurt. It will have meant he has lost Ohio, Texas, Pennsylvanian, North Carolina, Indiana -- five medium to large states right in a row.

    She's not (5.00 / 3) (#57)
    by AnninCA on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 11:06:46 AM EST
    won.  Voters vote.

    Frankly, he's outspending her again there....3 to 1.

    And she's got to spread her shoe leather between Indiana and NC.

    I did see that she's pulling in great crowds, and Bill is doing great at covering the rural bases again.

    He asked the campaign to bump up his schedule, and he's actually been keeping on track time-wise.

    Parent

    Hey -- I'm the best dam# chicken counter around! (none / 0) (#78)
    by Exeter on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 11:19:10 AM EST
    She's five points down and this is before the "Obama-buyers-remorse" dip the weekend before the election, Wright part deaux, and Clinton advertising being on for a significant amount of time.

    Parent
    Heh. (5.00 / 1) (#85)
    by madamab on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 11:22:30 AM EST
    Are you good at predicting primary results? I wish I were. I can often pick the winner but am usually off the margin of victory by many points. ;-)

    Parent
    Not to brag (5.00 / 1) (#91)
    by AnninCA on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 11:25:05 AM EST
    but I hit PA on the nose.  wink

    It's a gift, as Monk says.  

    Parent

    And a curse! (5.00 / 1) (#94)
    by madamab on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 11:27:05 AM EST
    Love that show. :-)

    I will pay special attention to your primary predictions, then. Polls, schmolls! :-)

    Parent

    Susa (5.00 / 3) (#88)
    by AnninCA on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 11:24:25 AM EST
    is our favorite poll for a reason.  That's all I'm saying.  

    I'm going to send some money.  She needs an infusion right now, although the PAC ads are hitting hard in Indiana.

    They saved up their money for Indiana from what I understand.

    Parent

    We'll see - don't count the chickens (5.00 / 3) (#60)
    by Prabhata on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 11:07:19 AM EST
    I will continue lighting my candle and giving thanks for the way the campaign has gone.  At times I felt despondent when the media kept hammering Hillary.  Now I see that it was good because she has come out stronger.  She is getting respect, and that is fabulous.  I never wish anything because I figure the heavens has a better plan.  I know nothing.

    Parent
    Anyone notice story for SUSA disappeared? (none / 0) (#52)
    by Marvin42 on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 11:03:35 AM EST
    From the stations web site?

    Wow (none / 0) (#58)
    by andgarden on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 11:06:57 AM EST
    maybe we got a scoop!

    Parent
    It was probably up before it was aired (none / 0) (#63)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 11:08:10 AM EST
    on the station's midday news.

    Parent
    Yup (none / 0) (#66)
    by andgarden on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 11:10:13 AM EST
    the webmaster probably saw the clicks and said "oops!"

    Parent
    what state are the candidates campaigning most? (none / 0) (#72)
    by ChuckieTomato on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 11:16:33 AM EST
    that will tell you the trend of the campaign.

    Once North Carolinians find out... (none / 0) (#154)
    by Universal on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 12:52:36 PM EST
    how much Wright has Obama by the nether regions of his anatomy, look for HRC to rise even further in that race:

    "Obama's Wright Conundrum"
    http://www.villarrealsports.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=481

    Wow. (none / 0) (#156)
    by Petey on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 12:53:37 PM EST
    Wow.  Simply, wow.

    Obama is in free fall at the moment.

    SUSA Internals (none / 0) (#171)
    by Dan the Man on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 02:06:37 PM EST
    Here.

    SUSA: Kentucky Clinton 63-27. Here.