No - because unlike the GOP primary, the Dem primary allocates delegates by vote % rather than having the winner take a huge amount. So if Clinton wins at her current levels - about 45% to 35% nationally - she'd net +175 more delegates than Obama. For her to gain 600, she would have to win nationally by about a 35% margin. Chances are, she'll pick up more delegates than Obama on Super Tuesday, unless he makes up significant ground - he still has a long way to go there. And his campaign very well may be on the edge after Super Tuesday, primarily due to momentum, if he doesn't make up major ground. The Edwards factor also matters here - do his voters keep voting for him? What does he do with his delegates? But neither candidate is going to have a 600 delegate advantage after Super Tuesday. Another one of those instances where it would be helpful if you actually did some research before posting so you could hide your lack of knowledge of the system.
Funny stuff. Mr. Meowgi would approve. For the CNN/Politico.com debate Thursday, members are being allowed to submit their questions, and then vote on their favorite questions. On the Democratic side, probably 75% of the questions, including most of the most popular, are about NASA. http://dyn.politico.com/debate/democrats/VoteForQuestion.cfm
A person after my own heart. I've always thought those who supported Nadir in 2000 deserved no sympathy, whatsoever, for any negative fallout due to George W. being selected President. Impeach Bush.
I don't know how legitimate this is (Rasmussen has it's detractors in the polling circles), but this is the first post-SC poll that I've seen. In Connecticut, it has Obama tied with Clinton at 40%. Ten days ago, Obama was down 14. We'll see if this kind of gain comes up in other states. http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2008/president/ct/connecticut_democratic_primary-273.html
As I asked in the other thread. Let's see how the voting goes in Florida for the dems tonight. It may not mean anything or it could mean a lot!
New national Gallup poll out today. Barack Obama has now cut the gap with Hillary Clinton to 6 percentage points among Democrats nationally in the Gallup Poll Daily tracking three-day average, and interviewing conducted Tuesday night shows the gap between the two candidates is within a few points. Obama's position has been strengthening on a day-by-day basis. As recently as Jan. 18-20, Clinton led Obama by 20 points. Today's Gallup Poll Daily tracking is based on interviews conducted Jan. 27-29, all after Obama's overwhelming victory in South Carolina on Saturday. Clinton 42% (-2) Obama 36% (+3) Edwards 12% (-2) http://www.gallup.com/poll/104044/Gallup-Daily-Tracking-Election-2008.aspx
Similar to what I said about the polls in Connecticut, I find it very hard to believe opinions have swung this quickly in Obama's favor. Not to say I don't like the notion. Thanks for the info mc mark.
As I said after NH, I'll never trust a poll again! And with the election cycle especially, no telling what's going to happen state by state. We're in uncharted waters here. But it's nice to see the trend if it's true.
Hulk Hogan endorses Obama... <object width="425" height="355"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/BEmiavw_-sE&rel=1"></param><param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/BEmiavw_-sE&rel=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="355"></embed></object>
Forget elections. Let's just have a Chuck Norris-Sylvester Stallone-Hulk Hogan cage match for Presiden.
Momentum seems to be swinging back the other way, if you believe Rasmussen. It's back to Clinton 45/Obama 37, a day after Obama had closed the gap to six (and closed it to 44-42 in the days after Edwards' departure). With three of the four days in this poll without Edwards, it seems Hillary had a strong Friday... perhaps a post-debate bounce? http://rasmussenreports.com/public_...ial_election/daily_presidential_tracking_poll
Yup - that's disturbing from an Obama perspective. The two previous days, the poll said the post-Edwards numbers were virtually tied (Clinton 44, Obama 42), so you figured he'd continue making up ground and once all 4 days were post-Edwards, you'd have the gap of 2 or 3 points. The fact that the gap actually grew says that the most recent day's numbers (yesterday) was bigger than the gap from the numbers that were dropped, which would have been Monday's, I believe. That's surprising and bad if it holds up in the coming days. If Gallup's numbers today confirm this and the spread there rises also, that's a definite problem for Obama.
I'm not saying you are, but obsessing over national daily tracking before primaries that award delegates proportionately is a bit much. Maybe the state by state numbers, but even those have not been reliable.
Really creative how you continually misspell Nader's name. Clever even. The first time I thought it might be accident, but now I really know how you feel!
The changes in the national daily polling numbers are the easiest way to track how things are flowing until Tuesday. Except for California, there are too many states to keep track of. Perhaps on Monday, taking a look at all of the individual state polls would make sense.
True, but with a lack of data on state polls, it's the best measure of overall trends. That said, it includes numbers from states that have already voted as well as states like Texas and Ohio that aren't voting anytime soon. Because of that, the actual numbers aren't as useful as the overall trends - especially after specific events. For example, there was a move up in Obama numbers after Edwards dropped out. Today is the first poll with post-debate results, so if that trend continues tomorrow, that could indicate Hillary made good gains on the debate. And it appears Obama might have a bit of a problem. The Gallup Poll confirms the Rasmussen results. Obama held steady on his support level, but undecideds shifted over to Clinton - Gallup went from a 3pt spread yesterday to 7 today.
If there's one constant in this race, it's that the determining factors for voters seem to be the same from state to state. There is much less regional campaigning and much more focus on broader, national issues such as the economy and an overall direction of change. Yes, individual states will differ, but I think in this particular year, the national tracking polls are a fairly reliable indicator for the momentum in specific states.
