Look at his national polling and state by state polling since this started. You can spin however you want, but Obama's trend is upward.
The super delegates aren't fixed in their support and anyway I didn't say Obama had all of the Democratic establishment but a lot. I would still say its hard to claim underdog status when Kennedy and Kerry are support Obama.
in the Democratic primary, so far, per cnn: Obama wins Alabama Delaware Georgia Illinois North Dakota Obama leads Connecticut (50-47 w/64% reporting) Idaho (75-25 w/22% reporting) Kansas (72-28 w/56% reporting) Minnesota (65-35 w/17% reporting) Clinton wins Arkansas Massechusetts New Jersey New York Oklahoma Tennessee Clinton leads Missouri (56-40 w/ 43% reporting) To early Arizona California Colorado New Mexico Utah
Out of the all of the candidates in both parties tonight while there might not be clear winners there will be one clear loser. Romney.
I think it depends on what you meant by Democratic establishment. Obama may have a slight edge in high profile Democratic names. Hillary has a decided edge when it comes to the democratic machines and establishments on most of the local levels.
No, but it's pretty easy to do so when you have not been known nationally for very long and your opponent has for the past fifteen to sixteen years...
As I said I don't think either of them are the underdog but I disagree with the idea that Obama is the underdog.
I dont mean to generalize but I find it immensely funny to have 20 somethings crying about change when they were probably still playing pokemon when Dubya was first elected. It's like the new guy at work who starts complaining that things need to change but who has no clue of how things work. Sad to say think we all have worked with these know it alls at some point in our lifetime. and yes I know not every Obama supporter is like that. If age is a factor, its that the older set is voting in Hillary because they live in the real world, while the young folks supporting Obama are living in their own fairy tale.
Are you saying that people didn't support Hillary because they know her too well? That might be the case but hardly supportive of the idea that Obama is the underdog.
I'm not surprised. Anyone afraid of McCain's stance on social issues need to take a real good look at Romney's before they start annointing him the savior.
I think it's fair that that neither of them are underdogs, but I would say that Obama has more non-traditional support.
hasnt the Obama supporters been arguing that those 15 years are what makes her unelectable? How can something thats supposed to be an albatross be a good thing?
I'm sure Obama raised more money than Hillary. As far as I know, that's always been the most traditional support.
well i saw a poll that had obama up 49% to 36%, which I'm basically just going to dismiss because i think those are dreamt up numbers. rom's been pushing REAL hard for Cali, he might take 2nd place there. McCain will probably win there IMO.
I'd disagree with this part. Hillary's numbers have stayed pretty flat (around 40-45%) for a few months now. Obama's have slowly trended up nationally, and in the week or two before the election in each state he campaigns in, he gains substantial ground. Whether that continues or not is certainly up in the air, but keep in mind he was down 20-30 points in almost all the Super Tuesday states before South Carolina. Notice that Clinton's numbers pretty much stay on a level field: But today he certainly seems to be underperforming in the northeast and possibly Missouri. He's doing slightly above expectations in the south and winning the tiny caucus states. It will be bad if he underperforms in the west, though. The exit polls over-showed him by 15-20 pts in Mass/NJ. If he loses CA by double digits, that's not good at all.
I don't think they have to have seen it for that long to know what the tone is Washington. I think the thing that gets them crying for change most isn't just that we need it, it's that they feel that they can be part of that change, and play a roll. The changes that happened in the 60's such as civil rights were by youth crying out for change, even though they hadn't experienced that much of the status quo at the time. But again they felt they could be the agents of change, and that inspired them to become active.
Since it started? Sure, but anyone who takes 2007 results as if they mean anything doesn't know politics. Folks looked at Giuliani as if he were a lock, and he didn't even crack 10 percent in most states! You have to look at the numbers since early January, when the race was really underway, the players were known and results started to come in. Since then, the results are mixed. He's had his ups, he's had his downs. He's up in some states relative to where he was a month ago, while he's down in some states relative to where he was a few days ago or a week ago. He's down in the sense of being the presumptive nominee almost across the board relative to the first week of January. It all depends on how it's framed and it's why you can't take these generalizations all that seriously. He has a very good chance, sure. But if Hillary wins the delegate battle tonight, she had a good showing. She doesn't have to overwhelm him to have a good night. These two are both strong candidates and it's a close race... both now and probably for the next few months.
