SDOGPEIT

[HuskyCaucasian]

First Minnesota poll is out, but it was actually taken pre-SC win for Obama, and pre-Edwards dropping out.

Well, they've been too frozen the last few days to do the polls. lol

[Mplssoxfan]

Well, they've been too frozen the last few days to do the polls. lol

Why is that in green? I was walking home at about 11PM Tuesday night and the thermometer at the bank read -22 degrees.

 

I love it here.

[HuskyCaucasian]

Why is that in green? I was walking home at about 11PM Tuesday night and the thermometer at the bank read -22 degrees.

 

I love it here.

Well, i put it in green because it's never too cold to poll. Heck, it might be better because more people are home.

[Rex Kickass]

First Minnesota poll is out, but it was actually taken pre-SC win for Obama, and pre-Edwards dropping out.

 

Minnesota Public Radio, 478 R, 1/18-1/27

Clinton: 40%

Obama: 33%

Edwards: 12%

UNDECIDED: 13%

 

Yet another state where the gap was already narrow, and an SC victory for Obama plus him visiting there soon should bump his numbers up. This is really more of a "before" sample anyway.

 

That's a long questioning window too. I wonder when the bulk of polling was done, it would be interesting to see a day by day breakout of that.

[NorthSideSox72]

That's a long questioning window too. I wonder when the bulk of polling was done, it would be interesting to see a day by day breakout of that.

Yeah, I am a bit skeptical of it as well. But it gives some idea of the baseline earlier in the month. Hopefully someone does a MN poll starting this week.

 

[Rex Kickass]

Rasmussen - California

Clinton 43

Obama 40

 

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_con...dential_primary

[NorthSideSox72]

More new Dem polls...

 

Alabama, which had been Clinton +15 a week or two ago, is now...

 

AEA Capital, 377 LV, 1/28-30...

Obama: 40% (+5)

Clinton: 35%

 

New Jersey, which most recently had been Clinton +17...

 

Rasmussen, 785 LV, 1/30...

Clinton: 49% (+12)

Obama: 37%

 

And finally, the two national tracking polls through Thursday...

 

Rasmussen: Clinton +7

Gallup: Clinton +4

 

[NorthSideSox72]

And more polling...

 

New York:

 

Survey USA, 950 LV, 1/30-31 (change from mid-Jan, same poll, in parens)

Clinton: 54% (-2)

Obama: 38% (+8)

UNDECIDED/OTHER: 8%

 

So even in Clinton's home state, that 26 point lead has shrunk to 16. I doubt he has a chance to win NY, but, he may make it less than a blowout. That would be a victory for him. The poll says that Edwards' dropping out gave Obama a big boost.

 

If he can work it in, I'd think a stop into Harlem or the Bronx might give Obama a further boost in NY.

 

[Balta1701]

If he can work it in, I'd think a stop into Harlem or the Bronx might give Obama a further boost in NY.

Now it's all a question of time utilization. Yes, that could give him a boost. But as much of a boost as 2 events in L.A. or 1 event somewhere else?

[southsider2k5]

And more polling...

 

New York:

 

Survey USA, 950 LV, 1/30-31 (change from mid-Jan, same poll, in parens)

Clinton: 54% (-2)

Obama: 38% (+8)

UNDECIDED/OTHER: 8%

 

So even in Clinton's home state, that 26 point lead has shrunk to 16. I doubt he has a chance to win NY, but, he may make it less than a blowout. That would be a victory for him. The poll says that Edwards' dropping out gave Obama a big boost.

 

If he can work it in, I'd think a stop into Harlem or the Bronx might give Obama a further boost in NY.

 

How great would it be for Barack to make a campaign appearence right outside of Bill Clinton's office in the Bronx?

[Balta1701]

How great would it be for Barack to make a campaign appearence right outside of Bill Clinton's office in the Bronx?

That'd probably kill his campaign.

[NorthSideSox72]

Now it's all a question of time utilization. Yes, that could give him a boost. But as much of a boost as 2 events in L.A. or 1 event somewhere else?

Well, you figure, he's got NJ, DE, NY, CT and MA all in the fight on Tuesday. He's sure to hit at least SOME of those. NYC, with its black population and being right in the middle of all those states, seems to me like a prime target. He doesn't even have to win NY - just make it interesting.

 

[NorthSideSox72]

Missouri - where Rasmussen and R2000 had shown +19 and +13 for Clinton a week or two ago, now:

 

Survey USA, 664 LV, 1/30-31

Clinton: 44%

Obama: 40%

 

Alabama, where AEA gave Obama a 5 point lead yesterday (after Clinton having led in all previous polls), has another poll:

 

Survey USA, 586 LV, 1/31

Obama: 47%

Clinton: 47%

 

Connecticut, where Obama had pulled into a tie according to a Rasmussen poll on the 27th (after Clinton held BIG leads there), has a new one too:

 

Survey USA, 679 LV, 1/30-31

Obama: 48%

Clinton: 44%

 

---

I don't think there is much denying at this point that Obama has huge momentum, and the numbers in most all of the SDOGPEIT states are running to him. The questions are... will it be enough to stay with Hillary on SDOGPEIT? And how much of this is Edwards voters, versus Obama's campaigning?

 

[Rex Kickass]

I think its a little of both. Most of Edwards's support was going to trail off this week, with or without him in the race as it became apparent that he didn't really have a legit shot at winning the race.

 

There was a daily kos diary yesterday that had a really interesting state by state delegate breakdown. If it stays reasonably close, and I think it will, we'd be looking at a roughly even breakdown of delegates for each. If that happens, I think that's a nail in Hillary's coffin.

 

They are at a point in the campaign where Hillary loses superdelegates that she'd desperately need if she plays dirty about MI and FL. If Obama comes back and basically wins by breaking even, you're looking at a ticket that's either a forced Clinton/Obama ticket or Obama/someone else.

[DBAHO]

So which is the most important state for either candidate to win on Tuesday (and that's for both Democrats and Republicans)?

[NorthSideSox72]

So which is the most important state for either candidate to win on Tuesday (and that's for both Democrats and Republicans)?

Well, California is the biggest number of delegates, by far, for both parties. And its WTA for the Republicans, so, that's huge for McCain and his huge lead there. For the Dems though, it looks so close across the full width of states, that it could come down to a surprise in some smaller state pushing someone up or down.

 

[Balta1701]

So which is the most important state for either candidate to win on Tuesday (and that's for both Democrats and Republicans)?

For the Republicans...well, it's hard to say. Romney would need a bunch of surprises.

 

For the Dems, it's us. Of the 3 biggest prizes, one is NY, one is IL, and the biggest is CA. Everything else looks to be close enough that pulling out a win in CA, especially if it's by more than a tiny bit, would be gigantic. Especially since there's no WTA states for us.

[Balta1701]

By the way...is it just me, or has anyone else realized that this Tuesday seems to mark the exact plot line of season 1 of 24. The day of the California Presidential Primary, an African American Senator...with a chance to win that primary and become the first African American President...

[KipWellsFan]

By the way...is it just me, or has anyone else realized that this Tuesday seems to mark the exact plot line of season 1 of 24. The day of the California Presidential Primary, an African American Senator...with a chance to win that primary and become the first African American President...

 

I was thinking about this a little bit too. But if I remember correctly Palmer was the heavy favorite and there were no other states mentioned.

[Balta1701]

I was thinking about this a little bit too. But if I remember correctly Palmer was the heavy favorite and there were no other states mentioned.

Very true, but they also made it clear that Palmer had to have someone running against him even though they didn't mention who it was, because there was a potential scandal involving his family that threatened to knock off the campaign, and that wouldn't have happened had he had things wrapped up.

[NorthSideSox72]

People want to know just how close the Dem race is for SDOGPEIT? The Obama campaign is setting up an office, and the Clinton campaign is organizing volunteers, in Navajo country (NM and AZ). These populations are normally ignored, being as small as they are and as difficult to work in. But, thanks to the huge amounts of money both campaigns have access to, and because the vote looks so close in NM and AZ, various indian tribes (not just Navajo, but others as well) are being courted aggressively. Link to one of the articles mentioning this.

 

[southsider2k5]

I heard an interesting tidbit on the Sunday newsmagazines yesterday. (Can't remember which one it was, I was flipping around) I guess Hillary Clinton is making a really hard push to the SuperDelegates, which are mostly members of Congress. Theoretically it is very possible for Hillary to lose the race for the regular deleates, but if she can convince enough SDs to vote for her, she could win the nomination, with 50% of voters voting for someone else. Its also possible as close as this race is looking for the samething to happen for Obama.

 

My questions would be after uproar over the electoral college in 2000, and since, would they be able to justify to their voting base nominating a candidate who didn't win a majority, over one who did? And next question is would the Dem's here be able to vote for that candidate if they had supported another?

[NorthSideSox72]

I heard an interesting tidbit on the Sunday newsmagazines yesterday. (Can't remember which one it was, I was flipping around) I guess Hillary Clinton is making a really hard push to the SuperDelegates, which are mostly members of Congress. Theoretically it is very possible for Hillary to lose the race for the regular deleates, but if she can convince enough SDs to vote for her, she could win the nomination, with 50% of voters voting for someone else. Its also possible as close as this race is looking for the samething to happen for Obama.

 

My questions would be after uproar over the electoral college in 2000, and since, would they be able to justify to their voting base nominating a candidate who didn't win a majority, over one who did? And next question is would the Dem's here be able to vote for that candidate if they had supported another?

Here is my take. Everyone assumes the superdelegates will be heavier towards Clinton, because she represents the establishment - the old guard. Except, my opinion is, what the superdelegates want more than anything is a win in November. And since Obama has consistently shown better head-to-head numbers against the GOP hopefuls, I think that means that if they are on the fence, more often than not, they'll fall to Obama. That's my take, anyway.

 

This is especially true if, come convention time, Obama holds a lead in voted delegates. If he has that, AND is more likely to win in November, I think Hillary will have zero luck with the supers. But, if Clinton goes to Denver with a slight lead in delegates, but the head-to-head polls stay the same... that will be a tough decision for those superdelegates.

 

 

[Rex Kickass]

Superdelegates tend to side with momentum. Is it possible Clinton loses overall tomorrow slightly and maintains an edge with Supers? Possible, but not terribly likely.

[NorthSideSox72]

Suffolk poll now shows Obama leading in Massachusetts for the first time.

 

Looking at the most recent non-Zogby polls, Obama is currently leading in CA, IL, MA, GA, AL, CT, CO and UT. Clinton leads in NY, NJ, MO, TN, AZ and OK. All other states (MN, AR, KS, NM, DE, ID, ND, AK) don't have any published polls in January or February. A number of those states that someone has a lead in (CA, MA, CT, CO, NJ, MO, AZ) have a gap of just a few points - virtually tied. And the national polls are somewhat split: CNN shows Obama +3, Cook shows Obama +6, Pew shows Clinton +8, Gallup shows Clinton +1, CBS shows a tie, and WaPo shows Clinton +4 (those are the Feb ones).

 

Its going to be close.