Clinton leads 50-42 in Indiana (PPP)

[jackson_dem]

PPP is the only firm that had Obama winning PA and had Obama up 57-33 in NC before Hillary's big PA win. PPP seems to be overestimating Obama's support lately, although I haven't went back and checked their past performance. I don't recall any problems with them in the past, though.

Crosstabs

Whites: H 54, O 38
Blacks: O 73, H 21

This is an overestimate of Clinton's black support. We have seen this in every state. Clinton will be in the high teens or even the 20's and Obama in the low 70's with black support but then when voting occurs Obama gets 85-92% as almost all the black undecideds go to Obama. This is why Clinton consistently has done worse on election day in southern states than in polling (elsewhere the opposite has often been the case as Obama underperforms). Correcting for this it is Clinton 48, Obama 44. Since Hillary is at 54% with whites now she could take 2/3 of undecided given her history of doing best with late deciders, with the exception mentioned above. That brings Clinton up to 53-47. It is sad we even have to do this but race has emerged as the single greatest predictor of preference between Obama and Clinton with Obama routinely getting 90% black support and Clinton mostly getting over 60% in March and April (gender isn't close. For instance in SUSA's poll Clinton leads 52-43 overall but only 55-41 among women.).

Since Clinton leads 1.5:1 with whites (Obama leads 3.5:1 with blacks) the good folks of Indiana better be prepared for an avalanche of this on May 7: . The good folks of Ohio, Texas, Pennsylvania have been subject to this and already we are seeing this cop out excuse being used to explain him losing Kentucky and perhaps even North Carolina. The truth is Obama has tanked across demographic lines since the vetting process began. This has cut across racial lines (with the exception of blacks where his support has actually slightly increased), class lines (even his margins with the affluent are down), and partisan lines (his 2:1 leads among indies and 3:1 leads among rethugs are things of the past). Obama is in decline. Voters didn't just discover he is black after 30+ states had voted. As the MSM crush with him has started to fade so have his numbers. The fact that Obama went a year without any vetting was unusual and gave him an artificial veneer of strength.

Age

18-29: O 50, H 40 (Indiana kids must be more racist, right? His margins are going down across the board. Maybe there is a reason for it that is legitimate? Is everyone but the "netroots" racist?)
30-45: O 47, H 45
46-65: H 52, O 40
Seniors: H 56, O 36

http://www.publicpolicypolling.com/pdf/PPP_Release_042908.pdf

[jackson_dem]

1. I notice Obama supporters loved to post poll graphs for other states

They must have forgotten to post it for Indiana so I will do it for them.

[Hoof Hearted]

4. Wow, look at that! Hillary's overcome a stunning lead by Obama!

GO HILLARY!

[Indenturedebtor]

6. That graph doesn't look good

Vetting is a nonsense term by the way. The Lewinsky scandal wasn't "vetting" it was a right wing media shitstorm designed to give power to the facists.

Now that he is the nominee the media is trying to destroy him for McDeath.

I have faith that Indiana will turn around. Still a few days to get away from the wright and other issues.

[Hoof Hearted]

9. So you admit your candidate can't win on the issues.

Still a few days to get away from the wright and other issues.

[jackson_dem]

14. Obama could turn the focus back to real issues if he had the balls to debate Hillary

But why debate when you have lost every one on one debate with her and paid a price with voters for doing so?

[guyanakoolaid]

43. Yeah, we need a debate on "real issues", Obama hasn't responded to that tough lapel pin question

But on the issues, do you really want to see Hillary up there again mumbling about her lack of a plan for Social Security?

[jackson_dem]

44. Clinton has offered a debate without moderators. So what is Obama afraid of? (answer: Hillary)

[guyanakoolaid]

46. No, he's just decided to use a page out of her own play book

Why debate a defeated candidate? Hillary didn't in her Senate run.

[NJSecularist]

16. Yeah, I was wondering why I hadn't seen a graph for IN lately..

It must be because Hillary is winning the state and gaining momentum. :)

[ProSense]

18. Except for the bump Obama experienced, the polls aren't good for Hillary

She's has actually lost ground in all except SurveyUSA:

Previous polls:

SurveyUSA 4/11-13/08
Hillary 55
Obama 39

ARG 4/2-3/08
Hillary 53
Obama 44

Research 2000 3/31-4/2/08
Hillary 49
Obama46

Current polls:

SurveyUSA 4/25-27/08
Hillary 52
Obama 43

ARG 4/23-24/08
Hillary 50
Obama 45

Research 2000 4/23-24/08
Hillary 47
Obama 48

link

[jackson_dem]

21. Nice cherry picking, misleading exclude Obama's Indiana surge into the lead in IN before losing PA

ProSpin lives up to her name. :thumbsup:

[ProSense]

29. No, spin, there are only two polls since March began that gave Obama a lead

All the others have Hillary ahead. They are also the only two not updated and factored into the graphic.

Why didn't you post the link? You're, the one being misleading.

[jackson_dem]

32. Nice try, ProSpin

(H is on the left, O's number on the right from PS's link)

PPP (D) 4/26-27/08 1388 LV 50 42 8
SurveyUSA 4/25-27/08 628 LV 52 43 2
Research 2000 4/23-24/08 400 LV 47 48 5
ARG 4/23-24/08 600 LV 50 45 5
Howey-Gauge 4/23-24/08 600 LV 46 46 -

Selzer-Star-WTHR 4/20-23/08 534 LV 38 41 21
Downs Center/SUSA 4/14-16/08 578 LV 45 50 5
Times/Bloomberg 4/10-14/08 687 LV 35 40 19
SurveyUSA 4/11-13/08 571 LV 55 39 3

He surged, took the lead in three of four polls and then Clinton's big PA win happened.

ARG 4/2-3/08 600 LV 53 44 2
Research 2000 3/31-4/2/08 400 LV 49 46 2
SurveyUSA 3/29-31/08 530 LV 52 43 1
Howey-Gauge 2/17-18/08 500 LV 25 40 36

[ProSense]

41. Three out of 13 polls Obama took a slight lead and you're trying to spin that as huge?

She lost ground and is trying to make it back up. Face it.

It will not help anyway. It's over.

[jackson_dem]

42. Nice try, again. That ignores the surge Obama experienced in IN like he does due to ads everywhere

[Texas Hill Country]

36. nice graph

[mikelgb]

2. big PA win of 1 delegate?

[jackson_dem]

11. A 210,000 vote win isn't big? A 2,000 vote win in Wyoming is?

[BlueIdaho]

38. Popular vote? Now there's grasping at straws.

Please don't hand me any guff about the popular vote - "estimated" vote totals for caucuses - or any other revisionist nonsense. That's not how this primary will be decided and you know it.

[PBS Poll-435]

59. Who only won 1 delegate?

It wasn't Clinton or Obama

Total or Net

Where ya gettin' your info?

[rocktivity]

3. Just like in PA, Obama only NEEDS around 40% of the vote

especially if he wins NC. Hillary, on the other hands, needs at least 66% of the vote in ALL the remaining contests.

:headbang:
rocknation

[jackson_dem]

8. Only in the "netroots" fantasy land where superdelegates, FL and MI don't exist

[rocktivity]

25. FL and MI DON'T exist

until the DNC says they do. I suspect their delegates will be seated 50-50 if at all, rendering them a wash.

:headbang:
rocknation

[jackson_dem]

34. The fact is we won't know until the convention

They may get in with half their delegations reduced. That would give Clinton a net gain of 19 delegates from FL alone.

[PBS Poll-435]

13. For what?

What is with the percentages?

[jackson_dem]

15. Fairy tales you can believe in

A popular fairy tale holds that superdelegates, FL and MI do not exist.

[PBS Poll-435]

19. But...But...If no one gets enough delegates to win the nomination, ....

That means McCain is going to run against Nader & Ron Paul.


:cry::cry::cry::cry::cry::cry:

[rocktivity]

20. Hillary's not going to be able to make a credible appeal to the superdelegates

unless she can get her numbers closer to Obama's. She can't do that unless she wins at least 66% of the vote in all nine of the remaining contests (not just in WV and KY, as the MSM is telling you). To stop her (as he did in PA), Obama needs to get around 40% of the vote from here on in. A win in NC and at least 40% of Indiana will put a huge dent in her plans.

:headbang:
rocknation

[PBS Poll-435]

27. "MaTh" is dead to me. Math, I can handle quite well.....

I am not a statistician, and I am certainly not a meteorologist, but I can certainly see the shit-storm coming...


The trend line is obvious, peaks have leveled, and I am optimistic about a Clinton nomination.

[jackson_dem]

31. Obama has been in decline ever since the vetting process began at the end of February

[rocktivity]

35. That explains Hillary's inability to overtake Obama since the end of February!

She lost so many races on the first Super Tuesday that she had to win at least 60% of the votes in each of the second Super Tuesday just to get close. Her failure to do so is why she needs at least 66% of the vote now.

:rofl:
rocknation

[PBS Poll-435]

48. %of What to matter?

You really don't seem to get it, do you...

"MaTh" doesn't matter...

It never did.

[jonestonesusa]

51. Some call it vetting, some call it the kitchen sink strategy,

and those calling it the kitchen sink are on the Clinton campaign team.

How have the media and Clinton surrogates "vetted" Obama? They attacked his preacher, they pounced on him for saying that rural America is bitter over social change, they said he was lucky to be black.

Not one iota of this "vetting" had anything to do with real issues. So if you want to cheer it on because it benefits your candidate, go for it. It does nothing to start a robust dialogue about policy within our party, nothing to help Democrats win the GE, and nothing to address this country's need for change.

It's politics as usual, Clinton-style, coming after eight years of George Bush. Pardon me for finding nothing in that to cheer about.

[jackson_dem]

53. None of them had anything to do with Hillary

Bittergate, Wright, Ayrers, lapel pingate are all self-inflicted wounds. Much of it is BS but welcome to politics. They have been doing this to Hillary for 16 years.

It is politics as usual. This is the way politics has been for over two centuries and the Obamamessiah won't change that.

[jonestonesusa]

56. It's a little late on this thread, but here's a quick reply.

First of all, in response to HC having nothing to do with this - I will forgo at this time providing any links to the numerous statements by HC herself and press releases from the Clinton campaign that have helped keep this story in the news cycle. Many posters on DU have done this; I have seen them on a number of occasions. Honestly, if you dispute this, I do not think you are following the story closely.

Second, your post implied that I'm surprised to see the political swiftboating of Obama. I am not the slightest bit surprised. In fact, it's an old old story to demonize African Americans, activist or not, in order to gain cheap political points. Any cursory look at American history would reveal this cycle being repeated, since the era of indentured servitude. You are right that there is nothing new about this, and I doubt if many African American observers are surprised by it, although some of us held out hope that America was going to be truer to its ideals of fair treatment for all with the historic occasion of the first competitive black candidate for president. To some extent that's a naive view, but without such hope, there would be even fewer African Americans participating in the political process in this country.

Third, I am slightly more surprised to see this demonizing proceed with some level of approbation and apathy on DU, a site that is supposed to represent the American Left. I'm disappointed that these attacks are directed at some of the most loyal voters to the Democratic Party, African Americans, during their difficulties in the last 40 years competing in national elections. And, while I've read enough American history to see how often politics as usual prevail, I am also going to keep criticizing unfair attacks that distract from doing the nation's real business. I wish that you and all people with progressive values would join me in this.

Finally, to point out how cliched and common the HC and MSM tactics have been does nothing to make me more likely to support your candidate. At the very least, HC supporters on DU ought to be making a case for their candidate based on the issues. I see precious little of that these days.

My humble opinion...thanks for the dialogue.

[JackORoses]

5. hold onto your racial arguments, may they comfort you when your Queen fails

[Hoof Hearted]

7. When Obama loses North Carolina it will truly be OVER.

I, will dance.

[NeedleCast]

10. Wouldn't Hold Your Breath

[jackson_dem]

12. Obama supporters have always been very confident about NC. Why?

[Nedsdag]

17. So will the Republicans.

[jackson_dem]

23. Remember when Obamites loved rethugs when they voted 3:1 for him?

Too bad Obama's crossover appeal to indies and rethugs has vanished as folks get to know him better. Among Democrats he has also declined but he is in a free fall with indies and rethugs. He used to win them 2:1 and 3:1 respectively (rethugs delivered Missouri to him). He now win them by single digits and sometimes even loses them. By May Clinton may be carrying them as consistently as she has won Democrats.

[rocktivity]

22. Only if he loses by less than 40%

Hillary is going to have to win at 66% of the vote from here in on or she'll continue to run in place. That won't impress the superdelegates.

:headbang:
rocknation

[jackson_dem]

26. That is quite a fairy tale but if makes you feel better about Obama losing

:thumbsup:

[rocktivity]

33. Not fanatsy, just mathematics

which you can try yourself.

:headbang:
rocknation

[JackORoses]

47. don't get your little hoof too set on that

have some tissues handy

[Leopolds Ghost]

24. You seem awfully obsessed with Obama's race... care to explain why?

[jackson_dem]

30. Sadly, race is the biggest predicator of how people will vote regarding Hillary and Obama

Why do you think Obama supporters were confident about winning North Carolina as far back as February?

This wasn't always this way but Obama tanked with whites, Latinos, as well as losing working folks by more than he once did, seeing his margins even among affluent folks decline, his once dominating leads among indies and rethugs vanish, etc.

[zabet]

28. ..

:woohoo:

[indimuse]

37. SUSA KY Poll: Clinton By 36 !!!!

http://www.surveyusa.com/client/PollReport.aspx?g=26808902-2e9b-462b-86bf-a023fae70b92


Tuesday :: April 29, 2008
SUSA KY Poll: Clinton By 36
By Big Tent Democrat, Section Elections 2008
Posted on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 03:27:30 PM EST
Tags: (all tags) Share This:
Meanwhile, back at the polls, SUSA's KY Poll says Clinton by 36:

Hillary Clinton decisively defeats Barack Obama, 63% to 27%. In three SurveyUSA tracking polls over the past 30 days, there is no movement in the contest. Obama gains a little bit of ground in Greater Louisville, but loses an equivalent amount in other portions of the state.
Whites (90% of the vote) 67-23 Clinton. African Americans (8% of the vote) 71-15 Obama.
K&R!

[haymakeragain]

40. Not quite 70% is it.

Too bad they didn't actually vote today or yesterday. should they even bother to have the primary?

[PBS Poll-435]

50. Should people actually get to vote and have it matter?

Umm..Probably...

[haymakeragain]

39. Not quite 70% is it?

Not gonna be enough.

[bigdarryl]

45. Obama is going to get more than 73% of the black vote this poll UNDER POLLS ...

Obama's numbers on african americans

[PBS Poll-435]

49. Why?

[jackson_dem]

52. Because he does in every state

See my OP. I also note where white undecideds will likely break.

-snip-

This is an overestimate of Clinton's black support. We have seen this in every state. Clinton will be in the high teens or even the 20's and Obama in the low 70's with black support but then when voting occurs Obama gets 85-92% as almost all the black undecideds go to Obama. This is why Clinton consistently has done worse on election day in southern states than in polling (elsewhere the opposite has often been the case as Obama underperforms). Correcting for this it is Clinton 48, Obama 44. Since Hillary is at 54% with whites now she could take 2/3 of undecided given her history of doing best with late deciders, with the exception mentioned above. That brings Clinton up to 53-47. It is sad we even have to do this but race has emerged as the single greatest predictor of preference between Obama and Clinton with Obama routinely getting 90% black support and Clinton mostly getting over 60% in March and April (gender isn't close. For instance in SUSA's poll Clinton leads 52-43 overall but only 55-41 among women.).

[rodeodance]

54. Thanks for the work of the analysis JD.

[Milo_Bloom]

55. LMAO....

" PPP is the only firm that had Obama winning PA and had Obama up 57-33 in NC before Hillary's big PA win. PPP seems to be overestimating Obama's support lately, although I haven't went back and checked their past performance. I don't recall any problems with them in the past, though. "

AKA... although PPP was wildly off base in the last contest, I am going to try and present this and still look credible.

[JanErikFl]

57. Indianapolis Star Endorses Hillary

http://www.indystar.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080502/OPINION08/805020400/1291/OPINION08

Experience makes Clinton better choice in primary

Clinton offers a clear-eyed view of the way things are. She offers nuanced positions on how to address the war in Iraq, trade with China and economic expansion. Her depth of knowledge is remarkable.

[book_worm]

58. Again look when it was taken