Over the weekend, RCP’s Jay Cost noted that the movement in the PA polls was strikingly similar to the movement in the OH pre-primary polls. Cost avers that past is not necessarily prologue, but notes that there are reasons to expect them to move in tandem. So it is worth keeping in the back of the mind that Clinton outpolled the RCP average in OH.
The RCP average in PA is Clinton +5.9, including results ranging from Clinton +10 to Obama+3. At the Hotline, Democratic pollster Mark Blumenthal plots the divergent poll results, noting that “as the undecided percentage gets lower, Clinton’s support gets higher,” though he leaves himself a little wiggle room near the end of the article. We can be fairly certain that the undecided will be at zero by the end of the night.ÂÂ
Moreover, TalkLeft’s admittedly pro-Clinton Jeralyn Merritt has the final tally of registered voters for the primary. Notably, there are many times more older voters than the Obama-friendly 18-25 demo. In addition, the vaunted surge in voter registration ends up looking marginal against a potential base of 4.2 million voters.
Most of those factors point to a good night for Clinton. However, even if Clinton outperforms the poll averages by a few points, she could easily fall short of the double-digit victory that would deny Obama the “moral victory” he was floating on PA radio yesterday. To beat expectations, she has to hope her organization can really turn out the vote in the more rural areas of the state to pad her popular vote total. And the popular vote will likely be the focus tonight, as the state’s large number of counties – split into multiple congressional districts — could delay the delegate counts for a day or longer.
As far as the delegate math and the district-by-district analyses go, true junkies may want to review prior analyses by Jay Cost, Al Giordano and Chris Bowers. The broader analysis from Sean Oxendine includes a fair amount about those Appalachian counties in play tonight.
As always, Karl, great stuff. Too many TWP’s for Baracky.
[…] at Protein Wisdom looks at the numbers and expectations: Over the weekend, RCP’s Jay Cost noted that the movement […]
I think it’s just axiomatic that one difference between Ohio and Pennsylvania is that a greater percentage of Hillary voters will be anti-Obama voters, and the longer this goes on the more that will be the case. Peaked too soon you did, little man.
So, what time should I start popping the corn tonight? I suppose it will be a late night.
[…] Pennsylvania math looks good for Hillary (Protein Wisdom) […]
REPORT FROM BATTLEGROUND PENNSYLVANIA!!!
I’m never going to get tired of typing that (heh!)
Here are a couple of personal, unscientific observations from the western Philly suburbs.
1) Obama’s reported 4 to 1 spending gap in media purchases is clearly reflected in the number of TV and radio ads I’ve seen and heard. Informally the gap is more like ten to one in Obama’s favor.
2) Obama’s ads have beaten away at the odious ogre of big oil companies raping everything in sight: high gas prices, melting polar ice caps, record profits, yada, yada. The last few days have seen a slight shift to “average voter” testimonials, almost all “working class looking” and more than a few of them gassing their cars (with prices prominantly featured in the background.) Change and unity as opposed to the “same old Washington politics” is the recurring message.
3) Hillary has balanced her comparatively scarce ads between the presidential gravitas meme, having a plan for America that “works in the real world” and snarky attacks on Obama for his “I take no money from oil companies” narrative (nobody can, it’s illegal) and the “bitter” comments. She had a very effective appearance on Fox29 Philly in which she gleefully suggested that Obama needed to toughen up if he expected to be president and stop whining about the debate questions. Obama changed his ads to bang back at Hillary’s “same old negative politics” by changing his message to taking money from “Oil Company PACS” and bashing Hillary for taking more money from industry PACS “than any other candidate.”
4) Hillary’s greatest resource in PA is ultra popular Gov. Ed Rendell who has pulled out all the stops in promoting her. While he’ll have some effect in the two major metropolitan areas (especially Philly as a former mayor) his real value might be seen in those working class rural districts where he enjoys big name recognition and strong support with working class Democrats. Philly Mayor Michael Nutter’s support for Clinton is a bit more problematic. Nutter was considered an outsider candidate and there are plenty of questions as to whether or not he can deliver significant votes for Clinton in that city.
5) Talking to people here and there leaves me with a sense of the “tefloness” of Obama and his message. There seem to be a significant number of his supporters who are wrapped in the dream and are perfectly willing to stick their fingers in their ears and “La La La” their way out of dealing with the myriad of questions raised about Obama. In other words, don’t harsh my mellow with your irrelevant questions. I WANT THE CHANGE, MAN!
6) My early sense is that Rendell’s support in the rural areas will buttress Clinton’s support in the metro suburbs enough to counteract Obama’s city and campus votes. As pointed out above, there are still a fair number of undecided votes so it should be a long and interesting evening.
While I am waiting to go into yet another meeting, I have to share this: I am an Obama supporter, but I would still vote for the Hills if she got the nod. But I have a coworker who can only be described as a Obamaton. She is totally in the bag for this guy and she is rather wild-eyed about it. I told her this morning that I was not sure that Obama was up to the task of putting up a good fight with the opposing party. I thought it was an ominous sign that he is faltering so badly against the Clinton campaign and a few media smackdowns. I thought my coworker was going to transform into a powerful werewolf right in front of me because she was SO mad. But she could not refute that he has been stumbling. It was just “someone else’s fault”. Sigh. That whiney, starry-eyed crankery is what is making me hear the clanking chains of the ghosts of popular candidates past: Dukkakis, Dean, Kerry, Hart, Ted Kennedy (more than once). Please Jeebus, let’s not go there again.
BJ – If Baracky wins, I will blame, and denounce, you.
That’s fine, JD. If Hillary wins I will blame and denounce myself!
And Halliburton … but not Kyoto
Oh, BJ, you can always blame Kyoto. And Halliburton, but not Blackwater.
Please Jeebus, let’s not go there again.
I think your prayer is futile. Introspection is not a Democratic party strong suit. Accusing the winner of malfeasance, and/or accusing the populace of stupidity is more in line with what the party has historically chosen to run with in the face of losses. The press, whether you believe in the actual leftist bias or not, will be all too happy to help spread the message.
I am just waiting for the MI and FL “count every vote” moments at the convention.
Oh, JD, it’s already happening.
As I noted previously Fast Eddie Rendell has been beating the “count every vote so every vote counts” drum for the last several weeks during his unabashed pimping for the Hildebeast. The delectable irony of promoting a Dem talking point that was originally created to counter the perceived disenfranchisement of minority voters at the expense of the minority candidate makes me tremble with mirth.
So, no one EVER accused the populace of being “bamboozled” or “bought” by Bill Clinton when he kicked some ass in those two elections? Hmmmmmmm?
But you are right, we have been sore losers. And we will probably be again if you win.
Dammit, I’m getting to the point of wanting to change my screen name. Is cranky-E the next one in the sequence?
The G– D– –ing Democrats can’t get anything right. I don’t want or expect much out of the political system, but the one thing I do want that the System can deliver is Clintons OUT!. I voted for Obama in the Texas primary, crossing party lines to do so, because I want somebody to hand Hillary! her ass, preferably in three or more pieces. From what I see around the Web, I suspect that there are a lot of Obaminators whose basic motivation is the same thing. No –ing wonder zombies are so popular all of a sudden, even tongue in cheek. Is there no stopping these charmless egotists? How many –ing hit points does it take to keep them from rising again?
Please Jeebus, let’s not go there again, Lisa sez. There is no point upon which she and I could possibly come to better or more heartfelt agreement. But I have to say to her and her allies: Please Jeebus, will you guys start checking these people out? I simply do not believe that all you’ve got is smooth-talking grifters, massive egos whose only talent is mudslinging, and the patently (if mildly) insane. But that’s all you seem to be able to put forward. It would help if you responded sensibly to others’ objections once in a while. John O’Neil is (or was) a Democrat; I met the man, once, in his capacity as fundraiser for Howard Dean. He tried to tell you Kerry is an asshole whose only capacity for leadership is to take you where you don’t want to go, and instead of listening and making adjustments you just cast him out as anathema.
Appointment as The Democratic Candidate does not confer sainthood irrespective of background; Anointment does not erase the past; and if you’re going to keep on pushing back the start of the campaign season, you’d damned well better realize that if nothing else it gives plenty of time for people to dig up dirt. At the very least, you ought to be able to dredge up one or two people who don’t have so many skeletons in the closet they have to keep their underwear on the nightstand, and when people come forward suggesting the skeletons are there you need to force Teh Candidate™ to let you check instead of issuing shrieking rants about the necessity for search warrants!
Jeebus. What’s with you guys? Just based on what’s appeared here, I could vote for Lisa with a clear conscience, despite disagreeing with much of what she believes. Check the bastards out before exposing them to public scrutiny, dammit. The process is called “vetting”. I commend it to you.
Regards,
Ric
Lisa has my vote too. Baracky is dangerous and Hillary would just be silly.
I never made any claims about the right and/or Bill Clinton.
The left really is hampered by the unreality that the press continues to report as fact. If the view you hold of the world is based only partially on reality, then you will have a tough time coming up with the actual reasons for failure.
For example, Paul Krugman continues to assert that the wins in 2006 were due to strong anti-war campaigns, despite the fact that many of the wins that year went to hawkish Democrats. The NY Times investigated the 2000 election and came away with the conclusion that Bush did in fact win, but it is an article of faith among many on the left that the election that year was “stolen”.
So it’s not that you are sore losers, which you are sometimes, it’s that you can’t accurately describe reality, or worse, can but decide that lies serve you better.
Ric – C’mon, vetting a black candidate is racist, because of the OPPRESSION.
Lisa: There is a huge difference between “bamboozled” and “bought.”
After the 2004 results were confirmed I dialed up Air America just for yucks. Like the moon’s Tidal Pull the first two things out of the mouths of Franken and the other stooge was: 1) “I can’t believe it! They stole another one!” 2) “I can only conclude that American voters are stupid.”
There is a Grand Canyon of separation in those two statements. Dumass, stupid, sheeplike, bamboozled voter complaints are part and parcel of the losing side. It’s an unserious, sore loser conclusion that works way more effectively than “our candidate sucked more.”
Stealing or buying an election also reflects a sore loser mentality but with a sharper edge. Now instead of insulting voters intelligence we’re on the cold gravy train headed towards violations of federal law. Bring the evidence and prosecute somebody. If you don ‘t have the evidence and aren’t inclined to even try to prosecute, then STFU. The sorest of sore losers were the die hard voter fraud lefties desperately trying to craft a disenfranchisement silk purse out of a Ohio 180,000 vote margin sow’s ear. When even the candidate doesn’t think you have a case (although Kerry, being the worthless, self centered asshat that he is tried to raise the issue years later) then STFU!
It’s all politics but of different stripes and of varying importance I’m not defensive about it (or Nora for that matter.) I watch it, facinated and, at times, LMAO.
Hint: I’m laughing now!
Just saw Chris Matthews at 30th Street Station in Philly.
He didn’t spit on me.
Oddly (or not, really), despite unhappiness over the results of those elections, I never heard anyone on the right claim the process was to blame. There was no discussion of eliminating the electoral college, or about the “unfairness” of someone who never broke 50% of the popular vote taking office.
I hope you didn’t return the favor.
Education Guy:
I really have a hard time talking to someone who is talking AT me telling me “THIS IS WHAT YOU THINK YOU FUCKING LYING LIBERAL – I AM TELLING YOU BECAUSE I KNOW”.
2006 was about the crappy direction of the war at the time. If the surge had begun showing the good results it has now, we would have still had a repub majority. That IS reality. There were SOME hawkish wins, but not a majority. Most were anti-war or at least not hawkish.
Since when did the NY Times word become gospel to you? It isn’t gospel to me and I LIKE the NY Times. Many more groups and journalists came away with a less than conclusive verdict on 2000.
Education Guy: You are pointing a finger with three pointing right back at your party. I can admit that the Democratic Party is chock-full-o quacks, can you bravely look your party in the face and say the same? Or are you SOOO busy blaming us for everything that is wrong with the country (in spite of the fact that you had two presidential terms, 6 years of congressional majority, and a stacked supreme court to work your Republican miracles?)
I think we could have a conversation here if you put that cudgel down and really start talking.
Clinton when he kicked some ass in those two elections
He never even got 50%+1 of the votes. Hardly kicking ass.
If that is the standard for kicking ass, W went nuclear on Kerry’s ass.
21. Yes there was. Rush Limbaugh was LIVID. He railed at the unfairness of Clinton’s supposed electoral landslide. But we didn’t have the nutroots to keep that going, alas.
Ric: Spot on.
One wonders when, at some point, someone within the shreiking hierarchy of the Democratic Party will talk to someone like Lisa who might be inclined to point out that “Hey! You nominated two empty suit self important nutso asshats to run against George W and they both lost. THEY BOTH LOST TO GEORGE STINKIN W BUSH!”
You know, one of those shining insights that would acknowledge the reality that GWB wasn’t the world’s greatest campaigner or inspirer. Hell he wouldn’t have been qualified to fetch water for wither Reagan or Bubba on the campaign trail. Both of the chosen candidates had comfortable leads until voters got to know them better and decided that they didn’t like what they saw!
How hard is it to face the truth and nominate someone without the chains dragging behind them like Jacob Marley? With all of the convergence of the forces of the universe aligning for overwhelming Democratic victory your party gives us Clinton Squared? Lovely to look at and hear but empty of substance and experience?
Elections are not won by shooting your own foot off, time after time. Unlike Ric “cranky-E” Locke, I would prefer if you do not begrudge me the opportunity to ROTF & LMAO by thinking it to be defensiveness. Far from it.
TY
Didn’t GWB say he had a mandate with 52%? I guess that is the standard.
If I ever saw Chris “Girls-r-Dumb” Matthews on the street I would put my high heel in his ass.
EG is a good guy. We are used to our ideological opponents coming here and telling us what we believe, how we act, who we hate, etc … and therefore, one that does not do so tends to be, at best, and outlier, and it takes some getting used to in order to converse outside of that paradigm. I fucking hate that word.
The idea that the Dem candidates won by being anti-war is not borne out by the facts, and their positions. They won because they ran as Republican-lite, and more measured analysis shows that being not-Republican played a greater role. Couple that with great dissatisfaction by R’s with the R’s, and it was a recipe for a win for San Fran Nan. The Left somehow co-opted this win for moderates into some denunciation of the war.
stacked supreme court That worked stacked has a historical context that I have to assume you accidentally overlooked in this description.
I wrote all that a didn’t even mention the winning strategy of Howard Dean as party head.
Yeesh!
Lisa the exit polling from 2006 showed less concern with Iraq and more concern with the dismal performance of the Republican lead Congress and Bush. Lot’s of conservatives stayed home in disgust and moderate Dems made great strides.
As it should have been.
So yea, the Republican Party is in disarray and can’t get out of its own way. Most here would readily acknowledge that fact and most here are less than impressed with John McCain being the best that we would do. Yup, the pot is calling the kettle black (heh.)
I’m merely pointing out the sad state of Democrats when they can’t beat candidates like GWB and Senator Livid McCodger.
My party is chock full of tepid vagina people like Arlen and Chuck Hagel and John Warner and also Olympia and many many others. I don’t just disagree with them. I a lot wish them ill.
Also Chuck Grassley should be starved to death. Stupid greasy ethanol-fetishizing wanker.
hf: Damn, man, you make me laugh!
ROTFLMAO!
BJ – He is being nice.
Happyfeet – Don’t be afraid to say what you really think.
I think this is the part where you’re not supposed to encourage me.
Au contraire, you tap dancing, word mixing loon. WE ENCOURAGE!
LOL. Ethanol-fetishizing wanker. And a stupid greasy one, no less.
I will try REALLY hard to encourage vetting. Not the current form of vetting though, which is: He’s cute. Let’s form an exploratory committee! Squee!
Do you think if I ran for office, they would hit me hard with pictures of me and my Richard Marx look-a-like ex? That mullet would totally take me down, man. My judgement would be deemed unsound. I think my youthful adorations for both Tito Jackson and Peter Frampton might be a problem as well.
I think hf has inspired Lisa. Well done.
The Marx thing is bad, but everyone would expect it from a Democrat. The Peter Frampton crush would show your multi-cultural appeal.
BJTexas: Yeah Howard Dean….sigh. That was a clear indicator that we haven’t learned a whole lot since the 1968 convention.
Ugh.
Happyfeet – Consider yourself encouraged. You are on a roll.
Lisa – As mullets were tacitly accepted by a broad base of our society for a limited period of time, that would not disqualify you. Had your paramour had a Meximullet or a Camaromullet, that would be a different story. Richard Marx wannabe’s, though sad, were harmless.
Uh…Eriq La Salle?
I haven’t done any candidate vetting myself, but I wonder if the Clintonian preference for governing-by-poll-results may have seeped into the Democratic Party? “What about him?” “Hmm. He’s young educated good-looking gives a mean speech and is of an ethnic minority. That matches what our numbers say the people are looking for.” “Good – run him!”
The problem is that so much of what has haunted these two candidates are things that random people doing random research on Google and YouTube have found out. This isn’t even the hyper-probbing opposition research that the other party will conduct. It just floors me that the whole concept of opposition research isn’t turned around immediately on own candidates to see what are the strengths we can exploit and the weaknesses we have to have an answer for. The fact that some of these simple things were surprises should scare the living daylights out of the state party chairs, and they ought to be asking what the devil the DNC is doing with their budget.
JD: LOL!! Love the Meximullets or the Central American Mullatino. And I live in Baltimore, home of the Camaromullet – which is totally badass.
Slart: Omg that is fantastic. Isn’t that a promo pic from Coming to America (one of the funniest movies ever). Just let your soooooooooooooooouuuuuul glow!
#38: Then I am ready to run. Can I spend any of my campaign money on Prada bags and Jimmy Choo sandals?
Ha, Lisa, dating a Richard Marx look-a-like is grounds for an automatic disqualification!
FOR THE FASHION SENSE AND MUSICAL APPRECIATION!!
It seems to me that the vetting of Democratic presidential candidates can be turned into a money making reality show:
SO YOU WANT TO BE A PRESIDENTIAL NOMINEE?
Let’s make Gilbert Gottfried the host and impanel several B-C list celebrities like David Hasselhoft, Laurie David, Sinbad, Daniel Baldwin and Caroline Rhea to judge the contestants.
They will be given tasks like confronting rich people at their businesses and getting them, right then, to give up some of their cash pie for a poor family in South Central.
The possibilites are endless! Who can more effectively and publically condemn the YMCA as “misogynist tool of the patriarchy?” Oh, I know! An artistic competition on who can paint the most creative message in pigs blood on the Marine recruiting center! Also, which contestant can get the most illegal aliens drivers licenses in a 24 hout period!
We need to call that ex-British commando guy, the one married to the “Touched by an Angel” chick! We’ll be rich, I tells ya!
I have a story about Leif Garrett and Peter Frampton, but I think I’ll save it.
Not necessarily. You could point out that you did divorce the asshole, thus demonstrating good judgement. But for that tactic to work you would also have to accept that digging up misbehavior by your opponent’s ancestors back to the Flood cancels it out, at best.
And that, m’dear, is a damnable, palpable, bald-faced lie, and there is no better proof that that is the case than the performance of the Pelosi Congress. Every District that elected a new Democrat had voted for Republicans before, in most cases for many years. Do you really suppose they all turned into pure-quill MoveOn moonbats overnight? Bullshit. Every time Nancy and Harry brought up another surrender-and-impeach program, those people started getting emails, cards, phone calls, letters, and personal visits from constituents reminding them that that was not what they were put into office for, and the measure went down in flames. That pattern repeated over and over and over again; it continues to repeat today, with (as you say) even more power now that “the surge” appears to be doing some good; and Pelosi & Co. are reduced to symbolic measures that shoot themselves in the foot — Colombian goods enter the US free of duty; the proposed new agreement is to allow US goods to enter Colombia on the same basis; so opposing the trade agreement is shooting their Union supporters in the ass and claiming it’s for their benefit! But it’s something that opposes Teh Bush Program™, right?
And tu quoque is beside the point; in fact, it’s an opportunity — what happens to the first party that gives up that sort of self-delusion and starts being serious? Talking about owning the political landscape for a generation! I’d vote for it, and I suspect the majority here would be out carrying signs for it, regardless whether the name began with “D” or “R” (or something else.)
Regards,
Ric
Everything you ever wanted to know about mullets, and then some, at:
mulletsgalore.com
Dig it.
Lisa: it’s the only picture I could find of La Salle from around then. In retrospect, I love his character in that movie. When it first came out, though, I hated him, and it took me a little while to sort out that I was supposed to hate him.
Hah! I just realized the error of having a Canadian Like Caroline Rhea on the candidate vetting panal.
Oh, wait a minute. MULTICULTURALISM BONA FIDES!!!
Never mind…
Eriq La Salle vid.
Haaaaaaaaaaaa!!!! I was kind of in love with Leif Garrett too. Which is kind of odd because he really looked like Kristy McNichol from “Eight is Enough”.
Let’s get back to you having your high heel in Chris Mathews ass. Will be doing that in your underwear? the reason I ask is I can get you a bunch of votes if that happens to be the case. You don’t even have to run for anything. You’ll still get a lot of votes.
Lisa
I didn’t call you a liar, so tone down the defense a bit. I am merely telling you what I have seen over the last few elections since I became a Republican. In addition, you will have to excuse me for not knowing that in a conversation regarding the Democrats I am supposed to present equal time to the faults of the Republican.
I know this will be shocking to you, but I am very much over the need to be accepted by those of the progressive bent. Your response to me shows me that you are not willing to judge based on what I say, but rather how you can put yourself into the group which I am discussing and then be offended by it.
That was “Family.” You’re thinking of Willie Ames. Same hair.
Frampton, eh? And this after Mrs. Butterworth made an appearance here on another thread. Next up should be Verne Troyer and that guy from the movie trailers.
…but not Joan Rivers. Okay?
[…] for Obama, that’s an excellent reason to vote for Hillary Clinton. And, according to Protein Wisdom, that’s what most of the Dems will do […]
[…] Field’s Al Giordano (whose earlier beakdown of PA was linked this morning) has a new forecast of Clinton +4.6 as part of a roundup that runs as high as Clinton+12. […]
LOLOL @ Rusty. I agree. I think the glee that would come from a half dressed woman kicking Chris Matthews ass in high heels would cross party lines.
Yes! Thanks Happy.
Education Guy: I didn’t think I was putting myself into some group and being offended by it. I was responding to the fact that you used the term “YOU” when you addressed me, which I took to mean, well…..me. I understand that your opinion is that members of the Democratic Party are in full flight from reality and cannot make sound choices because of this. Additionally, we cannot decide what lies we want to base our wild elusions on. Well I disagree, sir. So there.
I was using you in the more general term, in this case referring to Democrats. Sorry for the confusion.
Educ Guy: Ty. Sorry if I came off snottish or defensive. Now let us turn our eyes toward Pennsylvania to see which candidate McCain will beat in November. He won’t even have to leave the house to do it. He might not even have get up off of the couch (except to get another beer).
So depressing.
Lisa – Never underestimate the ability of “The Maverick” to piss off those that would only grudgingly support him.
Lisa,
Isn’t Baltimore, or more specifically Pasadena, the birthplace of the tramp stamp as well?
LOL, that is possible – even likely. They are are rather profligate around here. Always fascinating, but ultimately unattractive. I have been waiting to see one that says “Insert Cock Here” with an arrow or “Natural Gas Repository” or something like that.
The “D” refers to my name, David, which is unfortunate around here since so many with that name have appeared bringing massive stupidity with them. You would be “Cranky-R” under this template, of course.
Your site looks great! Best of luck to you.