Posted on 04/03/2008 9:16:43 AM PDT by COUNTrecount
April 2, 2008 -- WASHINGTON - Barack Obama has cut deeply into Hillary Rodham Clinton's lead in Pennsylvania, coming to within 5 percentage points in a new poll as the two rivals fought toe-to-toe over the same turf yesterday.
Sen. Clinton leads Sen. Obama by 47-42 percent in a new Rasmussen Reports survey. Just a week ago, Clinton was up 10 percentage points, and in early March she was ahead by 15.
"If Obama is able to pull off an upset in the Keystone State, it would effectively end the race for the Democratic nomination," wrote Scott Rasmussen in an analysis of the poll.
Clinton has been slipping over the past 10 days since her story that she came under sniper fire during a visit to Bosnia in 1996 was debunked.
Her admission that the story was false has received huge play in the media and she has come under heavy attack from the Obama campaign and other critics who say it calls her whole record of accomplishment into question.
(Excerpt) Read more at nypost.com ...
If he can even manage to lose like he did in Texas
It’s Official: Obama Wins Texas
4/1/08, 2:27 pm EST
The delegate battle in the Lone Star State goes to Obama 99-94.
To recap, Clinton scored a narrow primary delegate victory 65-61.
In the (ridiculously drawn out) caucus process, Obama won 38-29.
It’s a net of five for Obama.
So let’s revisit the delegate race since March 4:
Clinton wins
Ohio +9
and
Rhode Island +5
Obama wins
Texas +5
and
Vermont +3
and
Wyoming +2
and
Mississippi +7
Texas cancels out Rhode Island. Mississippi and Wyoming cancel out Ohio. Obama’s left with a three delegate surge from Vermont.
And that doesn’t count the 10 new delegates Obama netted at the Iowa county conventions. Or the five more he netted in the final counting of California.
I’ll say it again. The Math is the new black. And it’s a bitch for Clinton.
For more on how Obama secured his stunning victory in the Texas “two step” read this recent cover story from the magazine.
It doesn’t matter what your politics are at this point. Even what your identity politics are. Hillary looks like a clown, a buffoon, even more clownish and buffoonish than her clown-buffoon husband. She’s going to lose in PA and she’s going to lose big.
That sniper-lie is going to go down in history as one of the biggest single political blunders ever.
I think before she spewed that frighteningly psychotic nonsense she had a realistic (though outside) shot at winning PA big, finishing the primary season with more total popular votes than Hussein, and persuading the superdelegates that she was more electable than Hussein.
But now it’s over. She’s not persuading anybody about anything. She’s a used-up has-been hag who coulda been a contender.
I only wish I could be enjoying it more, the Clintons hanging on to the edge of a crumbling cliff by their fingernails.
But I can’t. A President Hussein scares me too much.
Have you seen the Rev. Wright clips?
How could Obama possible surive commercials with those clips? If you think there is even a remote possibility then you and I are hopelessly different in our view of the electorate.
If anybody thinks the blue collar and geriatric “typical white” voters in PA will vote for Obambi and his hate-white pastor, they are grossly mistaken.
I've been getting a kick out of his "operation chaos" stuff but there's no way I could stomach EVER marking a ballot for her.
That said, I want her to win the nomination because I think she's way more beatable than Obama - people will come out in droves to vote AGAINST her. Obama, on the other hand, may look pretty good up against zero charisma old cranky codger McCain. It would definitely be a tighter fight, imo.
My sentiments exactly.
“I can’t believe some dummies want to support her. Rush is urging decent Republicans to vote for her ick!”
I couldn’t support her, either. But given the choice between a superficial golden boy who refuses to deal with any policy substantively and Hillary Clinton, I’d take Hillary.
I’d at least expect Evil to defend our nation if under attack, if for no other reason than someone dared challenge her authority. And yes, in my book, there’s nothing worth than superficial, petty nonsense. I’ll take wild exaggerations and wrong-minded policies over that—at least you can combat and make cases against the latter two. Fluff should just be dismissed as inadmissable from the outset—mere vapor unworthy of consideration.
Obama is just as liberal as Clinton. I’d argue even moreso. At least put up someone who can discuss policy.
You’re exactly right. The media loves this guy. They flock to him. And all the while, the crowds stare blankly ahead and eat his fluff up like they’re watching their favorite sitcom. Further, with the economy turning into the major issue, McCain can’t call Obama to the mat over his superficial non-sensical and completely unsubstantial hope garbage, as he lacks the know-how and the experience to make such claims.
It’s one of the reasons I’m really missing Romney. As the economy dives, Romney could have very easily turned Obama’s superficial garbage over on its head and disected his gibberish. McCain is all too clueless on the matter to do the same.
And again, as you said, the press will just glow with Obama worship. He’ll be on women’s talk shows, and they’ll ask him about that time he baked cookies for his wife. Of course, the press will be all the while sharpening their pointy knives for the likes of John McCain.
Hillary Clinton is a far better candidate to face than Obama. And I personally think she’d make a better president, as well.
This race is to volatile to give even the usual low credence to polls.
In her mind it might be. She would not have won Texas without the hispanic vote.
Despite the fact that most Ricans are, like Obama, “biracial”, they have always been in denial about said fact, and will definately vote for the blonde white woman.
She has catered to Puerto Rico as Senator from NY and her hubby made sure that there were several critical Puerto Ricans among the midnight January 19, 2001 Presidential Pardons. That’s how far ahead they plan.
Nice Recap. That’s why all Hildabeast has left is “Electibility” (her own negatives are not important I guess) and Popular Vote Count.
Micheal Barone is smart guy.
He did a detailed analysis and concluded that even WITHOUT do-overs in MI and FL, Hildabeast has a chance to WIN Popular Vote count.
He assumed BIG Victories for Hillary in PA and IN. He also assumed Hillary Victories in DAKOTA and MONTANA.
I believe he is COMPLETELY WRONG in giving Hillary States of South Dakota and Montana. Mountain regions have been the STRONGEST for Obama and in no way Hillary beats him there.
Still he only gave Hillary 30,000 net gain from Dakota and Montana, but overall 100,000 net lead from remaining contests.
So the KEY is that in North Carolina Obama NEEDS to WIN BIG and KEEP it at worst within 5% in PA.
If he wins IN then its over for Hillary. If he keeps it within 1-2% and wins BIG in NC it is still MOST LIKELY over for Hillary.
However, if Obama loses BIG in IN, Hildabeast still got a chance.
Klintons won the support of Puerto Ricans by GRANTING PARDONS to FALN Terrorists.
Its a shame such a disgusting ploy works.
Found this.
The Top 10 Myths Keeping Hillary in the Race
I have noted a number of myths suggesting Hillary should stay in the race. Here are ten enduring, kudzu-like myths, with the debunking they sorely need.
Myth: This race is tied.
No, actually, it’s not. Obama has the lead in number of states won, in pledged delegates and in overall delegates. Nothing will happen in the remaining primaries to substantially change that. As to the one thing Hillary does lead in, superdelegates, her quickly shrinking margin is among DNC personnel only. When you look at the elected superdelegates, Congressman, Senators and Governors (i.e. people who actually work with both Obama and Clinton) Obama leads there, too.
Myth: Okay, the popular vote is tied.
There are people who claim that because of the 3% separation, that Obama’s lead in the popular vote is a “statistical tie.” This is a myth because, when you can actually count things, there’s no need of statistics and no such thing as a margin of error. The popular vote is not an estimate based on a sampling, like a poll. Like the general election, there are winners and losers and, so far, Obama is the winner.
Myth: Fine, but what if we count electoral votes? Now Hillary is ahead!
Not so much. The proportions of electoral votes to population versus delegates to population are pretty comparable. So if you allocated electors proportionally in the same manner that you allocate delegates, Obama is still ahead. If you allocate them on a winner-take-all basis, then that would be the same as allocating the delegates on a winner-take-all basis, so why bring electors into it?
Myth: But if we did do it like the Electoral College, that proves Hillary is more electable than Obama, because of states like California.
This is perhaps the saddest little myth of all. It’s ridiculous to suggest that Obama will lose New York and California to McCain because Clinton won them in the primaries. No, come November, those states will join with Obama’s Illinois to provide 40% of the electors necessary for him to win.
Myth: Very well, then, Mr. Smarty-Math. But if we counted Michigan and Florida, then Hillary would be winning!
Nooo, she wouldn’t. The margin would depend on how you allocate the delegates, but Obama would still be ahead. And he’d still be about 100,000 ahead in the popular vote, too, despite not even being on the ballot in Michigan. However, it would enhance Hillary’s chances of catching up in the remaining races.
Myth: Ah HA! So Dean is keeping them out just to help Obama! And Obama is keeping them out.
That’s two myths, but I’ll treat it like one. The only people who can come up with a solution to this problem are the states themselves, to be presented to the Rules and Regulations Committee of the DNC for ratification. It was Rules and Regs, not Howard Dean, who ruled that Florida and Michigan were breaking the rules when they presented their original primary plans. If the two states cannot come up with a plan to reselect delegates, they can try to seat whatever delegates were chosen in the discounted primaries by appealing to the Democratic Convention’s Credentialing Committee, which includes many members from Rules and Bylaws.
Myth: If they don’t get seated until the convention but a nominee is selected before these poor people get counted then these states are disenfranchised.
There are two ways to debunk this myth: semantically and practically. The first is based on the word “disenfranchised:” these people have not been deprived of their right to vote. Through the actions of their states, their votes don’t impact the outcome. Now, you may say that that is specious semantics (Myth: I do say that!) but practically speaking, this is the usual effect of the nominating process, anyway. All of the Republican primaries since McCain clinched the nomination have been meaningless, but those voters are not disenfranchised.
Florida and Michigan tried to become more relevant in the process by breaking the rules. They risked becoming irrelevant instead.
Myth: Well, I say they are disenfranchised, and Hillary Clinton is their champion.
Only when it suits her. Last fall, when the decision was first made to flush 100% of Michigan and Florida delegates, Clinton firmly ratified it. That was because the typical punishment of only 50% representation also kept the candidates from raising money in those states. Figuring that she would wrap up the nomination handily anyway, the clear front-runner agreed with all the other candidates - including Obama - to completely “disenfranchise” those two states.
Myth: Well, never mind 2007. She’s doing more now to bring them in.
Not really. Recent stories in the St. Petersburg Times political blog said that 1) the Obama camp has reached out to the Florida Democratic party about a compromise and that 2) the Clinton camp will discuss nothing else but re-votes, which are legally, practically and politically dead.
Myth: Whatever! Hillary can still win! I know she can! She and her 37% positive rating will sweep through the remaining primaries and Michigan and Florida, winning 70% of everything and superdelegates will flock to her banner and Barack Obama will personally nominate her at the Convention and John McCain will give up and George Bush will even quit early so she can take over and... and... and... can I have a glass of water?
Yes, and you should lie down, too.
I'm prepared to believe that Obama might at some point in August and/or September poll well against McCain. I am not prepared to believe that even 45% of the country at large will go into the privacy of the voting booth on November 4 and vote for "Reverend Wright" Obama.And that is an excellent reason for McCain to choose a black conservative running mate - to give moderates and nonblack liberals permission to vote against Obama, and to ameliorate the reaction of the Obama supporters (including Big Journalism) to Obama's defeat.
McCain should brook no criticism of the black conservative's thin credentials for POTUS, but simply insist that his running mate would be a better POTUS than either person on the Democratic ticket - and that that, and unifying the country, are the only two criteria that matter in a VP nomination.
If anybody thinks the blue collar and geriatric “typical white” voters in PA will vote for Obambi and his hate-white pastor, they are grossly mistaken.
____________
I agree, and when Obama loses PA, what will happen?
He can’t win Ohio, or PA, two major battleground states.
This election just sucks. Can’t vote for McCain, Clinton or Obama.
I want a do-over !!!!
clinton had better win and win big to keep her in this race
dry up the money, split the support of the dems and get them disillusioned with the other dem
Time clintons used some of those millions they have to keep her in this race
I truely believe Obama and his nationof islam, his racist other pals and his views will detroy this country from within
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.