EDIT:
At the time I originally posted this both CNN and MSNBC were saying the same thing. Now, this was updated about 1215 ET:
Clinton Won't Concede
![[info]](http://p-stat.livejournal.com/img/userinfo.gif){kind=small}
_decibel_'s journalCreate a LiveJournal Account Learn more
|
You are viewing _decibel_'s journal Create a LiveJournal Account Learn more | Explore LJ Culture Entertainment Life Music News & Politics Technology |
Comments
I seriously doubt she'd toss in the towel before today's results are in. This seems more like a crackpot attempt at deflating some of her votes. (and no, I'm not suggesting Obama is behind it)
http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/storie
Dunno if she'd take that either though.
The smartest thing for him to do is make her VP to carry over her supporters, without whom he will be fighting an uphill battle against McCain. The polls show that a Obama/Clinton ticket would beat McCain, but Obama/anyone-else might not.
Don't rely on any "popular vote" arguments from either side. Truthfully, we'll never know. Though logically it can be deduced that Obama won that vote by a large margin. Currently, depending on the count, estimates put them neck and neck, with either a slight lead for Obama or Clinton. Realistically, they are guestimates. Most states with caucuses (where Obama won by large margins) don't track 'popular' votes - on the result of each caucus. Also, the "leads" that Clinton claims (and the ones people report) are based on including Michigan, where Obama wasn't even on the ballot and hence not earning any votes. Its an incredibly weak position to claim, which is why she isn't winning over super delegates with that argument.
Not true.
http://rasmussenreports.com/public_cont
For Rasmussen Reports and the quality of the data there, this link:
http://rasmussenreports.com/public_cont
And here's a link as to why Obama might be in trouble:
http://rasmussenreports.com/public_cont
Rasmussen reports...
Rasmussen reports...
and...
Rasnmussen reports!
What I said earlier was that polls are showing both sides, depending on the source. You gave me one source. Here's a few others for variety:
GALLUP (nationally recognized independent polling)
http://www.gallup.com/poll/105529/Gallu
http://www.gallup.com/poll/107407/O
This next one is great, shows general election coverage, comparing Clinton/Obama against McCain - shows neither side performing consistently better. Clinton currently has a 1 pt lead, whereas Obama has a 1 point deficit. Two weeks ago, Obama had a three point lead to Clinton's 1 point lead. We'll see more when it comes general election time:
http://www.gallup.com/poll/election
Within hours of each other, these were released:
Obama ahead of McCain:
http://afp.google.com/article/ALeqM
Clinton performs better against McCain:
http://www.boston.com/news/politics/pol
Here's two competing memos from the DNC and RNC, detailing the tricky path that McCain faces:
http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/arch
"The Gallup poll found that 58 percent of Americans have a positive image of Obama, 56 view McCain favorably and 54 have a good opinion of Clinton."
http://afp.google.com/article/ALeqM
Regarding the overall favorable chances of Republicans versus Democrats, here's the clip from a recent Harris poll:
"Around 40 percent of independent voters said they would vote for Clinton or Obama, while around 36 percent said they would choose McCain.
Those numbers have "held pretty consistent for the past three months," Harris said.
President George W. Bush's approval rating was just 28 percent." (remember, to court the conservatives, McCain is going buddy buddy with Bush)
Combine that with, given recent polls from all candidates, considering the "top issues" so far - the economy, the war, the environment - Democrats are heavily favored to perform better (and be on the side of public opinion) on all those issues compared to Republicans.
The truth of the matter is that a lot of it was meaningless - it will all start to become a lot more clear as soon as the Democratic nominee is determined and the general election begins.
Gallup also addresses the possible loss of the white middle-aged female vote in this article:
http://www.gallup.com/poll/107659/Hilla
Excerpt:
Implications
Democrats traditionally do better among women than among men in general-election presidential matchups. Assuming that Obama gains the Democratic nomination, as appears all but certain, he will need to depend on a strong turnout among women to assure his victory or, conversely, he will need to disrupt the typical pattern by which men skew toward voting for the Republican presidential candidate.
The data reviewed here among Democratic voters show clearly the degree to which Clinton, the first major-party female presidential candidate to make it this far in the process, has capitalized on the strength of Democratic women as a core constituency. This suggests that Obama thus has the general-election challenge of gaining strength among the women who have favored Clinton, or capitalizing on the opportunity provided by the men who have supported his candidacy. Some observers have suggested that Obama could face a backlash of sorts among Democratic women and thus run the risk of losing their votes in the general election.
Causasian female women were among the voters who turned 1980 into a Reagan win, when one percent in a decently sized, historically Democratic demographic almost certainly made a difference:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Sta
(Source: CBS News/ New York Times interviews with 12,782 voters as they left the polls, as reported in the New York Times, November 9, 1980, p. 28, and in further analysis.)
I am afraid of this; men have a tendency to vote Republican, and Caucasian women could turn the tide if they feel disenfranchised enough. Obama is also going to have to face a great deal of tacit racism that he hasn't yet had to face, and he won't be able to fight it because those who hold such views are in hiding from the PC machine.
I just think it's going to be a much harder road than you're making it seem here.
I see your point that it won't be as easy as I may make it seem come November, but again, I have a hard time seriously believing people would vote for another Republican term. Then again, I also had a hard time believing anyone could vote for Bush in the first place.
On that, we definitely agree. Almost four years later, I still don't understand it.