MyDD :: Hillary Recovers in Natl. Polls [graph]

Hillary Recovers in Natl. Polls [graph]

by Zebra01, Mon Mar 31, 2008 at 01:37:46 PM EST

Yesterday Obama supporters celebrated his 10-point lead in the Gallup national tracking poll for likely Democratic voters.

Clinton, however, re-bounded with a net 2-point gain overnight (now O51:C43). The Rasmussen daily tracking poll, which shows a much tighter race, also posted a net 2-point gain for Clinton today (O46:C43).

The polls are good news for Clinton, as they confirm that her slide last week has reversed course. The Gallup graph illustrates the ongoing weave of this statistical tie:

It ain't over yet, folks!

Tags: hillary clinton, polls, democratic primary (all tags)

Permalink :: 60 Comments :: Post a Comment

Re: Hillary Recovers in Natl. Polls [graph] (1.00 / 2)

Drip drip. The trend has been established.
PA will reflect this sinking ship.

HRC is a weak candidate.

McCain: The Past, Obama: The Future

by KathyM on Mon Mar 31, 2008 at 01:40:44 PM EST

Interesting. (2.00 / 1)

Are you predicting an Obama victory in Pennsylvania? By how much?

by TomP on Mon Mar 31, 2008 at 01:43:01 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Interesting. (2.00 / 1)

No. HRC will win in PA. But the result will be tighter than 20%.

McCain: The Past, Obama: The Future

by KathyM on Mon Mar 31, 2008 at 01:49:59 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Interesting. (2.00 / 1)

A lot tighter. I bet he can keep it to single digits.

Cycloptichorn

by Cycloptichorn on Mon Mar 31, 2008 at 01:52:49 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Obama's arrogance.. (2.00 / 1)

Have people seen that video in which the Gov of PA says that Obama told him that he WILL be the nominee?

Not that he probably will be it, that he WILL be it.

I don't know about you, but I find that extremely arrogant.

he claims that Hillary Clinton has a misplaced sense of entitlement (which I don't see at all, however she has paid her dues in helping Americans, something that you have to earn.. by doing, not saying)
however, what could be more arrogant than insisting that you WILL be the nominee when there are still many more primaries and many months to go before its decided?

Universal healthcare IS a Democratic value
It's been defeated
Obama has the best $PIN that money can buy.

by architek on Mon Mar 31, 2008 at 02:33:43 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama's arrogance.. (none / 0)

Uh, you do realize that he WILL be the nominee at this point?

He's too far ahead for the remaining states to allow Hillary to catch up. It's a mathematical thing. You understand?

by Cycloptichorn on Mon Mar 31, 2008 at 02:46:27 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama's arrogance.. (none / 0)

The word isn't arrogance. It's confidence.

by KTinOhio on Mon Mar 31, 2008 at 02:51:48 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama's arrogance.. (none / 0)

The word isn't confidence. It's math.

by bawbie on Mon Mar 31, 2008 at 03:06:11 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama's arrogance.. (none / 0)

OK, he's confident in the math.

by KTinOhio on Mon Mar 31, 2008 at 03:17:39 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama's arrogance.. (none / 0)

Sounds good :)

by bawbie on Mon Mar 31, 2008 at 03:30:09 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Interesting. (2.00 / 2)

20%.

so silly!

you do know Pa is a real state right?

that would give her a 1,000,000 vote margin!

she will come out 400,000 votes up.

by John Wesley Hardin was a Friend to the Poor on Mon Mar 31, 2008 at 02:00:14 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Interesting. (2.00 / 1)

There are about 4 million Democratic voters in PA. For Clinton to win by a million votes and there was 100% turnout (unlikely), she would have to get 62.5% of the vote, a margin of 25%. With lower turnout than than 100%, she's have to get even larger margins.

So you think that will happen?

We care about politics because we know politics matters for people's lives and opportunities.

by politicsmatters on Mon Mar 31, 2008 at 02:08:34 PM EST
[ Parent ]

huge win (2.00 / 1)

400,000

by John Wesley Hardin was a Friend to the Poor on Mon Mar 31, 2008 at 02:32:41 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: huge win (none / 0)

Can you perhaps give your assumptions on turnout and the % won by each candidate?

We care about politics because we know politics matters for people's lives and opportunities.

by politicsmatters on Mon Mar 31, 2008 at 02:42:28 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Interesting. (none / 0)

you do know Pa is a real state right?

as opposed to....Texabamassippi?

by BlueinColorado on Mon Mar 31, 2008 at 02:39:41 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Interesting. (none / 0)

or North Iowaconsisota

by bawbie on Mon Mar 31, 2008 at 03:07:33 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Interesting. (none / 0)

Don't forget the mother of swing states -- Flosylhio.

"If we can't live together... we're going to die alone."

by VAAlex on Mon Mar 31, 2008 at 03:31:20 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Hillary Recovers in Natl. Polls [graph] (2.00 / 4)

Your "drip, drip" is getting a bit shopworn. I suggest you try adding something of substance to your comments here.

The "weak" candidate is the one with very little record of accomplishment. The one who could not honor his pledge to the voters of Illinois to serve out his full term. The one with a cartful of baggage labeled "Wright", "Rezko" and, god help us all, "Reagan".

by creeper1014 on Mon Mar 31, 2008 at 01:54:13 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Baggage (none / 0)

I'm not sure presenting evidence that "baggage" is a crippling thing is the best case for sending people towards Hillary Clinton, who is basing her candidacy on her ability to suffer through "baggage."

Anyway, every person I know in Illinois is elated that Obama broke that pledge. He will serve them better as President.

In this avalanche, the pebbles get to vote.

by Dracomicron on Mon Mar 31, 2008 at 05:12:39 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Hillary Recovers in Natl. Polls [graph] (2.00 / 2)

Sinking ship for HRC in PA???? What are YOU reading?

I LIVE in PA... there is no way any ship is sinking here unless it's initials are BHO...

Take it to the Convention! Hillary '08"

by JHL on Mon Mar 31, 2008 at 01:59:44 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Hillary Recovers in Natl. Polls [graph] (2.00 / 3)

The people of Pennsylvania will decide what they want to reflect. Not pundits, and not you.

While Obama surrogates have engaged in tireless negative campaigning, ranging from grotesque fear mongering to simple character assassination, Hillary has used her more limited resources to spend time with people, on the ground, and talk about real solutions.

Which will prove more effective on April 22, only the voters of PA can decide.

I'll tell you in advance how I will interpret the results:

Victory of less than 5% will concern me.
Victory of more than 10% will please me.
Victory of more than 15% will demonstrate serious flaws in an Obama candidacy.

Eyes on the Prize: Hillary 08

by bobbank on Mon Mar 31, 2008 at 02:28:37 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Hillary Recovers in Natl. Polls [graph] (none / 0)

Wow. Convincing graph.

by mikeinsf on Mon Mar 31, 2008 at 01:41:26 PM EST

LOL (1.75 / 4)

BREAKING: Hillary Supporters Awed By Statistical Noise

Visit Election Inspection for analysis, polls, and predictions!

by X Stryker on Mon Mar 31, 2008 at 02:13:41 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Hillary Recovers in Natl. Polls [graph] (2.00 / 1)

Obama's numbers generally fall on weekends, as the under 45 crowd are not at home...but as far as recovery goes, this is just noise

Bring Back MyDD - Just say No to Rec'ing Candidate Diaries.

by CardBoard on Mon Mar 31, 2008 at 01:42:36 PM EST

Re: Hillary Recovers in Natl. Polls [graph] (2.00 / 1)

Looks too soon to say she recovered. Two days ago she went from 42 to 43 and then right back to 42. So what?

by animated on Mon Mar 31, 2008 at 01:42:43 PM EST

Re: Hillary Recovers in Natl. Polls [graph] (2.00 / 1)

They're right, it's too soon for these polls to mean much. Obama supporters can get excited at this difference, and Clinton supporters concerned, but everyone needs to remember it'll need to be a longer trend to really establish a difference and rate things.

Hooray for John McCain!

by ragekage on Mon Mar 31, 2008 at 01:53:32 PM EST

Is this the new Hope? (2.00 / 1)

"he kept it to single digits?" Talk about defining victory down.

by Mayor McCheese on Mon Mar 31, 2008 at 01:57:08 PM EST

Re: Is this the new Hope? (none / 0)

It's called setting expectations and these are ones that the media will find credible.

We care about politics because we know politics matters for people's lives and opportunities.

by politicsmatters on Mon Mar 31, 2008 at 02:09:32 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Is this the new Hope? (none / 0)

It's ironic, isn't it, considering how Clinton has spent 75% of the campaign explaining how losses are really victories. If not for the exact same sort of expectations management from the Clinton side, she wouldn't even be in the race any longer.

NJ Hussein Independent

by NJIndependent on Mon Mar 31, 2008 at 02:30:33 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Seriously (none / 0)

The Jesse Jackson Defense has gotten a lot of play this season. So has the Red State Defense and the Small State Defense.

She hasn't really developed a Swing State defense for Minnesota and Wisconsin yet, though.

In this avalanche, the pebbles get to vote.

by Dracomicron on Mon Mar 31, 2008 at 05:17:04 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Hillary Recovers in Natl. Polls [graph] (none / 0)

A one day trend confirms nothing.

It could be random error.

It could be that Obama's ten point advantage was higher than reality, and that eight points is correct, making this more a correction than a trend.

Lots of possibilities.

A trend in her direction is certainly one of the possibilities...but this cannot be discerned from one day's polling.

Donate to Obama, Today!

by freedom78 on Mon Mar 31, 2008 at 01:58:00 PM EST

Re: Hillary Recovers in Natl. Polls [graph] (2.00 / 1)

Each candidate moves 1 percentage point in each poll, which is well well well within the margin of error. A one point move doesn't show any movement at all, in either direction.

by davisb on Mon Mar 31, 2008 at 02:00:25 PM EST

Re: Hillary Recovers in Natl. Polls [graph] (2.00 / 2)

Gallup says:

"This is the fourth consecutive Gallup Poll Daily tracking report showing Obama with a statistically significant lead. It marks the first time since late February that either Clinton or Obama has sustained a statistically significant lead in the race for more than two consecutive days."

We care about politics because we know politics matters for people's lives and opportunities.

by politicsmatters on Mon Mar 31, 2008 at 02:02:18 PM EST

pundiis and pundit wannabes will never learn (2.00 / 3)

the only polls that matter are those voters will be visiting in Pa on april 22.

by John Wesley Hardin was a Friend to the Poor on Mon Mar 31, 2008 at 02:03:34 PM EST

Re: Hillary Recovers in Natl. Polls [graph] (2.00 / 1)

Gallup's "pro-Hillary movement" is well within the MOE. For the fourth day in a row (an unprecedented streak in post Super Tuesday Gallup polling), Obama's lead is not.

by Ryan Anderson on Mon Mar 31, 2008 at 02:09:43 PM EST

Re: Hillary Recovers in Natl. Polls [graph] (2.00 / 1)

I'm no statistician, but it looks like Obama's lead is the same as it was three days ago and one point greater than it was two days ago. In other words, the trends for both candidates look pretty stable, at least for now.

by KTinOhio on Mon Mar 31, 2008 at 02:10:11 PM EST

Re: Hillary Recovers in Natl. Polls [graph] (none / 0)

Well, OK, but it depends on how you look at it. Further decline in HRC's numbers would have certainly been bad news for her campaign, and it didn't happen, but she didn't gain any ground either. Team Clinton can't afford to trade baskets with Team Obama this late in the game.

by KTinOhio on Mon Mar 31, 2008 at 02:20:20 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Hillary Recovers in Natl. Polls [graph] (none / 0)

Uh, sort of good news. If she wants to stabilize in a solid second place, that's perfectly fine with Obama and his supporters, I guarantee you!

by Cycloptichorn on Mon Mar 31, 2008 at 02:48:03 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Reality is biased toward Obama. (2.00 / 1)

Wow you guys are easy to please.

If the trend holds your candidate has stopped the bleeding from her most recent self-inflicted wound.

Bottoming out is not the same as moving into a lead, remember what that was like?

Still you are way behind in money and pledged delegates and NC will likely wipe away whatever gains you made in PA.

We shall overcome. Yes we can.

by Sam Wise Gingy on Mon Mar 31, 2008 at 02:14:49 PM EST

Hillary stops praising McCain... (none / 0)

... and starts beating up McCain instead of Obama, and is rewarded with a small increase in popularity.

Do you think maybe she'll learn from this experience?

Ignorance is weakness. Get strong.

by tbetz on Mon Mar 31, 2008 at 02:15:12 PM EST

I'm as eager as the next Hillary (2.00 / 2)

supporter to see her "rebound" but I think we all need to take these overnight polls with a grain of salt.

1. They have really small samples.

2. They are interviews, and interviews are notoriously easy to bias with intonation, wording, etc.

3. So far in this primary season, polls haven't been doing a very good job of predicting outcomes.

4. Pollsters -- gasp, yes -- have biases. They removed John Edwards from the mix a month before he suspended his campaign and at a time when he was doing better than Clinton or Obama in head-head matchups with Republicans.

Reasonable people can disagree.

by mnicholson0220 on Mon Mar 31, 2008 at 02:30:56 PM EST

Re: I'm as eager as the next Hillary (none / 0)

Gallup gets data from a 1000 people each day and they add this many and remove each from each tracking poll. So this is NOT a small poll.

You're right about prediction. Polls are always snapshots and you can't definitely know who will turnout. And this poll certainly can't predict outcomes because it is a national poll and we aren't having a national primary.

What's the bias in this poll? The wording is exactly the same as it was when HRC was in the lead.

We care about politics because we know politics matters for people's lives and opportunities.

by politicsmatters on Mon Mar 31, 2008 at 02:46:19 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: I'm as eager as the next Hillary (none / 0)

Actually, I was wrong about the #s in the poll:

"The Democratic nomination results are based on combined data from March 28-30, 2008. For results based on this sample of 1,262 Democratic and Democratic-leaning voters, the maximum margin of sampling error is ±3 percentage points."

We care about politics because we know politics matters for people's lives and opportunities.

by politicsmatters on Mon Mar 31, 2008 at 02:47:57 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: I'm as eager as the next Hillary (none / 0)

If 1,262 is a three-day sample, each day's sample would be about 420 people.

by KTinOhio on Mon Mar 31, 2008 at 02:50:59 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: I'm as eager as the next Hillary (none / 0)

Ever wonder why the final number is 1,262 and not an even 1300? Did they possibly stop polling when they got the percentage they wanted?

Reasonable people can disagree.

by mnicholson0220 on Mon Mar 31, 2008 at 03:08:48 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: I'm as eager as the next Hillary (none / 0)

Oh geez ... if each day's sample is about the same size as the last, how would either candidate have an advantage?

by KTinOhio on Mon Mar 31, 2008 at 03:22:05 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Hillary Recovers in Natl. Polls [graph] (2.00 / 2)

I have been very consistent on the subject of these polls; I have said this whether Hillary is up or down. Until I see a double-digit advantage sustained for 2 or more weeks, I do not take it very seriously. And I don't think any of you should either.

The bottom line is that the Democratic party is about evenly split on these two candidates. Pointing to a poll one day just sets you up for disappointment the next.

Frankly, I find the results a stunning encouragement, as a Hillary supporter. [full disclosure: spin incoming] When you have a national media that has made a determined and fully united effort to end her candidacy for weeks, and when Obama is now attempting to use Superdelgates to end the democratic process prematurely, it is remarkable that Hillary can hold onto anything more than a third in these national polls. But far more relevant are how folks in PA are hearing this, and how PA local media is receiving this.

Eyes on the Prize: Hillary 08

by bobbank on Mon Mar 31, 2008 at 02:34:45 PM EST

Re: Hillary Recovers in Natl. Polls [graph] (none / 0)

Bob,

I assume you had no problems with superdelegates endorsing Clinton before people started voting. (I don't have numbers for 1/1, but on 1/13, Clinton had 165 superdelegates compared to 69 for Obama.) Clinton continued to pick up endorsements up until right before Super Tuesday. (By 2/3, she had 198 compared to 105 for Obama.) At that point, only 4 states had participated, six if you count MI and FL. But now, it's a perversion of the democratic process for superdelegates to come out for Obama before everyone has voted? I don't think so.

by kjblair2 on Mon Mar 31, 2008 at 03:47:34 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Hillary Recovers in Natl. Polls [graph] (none / 0)

KJ,

Your assumption is correct. I have no problem with any superdelegate voting for anyone. That is their right and responsibility.

I am pointing out the deep, self-serving hypocrisy of the Obama campaign, and many of its supporters.

As recently as one week ago, we were told that the superdelegates must obey the will of the people, and must not interfere. The media did its job as a loyal parrot of David Axelrod, and repeated: the party will be destroyed if superdelegates interfere. There will be "revolts", some said!

Yet, what a difference one week can make. Today, we're being told that superdelegates MUST interfere, for the good of the party. We're told that if they do not shut this contest down before the rest of America has a chance to vote, then the party will be destroyed.

I'll tell you, I feel bad for these Superdelegates. Apparently they are harbingers of an apocalypse no matter what they do.

Now tell me honestly if you cannot see the hypocrisy in this.

Eyes on the Prize: Hillary 08

by bobbank on Mon Mar 31, 2008 at 04:21:15 PM EST
[ Parent ]

"must" (none / 0)

Who is saying "must?" I see a bunch of people saying "should," but that's just opinion.

In this avalanche, the pebbles get to vote.

by Dracomicron on Mon Mar 31, 2008 at 05:26:40 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Hillary Recovers in Natl. Polls [graph] (none / 0)

I think you're confusing should with must. And truth be told, if the superdelegates had been following that suggestion, it would be over by now.

And even if you believe the Obama campaign was "requiring" superdelegates to follow that advice, their argument was that superdelegates shouldn't overturn the pledged delegate leader. It was obvious then, and is obvious now, that Obama is going to be that person. There is nothing hypocritical or inconsistant in saying that once that outcome has become apparent, then for them to make up your mind.

by kjblair2 on Mon Mar 31, 2008 at 05:40:49 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Hillary Recovers in Natl. Polls [graph] (none / 0)

Two replies with almost the identical rhetoric. Did Axelrod put out a memo on this or something? :-)

I'm not "confusing should with must". I understand the difference in their meaning. I also understand that it is totally irrelevant. Observe:

(1) Superdelegates mustn't interfere with the democratic process, for the good of the party. Superdelegates must shut down the democratic process, for the good of the party.

These two statements are in complete contradiction. Now let's substitute must with should.

(2) Superdelegates shouldn't interfere with the democratic process, for the good of the party. Superdelegates should shut down the democratic process, for the good of the party.

Notice that these two statement are still in complete contradiction. Notice how the little talking point about must vs. should makes no different and, for that matter, served no constructive purpose.

So now that we've exposed that bit of misleading rhetoric, let's get back to the question at hand:

How can you people, who were just last week hammering us about how important it is that the Superdelegates not interfere with a democratic process, now support the use of Superdelegates to attempt to shut down a democratic process?

Putting it more directly: is there any motivation here, beside's ambition for ambition's sake?

Eyes on the Prize: Hillary 08

by bobbank on Mon Mar 31, 2008 at 06:35:40 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Hillary Recovers in Natl. Polls [graph] (none / 0)

No there's not. And the reason why is that the Obama camp has never stated that the superdelegates not interfere with the democratic process. They have been consistent in stating that the superdelegates should not overturn the results of the nomination process (i.e., the pledged delegates selected in the primaries and caucuses). There's nothing in here about when they should make up their mind. Please note the difference between what they've stated and your strawman argument.

As to when that occurs, one could wait until every single contest is finished or one could make that decision when the outcome is obvious. And unfortunately for Clinton, that point was reached some time ago. So although I'd prefer sooner rather than later, it really doesn't make that much difference.

by kjblair2 on Mon Mar 31, 2008 at 07:20:27 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Hillary Recovers in Natl. Polls [graph] (none / 0)

Me:

Putting it more directly: is there any motivation here, beside's ambition for ambition's sake?

You:

No there's not.

At least you are honest.

You don't care about the right to vote and you're darned proud. Well, this is American after all. It's your right to think that way, and mine to disagree.

I leave you with one closing suggestion: be careful what you wish for. Once basic principles are surrendered, they're not easily reclaimed.

Eyes on the Prize: Hillary 08

by bobbank on Mon Mar 31, 2008 at 08:52:30 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Gallup - Obama seen as stronger against McCain (none / 0)

There's also this poll out from Gallup -

http://www.gallup.com/poll/105904/Dems-R eps-Agree-Obama-Tougher-Opponent-McCain. aspx
"A new Gallup Panel survey finds a majority of both Republicans and Democrats saying Barack Obama has a better chance than Hillary Clinton of defeating Republican John McCain in the November presidential election."

65% of Republicans see Obama as stronger than Clinton, as do 59% of Democrats

We care about politics because we know politics matters for people's lives and opportunities.

by politicsmatters on Mon Mar 31, 2008 at 02:50:07 PM EST

Re: Hillary Recovers in Natl. Polls [graph] (2.00 / 4)

Laugh if you want, but Puerto Rico may save the day for Hillary. This is a small island, but its voters care deeply about democracy. There will be a huge turnout. Possibly at least a million or so and Hillary may win quite big there.

Hillary 2008!

by New York Democrat on Mon Mar 31, 2008 at 02:57:14 PM EST

Re: Hillary Recovers in Natl. Polls [graph] (none / 0)

PR has 55 delegates, less than half of NC.

Hillary is behind 160+ elected delegates. If everything else breaks even between now and then, she could get every vote in PR and still be trailing by 100 elected delegates (~80 with supers included)

by bawbie on Mon Mar 31, 2008 at 03:15:26 PM EST
[ Parent ]

But PR could really help HRC in the popular vote (none / 0)

by bluestatedude on Mon Mar 31, 2008 at 09:36:17 PM EST
[ Parent ]

How is 51 - 43 a statistical tie? (2.00 / 0)

I don't understand the logic of this post, other than the logic of "magical thinking." 51-43 is, empirically, NOT a statistical tie.

I keep trying to understand these diaries and I keep coming away with the sense that the people posting them are not in reality. I don't mean that in any way as a sign of disrespect. I'm someone who has voted for Hillary and supported her (during her Senate run in 2k), but am now supporting Obama. She has many admirable qualities and is not the one-dimensional image that her critics project on to her. And as much as I hope and want a different choice, I will vote for her if she is the nominee.

That said, I still don't understand where "reality" comes into many of these diaries. Anyone can look at this graph and see that Hillary is clearly on the ropes.

by DrPolitics on Mon Mar 31, 2008 at 03:24:14 PM EST

Media Bias (2.00 / 1)

Just a small experiment. Watching the cables today, they are showing the Gallup tracking results but not the Rasmussen tracking results. Obvious pro-Obama bias. If the polls were reversed they would be pushing the Rasmussen poll. The bias is so blatant you can see it from a mile away.

by bluestatedude on Mon Mar 31, 2008 at 09:40:53 PM EST

You are not logged in.

In order to post a comment, you must be logged in. If you have a member account, please log in to comment.

If not, you can make an account right here. It's quick and free.