Update: I spend countless billable hours (well, more like 1.2, all-told) putting this post together, and Matt C goes and pimps me in the interim. Kavon, my firm wants its $410.
Take a look at the RCP average chart in Ohio.
Now take a look at the RCP average chart for Texas.
This is very interesting stuff. In Texas, look at the difference in the spread for every polling company from their last iteration:
Rasmussen: Clinton +3
PPP: Clinton +6
SUSA: Clinton +3
Zogby: Clinton +1
ARG: Clinton +7
WFAA: Obama +1
These changes are all pretty small, and for the polls I would consider most reliable, are all within the error margin (at 95% confidence). But what is interesting in the consistent direction of the shift. This is consistent with the story in other polling: Clinton is simply the better closer, and undecideds tend to break heavily in her direction.
This isn’t to predict a Clinton win. Taking a look at the Pollster.com breakdown, we see that pollsters are modeling Hispanics to be anywhere from 24 to 39% of the turnout. AAs are modeled at anywhere from 14-22%. Independents are modeled at 19-37% of the turnout. In other words, the polls are all over the place, because their vision of what the electorate will look like is all over the place. My point is this: No one knows what things will look like in Texas tomorrow.*
On the Ohio side, we see some similar movement:
Rasmussen: Clinton +4
PPP: Clinton +5
SUSA: Clinton +5
Zogby: Obama +3
Q: Obama +7
ARG: Obama +2
Throw in Suffolk, which has suddenly decided to poll Ohio for some reason, and you have half the polls released today showing 10-point Clinton leads again, and only one showing an Obama lead of any kind. (Incidentally, there is less volatility in the Ohio polling internals, which is unsurprising, given that it is a more homogenous state).
So what’s going on? There is always the possibility that the answer is “nothing,” and that this is just statistical noise. On the other hand, almost all of these polls are moving together. It could be that Hillary is a better closer. But the other possibility is that her attacks are finally leaving marks on Obama. The NAFTA story has dominated Ohio, does not show signs of going away, and by painting a picture of Obama as “just another politician,” really does do damage at the heart of his campaign. I thought the her “3AM” ad — which has been compared to LBJ’s infamous “Daisy” ad — was clumsy, but it could be resonating in Texas. Throw in the fact that many polls are not polling in Spanish — possibly alienating 10% of the Hispanic population, and the portion that is probably least likely to be swayed by Obama’s rhetoric at that — and tomorrow is anyone’s game.
BTW, I thought I would quickly weigh in on the debate generated by Dave’s post below. I tend to agree with his central thesis: Clinton would be a tougher opponent in the fall for McCain than would Obama. Given a choice between a guy who has been receiving 85% favorable press coverage and has yet to be thoroughly vetted (we’re just now hearing that he never held a single hearing on Afghanistan??? Don’t you think McCain would have a field day with this? And what else is out there?) and who leads by a couple of points, and someone who is thoroughly vetted and only trails by a couple of points, I’d rather face the unknown and see what’s behind door #2. Obama is more dangerous to Republicans, because there’s a chance that what’s behind door #2 (and 3, and 4) is nothing, and that he could roll up a massive majority. But this is politics, and the odds of there not being anything behind the doors are pretty slender. And just to be clear, against either candidate, given the environment and slant of the playing field, Republicans will have a tough climb. And, finally, I’m not sure that an extended fight really hurts Dems that much, other than to drain resources. The party will coalesce behind the nominee regardless of who it is, and be a formidable force in the fall.
*A couple of days ago, we talked about confidence intervals, which are what I like to think of as the “inherent” error margins. There’s another type of error margin, which is more of the “human” error margin. Remember, polling assumes a normal distribution, ie that a population is spread out equally, like a bag of M&Ms, so that no matter where you reach into a bag, you’re just as likely to get a given distribution of M&Ms.
But in reality, society is more like a Snickers bar, and so to guess at its composition, you have to reach into a part of it that gets the chewy caramel, the delicious chocolate, and crunchy peanuts, and the sweet, buttery nouget. Mmmmmmm, what I wouldn’t give for a piece of that sweet can . . . but I digress. Point it, pollsters correct for this by giving a rough estimate what they think the Snickers will look like to begin with, by making sure that a poll has a certain percentage of AAs, Hispanics, etc. It is one of the most controversial aspects of polling, and it can cause some big “Oops“es.
March 3rd, 2008 at 2:58 pm
“Mmmmmmm, what I wouldn’t give for a piece of that sweet can . . . but I digress”
You REALLY are a Simpsons junkie…
March 3rd, 2008 at 3:51 pm
>”But this is politics, and the odds of there not being anything behind the doors are pretty slender.”
Especially when the guy in question is a product of the Chicago machine.
Illinois politics (both parties) is a cesspool, and the cessiest part of the pool is Chicago.
Along these lines, I was listening to a radio show yesterday, one of those things where a bunch of local reporters talk about the latest political events in the area. The consensus was that the Rezko scandal, when it all comes out, will turn out to be much messier than the George Ryan case (one guy said that it will make Ryan look like a small-town sheriff who took fifty bucks to ignore a traffic violation).
The big debate was whether or not Governor Blagojevich will be indicted in the next few months — since I’m sure Illinois is #1 in jailed governors, I’m looking forward to an opportunity to pad our lead.
If I were McCain, I would constantly identify Obama not by his middle name, but by his hometown. The idea of a Chicago machine pol posing as a reformer is stretching the electorate’s credulity too far.
March 3rd, 2008 at 4:15 pm
I’d still rather run against Clinton.
Obama, for all his faults, comes across as charismatic and likeable,and manages to attract a fair number of independants. How many will stick around when his political views get fleshed out is anyone’s guess but if I were in McCain’s shoes I’d much rather have an opponent who is already defined — and defined negatively — by the general public. Plus, Obama is still in a position to win the nomination without tearing the party apart, whereas a Hillary win at this point will likely have the effect of seriously alienating the party’s African-American voters.
March 3rd, 2008 at 4:30 pm
New Insider Advatange Poll has Hillary up five in Texas.
http://www.southernpoliticalreport.com/storylink_33_254.aspx
she pulled in 55% of the early vote according to poll. We should now right away if that is true since they Release those numbers right away when the polls closes.
March 3rd, 2008 at 4:33 pm
More importantly, it shows movement toward Hillary as well.
IA is not one of my favorite polling firms. Looking at the internals, do you really think Hill is doing better with Men than Women?
March 3rd, 2008 at 4:53 pm
I tend to agree that Clinton, even with her high negatives, would be a tougher opponent than Obama. I am also a pessimist on the entire political process…he who has the most money will most likely win. That’s why I want the dem primary race to continue hot and heavy until the convention. As Sean said, “I’m not sure that an extended fight really hurts Dems that much, other than to drain resources.” Any resources drained from them has to help McCain.
March 3rd, 2008 at 5:12 pm
Tex,
I think it hurts the Dems in two main ways; first if Hillary gets into a groove, the Michigan and Florida delegates again become relevant. Other then possibly holding new primaries in each state, there is no good outcome for the Democratic party in which the Michigan and Florida delegates become a political issue. For instance, I’d go so far as to say this; if the delegates aren’t seated, new primaries aren’t held, and Obama narrowly defeats Hillary at the convention (all plausible scenarios), Michigan will tip into the “leans Republican” column and Florida will be irreversibly red. That’s why I can’t quite understand the eagerness some Republicans have to see Clinton go down in defeat tomorrow; she’s going to lose ultimately anyway. But, their are cans of worms (particularly the Michigan and Florida issues) that instantly open if she makes a comeback, and these cans of worms redound to Republican benefit. Every red-blooded conservative Texan should vote for Hillary Clinton tomorrow.
March 3rd, 2008 at 5:46 pm
“she’s going to lose ultimately anyway”
I wouldn’t be so sure about that. If she wins OH and TX tomorrow, it could completely stop Obama’s momentum, make Clinton look like the comeback kid, and make “obamamania” look like just a fad. It would be precieved as a win for experienced statesmanship over idealistic rhetoric, and could send the DNC to a split convention – one where Hillary could have the advantage.
March 3rd, 2008 at 5:48 pm
Great analysis, Sean O.
Matt Miller, you might be right. But politics is inherently unpredictable, so I like to look at this from an entertainment perspective. And, yeah, while it would be entertaining to see Hillary go down tomorrow, it would be a lot more fun to see a fight that lasts all the way through to the convention. Popcornalicious.
March 3rd, 2008 at 6:26 pm
act, a split convention would be the best thing to happen to the GOP since Kerry’s “i was for it before i was against it”.
I’ve done the delegate math and even if Hillary wins OH and TX by double figures, and wins PA by a similar amount, and even if she does well in states in May(IN, WV, KY) that would appear to be good for her, because of the proportional allocation and what are sure to be Obama wins in WY, MS, NC, OR, SD, MT, even in a best case scenario for Hillary she would still trail Obama going into the convention by around 75 delegates. If things go amazing for her and Obama collapses, she’d still be behind by around 50 in a dream scenario.
Then you have the MI and FL delegates which would tie her or put her in the lead. But are they really going to have do-over elections in those states? I doubt it. There’ll be all sorts of chaos. There will still be a few hundred Super Delegates who will decide the thing. If they swing it and go for Hillary, I think that just about guarantees a GOP win in November. Even if they go for Obama, we’ve already seen polls indicating that Obama doesn’t hold key parts of Hillary’s voters and that will only increase after another 6 months of electoral combat.
Recreate ’68, the Obam-a-bust is coming!
Either way, the DNC is in big trouble.
March 3rd, 2008 at 7:00 pm
Clinton leads by 6.4 in the RCP average for Ohio and she also leads now by 0.3 in the RCP average for Texas.
March 3rd, 2008 at 7:10 pm
Hillary would be tougher. Obama has a lot of skeletons in his closet. They’re starting to come out. The Rezko-Chicago land deal trial started today. Novak now has uncovered links to Saddam Hussein. An Iraqi billionaire lent money to Tony Rezko (Syrian, NOT Italian as the media has been portraying), right before Rezko let Obama buy the south side Chicago mansion at cut-rate price.
And Novak is only scratching the surface. The Blogosphere has far more in-depth and damning info. Google “Rezko Saddam” at Blogs.
Folks, this is going to be huge!
Novak link and story now up at MainstreamLibertarian.com. Click on my name.
March 3rd, 2008 at 7:14 pm
You all, don’t forget about little Rhodie! Rhode Island also has a primary tomorrow. And Vermont. Hussein Obama will win VT easily. But RI will go overwhelmingly to Hillary.
Now think about this. If Hill wins Texas, Ohio AND RI she will be able to claim a 3 out of 4 sweep. And RI will be the first to report too. Imagine if it comes in like “60% for Hillary Clinton.” That will help her momentum.
I’m now hoping Hill loses. With Obama, we Republicans get the Jewish vote in our column, for this election cycle and perhaps forever. A NY State Assemblyman, Jewish Dem is saying that all Jews in NY will bolt to McCain if Hill loses. (NY Post this morning).
March 3rd, 2008 at 7:27 pm
Not sure if any of you have been following the tense situation right now in Colombia, Venezuela, and Ecuador. Basically, Colombia went over into Equador’s territory and killed the #2 leader in the FARC organization (communist revolutionary group in Colombia that is responsible for a majority of the drug supply in the US and kidnapping almost 1000 people). While killing the guy, they found his computer and Colombia has been releasing documents that they found on it.
What’s scary in this in one of these letters there are some “gringos” are basically guaranteeing Obama will win and they want to start talking with the FARC as a result…if this is not a reason to be against Obama (politically aligning and talking with one of our biggest enemies which terrorize millions), I don’t know what is…
“The gringos called for a meeting with the minister to ask him to tell us they are interested in talking about several topics. They claim the new president in their country will be Obama and that these people are interested in their fellow citizens. Obama will support neither Plan Colombia nor the signature of the Free Trade Agreement. In this regard, we replied we are interested in relations with the governments that are on equal grounds and that in the case of the United States, a public statement voicing their interest in talking to the FARC is needed, given their eternal war against us.”
Attached is the full document from the computer:
http://english.eluniversal.com/2008/03/03/en_int_art_memo-from-raul-reyes_03A1403519.shtml
March 3rd, 2008 at 7:29 pm
Rezko Connections: More Questions for Obama
http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?print=yes&id=25282
March 3rd, 2008 at 7:48 pm
For those who missed it, Rudy Giuliani showed his comedic chops on SNL during the Weekend Update segment.
http://www.nbc.com/Saturday_Night_Live/video/#mea=224733
March 3rd, 2008 at 8:15 pm
#6- I am also a pessimist on the entire political process…he who has the most money will most likely win.
Romney lost, remember? And McCain, the worst front-runner fundraiser ever, won. If that doesn’t prove that money isn’t everything, nothing will.
Unfortunately, if Obama wins then it’s all evidence that the main-stream media picks our nominees. Nothing, not even having every political connection in the world (Clinton) or spending everything you got and having a great team and strategy (Romney) can overcome the MSM.
March 4th, 2008 at 5:37 am
From NewsDay:
One of Clinton’s superdelegates, Rhode Island Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse, seemed to adopt a similar position [as Bill Richardson] when he spoke to a Providence radio station yesterday.
“We can’t go all the way through to the convention fighting with each other while McCain and the Republicans lob in whatever free shots they want,” he said. “Let’s see how Tuesday plays out, and then let’s start thinking about how we’re going to get behind a candidate.”
This is the pressure I spoke of yesterday. Here is a senate colleague who has endorsed Clinton who is ready to call for her to quit. Ed Rendell is also in that camp. Even a majority of NYers, according to a new poll, want Clinton to get out.
In a way, all the dirt thrown Obama’s way is working to his advantage. Voters as well as superdelegates are looking at how desperate Clinton is and deciding they don’t like what they see. So instead of raising doubts about Obama, Clinton is raising doubts about herself and her incompetent campaign.
March 4th, 2008 at 6:46 am
But Joe Six Pack (D) voter isn’t paying attention to things like we are. If Clinton gets a win in OH, RI and TX then she isn’t “a loser” anymore and those numbers change in a flash. Look how quickly McCain’s numbers changed after NH.
March 4th, 2008 at 8:07 am
Clinton’s lead has grown to 7.1 in the RCP average for Ohio and she also leads now by 1.7 in the RCP average for Texas.
March 4th, 2008 at 8:11 am
Strange to see this place as pro-Clinton. I’m gonna LMAO if the GOP turns out to be responsible for another Clinton administration (**crosses self**).
March 4th, 2008 at 8:13 am
It’s less pro-Clinton than anti-baseless fawning over a rookie with a thin record only three years removed from the IL state legislature.
That and the fact that it’s always a good thing to watch your enemies beat each other up. It’s kind of like how the Democrats shut up and kept their distance in the big GOP immigration debate of 2006-7.
March 4th, 2008 at 8:15 am
For the record, I hope Hil loses too – just not until May or June.
March 4th, 2008 at 9:09 am
Axel,
A new poll shows that 63% of Democrats want Hillary to stay in the race if she wins either Texas or Ohio today. Even if she loses both 45% want her to stay in. In face of numbers like that, believe me whitehouse, richardson and that ilk will back off if Hillary goes 3 for 4 today. There’d be alot of resentment from Clinton supporters, who already have problems with Obama, if it looked like the leadership in the party was trying to force her out of the race after a series of victories; there might even be, dare I say, a perception of sexism in the reactions.
March 4th, 2008 at 9:13 am
Axel,
I know you’re just dying to vote for the Madhi, but you’ll still get your chance; patience is a virtue. No need to concoct incoherent theories that have a CLINTON dropping out when public opinion is on her side, and when she’s just nabbed the momentum, to attempt to hasten the glorious day of American rebirth.
March 4th, 2008 at 9:57 am
Yeah, Matt imagine how the Iranian hardliner are going to feel when Obama reveals he’s the hidden imam. That’s going to be awkward for Ahmadinejad.
Obama: “I have hope because I was stuck in a well for 1,100 years.”
March 4th, 2008 at 10:00 am
Here’s the quote of the day –
“I think that I have a lifetime of experience that I will bring to the White House. Sen. John McCain has a lifetime of experience that he’d bring to the White House. And Sen. Obama has a speech he gave in 2002.”
-Hillary Rodham Clinton (http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/washington/2008/03/hillary-clinton.html)
March 4th, 2008 at 10:09 am
Aww, Hil you’re the gift that keeps on giving. Thems quotes are going to be useful in the general election. Anyone still think Hillary’s planning to go quietly after victories today?
March 4th, 2008 at 10:26 am
Geezzz, This site is more dead than fried chiken.
March 4th, 2008 at 10:27 am
Did anyone ever think she’d go quietly? I just voted for her and I’m trying to get time off work tonight to go to the caucus and see if I can pass for an actual democrat. I really love the way she and Obama are sniping at one another.
March 4th, 2008 at 10:38 am
I never thought she’d go quietly. Especially with the recent Pew Poll showing that 25% of her supporters would go with McCain over Obama in the general (http://people-press.org/reports/display.php3?PageID=1254)
March 4th, 2008 at 11:08 am
Hillary now leads in the RCP averages for both Texas and Ohio. Amazing.
If she wins both, the race goes on through June and well into the Summer as they fight it out at the convention.
Go Hillary
March 4th, 2008 at 11:50 am
Seems that Hillary will now win Texas and Ohio, so the Dem race goes on.
At the same time, McCain will lock up the nomination today. This is the
best possible scenario for the Republicans. Hillary and Obama will now
have plenty of time to list all of their toxic side-effects and the
electorate will be loathe to take either drug. I hope the eventual nominee
is Obama, who will be a stark contrast to McCain on foreign
policy, the role of government, and social issues. I would have to
say people would be crazy to vote for Obama and I don’t think we have
reached the crazy majority yet, but we’ll see.
#14 cap- I read the article but I can’t see that it has anything to do
with Obama. I think you are substituting Obama for the President of
Ecuador who seems to be in cahoots with the rebels according to the email.
March 4th, 2008 at 1:04 pm
Clinton has closed better in every state except Wisconsin, and I think she will win both states tonight. I also wonder how many Hispanic Clinton-voters are available to John McCain in November giving his moderate immigration stance. It won’t matter in Texas because he’ll take it anyway, but it could be key to winning New Mexico, Colorado, and Nevada. I don’t think Florida is even in play this time.
March 4th, 2008 at 1:31 pm
I think you are right abotu Florida Clarence. McCain has a lot of appeal to the wide variety of groups here in Florida (crackers, seniors, Vets, Cubans, white middle class, and transplants) It would be great if Florida was not contested. Spend the money on states like NM, OH, PA, NH and the like.
March 4th, 2008 at 1:37 pm
Clarence,
That’s it exactly. We want Hillary winning today, and Obama winning ultimately. Even if Democratic race progresses as far as Pennsylvania, we’ll have gained quite a bit. In a McCain/Obama race, McCain wins 55% of the Hispanic vote, 30-40% of the Jewish vote, and 55% of the Catholic vote. There are no sure things in politics, but it’s hard to imagine Obama winning the popular vote with those sort of demographic breakdowns, and the electoral college is even more problematic since Catholics, Hispanics, and to a lesser extent Jews, are concentrated in key states.
March 4th, 2008 at 1:44 pm
Matthew, I think your numbers may be a tad high there.
55% of Hispanics? I highly doubt that.
That said, the fact that Hillary is still in this and actually leading in the polls in OH and TX after the 2 moths Obama has had, after his 11 straight wins(really 9 but they count the US Virgin Islands and Democrats Abroad), after all the good press he’s gotten, after everything, is really amazing.
It testifies to her residual strength. And also a potential opening for McCain if Obama ultimately pulls it out.
For her to win it, though, she has to go all the way to the convention and have the Supers pull it out for her, which will be great for us.
Tonight should be interesting. This whole thing has just been reall fun to follow so I hope she wins OH and TX and prolongs it for another 6 months. If he wins both, it’s over tonight.
March 4th, 2008 at 1:46 pm
If John McCain even wins 40% of the Hispanic vote, we are going to win. Bush got 40% when he beat Kerry, and he got even less than that in 2000 and still tied Gore.
March 4th, 2008 at 1:50 pm
In the break room at work today a few liberals were talking about how annoying it is when they see cars with American flag bumper stickers. Then one person thought it was really bad that a gas station had a roof painted red, white, and blue. I’m sure Obama feels exactly the same way, and I hope he expresses it in the general election campaign.
March 4th, 2008 at 1:53 pm
Yeah, isn’t it amazing how almost ashmed liberals are of any expression of patriotism. They seem to think that feeling proud of your country is a kind of neanderthal instinct that the sophisticated look down upon with disdain.
March 4th, 2008 at 1:56 pm
Well, once they finished the discussion on how annoying displaying the flag is, they then went on to talk about how much smarter they are compared to President Bush.
March 4th, 2008 at 2:07 pm
#30
“I’m trying to get time off work tonight to go to the caucus and see if I can pass for an actual democrat.”
Tex,
Show up in a Prius and as you exit the vehicle bring a glass jar to fart in so you can smell it and – more importantly – so others can too. Maintain an air of superiority in your walk and wear plenty of layers to cover your bleeding heart. If you are spoken to, simply respond with either know-it-all sarcasm or bitter whininess depending on the situation or whatever role you can most naturally fit in. Bonus points for complaining about “Bush stealing the election†and how “Bush lied†to get us into war.
If you actually want people to talk to you, wear an “Edwards 2008†button so people think you are up for grabs and I assure you that you will be the most popular person at the precinct and will have plenty of people asking to smell what’s in your jar.
Credit to South Park on the Prius-fart joke.
March 4th, 2008 at 2:10 pm
Jonathan,
I also think McCain should go hard after Virginia, despite it’s blue tilt. Barring a Republican blowout, Virginia is one of the 5 or so previously red states that might ordinarily be considered “leaning Democratic” in 08′. But, McCain is ideally situated to keep the state in the red column. They’ve been happily voting for a sagging vet with a moderate image for decades now, and NOVA notwithstanding, I suspect they’re willing to do so again. Holding Virginia and Ohio essentially makes it much more difficult for a Democrat to win. Even if Obama carries Colorado and Iowa we narrowly, and McCain turns no blue states red, we narrowly win.
March 4th, 2008 at 2:17 pm
In 1996, Dole won Virginia by 2 points while losing by 8 nationally (10 points better than national average). In 2000, Bush won Virginia by 8 points while tying Gore nationally. In 2004, Bush won Virginia by 9 points while winning by 3 points nationally (6 points better than national average). If trends continue (which they don’t always do), McCain would win by 4 points BETTER than his national performance, unless Virginia has gotten drastically more Democratic in 4 short years.
March 4th, 2008 at 2:17 pm
jim,
Bush won 44% in 2004, as per the exit polls. Bush was fairly Hispanic friendly, but John McCain is moreso, and Barack Obama is less appealing to Hispanics then Kerry was. I should amend my statement to say that, relatively speaking, I’d expect McCain to do about 10 points among Hispanics then Bush did. I.e, Bush did 14 points better with white voters then with Hispanic voters. I’d expect McCain to do around 5 points better.
March 4th, 2008 at 2:23 pm
And McCain can’t really do any worse than Bush with black voters because Bush got practially zero anyway. I do know Bush won Catholics 52-47 last time. The one weakness for McCain will be voters who supported the Iraq War in 2004 and have since changed their mind on it.