What's the chance Obama has of winning PA in the primary?

[Colobo]

Let's see what's the take of DUers on this issue.

[tekisui]

1. 50%---He will or he won't.

[Colobo]

2. But Clinton's machine there is very strong...

Can he overcome that?

[tekisui]

4. He COULD.

That doesn't mean he will. He said himself, if they are able to play a "perfect game" they could win it. But, Hillary is the favorite, to be sure.

Should be exciting. We got the debate in about a week, and the vote a week after.

[jackson_dem]

10. Outspending her 3:1/4:1 gives him a shot

The question should be how did she overcome that in Ohio and Texas? How often does a candidate outspent by such margins win?

[dchill]

34. Easy: Lie about NAFTA.

Any other questions?

[nebula]

53. It doesn't matter if he wins or loses

if he gets within 15 points, Hillary is done for.

[MercutioATC]

60. Cool! I have a 50% chance of winning the lottery!

...or being elected King of the World, or sleeping with a supermodel...or spontaneously gaining the ability to fly...

:eyes:

[TahitiNut]

3. I think it's clearly "leaps tall buildings with a single bound."

ASSUMING you mean in the Primary and not the General Election.

[GoldieAZ49]

5. Won't win it - as OH & TX, White male voter

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x5424487

[jackson_dem]

12. His problem, as far as race/gender go is white women in PA

He is competitive with white men in PA. In Texas he actually tied among white males--but he lost white women by 19 and Latino women 68-30 as well as Latino men 62-36.

[GoldieAZ49]

20. after that last thread I did a little digging

check this out from PA

http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/08093/869727-457.stm

white women are not going for him but this shows older whites are not strong for him either

[jackson_dem]

24. Yes. It seems playing the generational card has hurt him with seniors. 29%? wow

[democrattotheend]

51. That makes sense, and it's reassuring

In states where he loses the white vote, I find it reassuring when there is a big gender gap, because that indicates to me that some white women are voting for Clinton in part because she is a woman, rather than whites voting against Obama because he's black. I would assume that most of the white women who vote for Clinton in the primaries would vote for either Dem in the general, just as most African Americans who turn out will vote for Clinton if she is the nominee. Although there may be some moderate Republican women voting for Clinton because they want to see a woman president, which is one argument she has in her favor in terms of electability.

[kwenu]

So white men are ONLY voting for Hillary because she is WHITE???

[PseudoIntellect]

30. Wha? Where'd he say that?

He just stated that Obama isn't strong in white male voting in PA.

[kwenu]

33. That actually isn't what he said but I'd love for you to make the distinction.

[jackson_dem]

42. Obama gets 90% black support in the last primary

Yet Clinton getting 60% white support is a shocker and MUST be because of racism? Come on. What a cop out. Obama loses Latinos and Asians too. Maybe he needs to "transcend" race like Clinton does and win groups other than his own? ;)

[kwenu]

59. I didn't say anything about racism. Please cite the primary where Obama got 90% of the Black vote?

And lying doesn't equal transcending in the world outside of Clinton supporters heads.

[jackson_dem]

61. Mississipi, the last one. He has gotten 85-90% everywhere. Even in Arkansas he cleaned up

New York is the only exception and there Clinton got only 34 or 37% of the black vote.

Is it racist for Clinton to nationally win, say, 55% of the white vote and 60-65% in some states but Obama winning 85-90% black support in 40 states is kosher? You can't have it both ways.

[GoldieAZ49]

62. right on!

:toast:

[kwenu]

70. Again, I didn't bring up the issue of race you did but...

In Mississippi, Obama won 90% of the Black vote and Hillary won 73% of the white vote. If race is the justification for why one of these candidates draws a supermajority of a racial group shouldn't it also apply to the other candidate as well? To say otherwise is insincere at best.

We both seem to agree, YOU CAN'T HAVE IT BOTH WAYS.

[jackson_dem]

71. Clinton doesn't draw a supermajority of whites

Except in some southern states. The most, I believe, she has gotten outside of the South is 63% in Ohio (excluding New York). Nationally it is probably something like 55%. If she was winning 90% or even 65-70% of the white vote nationally she would have won the nomination a long time ago.

The problem is Obama can't rely solely on black bloc voting in the general election since the black share of the electorate is half of what it is during the Democratic primaries. Where is Obama going to make up the 8.5-9% that vanishes because of this if he is the nominee?

[kwenu]

72. Aaaah. So you do want to have it both ways when it's Hillary.

Don't bother wasting my time with bullshit arguments about the GE. You were relying upon primaries to make your argument about why one racial group voted for a candidate of the same race but you refuse to apply the same argument for the other candidate who in fact DID receive a supermajority votes from voters of the same racial makeup. Mississippi and Arkansas. Those are the states you cited.

Now you want to bullshit with EXCEPT. EXCEPT my ass. You want it both ways.

In the general election there will be two candidates. Obama (almost certainly) and McCain (for sure) if you're still making the same racial arguments then white Democrats will not vote for their own candidate if he is Black. If that is what you mean, then say it. If it's true, then it seems difficult to argue that the country isn't still racially fucked up at least as it relates to white people. Black people after all have been voting for white presidents for quite some time so their track record is quite proven.

[jackson_dem]

76. I expressed dismay at racial voting in the states where Clinton received a white supermajority

Namely MS and LA. It is idiotic, though, to equate a handful of states with what Obama has enjoyed in every state. 100% of them. Even the supermajorities are of different sizes. 66% isn't the same as 90%. What is amusing is the hypocrisy of Obamanation on this.

In every election there is some crossover voting. There will be more Democrats crossing over to the rethugs with Obama as the nominee than with Clinton at the top of the ticket because of this. There is a reason no other Democratic candidate has won the primary in the multiracial era with the support without winning across racial lines. Obama is just odd in that he enjoys 85-90% support from the one group he does win and that allows him to offset his losses among everyone else--in the Dem primaries.

Polls show that roughly 20-25% of white Democrats won't vote for Obama if he is the nominee. Do the math. Let's say he wins 75-80% of the Democratic vote like Mondale did. Where does he make it up? Indies?

[kwenu]

80. I don't know how to make this any clearer. YOU CANNOT HAVE IT BOTH WAYS!!!!

It doesn't matter how much mental gymnastics you attempt to perform as to why it really doesn't matter when you're talking about the white candidate. Either it matters or it doesn't.

[jackson_dem]

82. What don't you understand?

In politics in a two candidate race getting 53, 57, 62 percent is not unusual. Getting 75%, 90% is unusual unless there is a marked difference in their positions. So according to you every place Clinton wins the white vote it MUST be because of race? So only Obama wins on merit? How about gender? Does that mean each state where he wins the male vote is because of his gender?

Clinton won 75% of the white vote in MS, a similar percentage in Louisana, Alabama, and Tennessee and race was a factor in it. Race is a factor in Obama getting 85-90% black support in each state. What is so hard to understand? These numbers are too out of whack to be explained by anything substantive since they both have the same policies.

The world exists as it is. Good for both for using race and gender to their advantage (although Clinton does not get anywhere near 90% of the female vote). They knocked Edwards out early because of it and because he had the integrity to not play the white male card. The problem is what will St. Obama do in the general election when he has to make up the extra ground that will vanish?

[kwenu]

85. Unless you are going to convince me that no significant part of Hillary's vote comes from whites

who won't vote for a Black person (despite the fact that they have virtually identical policies) you are wasting my time. What you don't understand is that you are arguing out both sides of your mouth. Race is never a factor for a white candidate but it is a factor (for whites and blacks apparently) when it is a Black candidate. You tacitly admit it in your last paragraph. WHY WOULD DEMOCRATIC VOTES (WHITE OR BLACK) THAT CLEARLY EXISTED DURING THE PRIMARY SUDDENLY VANISH DURING THE GE FOR A DEMOCRATIC NOMINEE, AS YOU SO CLEARLY FORECAST, WITH SHOCKING CERTAINTY? Has there even been a situation in the last 50 years where there has been such a desertion of a nominee of either party by his own party? That is unthinkable. Will it only happen because we have a Black candidate? Where will those votes go? To the opposing party's candidate who has vastly different policies? (Recall that obama/clinton has virtually identical policies.) Do you even acknowledge that the primary reason for discord in this country and discord between this country and the world, namely the Iraq war, will be the No.1 difference between the Republican and Democratic party candidates? Let's just jump to the conclusion:

THERE IS NO LOGICAL EXPLANATION OR JUSTIFICATION FOR THE DESERTION OF THE DEMOCRATIC NOMINEE BY HIS/HER OWN PARTY. Talking about the percentage of Black people that have supported Obama is an absolutely useless endeavor UNLESS you believe that Black people will be the ONLY people that will vote for Obama in the GE in your self-defined "states of racial concern." Or to put it more precisely without the bullshit: WHITE DEMOCRATS WON'T VOTE FOR A BLACK MAN FOR PRESIDENT. Well get ready because that so called dilemma is coming and there won't be anywhere for White Democrats to hide.

What YOU fail to understand is that Obama and Black people will get a pass on all of this racial crap despite the best undercover racial arguments being made on behalf of Hillary. WHY you ask?? Because Black people voted for Obama, the candidate who will almost certainly be the nominee. Those "Black" votes, in the end..are VOTES, among others, that have given Obama an unsurmountable lead in the primary race. That sleeping, utterly dependable, Black Giant in the Democratic tent, the same Black Giant that has been the chagrin of the Republican Party for generations, has now awakened for the first time and demanded that it's choice of candidate, who happens NOT to be the establishment candidate, will be the Democratic nominee.

Guess what?

The formerly sleeping Black Giant that the Democratic Party generally has taken for granted, has succeeded in exercising its voting strength. The Black Giant is on the winning side of this. And so, whining about Obama not being a real candidate because only Black people voted for him will get you and like minded persons nowhere. Whether you like it or not, there are basically two choices for the Democratic Party at this point:

Either:
1) Play by the same rules the party has always played by, support the nominee (white and black voters) in the GE, and WIN!,

or

2) come up with some pretext for not supporting the nominee , write in another candidate, vote republican, vote nader, stay home, stick your head in the sand, etc. AND LOSE!

The stakes for choosing No.2 could not be higher. Not only will the republicans maintain the WH, the Iraq war and likely obtain a permanent solid conservative majority on the SCOTUS, but they will receive as a bonus, the destruction of the Democratic Party as we know it and they will say it was destroyed because of its own racism. In fact, if you peep in on right wing radio, they're already saying that we're caught in our own racism. As hypocritical as that may be, they might be right.

Reality. Wonderful place. Get there.

[bellasgrams]

48. It's the Wright thing. People that have been around for awhile

seem to have more respect for the US, and won't vote for someone like bo. Especially the men who wouldn't vote for a female, now think BO's past will catch up with him.

[TLM]

58. Too bad Wright is also in the Clinton's past...

[GoldieAZ49]

64. LOL, Bill was a member of his church for 20 years?

Was he Hillary's spiritual adviser?

Did the Clintons check with Wright before making any major political move?


I think not, and yet BO did all of the above.

[jackson_dem]

65. Not in the real world. The President meets thousands of people

People in the real world understand that. Wright was Obama's mentor and pastor for two decades--and Obama didn't disassociate himself with him, something he claimed he would do "if" he knew about Wright's bigotry.

[ledvader7]

37. White male voter (aka Me)

For one he won TX for delegates and for another Wisconsin has even worse demographics for that and he killed. Older white women might be an argument, but not white males that are democratic primary voters. I still dont think hell win, but i am predicting a loss by less than 5 pts.

[GoldieAZ49]

38. Caucus is not the same as primaries and the GE

read the links at the thread I posted about the history of the white male vote in the dem party

and this one from PA in particular
http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/08093/869727-457.stm

[ledvader7]

50. those results are specious at best

think about it cnn has 41% of the voters being male and he got 85% of the black males (7% of the total) and there were not enough of other races besides white to consider if he only got 37% of whites (32% of total)how did he end up with 48% of all males. If he got 48 of the 41 he got about 20 of the his total from men. 12 of that from whites and 5 from blacks? thats only 17 percent. that leaves 3 percent unaccounted for and if it came from whites that is 3 percent of his total which could be 5 to 10 percent more of the whote male vote than he gets credit for. And see how Ohio is always compared to Penn. when Penn. votes a lot closer to Wisconsin in the general.

[jackson_dem]

43. You can't cherry pick a great state for him out of 40

What happened in Ohio? The game can be played both ways. The truth is nationally he has been losing whites, especially white women. He also loses Latinos and Asians. This is the point Herman was making when Obamites started to cry. Blacks are 20% of Dem primary voters but 10% of the general election vote. Where is Obama going to make up the 9% he loses simply because GE demographics are different than those for a party's primary?

[TLM]

56. I think he might win PA.... 50/50 right now....

I lived in PA for two years, near Pittsburgh.

I still keep in touch with people there... most are undecided or supporting Obama.

Hillary is not well liked. Her support is weak... people are not excited about the prospect of voting for her.

With regard to Obama, his problem's not that he isn't liked, but that he's not well known.

If someone in PA isn't supporting Hillary, it isn't because they do not know her. It is because they do know her and have issues with her.

Whereas lack of support for obama is a mix of not knowing him. I doubt the assertions from some Hillary supporters that there is some vast white male racist segment of the democratic voters that will not vote for a black man.

As Obama tours the state more and gets more face time, more and more people are getting beyond the feeling that he is an unknown, and supporting him.

If Obama is able to continue this trend, he could very well win PA.

[bowens43]

89. Obama won Texas.

[Zachstar]

6. I say 50 percent because the Clintons show no sign of getting out of the downward turn of events.

If the election was tomorrow then maybe, However with the time alloted Obama can continue his campaigning there. Therefore I think the chances overall are 50 percent

Tho I will go no higher than 50 percent tho, For Clinton could make a comeback.

[Double T]

7. LESS THAN 0%.

[Zachstar]

8. Hmm considering that is mathmatically impossible.

[Yael]

16. THANKS FOR THE INPUT.

HAVE A GREAT WEEK!

[jackson_dem]

9. 30%

[kmsarvis]

21. HOLY SHIT!!! I AGREE WITH JACKSON-DEM!!!

[GoldieAZ49]

23. see, your making progress!!!

:hi:

[PseudoIntellect]

31. I almost agree.

I'd say mid to high 30s percent.

Would have been first time agreeing, as well, lol.

[jackson_dem]

44. LOL

[mtnsnake]

11. 0-20%, but truthfully I think there's a 35% chance he could drop out of the race before PA

As surprising as that sounds to some of you, I believe it just might happen. I mean, why should he waste anymore time trying to beat Hillary now that the momentum will be all on her side from this Thursday on in. :smoke:

[Yael]

13. So when you wake up, stretch, yawn, and open the window in the morning

what color is the sky in your world?

[mtnsnake]

26. I'll let you know about it first thing tomorrow when I get up at the crack of noon!

[Buzz Clik]

27. "what color is the sky in your world?" LOL!

:rofl:

[jackson_dem]

14. What is happening on Thursday?

Is there a debate?

[Yael]

17. Rezko has an appointment at Glamour Shots

[mtnsnake]

22. No debate. Just the turning point & then its all downhill for Barack

Oh well, there's always 2016 for him to consider, unless Chelsea decides to run and then he'll have to wait until 2024.

[AX10]

35. What is going to happen on Thursday?

Do tell!

[mtnsnake]

39. I already said it will be the turning point. The time the momentum shifts to Hillary

[jackson_dem]

45. It could be. Didn't she turn things around in Ohio around the same time, 10-12 days before the vote?

[mtnsnake]

49. Thats kind of what I'm thinking. That and you can just sense a momentum shift just around the corner

[jackson_dem]

54. All fads eventually come to an end

Has Simon endorsed Obama?

[AX10]

55. It was within the two week window.

[democrattotheend]

93. I don't sense a momentum shift, but I am not ruling it out

Obama has had a pretty good week. The momentum seems to be with him right now but it could shift again, as it has in the past. Although I don't think the momentum is as clear now as it was before, when they had primaries every week.

[democrattotheend]

92. Chelsea wouldn't be old enough in 2016

She's 28 now. In 8 years she'll be 36, below the constitutionally required age to run for president (40).

[JimGinPA]

18. Crack Is Whack!

You really need to put the pipe down once in a while.

[Yael]

19. Quit being such a party pooper

its all they have at this point.

:spank:

[dchill]

36. What is all they have? Crack?

Because I think that they have much more - they have delusions, lies, smears, and rose-colored blinders, for starters.

[GoldieAZ49]

28. I just love it when you get all mysterious

so well uh, I guess your not going to spill the beans

[mtnsnake]

32. Thursday is just the day I'm predicting for the change of momentum to officially start

I might be off by half a day or so either way.

[ledvader7]

40. I predict dogs will start communicating in sanskrit starting Thursday

I mean it has to have an equal chance as the Hillary thing, right? Oh, and the momentum thing? Harry Truman is going to endorse HRC.

[mtnsnake]

41. lol

:thumbsup: :evilgrin:

[newmajority]

81. Is thursday the day that Mush Limpdick reveals his "Operation Steal PA" plan?

Is that where Hillary's "momentum change" is going to come from? A bunch of ignorant Dildoheads, like in Ohio?

[kwenu]

29. I dunno. Maybe that delegate thing you need to WIN?

[Spider Jerusalem]

15. With recent polling trends...

and two weeks to go...

I'd put it at even money.

[Buzz Clik]

25. The polls will show him closing to a statistical tie, but he will lose by 3-5 points.

[jackson_dem]

46. That would be great. We need the expectations for Obama to increase

That makes Clinton's win "bigger" in the eyes of the public. If Obama can take the lead (like he did in Texas) or get into a tie and then lose that will be awesome.

[democrattotheend]

52. That's why I don't want him taking the lead in any more polls

It ups the ante and sets expectations he's unlikely to meet.

[TLM]

67. LOL!!!! Obama was supposed to lose PA by 30 points...

Now her supporters are trying to spin a single digit win as a huge victory.


If she doesn't win PA big, she loses the primary. She will not have the needed delegates to catch up to Obama.

PA is supposed to be a Hillary stronghold... not a state she can barely win by 4 or 5 points.

[Buzz Clik]

90. The Comeback Kid. Worked in New Hampshire. Worked in Texas.

Why not Pennsylvania?

[Political Heretic]

68. Honestly, I like that QPAC (or whatever its called) Poll of 50-44... seems much more realistic.

The thing is, I'm totally stoked about how Obama seems to be doing. Oh how I wish the news story would be about how Obama managed to close a double digit lead. Yes, the clinton campaign will say its because he spent more money, as though that is a bad thing. News flash: It IS because he spent more money. That's how elections are won. Being able to spend more money is part of a healthy campaign and goes directly toward ELECTABILITY. Electability aint all about character, personality or other ambiguous qualities. Money wins elections. I don't like it, but its true, and I'm glad our guy has a metric butt-ton of it.

[Gore1FL]

47. I took "win" as an actual majority when I cast my vote

Anything under a 60%-40% loss is a win, however when it comes to he real picture.

[last_texas_dem]

57. At this point, I'd still play it safe

and give him about a 15-20-percent shot, but I feel like the trend is moving in his direction, and my estimate will likely change as this primary gets closer.

[Political Heretic]

63. After Texas, I have to go with 0-20%

I really thought he would win* there.

*win being be declared the winner that night by winning the overall vote by a few percentage point, not win by ultimately getting the most delegates from the state - an important thing for sure, but not a win that gives the same amount of media attention or momentum.

[Political Heretic]

66. One more comment my comrades won't enjoy:

This is the first primary where we get to hear from the voters and find out what impact the Wright story has had. The sad thing is, if white votes are anything other than amazing for Obama, it will be attributed in the media as because of Wright, which will probably kick the story up again. I'm not even saying the media would be doing something malicious... they just love to connect "causes" to "effects" and the easiest "cause" to attribute to anything other than amazing white voter support of Obama will be that.

[FrenchieCat]

69. "I'm not even saying the media would be doing something malicious... "

I'm not sure why you don't think they would....the whole Wright handling was malicious.

[Political Heretic]

91. How should they have handled it?

[AtomicKitten]

73. He's closing in so he's got a shot.

[loveangelc]

74. 0-20%

[McCamy Taylor]

75. If he saturates the state with money he could close the gap maybe.

[newmajority]

77. Depends on whether the massive turnout can overpower the Rendell "fix"

And if you don't think Ed's got one in play, I've got a bridge in London I'll sell you.

Given that the polls have the state tied right now, I voted 50%, but since Obama started out 20 points down in this state and is now tied, things are looking very good.

What is definitely true is that even with Rendell's "help", Hillary can't win by a large enough margin to make any difference in her pledged delegate numbers.

[elizm]

84. Agree the Rendell fix is in and we'll never know for sure. nt

[davidpdx]

78. I voted 21-39%

I think it's pretty unlikely he'll win Penn given Clinton's big lead there, but he'll narrow the gap. It's more likely that her win there will be a small one 5-8%, which will give her only a few delegate lead.

The next few contests after that will probably seal the deal:

Indiana-Could go either way
South Carolina-Obama by a large margin
West Virginia-Clinton by a large margin
Oregon-Obama by 10-15%
Kentucky-Clinton by a large margin

At this point I think PA, Indiana and Oregon are going to be the key states.

[Yukari Yakumo]

83. Don't you mean *North* Carolina?

About 60% of the remaining delegates are in PA, IN, and NC.

If Hill doesn't win and win big in PA, she should throw in the towel. PA has the most delegates of the remaining states (158 to be exact, over a quarter of the remaining pledged delegates). If she can't win w/ at least 60% of the vote, she'd need almost 70% of all remaining pledged delegates to tie Obama. And North Carolina is right around the corner (who has 115 delegates, about 20% of all remaining pledged delegates).

[davidpdx]

86. Yes, thank you

I have done that twice this week. Egads!

[stillcool]

79. As Ed Rendell says..

it's Hillary Country. Isn't she ahead by like 20+?

[Raine]

87. 21%-39%

possible but probably not likely.

[bowens43]

88. Of course, he doesn't have to win it.

Hillary on the other hand needs to win BIG and she isn't going to do it.

[SoonerPride]

94. He loses the popular vote but wins the delegate tally

That's my take on it.

Just like Texas.

[AnarchoFreeThinker]

95. I'd say better that 40% IF he were willing to campaign like she does in the primary.

He won't, though, and we'll get another Thursday/Friday surprise before the Tuesday vote. It'll be unfounded, nasty, low, and probably disgusting--a fear smear or a race smear. It'll be enough for her 4-5 point hollow victory. Hopefully, he'll roll out some more supers the same weekend to steal back the news cycle. But you can count on good old H-camp smears coming just before the primary.

[AnarchoFreeThinker]

96. I'd say better that 40% IF he were willing to campaign like she does in the primary.

He won't, though, and we'll get another Thursday/Friday surprise before the Tuesday vote. It'll be unfounded, nasty, low, and probably disgusting--a fear smear or a race smear. It'll be enough for her 4-5 point hollow victory. Hopefully, he'll roll out some more supers the same weekend to steal back the news cycle. But you can count on good old H-camp smears coming just before the primary.